Description Of Legal Dispute
This is a David and Goliath case. This is a breach of contract, common law fraud, and civil theft, fraudulent lien case brought in District Court in Texas. The claims against the defendants arise out of the contracts and tort.
The defendants are Deutsche Bank and Arklatex Benchmark Mortgage who is ranked 51st largest mortgage loan originator. Arklatex’s annual turnover is $250,000,00m USD. The basis of the claim is defendants perpetuating and engaging in an illegal course of fraudulent conduct by failing to comply with the terms of the deed of trust and notes. Defendant Mortgagee Arklatex sold its interest in the property and did not release that interest under the terms of the deed of trust. This defendant has made a judicial admission that it did not release its lien. This 100% clear and 100% recovery of all attorney’s fees and damages in this case for breach of contract. Defendant Deutsche did not have an interest in the property. Defendant fraudulently foreclosed on the property assigning a lien to itself. We have an injunction to stop defendants from filing the liens which it violated. We have a finding that the liens are fraudulent. We have motions before the court in August of 2016 to set a show cause hearing for October. Defendants Deutsche maintained dominion over the property using the fraudulent assignments. Demand was made and defendant refused to release. Under Penal Code § 32.46— this act shows intent to defraud and harm. This violates the TXCPRC 12.002 and the DTPA. b. A person may not make, present, or use a document or other record with: i. Knowledge that the document or other record is a fraudulent Court record or a fraudulent lien or claim against real or personal property or an interest in real or personal property;
ii. intent that the document or other record be given the same legal effect as a Court record or document of a Court created by or established under the constitution or laws of this state or the United States or another entity listed in Section 37.01, Penal Code, The defendants sought to cover up these failures through forgery of documents and fraud by concealment.
Defendants are relying that Plaintiff will not be able to continue litigation due to lack of funding. This is a very winnable case. Plaintiff is without the means to support herself because she is unable to become regulated banker until the litigation is resolved. She has been forced to hire contingency fee lawyers who lack the skills to win this case. She has now hired competent counsel, but needs a small amount of funding to continue to take the case to trial.
The damage claims center on loss of employment earnings, hurricane damages, maintenance costs and loss of sales on the property. Several claims include potential criminal violations for fraudulent liens and fraudulent misrepresentation, busting the damage caps for exemplary damages.
This is a documents case containing extensive documentary evidence in support of the Plaintiffs claims. The statute of limitations to collect on the notes by the defendants expired in 2011. There are no counterclaims. The breach of contract and wrongful foreclosure is set for no evidence summary judgment in October/Nov 2016. We intend to continue to file no evidence summary judgments and set a trial for damages once these are complete.
The overall case has reached a stage where the court could rule favorably on no-evidence summary judgment motions holding that Plaintiff has established that the Notes were not validly transferred to the alleged purchasers. This would result in a jury proceeding to determine damages. At that point, serious settlement discussions may be held between counsel or through mediation. Discovery on damages may well be necessary with experts being retained to determine damages. It is possible that the Court would hold that endorsements to the Note were fraudulent documents prohibited by statute, which also strengthen Plaintiffs settlement position.
Members of the jury will likely be very sympathetic to Plaintiff. She was successful until Arklatex, Deutsche and its agents destroyed her career, livelihood and caused her severe anguish and personal hardship. For example, Arklatex repeatedly stated that it would release the lien against the property, reduced that promise to writing, but never executed the release promised to her. This is common law fraud. It produced a disclaimer of interest, and wrote over this disclaimer that she could not file it in the land records until she gave up her damages. This is not a release of lien or a recordable document. Deutsche Bank knew or should have known that the allonges were not valid but nevertheless continued to maintain that it was the “holder” of the Notes. Deutsche bank was also noticed to release its fraudulent liens and refused. These assignments have been ruled to be fraudulent under the statute and by a court. . It is entirely possible that jury members, their families, and friends will have had problems with banks and their servicing companies, and will punish Defendants for not solving this problem sooner.
Trial Judge: Judge Denman is the trial judge in the first case filed by Plaintiff. Judge Denman has extensive experience as a trial judge. Prior to taking the bench, he specialized in real estate litigation. He is known to be decisive and will rule in accordance with the law.
