• Renee Ramos Yamagishi

Failure at Logic and All Known Laws: CA's "UD Court" against Homeowners

Updated: Jun 9


What does it look like when over eleven straight years of hard evidence in writing PROVES your Unwavering Offer to Pay your mortgage note; but your attackers maneuver the entire time under "color of law" to steal your home hoping you're so severely materially and financially devastated your evidence never sees the light of day?


What does it look like when you finally decide to un-hijack your life as an "accidental lawyer," upon full realization that the illegal operations of theft of homes and land in your midst is so pervasive that you conclude it best to PAY THE RANSOM IN FULL BY OBTAINING A PRIVATE HARD MONEY LOAN with "proof of written funds" TENDERED AND POSTED to these attackers (attorneys); BUT they decide to REJECT YOUR PAYMENT (yet again and incredulously) and HOLD THE AUCTION on your home anyway, in violation of ALL KNOWN LAWS?


ANSWER: You're looking at it here.


"Malum in se" should be "Malum prohibitum"


Translation: What is inherently wrong or evil should be deemed illegal and justice enforced..


Comment: But when wrong and evil is made "legal" by statute or policy, we do not consent and stand ground for the Rule of LAW.


sister site "Paid in Full Cancels Foreclosure"




California's Foreclosure Procedures are an Architectured Abomination


Persona Standi in Judicio and the right to defend


a LIEN on property is NOT ownership of the property


Calif.CodeCiv.Proc. 2074 "An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money, or to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property, is, if not accepted, equivalent to the actual production and tender of the money, instrument, or property."


Calif.CodeCiv.Proc. 2924(f)(b)(8)(a) Required disclaimer on the face of every Calif. notice of trustee sale publicly recorded document


Calif.CodeCiv.Proc. 2924.11(b)(2) Viable Alternative to Foreclosure (VAF) completed timely, results in mandatory cancellation of any pending trustee sale:

VAF#1 : Written agreement between all the parties to the alternative such that the trustee sale will NOT move forward; and

VAF #2: Written proof of funds.


Calif.CodeCiv.Proc. 2924.12(b) If a trustee's deed upon sale document has been recorded (which routinely occurs 5 to 10 days after the completion of a trustee sale event); the homeowner then has standing to bring suit for damages for certain specified violations of California Homeowners' Bill of Rights; such that a court of competent jurisdiction may award substantial monetary damages to the homeowner. The damages awards, while real and enforceable according to law, can be also seen to serve as or should act as a deterrent against violating California Homeowners' Bill of Rights; as enacted and intended by the legislature of the State of California.


2924.12(b) standing for the homeowner does not require that she give up possession of the property nor that she should be unwillingly dispossessed of her property while the case proceeds to trial, discovery and judicial determination; in order to determine amongst other issues, whether the trustee sale transaction itself was void by operation of law. A void trustee sale is of no effect as if it had never occurred and must be rescinded by law. Rescission restores parties to the status they each held prior to the trustee sale.


counter added 6/1/2018

All Rights Reserved,  Renee Shizue Ramos Yamagishi, 2016

Nothing on this site is to be taken as "legal advice," and content here is presented by a non-BAR non-lawyer and researcher / writer, who is self-represented Sui Juris when seeking remedy from the judiciary.