Another Bench Blunder

Now comes before this court a case from one Judge James D. Ward, (California appelate court) who figured the FDCPA didn't apply to stopping a foreclosure when the borrowers challenged the validity of a debt. Styled Sulak, et al. v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc., et al., No. E035021 (Cal Ct. App. 09/20/04).

The squaliformes, according to this yahoo at least, can violate the Fair Dept Collection Practices Act by refusing to provide debt validation information as the law requires, and they can keep on trying to foreclose and don't have to worry about a victim suing under the Act and stopping the foreclosure via an injunction. In his reasoning (?) the act doesn't offer equitable or injunctive relief, only monetary damages and to top it off, he thinks it's unclear as to whether the Act even applies to mortgage foreclosures! (Even though the notices say that they are attempts to collect a debt!)

Of course, since the victims appeared pro se and they were up against one of the squaliformes foreclosure mills (Moss Pite & Duncan), this Court duly recognizes the nature of the prejudice against the victims so commonly demonstrated in these kinds of cases.

Therefore, Judge Ward, it is the judgement of this Court that you are hereby guilty of judicial lunacy. Your sentence is that you serve five days as a guest in our jail and be fined one hundred dollars in gold pieces.

So ordered. Bailiff, take Judge Ward into custody. And keep him outta sight. And keep an extra shotgun handy. No telling what form of low-life might find its way in here to pay his fine.

The Honorable Judge Roy Bean.