Motion for Child Support in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Norberto Ferrer| Trellis.Law

On November 18, 2011 a Order to Show Cause was filed involving a dispute between Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and Norberto Ferrer, for Commercial in the District Court of Queens County.

Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 05/14/2013 INDEX NO. 700865/2011
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/14/2013

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Index No.: 700865/2011

Plaintiff,

-against-

NORBERTO FERRER,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

P~CHECO
LUGO ,,,.u:

340 Atla nbc Ave nue
Brooklyn, New York 11201
(718) 855-3000
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Index No.: 700865/2011

Plaintiff,

-against-

NORBERTO FERRER,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This Memorandum of Law is submitted in support of defendant's order to show

cause for an Order:

a) Vacate and set aside the default judgment entered on May 14, 2012 against
defendant in the above captioned matter pursuant to CPLR !l 5015(a)(1) and
CPLR !l5015(a)(4);

b) Permitting Defendant to interpose an Answer in this action pursuant to CPLR
!l3012(d) and CPLR !l2004;

c) Permanently restraining plaintiffand itsrepresentative from taking any further
action or proceeding to enforce or collect judgment pending the determination
of defendant's rights on the merits pursuant to CPLR !l!l6301 and 6313;

d) Issuing a temporary restraining order pending the hearing and determination
of the motion herein, wherein Plaintiff or anyone acting under this direction
shall not take any action to enforce or collect the judgment pursuant to CPLR
!l6301 and CPLR !l6313;

e) That Plaintiff and its representatives be STAYED, pending the determination
of Defendant's rights on the merits of this action, from taking any further
action to enforce or collect judgment pursuant to CPLR !l2221;

f) Converting this action, represented to the Court as a "CONSUMER CREDIT
TRANSACTION" based solely on a failure to repay a note, into a real estate
foreclosure action in the interest of justice pursuant to CPLR !l1 03(c);

g) Dismissing plaintiffs complaint;

h) Awarding. attorney's fees for having to make this motion; and

i) For such other and further reliefas this Court may deem just and proper.
PACIIH£O
ILT:GU
"'I"TIJ:UHlflY"'::-;"""lll\l\1
1
The facts relevant to this motion are set forth in the affirmation of Carmen A.

Pacheco, Esq. ("Pacheco Aff.") dated April 25, 2013, the Affidavit of Norberto Ferrer ("Norberto

Aff.") dated April 4, 2013 together with the Exhibits annexed thereto .

• STATEMENT OF FACTS

This action was commenced by plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. by filing of a

Summons and Complaint wrongfully titled"CONSUMER CREDIT TRANSACTION" on

November 18, 2011. See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit C. However, this case does not arise out of a

standard consumer credit transaction but arises out of a real estate mortgage transaction during

the purchase of a home with an address at 84-20 108th Avenue, Ozone Park, N.Y. 11417,

Block 9143 Lot 110 (hereinafter referred to as the "property").

Plaintiff in this action is an alleged mortgagor. In its complaint Wells Fargo seeks

to recover money damages, wrongfully by way of a consumer credit process, resulting from

defendant's alleged failure to repay his mortgage note.

n"Wells Fargo Bank. N .A.

No;rE DATE: 03"02",,2:007
'-IVlA TtJRITY.DATE: 03_20_2037
ACCOUNT#: c650'-{)SO-'4864138-':OOOl
'REFERENCE #: '200701.64900387

FIXED RATE LOAN NOTE
(Fully Amortl:dna)