Legal team includes:
Trial team identities will be furnished upon request. Counsel is available to discuss case and provide requested evidence and documents. Petition will shortly be revised.
35 year experienced trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor, in house trial counsel for Federal Express, former Navy trial lawyer, experienced in complex civil and criminal litigation, including commercial, intellectual property and employment litigation as well as civil and criminal racketeering, fraud, tax fraud and insider trading. Counsel has expertise in trying, winning, and settling this type of case.
Co-counsel: two decades of experience with real estate, issues who knows and has worked with the Judge. Has experience in trying, winning, and settling real estate cases.
Jurisdiction: Brazoria County, Texas is known as one of the most dangerous jurisdictions for corporate defendants in product liability cases, with huge multi-million dollar verdicts. The potential jury pool continues to be comprised primarily of blue collar workers although the jury pool of white collar workers or executives has steadily increased in recent years. Jury very pro plaintiff and awards very large damages where fraud personal injury damages have been wronged against Plaintiffs. The district judges tend to be liberal in allowing plaintiffs to have their day in court.
Damage expert witnesses identified.
Counsel opinion letter: 80% or better chance of recovery.
Litigation strategy: we intend to file a series of summary judgments on the breach of contract and lien claims shortly and findings of liability. This will reduce time to trial for damages or mediation.
Defendant’s ability to pay: liquid banks with ability to pay large damages.
Settlement offers to date: Arklatex has made a diminimus settlement offer.
Funding offer: We anticipate this case will settle within the next 6-8 months. This case has a lower risk profile because it is fully developed and ready for summary judgments. This case has several favourable rulings for the Plaintiff. Documentary evidence and rulings are available upon request. We are offering a return of 300% of amount raised for the investment effort ONLY. Should the case settle early or we recover attorney’s fees at an earlier stage in the litigation (i.e. within 4-6 months) your investment return will be less than 300% and made on an attractive ROI.
Disclosures: This is a consolidation of two cases. The first case filed has had several previous attorneys work on it who have resigned. This was due to the increasing complexity in the case and increasing damages.. Previous attorneys were plaintiff’s personal injury attorneys with varying degree of skill for complex litigation. The second case filed had the same attorney until April of 2016. Recent new counsel has been retained with the expertise to take this case to trial. There are no liens on this case.
These funds are greatly needed to make a good faith effort to pay new current counsel, and for living expenses and other bills.
About the plaintiff: Plaintiff is a 59 year old American lady from Texas. She was working as a corporate finance advisor for a boutique investment bank where she had worked for 12 years. Plaintiff is a resourceful, determined, and creative problem solver, who has utilized her banking, regulatory and legal relationships to advance this case. She is very credible. She is a knowledgeable asset to the case.
At the time this occurred, the plaintiff was regulated holding a CF30 banking license. A CF-30 license is not “portable”. To change jobs, an individual must obtain CF-30 licensure status with each new employer. The application requires that the applicant be financially stable and focuses on potential debts, liabilities and litigation that may reflect on the applicant’s financial soundness and reputation. The ongoing issues from the litigation caused the plaintiff to lose her CF30. As of 2016 she is still is unable to regain her CF30 because of this litigation. Plaintiff reached a reasonable amount of success in her career over the years earning a mid-6 figure salary. Plaintiffs’ employer decided to discontinue its operations in Texas. This was the beginning of the perfect storm.
This case has been as much about personal tragedy as triumph. The house she bought was destroyed in a hurricane. Step by step she rebuilt without the funds or insurance money. It took 6 years. A year after the storm, these same defendants foreclosed on her sister’s property. Just before the foreclosure her sister committed suicide. Plaintiff filed the second lawsuit, and used her business relationships and the knowledge she gained to help others save their homes. One example is she helped save were from elderly lady’s home who was a double amputee . At times Plaintiff has represented herself, winning several cutting edge motions against the Defendants for Fraud. The plaintiff has invested 1000s of hours in the case to date.
The damage claims center on loss of employment earnings, loss of value of the home, civil violations for fraudulent liens, forgery and fraudulent misrepresentation. The litigation, loss of the property in a hurricane caused financial soundness arose from having to engage in US litigation. This long running litigation seriously impeded the plaintiff ability to earn a living. This is a result of the litigation and its related issues caused the plaintiff to be unqualified to maintain her license.
Slowly Plaintiff has rebuilt her business relationships in banking. She is currently working straight commission in an unregulated capacity at a broker dealer. This greatly reduces her earning potential. She lives in a homeless shelter which she will shortly have to move from. As of 2016 she is still is unable to regain her CF30 because of this litigation. For this reason Plaintiffs identity will be revealed to qualified interested investors.
She became an expert witness for the Texas attorney general during the financial crises, assisting with gathering documentation that evidences the massive fraud in the mortgage industry during that time. The attorney general recovered $450 million for Texas as a result of her assistance.
The facts in this case have been repeatedly carried out across America. Despite the settlement with the attorneys general, little has changed. The same fraudulent practices are being repeated, using the same documents that the attorneys general obtained a cease and desist order. Plaintiff has fought for justice, what is right, to clear her name and restore her reputation for a crimes perpetrated against her and others who have not been as fortunate. These funds are greatly needed to make a good faith effort to pay new current counsel, and for living expenses and other bills.
Thank you for taking the time to read about me and my case.
Username
|
| |
arklatex23
|
E-mail Address
|
| |
acolvin@cadogansecurities.com
|
Country Where Your Dispute Is Located
|
| |
United States
|
How Much Litigation Funding Do You Want To Raise?
|
| |
$32,000.00
|
Headline For Your Litigation Crowdfunding Campaign
|
| |
300% Return Case Ready for Summary Judgment Breach of Contract Fraud Case Against Deutsche Bank and Benchmark mortgage.
|
Description Of Your Legal Dispute
|
| |
This is a David and Goliath case. This is a breach of contract, common law fraud, and civil theft, fraudulent lien case brought in District Court in Texas. The claims against the defendants arise out of the contracts and tort.
The defendants are Deutsche Bank and Arklatex Benchmark Mortgage who is ranked 51st largest mortgage loan originator. Arklatex’s annual turnover is $250,000,00m USD. The basis of the claim is defendants perpetuating and engaging in an illegal course of fraudulent conduct by failing to comply with the terms of the deed of trust and notes. Defendant Mortgagee Arklatex sold its interest in the property and did not release that interest under the terms of the deed of trust. This defendant has made a judicial admission that it did not release its lien. This 100% clear and 100% recovery of all attorney’s fees and damages in this case for breach of contract. Defendant Deutsche did not have an interest in the property. Defendant fraudulently foreclosed on the property assigning a lien to itself. We have an injunction to stop defendants from filing the liens which it violated. We have a finding that the liens are fraudulent. We have motions before the court in August of 2016 to set a show cause hearing for October. Defendants Deutsche maintained dominion over the property using the fraudulent assignments. Demand was made and defendant refused to release. Under Penal Code § 32.46— this act shows intent to defraud and harm. This violates the TXCPRC 12.002 and the DTPA. b. A person may not make, present, or use a document or other record with: i. Knowledge that the document or other record is a fraudulent Court record or a fraudulent lien or claim against real or personal property or an interest in real or personal property;
ii. intent that the document or other record be given the same legal effect as a Court record or document of a Court created by or established under the constitution or laws of this state or the United States or another entity listed in Section 37.01, Penal Code, The defendants sought to cover up these failures through forgery of documents and fraud by concealment.
Defendants are relying that Plaintiff will not be able to continue litigation due to lack of funding. This is a very winnable case. Plaintiff is without the means to support herself because she is unable to become regulated banker until the litigation is resolved. She has been forced to hire contingency fee lawyers who lack the skills to win this case. She has now hired competent counsel, but needs a small amount of funding to continue to take the case to trial.
The damage claims center on loss of employment earnings, hurricane damages, maintenance costs and loss of sales on the property. Several claims include potential criminal violations for fraudulent liens and fraudulent misrepresentation, busting the damage caps for exemplary damages.
