IMPOSSIBLE RECOVERY

The lender as Defendant willfully slanders title to real property held by Plaintiffs (first) (last) as it fails to demonstrate where any successor's holds sufficient and adequate rights of ownership or relies solely upon the electronic recording method. Special privileges afforded an FDIC member bank; Mortgage Banker and Mortgage Servicer no more exist herein than do a statutory interpretation for a revised conventional foreclosure employed by FDIC contract legal services disguised a debt collections effort for a receiver.

 A mortgage loan is in foreclosure and placed into receivership is an impaired asset no longer possibly secured by real property. Forfeiture causes an accounting controversy through the use of a mortgage note and electronic entry to evidence the existence of the encumbrance of that realty for which granting of a mortgage secures the certificates and not the loan. In accounting management an encumbrance is a management tool used to reflect commitments in the accounting system and attempt to budget as would be the case.

 A receiver appointed over certain assets in question under any circumstances will ledger accordingly. Encumbrances allow the FDIC to recognize future commitments of resources prior to an actual expenditure. It's documented by the receiver appointed and not necessarily in your production request to the FDIC. We can assist here.

 The foreclosure represents a "pre-encumbrance" and is the amount expected to be allocated or to "spend", but for which there is no legal obligation exists to spend.

 A requisition by the FDIC member bank subsequent to sale is the evidence of no condition the "precedes" the sale. It's documented as a budgetary line item in advance of the sale and is for a general ledger debit posted against the appropriate account conceived by and for a receiver deemed a typical pre-encumbrance transaction. It is posted against the appropriate account in favor of the successor by assignment under the FDIC subrogation claims adjustor at time of sale.

 Robo signatures and documents that lack integrity are something the State courts care not to influence the overwhelming evidence for which the debtor defaulted.  District courts will entertain with greater care in it opine due to diversity and requirement for maintaining the statutory requirements versus a bias for statutory and judicial interpretation. 

 .Soliman

expert.witness@live.com