Borrower ,Nanl.l.'.::
NORDERTO FERRER

roperty.Address:
84-20 .108TH AVENUE. OZONE PARK. NEVV YORK 11417..,0000

;lVl:ailing
Address 'Cor .billing '(J1"'dlf"Cel"'ent):
PUt':POIiiCS
.N/A
•

In {hi ••Note.
the 'W'ords •.••X•.•.•"nte •••.••:rny;'.
and 1'1ich also
.~BorTovvcr~.1 .•••.• meRns "vve;" '-..sorro""",crs;",'if'
.•~us;~ "~our;"lllnd.
'more:than.one .borrowcJ.'
signs bela""')
refer toeach person '''''''']10signs
:this ~No'tThe .'Nor6$ "~you;~' "'your';.'
'"!Le-ndcl.;;"
.and"~theBank" TC£CI' to
''W"elh,
Fal"go 'Bank,N .A., and .anyJI'UCC:"'5sor 'Or 'assi
11.orsubseguent :holder,cff,tbis
JNo'te.
.Each person "",hosigns:tllis'Note'is.jointly
and individually .boundby.its tenns -:Jd,.""'ill'be,di
•.edtly,jiablc
..•.
o:1hc:Barik
lor.the-enfireamount ovved on ',this ,Note,
and each is liableas 'the :pl'incipal
and 'nit-n'1ereJy.:as,p,guarunto"'.'

SECTJ:ON .2: . SECURITY' INTEREST

l.am 'givinatheBank.'a deed of tn.1St, 'mortgage
'or ,other
--security
i 'al1 ;rnodificationB,
(addenda:a-no
a:rnondments to then:< (the
"Securit,y"Instturnent")
.signed:the 's.ome
'Cia "'5
tliis
:Not 'Th.'C
:Secud'ty
'Instrutnent'S;ives
y~u.a'securirYinterestinthe property located at.theaddresl!l,sho"W"~ .bove
(the"Property").

:SECTI'ON:3: l-"'IY ,PROIVJ:ISE'YO PAY
.In rCiturn'-for.a loan that'I,11avc ,received
,(the '~Loan") •.r .promise 'to;pay $.90,640.00
,(this :arn01,Int 'is 3
r•.t"I=Jll'fl~--'''''''"UA''il!vj
the process server. Further, at the time of the alleged service, he always wore glasses which

also were not identified in the physical description of the person served. See Ferrer Aff. 119.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Ferrer does state that he recalls being in

receipt of documents on some day after the alleged service. See Ferrer Aff. 11 10. The

• documents later were identified to him by his daughter as documents stating that he was being

sued. Id. The term "Consumer Credit Transaction" was prominently displayed on the paper

titled "Summons". See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit C. Consequently Mr. Ferrer thought it was a

mistake. Mr. Ferrer only had knowledge of having a mortgage with plaintiff and not any type of

outstanding credit card. See Ferrer Aff. 11 11. In fact he never had a credit card from Wells

Fargo. jQ.

Further, with respect to the mortgage, Mr. Ferrer had discussions with Wells

Fargo and its lawyers about resolving his problems with the mortgage on the property. See

Ferrer Aff. 1116. He had been trying to initiate a "deed in lieu" of foreclosure on the property and

even sent plaintiff the original filed deed to the home. See Ferrer Aff. 1124.

In addition, the words "home loan" or "mortgage" were not printed anywhere on

the summons or complaint. See Pacheco Aff. Exhibt C. The location where the alleged

transaction took place was also missing from the summons and complaint. Also, the term

"fixed rate note" was used in the complaint but Mr. Ferrer did not recall signing a "fixed rate

note". See Ferrer Aff. 1113 He was never provided a copy of any such .note before, during, or

after the closing. Id. In fact, until recently, he was not given any documents concerning the

closing for the property. jQ. As a result, Mr. Ferrer was confused and unable to determine the

nature and origin of the allegations made in the complaint. See Ferrer Aff. 1114. He was also

unable to identify the particular "Consumer Credit Transaction" being referred to in the

Summons. See Ferrer Aff. 1115.

IPACHIIOCO
ILCl.n:G;(~
•••
m"l'lnfl.WJ..,'''''lJ/'>\~'
I
4
As to the alleged mailing that occurred on December 19, 2011, Mr. Ferrer did not

receive any papers in the mail regarding a summons and compliant. See FerrerAff. 1129. If

those documents were in the mail hisdaughterorwifewouldhavementionedittohim.ld.

Moreover there is no affidavit of servi.ce for the alleged mailing. The only affidavit of service

• regarding the mailing is by someone who claims to have personal knowledge of the mailing, but

this affidavit is signed March 27, 2012, over 3 months after the alleged mailing take place.

