May 23, 2012

Dispelling the Myth of MERS as a "Sham" Beneficiary

In the current flood of mortgage litigation, plaintiffs often rely on myth to avoid paying their debts. One of the most pervasive concerns the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS). Plaintiffs accuse MERS of being a "sham" entity, lacking authority to foreclosure and used by lenders to engage in fraud. In Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., No. 09-17364 (9th Cir. Sept. 7, 2011), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals joins other recent courts in dispelling the Myth of MERS.

In affirming the trial court's dismissal with prejudice, the Court began by explaining that there is nothing inherently misleading or improper about MERS. MERS is a private electronic database that tracks the transfer of the "beneficial interest" in home loans, as well as changes in loan servicers. MERS was designed to avoid the need to record multiple transfers of deeds of trust by serving as the nominal record holder of the deed for the original lender and any subsequent lender. Accordingly, MERS holds legal title to the security interest conveyed even when the lender sells or assigns its beneficial interest in the loan. MERS serves a legitimate function.

Further, the deed of trust—"an essentially private contractual agreement"—spells out MERS' role. By signing it, the plaintiffs agreed to its terms, including those concerning MERS. So long as MERS acted consistently with the terms of the deed of trust, which it did, there can be no fraud.

Finally, the Ninth Circuit held that any amendment by plaintiffs would be futile. Even if MERS acted fraudulently or without authority—and it did not—plaintiffs admittedly defaulted on their loans. The lender was entitled to foreclose even if MERS was not.

Try as they might, there is no mythical loophole recognized by law to avoid paying a mortgage debt. 

Copyright © 2012, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP.

About the Author

Associate

Mr. Rackers is an associate in the Business Trial practice group in the firm's San Diego office.

619-338-6648

About the Author

Partner

Shannon Z. Petersen is a partner in the Business Trial Practice Group in the firm's San Diego office.

619-338-6656

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.