In Re: Wells Fargo vs Robex and Adams

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&navby=year&year=2006januaryiaapp

Judge Christensen struck Adams’ Resistance to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and awarded in favor of Wells Fargo. Judge Christensen in Fifth District Court ruled Adams resistance as being untimely in early 2003. To prevent the evidence Adams presented to the District Court from being entered into the court transcript that showed clear fraud by Wells Fargo, Judge Christensen found for Plaintiff by ruling Adams' Resistance to Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment untimely. Adams cried out then, "Where Justice!" This ruling was over turned in a nunc pro tunc filed by Adams concerning a previous order from the another District Court judge that had given an order in favor of Adams for an extension of time that Adams had asked for in order to try and find an attorney.

Adams had spent weeks of phone calls to try to find an attorney and asking her own attorneys to help Adams gave up and used two weeks of time given by the court to file a resistance to Wells Fargo's request for summary judgment. At that point Adams had no idea that her attorney actually worked for Norwest/ Wells Fargo. Adams and her husband would not learn about this until 2005. Adams and her husband had to learn in a few short weeks how to make a filing of resistance to the request of summary judgment by Wells Fargo.

Unknown to Adams and her husband while Wells Fargo was pillaging and dragging Adams through the court. The county locally was transferring their house and property to their neighbors. They would not be aware of this until the Wells Fargo banker was telling his attorney "get her for fraud" at the end of the trial for the Replevin in October 2003. In the meantime what Wells Fargo and the sheriff did not already steal others help themselves to while Adams husband tried to keep her a safe distance from their home because she was still under continues threat by the local sheriff.

By 2006 when Adams was finally hoping for justice in the Supreme Court of Iowa for the illegal actions taken in the Replvin action. The Iowa Supreme Court bumped her back to the Iowa Court of Appeals. In her briefs Adams detailed each document that was submitting by the bank as evidence that was clearly and admittedly altered by "someone" in Wells Fargo according to the Wells Fargo banker in court. Judge Christensen ruled opposite of the testimony of even the bankers at the trial. Fully ignored the testimony the bankers gave of "Guessing" and "Guestimated". No viable proof was given to even that the payments were in arrears; the testimony of the banker claiming to have "guestimated" merely stated that the company was behind in payments. Wells Fargo did not provide records to show payments in arrears because they had shorted loan funds and did not credit payments properly. Adams detailed the deficiencies in the various amounts claimed owed by the Wells Fargo banker in all the filings Wells Fargo had created throughout the case. The amounts were clearly erroneous when compared with each statement given by the "Guesstimator" banker and each payment voucher the bank made up and submitted to the court.

If Wells Fargo had been compelled to prove their claim of default they would have had to show what they did to Adams corporate loan funds. The bank did not even have to show that the corporation was behind in payments only make statements by a banker that used "Questimating" to figure it out.

Even though the banker testimony was clear that even though he did not do it someone in Wells Fargo created and added the exhibit page to the UCC filing that only specifically claimed land Adams started the mine on. Nor could the banker tell the court exactly what corporation owed at any given time and exactly when a default occurred. Adams did not own the 399 acres that Wells Fargo was claiming on the UCC filing that was used to facilitate a cause of action. The bank used fraudulent documentation and false statements to the court and to SBA to concur and agree with their actions.

With the original UCC filing Wells Fargo took away the exhibit "A" they had provided Adams as to what was to be collateral for the loan, Adams and her husband's home the bank valued at $150,000.00. Judge Christensen claimed that false UCC filing was original as part of his final ruling. Ignored the testimony of the accurate ownership of the equipment that Wells Fargo had seized right down to the travel trailer Adams and her husband used (Wells Fargo sold the travel trailer at auction with no title) Wells Fargo had fired the original banker so he could not be found for that trial. He clearly states personal property was not a part of the corporate loan. He would not accept Rod's equipment for his wife's corporate loan for the mine.

Why would Wells Fargo wipe out Adams husband's landscaping business? Then keep Adams in court to run out the time limitations in Iowa state statutes?

In the final Order from the court of appeals however, by virtue of the omission of the word "properly" in the Supreme Court of Appeals the ruling was allowed to stand. Along with the facts of evidence and testimony showed the details that clear and concise erroneous bank created documents were supplied to the court by the bank. The appeals court struck these briefs that Adams wrote detailing the fraudulent actions of the bank. Adams had received an Order that stated all her briefs had been previously accepted by the Supreme Court. Alas the Supreme Court of Iowa denied justice by allowing Wells Fargo fraud to stand. As the attorney for Wells Fargo stated at the court of appeals, "Standard banking practices" of adding documents to a loan file and "Guessing", "Guestimating" and erroneous accounting measures. Accountability for wrongful actions denied.