CSTATE.OFNEW YDRKCOUNT¥ OF EX!# '7,',QU8l5'SfJD

NORBERTGFERRER
'De'fendanl.

'STA'TE(OF~' yg~
COUNTY 0 MONROE ,SS.':

JRobin ;Dalle-.Arella~ being :dlily :swom ,deposes ;and :says:

II;aUl ,:0v:er 1:8 'years
:of~~ge ,and "am.,eluployed ~y rthe tattom'~:y ifor:the iPJain'tiffihere"iu.

On or about the 12/19/20 11 ~,in "acc0rdan.ce with lthe ;additionallnotice pro:vis'i0fls (Q'ftthe
( ';'PLR~.I-.enclosed:8 -copy '.of:'tbeSummons ,& 'Complaint in ia .pr.ope:rl.'Y -addr.essed :staln;ped
\ 1;v.e1:ope (directed :to the IJ>efendantts) .at '"the JIast
!known <'address, tto wi't:

;y ,:5 :SENEGA ,AVE RIDGEWOOD N¥ 1.13:85

'Th 'envelope bore :the 'legend "Per-sonal and (Confiden:tia'P' ~and,did ;11'01indicate ~0n ',the
:,out ide thereof., by .r:eturn 'address ,or otherwise., tha"t tthe(communication "V'\fasTrom ian
,'atto '1ey,or :that it ,concerned la,debt.

iMnre :than -.twenty ~day.s.have,elapsed since 'the SumlHol1s & (Comp1aln't !have been :tnai]ed
.and ~ ~y ~have ,not Ibeen.rreturned ,b:y.:thePost ,O'ffice :asundeliv.er.able,.

,..
~Sworn :t "CreTe'll.l.e
~Q
~"'.... ,. .' .: m+0l'J 'n

March 27, 2012

,\. ~~ 'A;Q...'>f.£: :RA..:!f\
'() --.::>

C. Settlement Negotiations

Prior to the receipt of the summons and complaint, Mr. Ferrer was speaking with

representatives at Wells Fargo and their attorneys. During those conversations, no one

\PACDEC:O mentioned that he was in danger of being sued for repayment. See Ferrer Aff. 1115. In fact he
"LFGO
5
had an open dialogue with its attorney with whom they asked him to contact. See Ferrer Aff. ~

17. Mr. Ferrer reasonably believed that his communications with Wells Fargo were a true

attempt to work out a settlement or some good faith solution with the bank. See Ferrer Affa. ~

16; see also Pacheco Aff. ~ 58. Consequently, Mr. Ferrer had a good faith basis to believe that

• the summons and complaint were sent in error as the two sides were in negotiation to resolve

this matter. See Pacheco Aff. ~ 59. Moreover and consistent with Mr. Ferrer's ongoing

negotiations, he sent multiple letters to Wells Fargo with a carbon copy to its law firm after

falling behind on the mortgage payments. See Ferrer Aff. ~ 18.

On March 17, 2011, Mr. Ferrer received a letter from plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank

regarding loan number 0072907595 that stated in capital letters "THIS IS FOR

INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT A DEMAND FOR PAYMENT." See

Pacheco Aff. Exhibit O. In the same letter, Wells Fargo stated that "the loan filewas being

referred to their attorney with instructions to begin foreclosure proceedings." Id. The letter also

mentioned that "due to your default under the terms of the mortgage or deed of trust, the entire

balance is due and payable." jQ. The letter listed "Steven J. Baum Pc" as the attorney to

contact. In another paragraph, the letter contained:

In the event you are experiencing an involuntary inability to pay
and wish to explore an opportunity to reinstate, or need
. assistance in selling your property, please contact our offices at
(800 ) 848 - 9862 and request to speak to one of our Borrower
Counseling Representatives.

See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit O.

Please be advised that in the event of foreclosure, you would ina}
be :f)el'SClnallyliable for any part of the debt, but you will lose your
interest in and rights to the property.

See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit o. logically once Mr. Ferrer received any documents from Wells

Fargo he did not understand what really was going on. Id.

In response to the March 17th, Mr. Ferrer wrote a letter on March 21, 2011. In

that letter,Mr. Ferrer explained that he could no longer make payments on the mortgage due to

IPACHELO
IJLu'GID 6
.....-rrmtt,nw;:......""uM.wj
financial difficulties'. In that same letter he requested assistance. See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit P.

In addition, Mr. Ferrer telephoned Wells Fargo. During those conversation he requested

instruction for turning the deed over to Wells Fargo. See Ferrer Aff. 1123. However each time

he asked a question about turning the deed over to them, he was put on hold and then the

• representative would hang up the call. lQ. In frustration and in an attempt to resolve this matter

with Wells Fargo, Mr. Ferrer sent another letter. Id.

Specifically on April 13, 2011, he sent a letter explaining his intention to proceed

with a "Deed in Lieu". See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit Q. This was something that his wife read on the

internet. See Ferrer Aff. 1124.Toward accomplishing his goal, he enclosed with that letter the

original deed that was filed at the Kings County Clerk's Office. Id. In the same letter he

requested a letter of clearance regarding the matter upon receipt of the deed. Id. Thereafter he

continued to communicate with plaintiff and its counsel to determine when he would get

clearance from the loan.

Thereafter on October 20, 2011, he sent a third letter to Wells Fargo wherein he

enclosed copies of the March and April letters. See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit R. Mr. Ferrer stated

that he had enclosed the original deed in the April 13th letter and its receipt was neither

acknowledged nor was the deed returned to him. See Ferrer Aff. 1125. He also stated therein

that numerous attempts had been made to speak with someone at Wells Fargo to assist with

the "deed in lieu" procedure with littlesuccess. Id.

Mr. Ferrer had been in constant telephone communication with representatives of

Wells Fargo and itsattorneys. During those conversations no one denied or acknowledged

receipt of the deed. See Pacheco Aff. 1168. Further, he believed that once Wells Fargo had the

original filed deed, it became the owner of the house. See Ferrer Aff. 1127. In fact, in conformity

with his beliefs, the Marreros moved out of the house once the letter was sent. Id. Moreover

1 Shortly before this, Mr. Ferrer had been told by Mr. Marrero that the Marrero's would no longer be able
to pay the mortgage due to financial troubles. See Ferrer Aft. ~ 19. Because Wells Fargo would not deal
with the Marreros directly, Mr. Ferrer had to communicate such financial distress himself. See Ferrer Aft.
~20.
'-
I•..~£HE:CO.
. JL1l"G()
7
Wells Fargo and itsattorney never once told Mr. Ferrer that they were discussing only one of

the loans. See Ferrer Aff. 1128. The discussions centered on the fullamount owed on the house

and not anything less than that amount. jQ. Equally important is that Mr. Ferrer had no idea that

there were two mortgage notes and mortgages. Mr. Marrero lived in the home with his wife and

• family. Thus Mr. Marrero was responsible for making the mortgage payments. See Ferrer Aff. 11
19. Consequently, only when Mr. Marrero fell behind on his payments did Mr. Ferrer learned

that there were two home mortgage loans. See Ferrer Aff. 1120.

D. No RPAPL Required Notice

In addition, while the present action is an attempt to foreclose, Mr. Ferrer did not

receive by mail or otherwise any notice prior to the commencement of this action that conforms

to the standards of RPAPL 9 1304. See Ferrer Aff. 1130. Likewise he never was notified about

attending a mandated Foreclosure Settlement Conference. See Ferrer Aff. 1131. He also never

received, by hand or mail, notice containing the summons & complaint prior to plaintiff's

application for a default judgment. See Ferrer Aff.1132. He also never received any documents

requesting that he attend a Foreclosure Settlement Conference. See Ferrer Aff.1133.

