[crycleascentyv]

and response

you underestimate some of us. I am the CCO for the licensed private investigation company, Endless Fraud Detection Services Corp. headquartered in Austin, Texas. Our company provides clients and counsel with "COMPETENT EVIDENCE" of mortgage fraud and other relates offenses.

Our website: http://www.endlessfrauddetection.com/

The "produce the note" strategy worked for a little while, but to demand this production is not enough.

Here is how our process works.

On our client’s behalf we will have a Licensed Private Investigator (PI) pull all records from the county recorder’s office in where the subject property is located to attempt to establish a clear chain of title by establishing whether there is a “Real Party in Interest” through filed assignments and other documents filed with the county recorder’s office pursuant to statute.

The PI will then order a Forensic Mortgage and Securitization audit to be preformed on the mortgage closing documents and documents filed in the public records and all other documentation provided by the client. The audits are performed by an individual who has years of experience in the lending industry and has been trained and certified by the National Association of Mortgage Underwriters (NAMU) for the express purpose of auditing mortgage documents in order to determine if the mortgage was constructed in complete compliance with state and federal consumer protection law. NAMU is the same certifying entity for many bank loan processors, and underwriters therefore the auditor’s certification must be recognized.

The PI will also perform background checks on anyone signing documents, and notarizing them. There are usually several inconsistencies found in the background checks such as; one woman found was dead and buried in Oklahoma yet 3 years later she is signing documents as a VP for Chase in California; Another we found who was signing as a VP for MERS lived in Louisiana and Oklahoma but had never had a state DL, no state issued ID, and never had a car registered in her name. In another case it was found that the notary seal had the commission expiration date (2009) scratched out and current date (2011) hand written in. The background check on this individual revealed that the individual was convicted of DUI 2 years prior and her notary commission had been revoked.

The homeowner can then put the PI’s report, audit results, and laws pertaining to consumer protection, foreclosure process, and securities before a court of competent jurisdiction for the purpose of validating that the records found in the county recorder’s office were in fact generated, and filed pursuant to those laws.

If the judge declares that the records filed in the county recorder’s office are not pursuant to state law, federal law, or constitutional provisions, and therefore does not create a valid lien the county clerk then has to remove said documents from the county records, or submit a judicial finding of facts and conclusions of law stating that the documentation or instrument(s) currently filed in the county records does not create a valid lien against real property.

As a matter of company policy we must always suggest to all of our clients that they seek competent counsel. We have had clients who have had success without using an attorney, but these clients are already well versed in the law.

Keep in mind that this process will not result in money damages. However, we have been informed by counsel that since the client has law established in your case (also called res judicata), that can be used as foundational support in your claim of damages in the event the client decide to sue for damages.

What is Competent Evidence?

The reason I made such a big deal out of "COMPETENT EVIDENCE" is very important to understand here. What I've been saying for a long time now was confirmed to me last week in a conversation with a California (foreclosure defense) attorney. Allow me to illustrate what I mean with some background, legal theory, and confirmation.

Background:

This, by the way, is the whole reason we (EFDS) applied for our Private Investigation Company License #(A-17660) in the first place.

There are 42 states in the union that have "License Requirements" for "Private Investigators" and/or "Private Investigation Companies".

What constitutes being engaged in this occupation?

I encourage you to research these state's statutes as I have done. Here is a list of the states you can take off your list;

NO "STATE" PI LICENSING REQUIREMENTS:

1) COLORADO (Private Investigators Voluntary Licensure beginning July 1, 2012)
2) MISSISSIPPI
3) SOUTH DAKOTA

The following states have NO STATE PI LICENSING, but some cities have their own licensing with minimal requirements:

4) IDAHO (Boise has city licensing only)
5) ALASKA
6) WYOMING (some cities have city licensing, although no state licensing)
7) ALABAMA (only requires a state "business license" with no PI experience needed)

According to a relatively universal language throughout the remaining states if you are (loosely translated to fit the average scope of 42 states);
1) a finder of facts who,
2) generates a report containing those facts that is,
3) intended to go before a court of law, then by definition you are considered to be conducting a Private Investigation as a Private Investigator, or operating a Private Investigation Company for which there are license requirements.

Legal Theory:

In other words, you can look into your own issues all day long, no problem, and I'll address that as well, but as soon as someone looks into the issues of another, they are then conducting a "private investigation" for which, they had better have a license. If the finder of facts (the law[s] broken by what ever party) is not licensed then what ever evidence they produce is incompetent by nature of that individual's or company's failure to meet the state's licensing requirements.

Now lets look at providing your own evidence. If you enter your own evidence it is easily shown by opposing counsel to be bias and prejudice and move the court to remove your evidence and dismiss your cause because you have an interest in; the outcome of the evidence, the process of gathering your evidence, the property, the outcome of the case, etc., and now the question of omissions comes into view, i.e. what did you, the finder of facts, leave out that was not beneficial to your cause.

This invokes the necessity for evidence from an uninterested 3rd party who is; 1) licensed, 2) insures/bonded, and 3) capable of providing "COMPETENT EVIDENCE".

Confirmation:

The attorney I referred to above told me that he had lost a case about a month ago for that very reason. He said, "Work product is everything".

It was alleged by opposing counsel that the evidence admitted into court was hearsay because of a failure to meet licensing requirements and upon those grounds moved the court to remove the evidence from the record and moved to dismiss the homeowner's action for lack of evidence. His (opposing counsel's) motions were granted. The homeowner lost because the evidence was incompetent.