Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Bank Foreclosure Fraud - FRAUD Element # 2 of 20 - Ignored Instructions to Service Loans

In the last phase of the Worst Bank Foreclosure Fraud in U.S. History, there were TWENTY elements of FRAUD employed entailing mortgage loans that were:
  • ALWAYS paid before the monthly due date
  • NEVER delinquent
  • NEVER in default
  • And with regard to Mr. Young residence in Chapel Hill, NC the subject mortgage loan was PAID-IN-FULL on the day he was violently evicted by a SWAT team of corrupt cops.
The 20 Elements of Fraud Were Perpetrated By . . .
. . . At the behest of . . .

. . . to cover-up the FRESCA crimes of MorganStanleyGate 

This entry covers . . .
FRAUD ELEMENT # 2
 which involved . . .
Ignoring Instructions to Apply
 Available Funds to Service Loans


Jim Hoose
On Feb. 6, 2009 Mr. Young sent an email to Jim Hoose, directing Paragon Commercial Bank to “make the payments from [the main operating account], thereby bringing all the loans current [through the end of February 2009]”.

Then on Feb. 10, 2009, in response to one of Mr. Hoose’s typically prevarication-laden missives, Mr. Young responded with an email (copying Bob Hatley), which was aptly titled “Your Intentions Are Fraudulent & Malicious”. In it, Mr. Young repeated his earlier instructions – “I gave you explicit instructions via email to bring all Paragon loans current”, and asked him to “report back when you’ve brought each of the loans current”. (Note: There were sufficient available funds to do so WHEN INSTRUCTED on February 6, 2009), which is confirmed by the February 2009 bank statement produced by Paragon – HOWEVER, Mr. Hoose did NOT do so. 

Bob Hatley
On Feb. 11, 2009, Mr. Young fired off a memo to Mr. Hatley indicating its purpose to be to: “reiterate my instructions given to process debt service payments to ensure ALL of my loans with Paragon are kept current as they have always been since their inception”. Mr. Young further directed Mr. Hatley to “reinstate automatic debt service payments on all of my loans”, which were temporarily suspended for a couple of weeks in January. 

Despite these very explicit written instructions, which were also supplemented with similar instructions communicated orally, Paragon deliberately failed to follow them, and instead undertook additional actions intended to orchestrate entirely FRAUDULENT loan defaults. When Mr. Young received the bank statement on Mar. 4, 2009, he noted the following: 
  1. Paragon failed to process the debt service payments to bring all loans current on Feb. 6, as he had directed 
  2. Although Jim Hoose of Paragon was told to cease making the $5,000 monthly transfer to another of Mr. Young’s accounts, it was processed anyway on February 10; 
  3. Paragon only made partial loan payments on Feb.11, and failed entirely to process loan payments on the recently acquired Graham St. lots (to be used for stacked valet parking at The Courtyard of Chapel Hill); 
  4. On Feb. 13, Paragon wired monies out of Mr. Young’s operating account in the amount of roughly $12,000 without authorization, nor legitimacy (as discussed in the FRAUD element that follows). This is the same illegitimate transfer they said was carried out on Feb 10. 
  5. In failing to follow Mr. Young’s instruction, blocking the receipt of ACH deposits, and items # 2 and # 4 above, Paragon created the impression that there were insufficient funds to make the remaining loan payments 
As a result: Paragon deliberately defied Mr. Young’s express instructions to bring ALL loans current on February 6th, and instead undertook sinister actions to orchestrate entirely BOGUS and FRAUDULENT loan defaults. 

Importantly, Congress did NOT bail out Banks so they could defraud and persecute the taxpayers who bailed them out. Moreover, the corruption observed in this matter alone, suggests a threat to the integrity of the U.S. Justice System may exist.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Bank Foreclosure Fraud - FRAUD Element # 1 of 20 - Rejecting Deposits of Tenant Rent Remittances

The Worst Bank Foreclosure Fraud in U.S. History was sponsored by Morgan Stanley and was a collaborative effort principally executed in North Carolina by Wachovia Bank and Paragon Commercial Bank.  These banks were assisted in their efforts by the law firms of Kirkland & Ellis, Nelson Mullins and Poyner & Spruill, respectively through an astonishing display of legal and judicial corruption. This foreclosure fraud involves six properties aggregating $22 million in value and seven loans, aggregating $9 million at the time the fraud was commenced.  The foreclosures proceeded uncontested because Spencer C. Young, a mortgage expert with an extensive experience base, was unlawfully denied legal representation.

