UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

______________________________________________________________________________
In Re the Bankruptcy of
SUZANNAH META SCHMID, Case No. 10-12142-tsu
Debtor
______________________________________________________________________________

NOTICE OF OBJECTION AND

OBJECTION TO CLAIM #2 FILED BY BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP
______________________________________________________________________________

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned brings Debtor objects to Claim #2 in
these proceedings, filed by BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP.

IF YOU WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE OBJECTION, YOU MAY DO SO BY FILING A

WRITTEN RESPONSE AND REQUEST FOR HEARING WITH THE UNITED
STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
AT 500 S. BARSTOW STREET, EAU CLAIRE, WISCONSIN 54701-3657 ON OR
BEFORE THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE. THE COURT
WILL THEN SCHEDULE A HEARING ON THE MOTION. YOUR RESPONSE AND
REQUEST FOR HEARING SHOULD STATE BRIEFLY THE GROUNDS THEREOF.

Unless a written response and request for hearing is filed with the Court on or before the date
indicated above, an Order will be entered disallowing Claim #2. In the event that there are no
responses and requests for objections to the entry of the proposed Order within thirty (20) days
after the date of service of the Objection, the Debtor moves the Court to enter the Order without
hearing.

NOW COMES the Debtor, Suzannah Meta Schmid, by her attorney Wendy Alison Nora
of ACCESS LEGAL SERVICES, respectfully objects to Claim #2 in these proceedings and
shows the Court:

1. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. (hereinafter BAC) is not the real party in interest in
these proceedings. It owns neither the promissory note nor the mortgage and must own both at
the time of filing any action against the Debtor, including a claim in bankruptcy proceedings.

2. Since September 20, 2010, new evidence has been developing concerning the validity
of mortgage assignments throughout the nation. This evidence includes the assignee using in-
house personnel and notaries to create assignments of mortgages and that the signatures
appearing on the assignments are not those of the assignors’ agent, as required by law, but are
invalid and fraudulent assignments executed by the assignees’ agents and notarized by the
assignees’ in house notary.

1
 3. In reviewing the mortgage assignment attached to the claim, there is no signature
from the assignor Countrywide Document Custody Service, a Division of Treasury Bank, but the
notary for the signers is Liliana Morcan, who is the in-house notary of BAC.

4. Counsel for the Debtor attaches the application of Liliana Morcan for notary privileges
(Exhibit A) and the notary certification for Liliana Morcan from the Secretary of State for the
State of Texas (Exhibit B.)

5. It is clear that Liliana Morcan is the in-house notary for BAC and has notarized the
signatures of the assignee’s agents, not the signatures of the assignor. Exhibit C attached hereto is
the fraudulently assigned mortgage from the assignee to itself.

6. Additionally, the original mortgage was assigned from M&I Mortgage Corporation to
Countrywide Document Custody Services, a Division of Treasury Bank. (Exhibit D.) This
assignment appears to be for purposes of securitizing Debtor’s mortgage, which process
separates the notes and mortgages in to collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) which are sold to
investors throughout the world. Countrywide Document Custody Services, a Division of
Treasury Bank1 did not exist at the time Exhibit C was created.

7. Furthermore, there is no promissory note submitted in connection with the BAC

claim. The promissory note is necessary to establish the party entitled to the mortgage payments.
Thousands of homes throughout the United States have been discovered to be foreclosed or
facing foreclosure by entities which do not own the promissory note and are not the lawful
assignees of the mortgage. No promissory note has been submitted in these proceedings nor was
the promissory note submitted in the state court foreclosure proceedings. The original note was
payable to M&I Mortgage Corporation on March 3, 2004. There is no evidence that M&I Bank
ever endorsed the promissory note in favor of any other entity.

8. Without the promissory note, the fraudulent assignee-claimant cannot establish that it
is owed any amount from Debtor nor can it establish the amount of payments it falsely claims.

9. If the claimant were the lawful owner of the promissory note by proper endorsement
and the lawful assignee by proper assignment by the assignor, it would know what the amount of
payments it is entitled to claim.

10. This case has been pending in bankruptcy since March 23, 2010 and each month

1
Diligent research by Debtor’s counsel has failed to locate any entity in the United States
of America with the name of “Treasury Bank.” An entity by the name of Treasury Bank was a
subsidiary of Countrywide Financial Corporation, which failed in 2008 and was reluctantly
purchased by Bank of America as a condition of its own TARP bailout funding. Neither
Countrywide Financial nor Treasury Bank existed at the time of the execution of Exhibit C by
BAC to itself as demonstrated herein. (See Exhibits E and F)

2
commencing in April, 2010, the Debtor has paid the current amount of her monthly payment
under the promissory note which was executed in connection with the original promissory note
connected with the mortgage interest now claimed by BAC, under protest, in the amount of
$290.44. These payments have been accepted without any relief being sought by BAC and are,
therefore, the correct amount of the monthly payments owed to the real party in interest, if such
party held a secured claim.

11. BAC is not a secured party in these proceedings, owning neither the promissory note
nor the lawful assignment of the mortgage, both of which are required to be owned by the real
party in interest which is the only claimant entitled to bring a claim in these proceedings.

12. Associated Bank, N.A. has filed a lawful secured claim on its mortgage in these
proceedings and is entitled to payment on its secured claim.

13. All payments made to BAC under protest to the false claimant must be returned to
the Debtor’s estate.

WHEREFORE, the Debtor respectfully objects to Claim #2 in these proceedings.

Dated at Minneapolis, Minnesota this 12th day of November, 2010.

/s/ Wendy Alison Nora

____________________________________
Wendy Alison Nora
ACCESS LEGAL SERVICES
4575 W. 80th Street Circle, #141
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437
VOICE (952) 405-8631
FAX (952) 405-8691
accesslegalservices.bky@gmail.com