E. Facts Surrounding Underlying Transaction

1. Introduction

Mr. Ferrer knew Jose Marrero from where they lived in Bushwick, Brooklyn. See

Ferrer Aff. 11 37. They went to bible study classes together. jQ. Prior to Mr. Marrero's request

that Mr. Ferrer be a co-signor of the loan, Mr. Ferrer had knownMr. Marrero for approximately

ten (10) years. Id.

In and around late 2006, Mr. Ferrer's friend Jose Marrero and his wife Janet

Marrero Uointly referred to as the "Marreros") told his Mr. Ferrer's wife that they fell in love with

what they feltwas their dream home. See Ferrer Aff. 1134. When they saw the house there was

a sign outside of itwith a telephone number. jQ. They called the number on the sign. Id. A

woman name Joyce was the person with whom they dealt. jQ.

I PACHECO
IL~~G(1)
8
Mr. Marrero said that Joyce told him that in order for them to buy their dream

home they needed a guarantor or co-signor to get a loan. See Ferrer Aff. 11 35. Consequently,

Mrs. Marrero asked Mr. Ferrer's wife ifhe could guarantee the loan. See Ferrer Aff. 11 36. His

wife then asked him if he would act as a co-signor of the Marrero loan. See Ferrer Aff.11 35. Mr .

• Ferrer did not quite understand what they meant but knew that they needed help to get the

property.!.Q. He did not understand what was involved but agreed to help their friends. See

Ferrer Aff. 1136.
Mr. Ferrer believes that it was Joyce that introduced the Marreros to an attorney.

See Ferrer Aff. 11 38. However, he was told that prior to the closing date the Marreros met the

attorney only once. Mr. Ferrer never met her until the date of the c1osing2 See Ferrer Aff. 1138.
In fact, Mr. Ferrer never even filled out an application for the home mortgage loans. See Ferrer

Aff. 11 46. He was called by the Marreros while they were at the bank applying for what he

believed was one home mortgage loan. Id. Under the bank's supervision, the Marreros

requested his personal information and provided it to the loan officer for Wells Fargo, Patricia

Kemesies, to get the home mortgage loan on the property approved. !.Q.

2. Closing

On March 2, 2007, Mr. Ferrer attended what he was told to be a closing so that

the Marreros could buy the property. See Ferrer Aff. 11 39. He went because he was needed to

be a co-signor/guarantor on the home mortgage loan. Id. In attendance at the closing were the

Marreros, the Marrero's attorney, Mr. Ferrer, the sellers, the sellers' attorney, Joyce (real estate

agent), and other people.3 See Ferrer Aff. 11 40. Unbeknownst to Mr. Ferrer, the Marreros'

attorney was not also representing him in the closing. Thus, Mr. Ferrer did not have an attorney

at the closing. See Ferrer Aff. 1141. His wife did not attend the closing either. Id.

At the closing, Mr. Ferrer was given a lotof documents to sign. See Ferrer Aff. 11
43. He also saw Mr. Marrero signing papers as well. Id. Mr. Ferrer thought that he was signing

2 Outside of meeting with the Marreros, Mr. Ferrer did not meet with anyone, including the attorney, until
the date of the closing. lQ.
3 Patricia Kemesies was also at the attorney's office on the day of the closing, but she stayed in the foyer.
IPACHErO See Ferrer Aff. ~ 40.
jTLlr'GO
•••.•• 1
--.rr.r"'.flw;:>(,<;"TUM
9
as a co-signor only to guarantee the loan. Id. However, no one explained documents to him.

Id. He was only told where to sign the documents. Id. However because he is illiterate,he did

not know he was the sole borrower of the loan. See Ferrer Aff. 1144. Again, Mr. Ferrer cannot

read or write in any language except for signing his name. See Ferrer Aff. 42.

Plaintiff Wells Fargo closing attorneys communicated exclusively with the

Marreros with the small exception of telling Mr. Ferrer where to sign. See Ferrer Aff. 11 45. In

fact its attorney knew that the Marreros were trying to purchase the property with the purpose of

living there. See Ferrer Aff. 11 45. Mr. Ferrer never filled out any application for a mortgage.

