Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

U. S. The Dead Sign Affidavits - Nationwide - Denniger

Recommended Posts

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=176183

The Dead Sign Affidavits - Nationwide

When are we going to see law enforcement actually enforce laws?

She died in 1995. Yet her signature later appeared on thousands of affidavits submitted by one of the nation's largest debt collectors, Portfolio Recovery Associates Inc., in lawsuits filed against borrowers.

Some regulators complain that the use of Ms. Kunkle's name reflects an epidemic of mass-produced, sloppy and inaccurate documentation in the debt-collection industry.

Complain? Sloppy? Inaccurate?

Perjury is a felony!

And using the signature of a dead person sure looks like perjury to me (can't swear to what you can't see because you're dead!) along with "uttering" - that is, forgery.

It has to be forgery since the person is dead, right?

"When you see corner-cutting like this, it's alarming," Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson said about the Kunkle case.

Corner-cutting?

The State Attorney General for Minnesota calls this corner-cutting?

I guess robbing a bank in your jurisdiction would be "corner cutting" when it comes to acquisition of money, right? It's just an easier way to get money than actually earning it honestly.

Law enforcement, including attorneys' general, sucking off banksters and their cohorts in the "debt collection" industry is an outrage. These are not "cut corners" they're apparent felonies and must be investigated and prosecuted as exactly that.

What The Attorneys General of this nation at both Federal and State level have proved, beyond any reasonable doubt, over the last three years is this:

There is no longer a rule of law in this nation and there are no longer law-enforcement agencies that will enforce the law when the party harmed is an ordinary citizen. None. Neither political party will bring a single felony-level charge against these jackals.

I leave to the reader's own determination what sort of response is appropriate in light of the continuing documentation that willful and intentional refusal to investigate and prosecute apparent felonious acts is not an isolated incident but rather has become the standard and expected procedure and response by alleged "law enforcement" at the highest levels of our government when it comes to those firms, including but not limited to banks and collection agencies.

Now I'm sure if anyone here used a dead persons signature it would be fraud and we'd be jailed for it. Friends of the bankers, it's just how we do business, just an oversight it won't happen again gov....

Us debt slaves are just here to be screwed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm sure if anyone here used a dead persons signature it would be fraud and we'd be jailed for it. Friends of the bankers, it's just how we do business, just an oversight it won't happen again gov....

Us debt slaves are just here to be screwed.

It is truly beyond belief. Anyone who still believes in the rule of law should be made to sit down and read that WSJ article until they are cured of their delusion. What amazes me in these sorts of cases of wrong doing is that the plaintiff can be gagged so we cannot know how many other false documents are out there.

One small company I worked for signed a contract for the purchase of a piece of software and was knowingly provided with something else. The seller did this because they knew the small company would not be able to afford to sue if they discovered their ruse, which is what happened. Result, one small company destroyed; 5 people out of work; lots of small investors badly burnt; and bonuses all around in London. This sort of stuff is no different to being mugged in the street.

First, let's start with the lawyers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is truly beyond belief. Anyone who still believes in the rule of law should be made to sit down and read that WSJ article until they are cured of their delusion. What amazes me in these sorts of cases of wrong doing is that the plaintiff can be gagged so we cannot know how many other false documents are out there.

One small company I worked for signed a contract for the purchase of a piece of software and was knowingly provided with something else. The seller did this because they knew the small company would not be able to afford to sue if they discovered their ruse, which is what happened. Result, one small company destroyed; 5 people out of work; lots of small investors badly burnt; and bonuses all around in London. This sort of stuff is no different to being mugged in the street.

First, let's start with the lawyers...

The lawyers have a lot to answer for.

It's becoming increasingly clear their is one rule for the proles and another for the elites. It's hard to see how they can keep this up without the people revolting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lawyers have a lot to answer for.

It's becoming increasingly clear their is one rule for the proles and another for the elites. It's hard to see how they can keep this up without the people revolting.

It cannot be long before most Americans tell their 'credit collectors' to eff off en masse. If they don't then they are really stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK, the actions described in the article are very serious ARRESTABLE offences with serious consequences for the perp and the organisation. Having Plod closing down these places clearly is a breach of the Bankers rights act.

Paragraph 2.9 repeats the criteria stated under s.110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 that may justify making an arrest. Some useful examples are reproduced as follows:

‘(e) to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question. This may include cases such as:

(i) Where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person:

· has made false statements;

· has made statements which cannot be readily verified;

· has presented false evidence;

· may steal or destroy evidence;

· may make contact with co-suspects or conspirators;

· may intimidate or threaten or make contact with witnesses;

· where it is necessary to obtain evidence by questioning; or

(ii) when considering arrest in connection with an indictable offence, there is a need to:

· enter and search any premises occupied or controlled by a person

· search the person

· prevent contact with others

· take fingerprints, footwear impressions, samples or photographs of the suspect

(iii) ensuring compliance with statutory drug testing requirements.’

The code later goes on to provide guidance regarding information to be given on arrest including the terms of the caution, much of which is already in pages 77- 78 and part of page 79 of the book. It then provides guidance in respect of records of arrests as follows:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lawyers have a lot to answer for.

It's becoming increasingly clear their is one rule for the proles and another for the elites. It's hard to see how they can keep this up without the people revolting.

Hmm what was that Injin said again?

Courts a place where somebody just makes stuff up in order to steal your money and posessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK, the actions described in the article are very serious ARRESTABLE offences with serious consequences for the perp and the organisation. Having Plod closing down these places clearly is a breach of the Bankers rights act.

Paragraph 2.9 repeats the criteria stated under s.110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 that may justify making an arrest. Some useful examples are reproduced as follows:

‘(e) to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question. This may include cases such as:

(i) Where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person:

· has made false statements;

· has made statements which cannot be readily verified;

· has presented false evidence;

· may steal or destroy evidence;

· may make contact with co-suspects or conspirators;

· may intimidate or threaten or make contact with witnesses;

· where it is necessary to obtain evidence by questioning; or

(ii) when considering arrest in connection with an indictable offence, there is a need to:

· enter and search any premises occupied or controlled by a person

· search the person

· prevent contact with others

· take fingerprints, footwear impressions, samples or photographs of the suspect

(iii) ensuring compliance with statutory drug testing requirements.’

The code later goes on to provide guidance regarding information to be given on arrest including the terms of the caution, much of which is already in pages 77- 78 and part of page 79 of the book. It then provides guidance in respect of records of arrests as follows:

I'm sure there are very similar laws in the US...yet most of these crooks will never see the inside of a court. The robo-signing is so clearly fraud on a massive scale - entire companies exist to support it - that one's brain has difficulty accepting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there are very similar laws in the US...yet most of these crooks will never see the inside of a court. The robo-signing is so clearly fraud on a massive scale - entire companies exist to support it - that one's brain has difficulty accepting it.

Probably so but these laws are for the proles, not the elites.

If the elites break the law they get a fine and must promise never to do it again, ie find another way to break the law and steal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.