The last phase of this foreclosure fraud was executed by Paragon Commercial Bank and Poyner & Spruill, entailing a mortgage loan that was:
  • ALWAYS paid before the monthly due date
  • NEVER delinquent
  • NEVER in default
  • And on the day of eviction PAID-IN-FULL !!
In this final phase there were TWENTY separate elements of fraud employed and . . .

FRAUD ELEMENT # 1
 involved . . .
Rejecting the Receipt and Deposit 
of Rent Remittances from Tenants

In late January 2009, Paragon Commercial Bank initiated their FRAUD by suddenly blocking the receipt and deposit of monthly rental remittances from tenants.  Their malicious intent was obvious, and their timing was deliberate.  They did this by abruptly canceling a long-established ACH  agreement with Mr. Young, and fabricating reasons for doing so.  Knowledge of the ACH is important in understanding how utterly absurd Paragon’s actions and stated rationale were – hence an explanation of the ACH electronic network for processing interbank transfers of monies between customer accounts is presented in Exhibit XIII.

Reason For Rejecting Deposits Was Absurd
The rationale provided for carrying out such a sudden draconian action was predicated on a:
  • Lie – in fact, it was a bold-faced lie;
  • Misrepresentation – in this case, it was a complete misrepresentation of  risks THAT DID NOT EXIST in this case because the ACH transactions pertained to the direct deposit of rental receipts from CORPORATE customers; and
  • Convolution - the reasoning for their action was predicated on a complete falsehood and entirely convoluted reasoning . . . in other words, because there was no legitimate reason for taking such a draconian action, and the circumstances could not support their evil plans, THEY JUST MADE IT UP . . . and as reflected in the evidentiary documents contained in Exhibit XII – FRAUD Element # 1, they did a poor job of that indeed.


Concocted Reason 
Jim Hoose
On Jan. 14, 2009, Jim Hoose Of Paragon sent Spencer Young an email informing him the ACH Agreements in effect for years with Paragon would be suddenly cancelled in 9 days. (Click here to access this)

The reason given was “several returned ACH transactions”, “over the last two months” posed an “unacceptable risk to the Bank”. 

As explained further below, this is utter NONSENSE.




Further Analysis of Paragon’s Bogus Rationale & Entirely Flawed Conclusions:
The Lie – This was a bold-faced lie and represented the initial step in the carefully orchestrated Assault – there were NOT several returned transactions – in fact, there were NO ACH reversals in the prior two months associated with the subject property.  The ONE reversal occurring during this time period was: 
  1. UNRELATED to the Paragon Loans; 
  2. An INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, in that is was less than 5% of the monthly rent roll, and an even lesser percentage of the average deposit balance kept on account; and 
  3. A ONE-TIME EVENT that was beyond Mr. Young’s control, in that it was “kangaroo court” ordered (explained further in FRAUD Element # 17) but outside the scope of this matter.  In actuality, it was a temporary deposit from a tenant at a property where Paragon was NOT the first mortgage lender.  
This lie was exposed in a Jan. 20, 2009 email from Mr. Young to CEO Bob Hatley (Click here to access this), whereby Mr. Young provided a listing of ALL transactions over the past 2 ½ months using bank statements produced by Paragon’s on-line reporting.  In his emailed response later that day, Mr. Hatley ignored the overwhelming evidence exposing this canard (Click here to access this).

Bob Hatley
The Misrepresentation – There was NO ASSOCIATED RISK to Paragon, in that: (1) Paragon served as the Originating Depositary Financial Institution on all of Mr. Young’s ACHs; (2) all rent receipts are from corporate business entities (i.e., NOT consumers); and (3) the ONLY risk that could have possibly existed would be a “time-frame” risk, which would arise ONLY IF Paragon served as the “Receiving Depositary Institution” and the monies were received from consumers, as there are certain provisions of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act that could introduce a time-frame problem.  Since NONE OF THESE CONDITIONS APPLIED, the transactions posed NO RISK WHATSOEVER to Paragon.  Moreover, if there was any fraudulent  “money good” risk (there wasn’t), it could be readily ameliorated by placing a simple “hold” for 24 hours, as the majority of any reversals occur within 24 hours of the processed ACH.  And lastly, no bank would terminate such an arrangement under the circumstances – for it would merely be another source of income from the related NSF processing fees, which the banking industry has dramatically increased recently.

The Convolution - A fundamental feature in sound commercial mortgage loan administration and related credit management is to require the direct receipt of rental monies (this was voluntarily arranged by Mr. Young years earlier).   In this case, Paragon Commercial Bank did the opposite.  The convoluted logic behind Paragon’s action is beyond the pale, and only further underscores their malicious intentions.

The Prophetic Warning - On Jan. 21, 2009, Mr. Young issued a memo to Hatley (click here to access this) asking that he cease and desist from preventing the deposit of rental monies, and ended his message with a prophetic warning: “I want to go on record that your action is baseless, and absolutely irrational from a banking and credit risk perspective – ergo, it is seemingly sinister – for it appears you are trying to prevent the good faith deposit of monies in order to orchestrate a fraudulent loan default. “
             
Martin Borden
Fraud Exposed – in an email dated Feb. 10, 2009, Mr. Young sent a responding email to Carol Horton of Paragon (click here to access this), and copied Mr. Hatley and Martin Borden (Mr. Young’s relationship banker).  In this transmittal, Mr. Young laid bare Paragon’s FRAUD-based rejection of deposits.

Importantly, Congress did NOT bail out Banks so they could defraud and maliciously defraud and persecute the very taxpayers who bailed them out.  Moreover, the corruption observed in this matter alone, suggests a threat to the integrity of the U.S. Justice System  may exist.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Bank Foreclosure Fraud - Exhibit XII - The "Smoking Gun" Evidence On Paragon's 20 Elements of Fraud


The excerpt below is Exhibit XII - Evidence Supporting Each of the TWENTY Elements of Fraud from the Jan. 29, 2010 Notice sent to Senior officials for North Carolina and the Federal government on a mortgage that was:
  • ALWAYS paid before the monthly due date
  • NEVER delinquent
  • NEVER in default
  • And on the day of eviction PAID-IN-FULL !!

In the last phase of the Worst Bank Foreclosure Fraud in U.S. History, which was carried out by Paragon Commercial Bank and Poyner & Spruill, there were TWENTY elements of FRAUD committed by the Perpetrators, and this Exhibit contains the “smoking gun” evidence of each Element of FRAUD.

Keep in mind the following: The Jan. 29, 2010 Notice filed with Senior officials for North Carolina and the Federal government contained an explanation of each of the TWENTY elements of Fraud, which factored into the 31-count indictment, which was also included in the Jan. 29 Notice.



# # # # #

The 20 Elements of Fraud Were Perpetrated By . . .
. . . At the behest of . . .

. . . to cover-up the FRESCA crimes of MorganStanleyGate 

Note:  To Access the Smoking Gun Evidence, Click On Each Of TWENTY Hyper-Linked Fraud Elements Listed in the table below:
#
Fraud Element
Evidentiary Documents
Pages
1
These documents show Paragon’s actions to be baseless and intended to orchestrate a default.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #1]
  1. 1/14/09 email from JHoose to SYoung titled: Acceptance of ACH Transactions;
1-2
  1. 1/20/09 email from SYoung to BHatley titled: Please Rescind Malicious Threat;
3-17
  1. 1/20/09 email from BHatley to SYoung in response to email titled: Please Rescind Malicious Threat;
18
  1. 1/21/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley demanding he cease and desist from FRAUD
19
  1. 2/10/09 email from SYoung  to CHorton titled: Paragon’s ACH Debacle;
20
2
These documents show Paragon fraudulently fabricated the illusion of a default

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #2]
  1. 2/6/09 email from SYoung to JHoose titled: Late Loan Payments
1
  1. 2/10/09 email from SYoung  to JHoose titled: Your Intentions are Fraudulent & Malicious
2-3
  1. 2/11/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley reiterating that ALL loans be brought current
4
  1. 2/27/09 Paragon Bank Statement for Spencer C. Young Investments, Inc.
5-7
3
These documents show Paragon had ignored specific instructions to keep all loans current

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #3]
A.    2/10/09 email from SYoung  to CHorton titled: Paragon’s ACH Debacle;
1
B.     2/10/09 email from SYoung to JHoose titled Your Intentions are Fraudulent & Malicious
2-3
C.     2/11/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley that the ACH deposits NOT be reversed
4
D.    2/27/09 Paragon Bank Statement for Spencer C. Young Investments, Inc.
5-7
4
Declaring Maliciously Orchestrated and Entirely Fraudulent Monetary Defaults

In the context of the preceding evidence, these documents show that the Notice of Default was based entirely on the orchestrated Fraud perpetrated by Paragon

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #4]
  1. 2/24/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled: Notice of Default and Intent to Accelerate [re: the TCoCH Valet Lots Mtge.]
1
  1. 2/25/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley in response to Default of Graham St. Loan
2
  1. 3/3/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled: Notice of Default and Intent to Accelerate [re: the TPSoD Mtge. and Line of Credit]
3
  1. 3/3/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled: Notice of Default and Intent to Accelerate [re: the MVC Mtge.]
4
  1. 3/6/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley in response to Fraudulent Default of ALL Paragon Loans
5
5
Since the loan accelerations were based on entirely fabricated, and therefore Fraudulent defaults, the demands for payment in full were without merit, and maliciously intended

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #5]
  1. 3/12/09 Letter from DWarren to SYoung titled: Loan No. 3857 in the original amt. of $791,000;
1-2
  1. 3/13/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley in response to Fraudulent Acceleration of the Graham St. Loan
3
  1. 3/18/09 Letter from DWarren to SYoung titled: Loan No. 2147 in the orig. amt. of $3,936,000;
4-5
  1. 3/18/09 Letter from DWarren to SYoung titled: Loan No. 3714 in the original amt. of $100,000;
6-7
  1. 3/18/09 Letter from DWarren to SYoung titled: Loan No. 2346 in the original amt. of $276,000;
8-9
  1. 3/20/09 memo from SYoung to BHatley in response to Fraudulent Acceleration of ALL Paragon Loans
10
6
The subject loans were NOT in default, so he exercise an assignment of rents was a FRAUD, and intended to cause emotional distress

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #6]
  1. 3/25/09 Letter from JHoose hand-delivered to ALL of Mr. Young’s tenants  (this particular one was sent to the President of AAA Care Care)
1
  1. 4/2/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled: Assignment of Rents
2
  1. 4/15/09 Email from Mr. Young to one of Mr. Young’s tenants (Ronnie Lloyd of Colonial Tire)
3-4
  1. 4/15/09 Email from Mr. Young to his ex-wife and his mother re; implications of the criminal acts of Paragon and Poyner & Spruill
5-6
  1. 4/28/09 email from Mr. Young to his tenants, exposing the FRAUD, along with context
7-11
7
These are the documents that were hand delivered by Jim Hoose of Paragon to Mr. Young’s commercial tenants, which caused consternation, confusion and uncertainty, thereby disrupting commerce at the subject property

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #7]
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Whipz n Chainz) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
1
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Precision Tune) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
2
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Chosun Ok) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
3
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Baba Ghannouj) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
4
  1. 33/25/09 Letter to Tenant (AAA Car Care) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
5
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (54 West Bar & Grill) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
6
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Colonial Tire & Automotive) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
7
  1. 3/25/09 Letter to Tenant (Spice & Curry) hand-delivered by JHoose in a threatening manner
8
  1. 4/2/09 Email from JHoose to Mr. Young advising Paragon’s FRAUD-based election to exercise the Assignment of Rents
9
8
These documents portrayed Mr. Young as financially irresponsible and threatened each tenant

 [Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #8]
  1. Example 3/25/09 Letter from JHoose to each Tenant [Note: these letters were sent to each and every tenant of The Pit Stop of Durham, as noted it # 7]
1
  1. Example 4/9/09 Letter from DWarren to each Tenant  [Note: these letters were sent to each and every tenant of The Pit Stop of Durham, as noted in # 7]
2
9
These documents show the leasing Paragon’s malicious fraud undermined. The net effect was a loss of rental income totaling $263,000, whose revenue stream represented an incremental value ranging from $3.3 million and $3.5 million

 [Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #9]
  1. Emails exchanged with AAA Auto Care in 12/08 concerning leasing adjacent Unit K at The Pit Stop of Durham
1-6
  1. 1/22/09 email and Letter of Intent to Dutch Bros. Coffee Shop concerning leasing Unit I at The Pit Stop of Durham
7-16
  1. Executed Letter of Intent to lease Unit I at The Pit Stop of Durham with La Tropicale Catering which was being revisited during the first quarter of 2009
17-20
  1. Email and Letter of Intent exchanged with Bobby’s Salon in January 2009 concerning leasing Unit J at The Pit Stop of Durham
21-31
  1. Email and Letter of Intent exchanged with Bobby’s Salon in February 2009 concerning leasing Unit J at The Pit Stop of Durham
32-41
  1. Lease sent to Bobby’s Salon for execution on March 10, 2009 concerning leasing Unit J at The Pit Stop of Durham
42-83
  1. Email from Bobby’s Salon on in Feb 17, 2009 indicating its intent to lease Unit J at The Pit Stop of Durham
84
  1. Email to Bobby’s Salon on Mar. 20, 2009 inquiring why they never executed and returned the lease for Unit J sent to them on Mar. 10, 2009
85
  1. 3/3/09 email and Letter of Intent to Broker for Japanese Restaurant concerning taking over the Unit I at The Pit Stop of Durham
86-98
  1. Email and Letter of Intent sent to The Pit Bar & Grill on Mar 19, 2009 concerning leasing Units B, C & D at The Pit Stop of Durham
99-112
  1. Email, Letter of Intent and Lease sent to The Pit Bar & Grill on Mar 24, 2009 concerning leasing Units B, C & D at The Pit Stop of Durham
113-126
  1. Lease sent to The Pit Bar & Grill for execution on March 27, 2009 concerning leasing Units B, C & D at The Pit Stop of Durham
127-171
  1. Capitalized Value of Leases Queered by Paragon’s FRAUD
172
10
This document reflects Paragon’s abrupt closure of Mr. Young’s deposit accounts in support of their FRAUD

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #10]
  1. 4/1/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled: ”Closure of deposit accounts
1
11
These documents show Paragon’s absconding with the funds in Mr. Young’s deposit accounts, constituting criminal felonies of embezzlement and grand larceny 

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #11]
  1. 4/1/09 Letter from JHoose to SYoung titled:”Closure of deposit accounts”
1
  1. 4/1/09 Bank Statement for The Pit Stop of Durham, reflecting the FRAUD-based absconding with funds in the amount of  $18,356
2-3
  1. 4/1/09 Bank Statement for Spencer C. Young, reflecting the FRAUD-based absconding with funds in the amount of  $405
4
  1. 4/1/09 Bank Statement for Meadowmont Village Condo, reflecting the FRAUD-based absconding with funds in the amount of  $4,110
5
12
This document is self-explanatory

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #12]
  1. Monthly Billing for the $100,000 line of credit dated Apr. 24, 2009, reflecting the misapplication of funds to pay down the principal on this loan instead of applying to service the monthly debt of ALL four of Mr. Young’s loans.
1
13
These documents show the extensive level of corruption employed to prevent Mr. Young from engaging local real estate counsel, thereby paving the way for Paragon to proceed with their FRAUD-based foreclosures uncontested.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #13]
  1. Grievance filed against Buzzy Stubbs to The NC State Bar, including detailed supporting documents
1-68
  1. The NC State Bar’s Response to the Grievance filed against Buzzy Stubbs – a six month delay, whereby questions were asked, which indicated the 68 page grievance was NOT read  -- in light of this absurd delay and complete lack of responsiveness, Mr. Young chose not to file similar grievances against the other seven attorneys who also abruptly quit after a short time period
69
  1. 5/15/09 email to Bill Matthews of Womble Carlyle – requesting a referral to legal couinsel which he suddenly refused to do, despite earlier promises to provide such assistance. [Note the same odd reaction was received from other legal counsel – e.g., Kyle Hall, Esq.
70
  1. Communications with the NC State Bar and Accompanying Documents – alerting them about being denied the right to legal representation’ along with implored requests for help – which was NOT provided whatsoever.
71-90
  1. Motion For Entry of Default – Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 6/10/09
91-93
  1. Entry Of Default – Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 6/25/09 – (received  7/2/09)
94-96
14
These documents describe and evidence the extensive and completely unnecessary use of the Orange County Sheriff to intimidate Mr. Young

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #14]
  1. Introduction – Provides context to how intimidation tactics were employed against Mr. Young using over-the-top resources of the Orange County Sheriff’s office
1
  1. Affidavit – submitted by Sargent R.A. Simpson of the  the Orange County Sheriff’s office, attesting to the extensive and unnecessary utilization of the County’s resources, citing accompanying duplicative documents
2
  1. Examples of the Duplicative Documents – delivered multiple times to Mr. Young
3-5
15
These documents show how Paragon and Poyner & Spruill collaborated with judges to accelerate the appointment of a Receiver without ever having to prove there was in fact a default on the subject notes while denying Mr. Young from presenting evidence that show all proceedings to be a FRAUD.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #15]
  1. Complaint & Motion for Appointment of a Receiver– Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 5/4/09
1-12
  1. Emergency Motion for Appointment of Receiver – Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 5/8/09
13-18
  1. Cover letter of  Ex Parte Documents received two business days before hearing – May 11, 2009
19
  1. Order Shortening Time and Notice of Hearing Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 5/11/09 (Executed)
20-22
  1. Order Shortening Time and Notice of Hearing Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798 – 5/11/09
23-25
  1. Summary of Key Points for Ex Parte Hearing which Spencer Young was precluded from defending (Denial of Right to Due Process / Loans NOT in default)
26-29
16
These documents show requests were made for time to engage legal counsel – these were denied or granted for such a significantly shortened period that it had essentially the same effect as a denial

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #16]
  1. May 15, 2009 Motion for Continuance for additional time to engage representative legal counsel pertaining to Ex Parte (i.e. accelerated or rushed ) Motion to appoint a Receiver, predicated on Paragon’s  FRAUDULENTLY declared  default – this was granted albeit for only two weeks
1
  1. May 29, 2009 Motion for Continuance for additional time to engage representative legal counsel pertaining to Ex Parte (i.e. accelerated or rushed ) Motion to appoint a Receiver, predicated on Paragon’s  FRAUDULENTLY declared  default – the request to Aug, 15th was rejected although it was pointed out the Plaintiffs tortiously interfered in Young’s engagement of legal counsel.
2
  1. May 26, 2009 Motion for Continuance for additional time to engage representative legal counsel pertaining to Motion to Hear Foreclosure Complaint on The Pit Stop of Durham, -- this was effectively rejected, and the formal adversarial hearing was accelerated.  – thereby giving the impression that additional time was granted, when in effect the hearings were accelerated.
3
  1. May 26, 2009 Motion for Continuance for additional time to engage representative legal counsel pertaining to Motion to Hear Foreclosure Complaint on The Valet parking lots for The Courtyard of Chapel Hill, -- this was effectively rejected outright
4
17
The documents pertain to a series of court proceedings where Paragon did not have to prove there were in fact monetary defaults on all four loans, other than to submit an affidavit by one of the Primary Perpetrators of this audacious FRAD – to wit, James Hoose. And Mr. Young was prevented from presenting the overwhelming evidence that showed the Defaults to ALL be FRAUDULENT.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #17]
  1. Letter Reiterating Notice of a Fraudulent  Default on MVC Condo Mortgage – April 15, 2009
1-2
  1. Letter Reiterating Notice of a Fraudulent  Default on TCoCH Lots Mortgage – April 15, 2009
3-4
  1. Special Proceeding Notice 0n TCoCH Lots Mortgage – Apr. 20, 2009
5
  1. Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – TCoCH Lots Mtge - Superior Court – 09-SP-643 – 4/20/09
6-10
  1. Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – MVC Mtge - Superior Court – 09-SP-___ – 4/20/09
11-14
  1. Amended Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – MVC Mtge - Superior Court – 09-SP-643 – 5/28/09
15-18
  1. Order Appointing Receiver - Superior Court – 09-CVS-8798– 6/1/09
19-27
18
These documents reflect many of the hearings and proceedings that were aggressively moved forward uncontested because Mr. Young was blocked from hiring legal counsel, and therefore unable to present overwhelming evidence of Paragon’s FRAUD

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #18]
  1. Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – TPSoD Mtge - Superior Court – 09-SP-643 – 4/20/09
1-8
  1. Special Proceedings Notice – Spencer C. Young Investments, Inc.
9
  1. Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – TPSoD Mtge - Superior Court – 09-SP-643 – 4/20/09 (Note Delay in Receiving Notice)
10-17
  1. Notice of Hearing on Foreclosure of Deed of Trust – TCoCH Valet Lots - Superior Court – 09-SP-153 – 4/20/09 (Note Delay)
18-25
  1. Notice of Foreclosure Sale – TPSoD – 6/24/09
26-29
  1. Report of Foreclosure Sale – TPSoD – 7/23/09
30
  1. Amended Notice of Foreclosure Sale  - MVC – 10/2/09
31-32
  1. Amended Notice of Foreclosure Sale  - MVC – 11/18/09
33-34
19
These documents reflect the substantial amount of grand larceny perpetrated against Mr. Young – the intent being to wipe him out so he will not be able to pursue his substantial civil claims, and lead the prosecution effort.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #19]
  1. Notes Used for FRAUD-based Hearings in May 2009 – these summarize the estimated dollar amount of equity stolen via the subject FRAUD-based foreclosures
1
  1. Proforma Net Worth of Spencer C. Young as of Spring 2008 – Note that this excludes the impact of the extensive Fraud, Corruption and Commercial Sabotage directed at Mr. Young that threatens to wipe out his entire net worth.
2
  1. Apr. 1, 2009 Letter from Jim Hoose – this documents the amount of funds Paragon wrongfully and FRAUDULENTLY absconded with – hence another instance of Grand Larceny.
3
  1. Apr.. 2, 2009 Letter from Jim Hoose  - announcing FRAUD-based and therefore unlawful diversion of ALL of Mr. Young’s income
4
20
These documents reveal Paragon’s malicious intent for in creating stress and homelessness to Mr. Young’s 83 yr old mother and 53 yr old ex-wife, who have a heart condition and cancer, respectively they have sought to hasten their death.

[Click Here for the Blog Post And Explanation of this Fraud Element #20]
  1. Context to Larger Matter at Hand – the email which explains “MoprganStanleyGate” and the dire effects it has had on Mr. Young’s family
1-2
  1. 4/15/09 Email from Mr. Young to variouis family members – advising them the most recent acts of Paragon (and Poyner & Spruill) have deprived him of his only remaining income, and therefore will be unable to provide financial support until this gets resolved.
3
  1. Emails Exchanged Between Mr. Young and his Oldest Son in Jun & Jul 2009 – which reflect the dysfunction created by the acts of Paragon and others
4-5






Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)