See Ferrer Aff. 11 46. He only provided the Marreros with his social security number over the

telephone while they were meeting with the bank to apply for a mortgage. Id. It was Mr. Ferrer's

understanding that representatives from the bank knew that the Marreros had called him to get

his information so that he would be a co-signor/guarantor. At no point did he agree to be the

sole borrower for the purchase of the home. Id. However unbeknownst to Mr. Ferrer at the time

of the closing, he was the sole borrower on the home mortgage loans. See Ferrer Aff. 1147. In

fact, at that time, it was his understanding that there would only be one mortgage loan.

When the closing ended neither Mr. Marrero nor Mr. Ferrer received any of the

papers that were signed. See Ferrer Aff. 11 53. However Mr. Marrero was given the keys to the

house; Mr. Ferrer received nothing. Id. At no point after the closing were any of the documents

Mr. Ferrer signed or copies of same sent to him by mail or by any other method. See Ferrer Aff.

11 54. He later learned that his name was on the deed along with Mr. Marrero (as tenants-in-

common), that he was the only applicant for the home mortgage loan, and that he was the only

borrower for the money used to purchase the house. See Ferrer Aff. 11 55. In fact, Mr. Ferrer

was read a letterfrom the Marreros' attorney stating that Mr. Marrero should make sure that Mr.

Ferrer's name be removed from the deed so he can protect his interest in the property. See

Ferrer Aff. 1156.

\ PACHBOCO
liL~r.Gn
,..nroJlNflW~:'MU"\1
10
3. Loan Note and Mortgage

The mortgage note, which is the subject of this litigation, was secured by a first

mortgage lien on the house for $90,640.00 and a mortgage note secured by a second mortgage

lien for $271,920.00. See Ferrer Aft. 1148; see also Pacheco Aft. Exhibit D. Both mortgage

notes were used in their entirety to fund the purchase of the property. See Pacheco Aft. 1146

and Exhibit N.

At the time of the closing, Mr. Ferrer did not hear the Marreros' lawyer or anyone

else explain that the mortgage note for $90,640.00 bore a high interest rate of 10%.

fSECiTIION"l: lINTEREs;r

11w./illipay fsirrrP1e :annuallinterest
iiritereStlat:8 [Tale ~o'f:il'-O:OnO%. ihitercst"W'ill
tbc(cnarged'On lthe iUIWaill iPiin-cy,al
ntn'fi)
(the ~fullramount
co'f!Rnnc~palihas [been linterest
Ipa"id. 'The ,rate :.required lb.y (fllis ~Sectjon.(4
ItS1the Irate)1 \wil11pay
lboth
lbeTore rand rafter iatly(de'fa rilt ,under
:tliis )Note.

See Pacheco Aft. Exhibit D. The monthly payments for that loan were $799.99. Id.

The second mortgage note was in the amount of $271,920.00 and titled "New

York Balloon Note". See Ferrer.Aft.1I50. That mortgage note bore an interest rate of 7.125%

with a balloon payment of $148,566.40 on the last payment after thirty years. Id. The monthly

payments for this loan were $1,714.54.!.Q. The combined monthly payments for the loan were

$2,514.53. See Ferrer Aft. 1151.

It was represented by Patricia Kemesies, the Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

Consultant, that Mr. Ferrer's co-signature could be removed from the mortgage loan documents

six (6) months from the date he signed the papers. See Ferrer Aft. 1152. Thereafter Mr. Marrero

would be able to reapply to have the home mortgage loan solely iri his name without a

guarantor.!.Q' He relied on this representation when he signed the loan documents. Id. It is

submitted that this loan was a disaster from inception.

4. Priority, Assignment and Subordination

There are also considerable issues regarding the priority of the mortgages and

whether the recorded subordination and assignment of mortgage are valid as a matter of law. It

will go undisputed that the first mortgage in the amount of the US$90,640.00 was recorded

before the second mortgage in the amount of US$271,920,00. Thereafter, according to
PA£HIIXO
iLcJ.T,.{,:;;:{))
,
11
documents obtained from the EDGAR database on the SEC.gov website, in and around May 1,

2007 the second mortgage in the amount of US$271 ,920.00 was securitized and sold into the

trust, Banc of America Funding 2007-4 Trust. The cut-off date for this trust was May 1, 2007.