This is a documents case containing extensive documentary evidence in support of the Plaintiffs claims. The statute of limitations to collect on the notes by the defendants expired in 2011. There are no counterclaims. The breach of contract and wrongful foreclosure is set for no evidence summary judgment in October/Nov 2016. We intend to continue to file no evidence summary judgments and set a trial for damages once these are complete.
The overall case has reached a stage where the court could rule favorably on no-evidence summary judgment motions holding that Plaintiff has established that the Notes were not validly transferred to the alleged purchasers. This would result in a jury proceeding to determine damages. At that point, serious settlement discussions may be held between counsel or through mediation. Discovery on damages may well be necessary with experts being retained to determine damages. It is possible that the Court would hold that endorsements to the Note were fraudulent documents prohibited by statute, which also strengthen Plaintiffs settlement position.
Members of the jury will likely be very sympathetic to Plaintiff. She was successful until Arklatex, Deutsche and its agents destroyed her career, livelihood and caused her severe anguish and personal hardship. For example, Arklatex repeatedly stated that it would release the lien against the property, reduced that promise to writing, but never executed the release promised to her. This is common law fraud. It produced a disclaimer of interest, and wrote over this disclaimer that she could not file it in the land records until she gave up her damages. This is not a release of lien or a recordable document. Deutsche Bank knew or should have known that the allonges were not valid but nevertheless continued to maintain that it was the “holder” of the Notes. Deutsche bank was also noticed to release its fraudulent liens and refused. These assignments have been ruled to be fraudulent under the statute and by a court. . It is entirely possible that jury members, their families, and friends will have had problems with banks and their servicing companies, and will punish Defendants for not solving this problem sooner.
Trial Judge: Judge Denman is the trial judge in the first case filed by Plaintiff. Judge Denman has extensive experience as a trial judge. Prior to taking the bench, he specialized in real estate litigation. He is known to be decisive and will rule in accordance with the law.
Legal team includes:
Trial team identities will be furnished upon request. Counsel is available to discuss case and provide requested evidence and documents. Petition will shortly be revised.
35 year experienced trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor, in house trial counsel for Federal Express, former Navy trial lawyer, experienced in complex civil and criminal litigation, including commercial, intellectual property and employment litigation as well as civil and criminal racketeering, fraud, tax fraud and insider trading. Counsel has expertise in trying, winning, and settling this type of case.
Co-counsel: two decades of experience with real estate, issues who knows and has worked with the Judge. Has experience in trying, winning, and settling real estate cases.
Jurisdiction: Brazoria County, Texas is known as one of the most dangerous jurisdictions for corporate defendants in product liability cases, with huge multi-million dollar verdicts. The potential jury pool continues to be comprised primarily of blue collar workers although the jury pool of white collar workers or executives has steadily increased in recent years. Jury very pro plaintiff and awards very large damages where fraud personal injury damages have been wronged against Plaintiffs. The district judges tend to be liberal in allowing plaintiffs to have their day in court.
Damage expert witnesses identified.
Counsel opinion letter: 80% or better chance of recovery.
Litigation strategy: we intend to file a series of summary judgments on the breach of contract and lien claims shortly and findings of liability. This will reduce time to trial for damages or mediation.
Defendant’s ability to pay: liquid banks with ability to pay large damages.
Settlement offers to date: Arklatex has made a diminimus settlement offer.
Funding offer: We anticipate this case will settle within the next 6-8 months. This case has a lower risk profile because it is fully developed and ready for summary judgments. This case has several favourable rulings for the Plaintiff. Documentary evidence and rulings are available upon request. We are offering a return of 300% of amount raised for the investment effort ONLY. Should the case settle early or we recover attorney’s fees at an earlier stage in the litigation (i.e. within 4-6 months) your investment return will be less than 300% and made on an attractive ROI.
Disclosures: This is a consolidation of two cases. The first case filed has had several previous attorneys work on it who have resigned. This was due to the increasing complexity in the case and increasing damages.. Previous attorneys were plaintiff’s personal injury attorneys with varying degree of skill for complex litigation. The second case filed had the same attorney until April of 2016. Recent new counsel has been retained with the expertise to take this case to trial. There are no liens on this case.
These funds are greatly needed to make a good faith effort to pay new current counsel, and for living expenses and other bills.
About the plaintiff: Plaintiff is a 59 year old American lady from Texas. She was working as a corporate finance advisor for a boutique investment bank where she had worked for 12 years. Plaintiff is a resourceful, determined, and creative problem solver, who has utilized her banking, regulatory and legal relationships to advance this case. She is very credible. She is a knowledgeable asset to the case.
At the time this occurred, the plaintiff was regulated holding a CF30 banking license. A CF-30 license is not “portable”. To change jobs, an individual must obtain CF-30 licensure status with each new employer. The application requires that the applicant be financially stable and focuses on potential debts, liabilities and litigation that may reflect on the applicant’s financial soundness and reputation. The ongoing issues from the litigation caused the plaintiff to lose her CF30. As of 2016 she is still is unable to regain her CF30 because of this litigation. Plaintiff reached a reasonable amount of success in her career over the years earning a mid-6 figure salary. Plaintiffs’ employer decided to discontinue its operations in Texas. This was the beginning of the perfect storm.
This case has been as much about personal tragedy as triumph. The house she bought was destroyed in a hurricane. Step by step she rebuilt without the funds or insurance money. It took 6 years. A year after the storm, these same defendants foreclosed on her sister’s property. Just before the foreclosure her sister committed suicide. Plaintiff filed the second lawsuit, and used her business relationships and the knowledge she gained to help others save their homes. One example is she helped save were from elderly lady’s home who was a double amputee . At times Plaintiff has represented herself, winning several cutting edge motions against the Defendants for Fraud. The plaintiff has invested 1000s of hours in the case to date.
The damage claims center on loss of employment earnings, loss of value of the home, civil violations for fraudulent liens, forgery and fraudulent misrepresentation. The litigation, loss of the property in a hurricane caused financial soundness arose from having to engage in US litigation. This long running litigation seriously impeded the plaintiff ability to earn a living. This is a result of the litigation and its related issues caused the plaintiff to be unqualified to maintain her license.
Slowly Plaintiff has rebuilt her business relationships in banking. She is currently working straight commission in an unregulated capacity at a broker dealer. This greatly reduces her earning potential. She lives in a homeless shelter which she will shortly have to move from. As of 2016 she is still is unable to regain her CF30 because of this litigation. For this reason Plaintiffs identity will be revealed to qualified interested investors.
She became an expert witness for the Texas attorney general during the financial crises, assisting with gathering documentation that evidences the massive fraud in the mortgage industry during that time. The attorney general recovered $450 million for Texas as a result of her assistance.
The facts in this case have been repeatedly carried out across America. Despite the settlement with the attorneys general, little has changed. The same fraudulent practices are being repeated, using the same documents that the attorneys general obtained a cease and desist order. Plaintiff has fought for justice, what is right, to clear her name and restore her reputation for a crimes perpetrated against her and others who have not been as fortunate. These funds are greatly needed to make a good faith effort to pay new current counsel, and for living expenses and other bills.
Thank you for taking the time to read about me and my case.
|
Featured Image For Your Litigation Funding Campaign
|
| |
|
End Date Of Your Litigation Crowdfunding Campaign
|
| |
2016-10-24
|
How Much Compensation Can You Receive If Your Case Wins?
|
| |
$1,000,000.00
|
Percentage Of Future Potential Compensation You Are Offering As A Reward (Success Fee / Contingent Fee)
|
| |
10% Of Amount Recovered
|
| AUTOMATIC CALCULATIONS |
Potential Return Of Investors (Percent)
|
| |
312.5
|
Estimated Total Reward Offered To Investors
|
| |
$100,000.00
|
Estimated Remaining Compensation For Litigant
|
| |
$900,000.00
|
Litigation Crowdfunding Campaign Author
|
| |
clause23
|
Role
|
| |
Litigant
|
|
International arbitration case analysis is provided to Invest4Justice by the lawyers of the International Arbitration Attorney Network. All other legal advice is provided by Aceris Law LLC.
Estimated 312.5% Returns: 300% Return Case Ready for Summary Judgment Breach of Contract Fraud Case Against Deutsche Bank and Benchmark mortgage.