In 2002, the initial attorney for Defendant Adams filed an incomplete Statement Of Robex. The original statement submitted to the District Court contains the following phrase, "no claim as an individual for any property "properly" included in this case". When Adams filed a Resistance she documented this and many discrepancies in the Plaintiff's voluminous filings. Adams Resistance was in fact filed timely and delivered in hand to Plaintiff's attorney and the Court. This attorney assured Adams Wells Fargo would have to provide accurate and proper documentation in order to take personal property. The initial judge instructed the attorney for the bank "Do not take anything you do not have make, model and serial number for". They did not! They took anything and everything they could using a hostile sheriff ("Have gun will travel") who just a few months before literally stole a dozer from Adams as their collector and enforcer for CitiCapital. It worked well for CitiCapital so Wells Fargo used the same tactics of using a hostile sheriff as a collection agency. The only difference is Wells Fargo skirted the law by getting a court order. Not that Wells Fargo abided in the courts instructions of "Do not take anything you do not have make, model and serial number for." Using the hostile sheriff with a court order without properly identification worked for Wells Fargo just like their made up papers in the loan were validatedeven though they were fakes. Make it look half good use threats and whatever works. Funny thing when you look at the history of the majority of executive/ceo's in Wells Fargo they worked for CitiCapital prior to taking charge of Wells Fargo. I cannot help but wonder if they were in cahoots with Citicapital in the dozer theft? That person who was my contact in CitiCapital was fired just the same as the original banker for Wells Fargo was fired.

The documents as posted at FindLaw do not reflect these and other discrepancies throughout the case. The reference to the case numbers were given to accentuate the fact that the Plaintiff seized Stubbs machinery and equipment without Stubbs being a party to the action. The court ruled in favor of Wells Fargo fully ignoring the phrase property "PROPERLY" that was in the initial filing in the body of their final decision. Striking Adams resistances and briefs that clearly outlined the fraud evidenced in court that the bank created was necessary for the court to preclude any charge of fraud against the Plaintiff. This measure proved successful. In the second case listed on Findlaw Adams was not a pro se defendant, either Find Law is in error or the information given to them is in error. Wells Fargo recieved a summary judgment award against Adams personally by Judge Christensen in the favor of Wells Fargo. The judge refused to allow a counterclaim or a trial for Adams could recieve justice and the fraud Wells Fargo committed could be dealt with and entered into court records. Justice was prohibited and major bank fraud committed by Wells Fargo against a small business owner and her husband was legalized by the courts of Iowa from October 2002 until January of 2006.

Wells Fargo has not had to answer for the misreported funds of the SBA loan, any of the false information that Wells Fargo gave to SBA, the misreported funds amounts or loan payments that Wells Fargo claimed was owing on the loan to the Iowa courts or any of the voluminous altered documents created by Wells Fargo in the loan account or the misreported funds that Wells Fargo reported to Adams and SBA. Wells Fargo can repeatedly lie, give false information to a borrower and SBA, the courts and get away with. Wells Fargo crushed a small business enterprise through deceptive illegal practices and stole my husband's business to insure my business could not survive.

In the 1970's and 1980's family farms were crushed to facilitate corporate farms. The Christensen family happens to own large corporate farms from Minnesota to Southern Iowa. For years now and today small family enterprises are crushed to make way for large corporations to control of federally funded projects such as road contracting and the federal farm subsidies available. It just so happens the Christensen family was also involved in the irregular property issues surrounding our land too. The proof is in the paperwork again. Property deeds made up from thin air or great great great grandchildren of property owners from ages ago signing quit claims deeds to create property transfers. At the county auditor's office and the recorders office penciling in owners and erasing actual property owners by county officials seems to work here in Southern Iowa. Then as in the case where the county had put Adams and her husband on land Adams parents owned, the tax assessor told the judge several times after the judge asked him, "Don't you use actual deeds to determine property ownership?" , "Give me a name judge I'll put it on there".

If one is not willing to partner or sign on with a large corporation or sign a waiver of rights when a major bank commits fraud upon you then you are subjected to court legalizing fraud such as the true record in this case proves.