See Pacheco Aff. Exhibit S.

Over four years later, the mortgage is allegedly assigned for value from Wells

Fargo Bank, NA to US Bank National Association, as Trustee for Banc of America Funding

2007-4 Trust. The document is dated May 17, 2011 and was filed on August 26,2011. The

alleged assignment is signed by someone whose name is illegible and purporting to be "Vice

President Loan Documentation."
IAsstgnmerit,dfMortgage
lFor\value;received,
',Wells'FaraorBarik.
'N1A.
'J.~Home(Cam.pus,~OeslMolnes.Il~'50328
,assigns, ;and \transferSlto:
,Hen!by:sells.
~USfB8rik'National{AsSOclatlon.;as':Trustee(for,Banc~o'fJArner'lcal'fundlna2007-4'iT:rust
/48011F.rederlca 'Street.(Owensboro.
:KY'42301
~Its'successors
'and/or,assigns, ,all 'Its 'rigl"lt.ltltle.
'3nd ;all ibeneflci;:il
[interest
wnderlth fM angage,as {fdllows;
at /cer.uiln

:ExecutlonlDate: IMarch:2••2007
.l:e8al~Name: ~NOr'bertotFeTr'er./A'marrlea:person
;and.;JoseIA.rMarrero
•.{A,lmarr.;edlperson

tBeneflclar,y: ,Wells[FargotBank.
fN/A.
:P.roper.tyfAddress:f84";20',10St'htAvenue.
(OzonefP.ar'k.
[NewWor.k :3.~'41:]
iCounty: (Queens !5tate: ~NewW.or'k
,RecordlnglOate: IApr.1I :.16.~2007 fl!oan/Amount::'$2.7i11920l00
ilnStrument/GRF.N{#:;2007032i100S56003 lReel/.lJlber:
:n1a

[I:egal, Description:
'See'Attached

.This "assign m en't :Is 'not
'subject
,to (the .requirements
(cif:Seaion
;275 ,iJQSElA. IMA!RRER'Gl
.•~S,1JGlrNiT'mEN~\NiTS.

(indiviatuilly!anQ(cdllec'iivelylthe
"~0wnei'::)(ownLthe:rea1iprq:petty
lIo"Cs:tC:Q
tal (the [above
~p.rQPcJ1Y
b\:dilress(ihe
,.tP,ropet1J'j).

"iFheSuborainafi'!8luenaer'has :in,the ~P.ropc~
Ian !iriterest !b.y,v'irtue
(OTIB lN10RlFG A.'GE
«tbe":EX:iS:i~g
~Securl~ ;lnstrumeIit':~given
~by(th.e((J)wner. (Coveringtthatlrea:1 lPrQpe~.l1UorelParticulailYlaescribearas
{follows:

;See/A:ttached IA
JEXliib'it

,wh';chdfocumentiis(dateolthe;200 loay(of;March ,,20077 ";,l,w:hlchwasffi!eCl iin(GREN
:a00::7000X9,602i7 11ltlpage jN1P.t. \tarras

Case Info

Judge

Marguerite A Grays Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

May 14, 2013

Case Filing Date

November 18, 2011

County

Parties

BLAIR, PATRICIA A Attorney for the Plaintiff
HENRICHS, JULIA JANE Attorney for the Plaintiff
LUGO, BETTY Attorney for the Defendants
Norberto Ferrer Defendant
Norberto Ferrer Non Party
PACHECO, CARMEN ANGELICA Attorney for the Defendants
REED, MARIA J Attorney for the Plaintiff
SCHOENTHAL, ALLISON J Attorney for the Plaintiff
SUSSMAN, DAVID JEFFREY Attorney for the Plaintiff
VERHAGEN, JASON P Attorney for the Plaintiff
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Plaintiff

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Order to Show Cause: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Norberto Ferrer

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties