This is not just a project but a social experiment aimed at creating access to legal help when there are no other choices. We are attempting to crowd-source legal action for the good of the country.
This case, DPW Enterprises LLC and Mountain Prime 2018 LLC v. Jeremy L. Bass, et al., centers on the foreclosure and trustee sale of Jeremy L. Bass's property at 1515 21st Ave, Lewiston, Idaho. Bass contends the sale was conducted through collusion, procedural failures, and a lack of lawful authority, rendering it void. Plaintiffs assert they are lawful purchasers entitled to possession, while Bass disputes the validity of the sale on grounds including alleged bid manipulation, fraudulent documentation, and statutory violations that invalidate the plaintiffs' claim.
Bass has faced repeated challenges from the plaintiffs, who have pursued summary judgment to gain possession, supported by claims of their status as bona fide purchasers. The court granted summary judgment against Bass but acknowledged factual disputes concerning co-defendant Pike's lease. A stay on eviction was filed to halt enforcement until a reconsideration or appeal could be pursued.
-
Auction Fixing and Collusion: Bass argues that the foreclosure sale involved collusion, infringing on federal antitrust laws and statutory requirements for a fair, competitive auction. The auction purportedly involved pre-printed checks for specific amounts, indicating a predetermined bid, which undermines the sale's integrity and the plaintiff's claim to bona fide purchaser status.
-
Breach of Agreement and Contract: Bass alleges that Carrington Mortgage Services, the loan servicer, breached a verbal agreement to allow a payoff rather than proceed with the sale. Bass states that he maintained payments on property taxes and insurance, evidencing an understanding that foreclosure would be paused. Despite this, Carrington abruptly moved forward with foreclosure, leading to substantial damages and breach of contract claims.
-
Fraudulent Instruments and Title Dispute: The sale was based on documents Bass alleges were fraudulent, including a trustee deed derived from a forged or invalid instrument, which he argues nullifies the foreclosure's legitimacy. He asserts that Carrington misrepresented their authority over the property post-reconveyance, and Bass's recording of a Letter of Full Reconveyance substantiates that all prior debts were resolved.
-
Protecting Tenant Rights: Bass and tenant Pike also contend with Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (PTFA) rights, which complicate the eviction claims. Pike, under a subsidized lease arrangement, argues he is entitled to occupancy protections, which plaintiffs have contested due to Pike's failure to pay rent to the new owners.
-
Preventing Premature Eviction: The immediate goal is to prevent an eviction until the appeal and reconsideration are fully addressed. A stay was requested to prevent irrevocable harm, such as property loss, pending a full legal review.
-
Securing Co-Counsel and Legal Support: Bass filed a motion for appointment of co-counsel, emphasizing the disparity in resources and legal experience. This motion, grounded in due process rights, was denied, presenting a significant challenge in maintaining effective self-representation against corporate-backed plaintiffs.
-
Establishing Rightful Ownership and Invalidating the Trustee Sale: To reverse the current ruling, Bass aims to prove that procedural deficiencies, fraud, and collusion invalidate the sale. A favorable outcome would set a precedent, emphasizing the need for transparent, lawful foreclosure practices and protecting property rights from abuse.
-
Exposing Collusion in Foreclosure Practices: By highlighting bid manipulation, trustee conflicts of interest, and documented breaches, Bass aims to bring attention to broader systemic issues within foreclosure practices. A successful case could support regulatory reforms, providing additional protections for homeowners nationwide.
Ideal Outcome: The ideal outcome would be a court ruling that invalidates the trustee sale based on procedural and statutory violations. Bass would retain ownership, and the court would mandate reforms in foreclosure practices to curb collusion and protect homeowners. This case could set a national precedent, emphasizing stricter standards for auction processes and addressing conflicts of interest.
Next Steps and What's Expected:
- Reconsideration Hearing: The motion for reconsideration will be critical. Success here could potentially reverse the summary judgment order or allow for a more thorough examination of Bass's claims.
- Appeal: If reconsideration fails, a full appeal may be pursued. This process will involve a detailed review of case law, procedural integrity, and plaintiff conduct, which could further delay enforcement actions and maintain occupancy.
- Ongoing Documentation: As evidence of procedural and statutory violations continues to mount, Bass may introduce additional claims or counterclaims addressing damages from the wrongful foreclosure.
What's Needed:
- Legal and Research Support: Access to co-counsel or legal assistance could be vital to navigate procedural complexities, given the court's dismissal of Bass's co-counsel request.
- Community and Financial Backing: Community and financial support for Bass's legal efforts could sustain his challenge, especially as appeals and procedural requirements mount.
- Media and Public Awareness: Increased awareness can bolster the case's impact, drawing attention to potentially abusive practices in foreclosure and trustee sale processes.
In 2008, the financial world was shaken by a crisis that exposed the shady deals made by banks. These institutions cheated and forced the risk onto everyone else and then had the audacity to ask to be saved.
Our main focus is Bank of America (BoA) and its subsidiaries. Between 2008 and 2012, BoA and its parties faced numerous settlements and judgments due to fraudulent activities.
However, they also managed to hide more than we know. That was until a change in our landscape; Covid hit, and then a man at just the right time in life stumbled upon a beacon of fraud begging to be exposed.
This case lays out a massive fraud that was hidden by process, yet BoA has been ever since trying to get any evidence of it neutralized over the years, and it was working too. If you know anything about Wells Fargo and the fake accounts scandal, you will get the scope here. So think Wells Fargo but with home loans. BoA carefully did a form of financial arts and crafts, and it seems thousands of people were taken advantage of.
The man who found that fraud has BoA trying to cover it up by foreclosing on him, with the hope it will go away. Well, that man will not lose his home and life savings invested into his home so that BoA can be rewarded for committing the fraud. Instead, this case is using that attempt to take his home to confront and bring BoA to task for their actions. And he needs your help!
This is not just about helping him save his house, but it's about laying the groundwork for sweeping changes to the system for the good of us all. He could take a settlement and let BoA sweep it under the rug, but that means everyone else that has been cheated would not be helped. So he is risking everything because it's the right thing to do, and he knows upon the successful litigation of this case, people will start to see a massive change in our favor, finally, for once in 80 years.
By participating in this project, you can help bring justice to not just one man, but potentially thousands of people who have been wronged. Your contributions can help shape the case, provide valuable insights, and help navigate the complex legal landscape.
This is a unique opportunity to be part of a groundbreaking approach to legal action. By leveraging the power of crowd-sourcing and AI, we can take on well-funded corporations and seek justice for the common people.
Before you participate, please read the Notice and Terms of Participation carefully. By participating in this project, you agree to these terms and conditions.
This is more than just a legal case. It's a chance to make a real difference and bring about change in a system that has long favored the powerful. Let's stand together and fight for justice.
Thank you for your support and participation. Let's make a difference together.
For more information on similar cases, please refer to the Sheets v. Countrywide case, which matches nearly every detail of this case, even within hours of each other as far as the records go.
If you have any questions or suggestions or would like to contribute in any other way, please feel free to reach out.
Together, we can make a difference.
For a better understanding of the scope of fraudulent activities conducted by BoA, here is a list of settlements and judgments against BoA and its parties from just 2008-2012.
| DATE | DESCRIPTION | SETTLEMENT/JUDGMENT AMOUNT |
|---|---|---|
| 2008-10-01 | Countrywide (CW) settled with 11 states over predatory lending allegations, including relaxing underwriting standards, structuring loans with risky features, and misleading consumers with hidden fees and fake marketing claims like its "no closing costs loan." At the time, "it was the largest predatory lending settlement in history, far exceeding the $484 million deal struck in 2002 with the Household Finance Corporation." — in "direct loan relief." | $8.4 billion |
| 2009-01-01 | Merrill Lynch (ML) settled a securities fraud case with institutional investors in its common and preferred shares between Oct. 17, 2006, and Dec. 31, 2008. The plaintiffs alleged that the investment bank inflated the price of collateralized debt obligations to boost its own share price. | $475 million |
| 2009-06-01 | Bank Of America (BoA) completes a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission and several states over alleged misrepresentations the bank made to customers about the safety and liquidity of auction-rate securities. (in "restored liquidity" to the ARS market) | $4.5 billion |
| 2009-07-01 | BoA settles a racial discrimination class action accusing it of "routinely giving black workers short shrift with respect to pay, advancement, and resources." | $7.2 million |
| 2010-02-01 | BoA completed a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission over its failure to "properly disclose employee bonuses and financial losses at ML before shareholders approved the merger of the companies in December 2008." | $150 million |
| 2010-05-01 | CW settles class action securities fraud claims made by institutional investors, including New York pension funds, alleging that the lender misled them about its health. | $600 million |
| 2010-06-01 | CW settles with the Federal Trade Commission over allegations that it overcharged customers struggling to hang on to their homes. | $108 million |
| 2010-07-01 | BoA settles class action antitrust claims regarding credit card arbitration. | $0 (injunctive relief) |
| 2010-10-01 | BoA covers part of former CW CEO Angelo Mozilo's $67.5 million civil fraud settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission. | $20 million |
| 2010-11-01 | CW settled a class action lawsuit related to overcharging for mortgage insurance in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974. | $34 million |
| 2010-12-01 | BoA settles with 19 state attorneys general and four federal agencies over bid-rigging charges in the municipal bond market. | $137 million |
| 2011-01-01 | BoA settles a class action debit-card overdraft lawsuit. Here's how one plaintiff described it: "The bank actively provides false or misleading balance information to these customers, including the plaintiff, that in turn deceives these customers into making additional transactions that, in turn, will generate even more overdraft fees for the bank." | $410 million |
| 2011-01-01 | Freddie Mac had reached a settlement to "end all claims, including future claims, related to mortgages sold through 2008 by CW." | $1.28 billion |
| 2011-01-01 | A settlement was reached with Fannie Mae to settle claims on 12,045 CW loans that originated between 2004 and 2008. | $1.52 billion |
| 2011-02-01 | BoA settled a class action lawsuit claiming that it "improperly increased the interest rate on delinquent or defaulted FIA, MBNA, and BoA credit cards by calculating the rate increase starting at the beginning of the billing cycle in which the default or delinquency occurred." | $10 million |
| 2011-04-01 | CW settles with mortgage-bond insurer Assured Guaranty over toxic CW-issued mortgage-backed securities. | $1.6 billion |
| 2011-05-01 | CW settlements with the U.S. Department of Justice over allegations that CW "wrongfully foreclosed upon active duty servicemembers without first obtaining court orders." | $20 million |
| 2011-06-01 | CW reaches a preliminary $8.5 billion settlement with The Bank of New York Mellon and 22 institutional investors (including Goldman Sachs and Blackrock) over toxic mortgage-backed securities. | $8.5 billion |
| 2011-08-01 | BoA settles with the City of San Francisco over allegations that the bank's FIA Card Services used a rigged system to arbitrate credit card debt collection disputes. | $5 million |
| 2011-12-01 | A settlement was reached with the U.S. Justice Department, which charged that CW carried out a "widespread pattern or practice of discrimination against qualified African-American and Hispanic borrowers." | $335 million |
| 2011-12-01 | A class action suit settlement is reached against ML brought by investors alleging that the investment bank misled them about the risks associated with $16.5 billion of mortgage-backed securities in 18 offerings made between 2006 and 2007. | $315 million |
| 2012-03-01 | BoA settles with federal and state regulators and agencies related to faulty foreclosure and servicing practices. This was part of the National Mortgage Settlement.($3.2 billion in federal and state payments; $8.58 billion in relief to borrowers) | $11.82 billion |
| 2012-07-01 | BoA settles a class action lawsuit alleging that the bank "used deceptive marketing tactics to sign up and charge credit card customers for a useless credit-protection service." | $20 million |
| 2012-07-01 | A settlement is reached with Syncora Holdings regarding claims that the mortgage-bond insurer was duped into ensuring CW-issued mortgage-backed securities. | $375 million |
| 2012-09-01 | BoA settled a class action lawsuit brought by the bank's shareholders alleging that it provided "false and misleading statements about the health of" ML before its acquisition. | $2.43 billion |
| 25 cases | in the first four years after the sale of the property was executed | $43.07 Billion in fines and or judgments and or as so noted above |
For the full table, please refer to this link.
This project is not intended to provide legal advice. It is a platform for information sharing and collaborative research. Always consult with a qualified attorney for legal advice.