24 March 2015

KingCast & Mortgage Movies Called by Subpoena to Testify on RCO/NWTS Auctions in Wetmore v. NWTS, BoA & Vonnie McElligott.


Y'all remember the chat I had with security at the Northwest Trustee/RCO auction/corporate crime scene over at 13555 SE 36th St Ste 120, Bellevue, WA? The one where I had to wonder why the First Amendment atmosphere was so oppressive at what is allegedly a public event. Yeah, that one. If you have any questions just watch the video, above.

Well guess what? I get to reprise that visit under the direct and potentially cross examinations of Attorney Scott Stafne and his opposing counsel in Wetmore v. Northwest Trustee Services, Bank of America, N.A. & Vonnie McElligott.  Here is a Trujillo briefing as filed into this case regarding the viability of post sale damages. 

Here's another fun fact: The opposing counsel of Heidi Buck Morrison and John McIntosh don't want me on that stand for long on X/E because I will rip them to shreds on this issue. I already schooled them once when Mac and his buddy Luke Wozniak had the nerve to threaten me with arrest when they reneged on a video agreement. Yep, fucking-A-right watch the video that I caught because my DSLR was still running. I told those cats they better back off because I was winning Jury trials before they could pee straight. Listen to McIntosh's exasperated sigh at about 0:45 when he says "You want me to have security escort you out of here," whereupon I tell him, "Do it... .and I'll video that, too. I'm not scared of you, Counselor."  Anyway, you know it's always tricky shooting video with those things you know because you think you've turned it off sometimes only to discover that you haven't. Sometimes this actually works in your favor, take a look:


Meanwhile, Ms. McElligott is a 17-year career employee at Northwest Trustee Services who is not yet an equity partner and who does not sign documents under her legal name, as I recall her Deposition Testimony in another case.   Anyway, you can watch said Depo over at my Affordable Video Depo pages as well as the Mortgage Movies Journal Entry of 9 June, 2014. Here's another McElligott Depo from 2013 in text/pdf format from Attorney Dao's office. But you know what, to hell with it. Here's all of the 2014 video, along with some choice colloquy to boot:

Q:  My Question is then is why you don't sign with your legal name?
A:  I don't sign using my legal name.
Q:  And you have no reason for that?
A:  I don't.

Q:  What does the term Actual Holder mean to you?
A:  The one who actually holds the note as stated in the Beneficiary Docs.
Q:  As prepared by NW Trustee? 
A:  Often.

Q:  What is your working knowledge of Beneficiary?
A:  Holder of the Note.
Q:  Actual Holder?
A:  I don't know.

Q:  I want to draw you attention to Para C the Declaration of Payment Default (on a    
     Notice of Default). It says the Beneficiary Declares you to be in Default.... Take a      
     moment and tell me where the Beneficiary is identified.
A:  The Beneficiary does not appear to be identified.

Q:  So if you receive a Beneficiary Declaration you assume they are the Holder of the 
      Note?
A:  Yes.

Q:  Do you know why there are two Beneficiary Declarations in the Lucero case?
A:  No, I don't.
Q:  Is it the practice of your company to submit different version of Declarations in 
     mediation or litigation?
A:  I have no way of answering that. I'm not involved....

Q:  Are both capable of being true.. Ex. 12 notifies the Borrower that the owner of the 
     Note is Freddie Mac. If Freddie Mac is the owner of the Note who is the Creditor to 
     Whom the Debt is owed?
A:  According to the Document in front of me it is Wells Fargo.

Q:  How can that be true?
A:  I have no Answer for you.
Q:  Why didn't you take an opinion when these documents were distributed?
A:  My job isn't to take an opinion.

Q:  How many NoDs does NWTS perform in a week?
A:  I have no idea.
Q:  In a month?
A:  I don't know.
Q:  As you sit there today you have no inkling as to 2013?
A:  No idea.
Q:  2012?
A:  None.

Q:  Do you have any idea why Exhibit 24 would be recorded a year after it was 
A:  I do not.

Q:  What is the rationale of recording an appointment of successor Trustee nearly a year   
      after it was drafted?
A:  I can't tell you.

Q:  Why was Exhibit 24 Recorded?
A:  I have no way of knowing without looking at my file.

Q:  Do you recognize Exhibit 25 as a document that your team would have been 
     responsible for?
Q:  What is the purpose of Exhibit 25 that you executed. Why did you execute it.
A:  Because we were setting the sale of the property.

Q:  Can you say that you relied on the Appointment of Successor Trustee?
A:  I don't understand your question.

Q:  Is 25 related to the Appointment of Successor Trustee?
A:  Yes.

Note: I'll be tying up a bit more of a heated exchange in the morning.

OK here it is:

Q:  Why would the question of who holds my note be a legal question.... Let's talk about 
      Lucero..... 
A:  You could refer her to the Beneficiary Declaration.

Q:  But she doesn't have a copy of that [Deponent smiles]. As you sit there the question I 
      pose to you is not to be comical and it is a question of fact. If I can't know who holds 
      my note how can I find out how do I do it.... you don't know or you don't have an 
      answer?
A:  Both.

Q:  At the time my client received the NoD she had no access to the [Beneficiary] 
     Declaration. 
A:  How will that help her?

Q:  [Attorney Dao, exasperated].... She wants to know who holds the note and who has 
     the power to foreclose and you have no answer or resources?
A:  I guess I don't.

No comments: