Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Does Sarah Palin Favor Consumer Protection? | Main | First Circuit Revives Large Illegal Downloading Award Against Boston University Student »

Wednesday, September 21, 2011


Dean Farris

If you can record with a cabal of bankers, how about with Dick & Jane's lemonade stand or Wild Willie's porno shop? Given what we now know about MERS, Wild Willie is a safer bet.
Lots of folks will want to record with Dallas County, simply because they filed suit.


I hope counties start doing this in droves. This is the proper procedure posture to attack MERS. Consumers trying to do so almost never win because of the severe anti-consumer bias in so many courts across the country. If the entire purpose of the recording statute, as it relates to trust deeds, is to provide a lock step method for a borrower to know who their current loan holder is, then MERS obliterates that purpose. So often, loan servicers refuse to disclose who the actual loan holder is as say that information is "confidential" and that the borrower has no right to know. This type of proposition is so ridiculous, that only a pro-creditor judiciary could ever fall for it.

Matt Wadsworth, Arnold & Wadsworth,

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30