George Tran was wrong and still is.

George Tran now admits that just as Creditwrench said, he is wrong. The problem is that he still is in his new book. He is wrong in many, many ways.

Most of what he says sounds very plausible as do most scams. For instance, he says that his name is copyrighted or maybe trademarked. That old scam has been around for a long, long time. The idea that you can copyright your name in any form is simply nonsense. You might be able to trademark your name if you have a business or corporation under that name and nobody else has trademarked it previously.

The courts simply will not go along with the idea of copyrighting one's name. Back in 2004 U.S. Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant accused me of being one of the teachers of that nonsense and of course nothing could have been further from the truth. I have always railed against such stupidity. As always, people will believe anything that comes along and most of George Tran's nonsense is a shining example.

For instance, in his revised comedy of errors he gives a long list of court cases and claims that they have been unpublished and hidden from the public. Such a claim is simply not true.

George goes into a long diatribe about what a lawyer might ask a banker in a court trial. Such a lengthy diatribe would never be allowed in a court of law. It would be considered badgering the witness. It is nothing more than the inner workings of an overactive imagination. In any such court hearing the only question before the court is whether or not the defendant owes the money. Nothing else is of any importance to the court.

Another reliable indicator that the whole thing is nothing but a scam foisted upon the gullible is the example of the Oregon court case. The problem with that petition is that there is no visible cause of action. There is no allegation that the defendant has done anything wrong. No cause of action means the case will be thrown out of court without ever being heard.

The Inhabitant's view of George Tran's successes.

Trumpeting George Tran’s invalid usage of the County Records as a “success” is akin to announcing that Thomas E. Dewey won the Presidential election in 1948. 

Now where in George’s Commentary did ne notice the Holder in due Course of his actions?  Failure to provide legal notice to the current holder in due course by George  Tran denies said holder their substantive right, even if the holder in due course holds an obligation that falls within the Law of the Fraudulent transaction.

All George Tran has filed in the Davis County Office is nothing more than a fictitious claim of Reconveyance, which when challenged will enable the challenger to circumnavigate the statutory limitation for the collection of debt due directly to what appears to be civil fraud.  Generally the State’s statutory limitation for the collections of debt tolls six years from the last transaction date.  One should check their State’s statutory laws to validate that fact, for some state’s toll longer and a few even toll a shorter statutory period.

George Tran’s “Deed of Reconveyance” is a civil fraud at its best, and its worst, well, look up the Utah Statutory laws as it relates to filing fictitious documents for claiming rights to real property.  In the wild days of the Frontier, such claim jumping was considered a terminal offense when the perpetrator was discovered hiding under its rock of deceit.

George Tran’s conclusions, and actions are based upon his miscomprehension to the due process of State statutory law, and his singular failure to comprehend this State’s statutory administrative resolution to overcome the financial services contract, most know as a mortgage.

If George sitting up Eugene Oregon desired to secure rights to property in Utah, where his ownership stands, he will need to move under Utah administrative law  challenging the party accepting the payments, as to their ability to default the payment obligation.  All George has acknowledged to date, is that he wrote two letters requesting validation of debt, and when the financial institutions did not respond to his liking, he chose to file his Deed of Reconveyance.

George states that his standing is substantiated by the Federal Administrative Procedures Act, well there is a problem with that Statement, as rights to property are perfected under State law.  George should have moved under the financial regulatory authorities in Utah, wherein he had standing to challenge the recipient of his Payments standing to foreclose upon his rights to property.

George’s claim that he secured a rescission when the financial institutions accepting his payments failed to respond to his validation of debt questions to his liking, is another of his many inappropriate statements and actions.  

The financial services contract, most know as a mortgage is a bifurcated financial contract wherein the first part is deposited into a demand deposit transaction account, from where the “bank” draws funds to pay to the “seller”.  This financial transaction is clearly described in Modern Money Mechanics  publication of the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank originally written by Dorothy M. Nichols in May of 1961.  This deposit of “funds” is statutorily dependent upon the signature of the purchaser appended to the promissory note for the contractual value of the purchase price.

The second part of this bifurcated financial contract is the obligation, which is statutorily defined as “debt”.  The obligation’s value is directly derived from the amortization period.  It is this amortization period that is sold by the originator in the secondary market, by discounting the years sold so that a  purchaser may reap a twenty year payment stream on a thirty year obligation.  The obligations are generally bundled, such as the failed Indy Mac Federal Savings Bank did with every obligation it controlled, which is then marketed in what is popularly known as the derivatives market.

Now George Tran alleges the Troubled Asset Relief Program paid the “banks” for the bundled obligations.  Well that is a statutory misstatement of fact by George Tran.

Secondly, the originator never loaned the purchaser funds.  The financial services institution, who processed the “mortgage”  documents deposited the promise to pay the contractual purchase amount into a demand deposit transaction account from where the “bank” then drew the check (non interesting bearing promise to pay) to hand over to the “seller”.

Then the financial services institution took the obligation bundled with others in its portfolio and sold said bundled securities as a discounted instrument into the derivatives market.  The financial services institution generally retains the servicing rights, not the value of the amortization period.  The value of the amortized obligation is now owned by the “owners” of the derivative bundle.  The financial service institution that sold its bundled securities generally receives the discounted price of the amortized end value.  It is this discounted price from where the originator secures its fees, and other costs, inclusive of a net profit which is put in a demand deposit transaction account, or in other capital ventures, such as in equities exchanged on the “financial markets”.

The Federal Legislature’s Troubled Asset Relief Program provided liquidity to financial institutions whose servicing rights cash flow was terminated when the obligor would no longer make their monthly contribution to the servicing institutions.  Indy Mac Federal Savings Bank, and Washington Mutual Federal Savings Bank were two of the largest collapses in this services market.  If one turns to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporations web page, there is a list of Material Lost Investigation reports of collapsed  “banks” that totals in the hundreds. The Troubled Asset Relief Program is a 750 billion dollar federal tax program that was imposed upon all banks by the then current Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson, under a direct suggestion that those who refused to  participate  would discover the true meaning of suffering the insufferable.  If George Tran’s premise that this program “paid” the banks for the obligations why has the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation seized hundreds of these institution over the past twenty four months.  According to George’s statement this would not occur, for the banks were “paid”.  Well contrary to George’s miscomprehension of the Federal Troubled Asset Relief Program 750 Billion dollars was first funneled to domestically chartered banks in America, and the later to Deutsche Bank of Germany, through American Insurance General, then finally to Chrysler Motors, and General Motors Automotive Division.  General Electric’s GE Capital Division also secured its “fair share” of funds under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The financial institutions collapsed due directly to the obligors failures to make the monthly contribution on the obligation, inclusive of poor corporate management.  The financial institutions that retained the servicing rights generally reap two percent of the payment stream, and are not necessarily the holder in due course.  Where in George’s narrative does he stipulate he legally voided the holder’s in due course standing under state law?  Where is the administrative order from the State’s Financial regulatory authority that empowered George to secure an Equitable Order from the “State Court” that perfects Georges issuance of a Deed of Reconveyance?

By the way George claims he had the authority to dismiss the current trustee and appoint his own successor.  Why would George need to appoint a trustee if he owned the real property free and clear?  If George’s action were lawful, the current Trustee would have legally signed off its position which would clear the lien on the property.  George Tran’s claim that he may substitute a trustee has no merit, as only the holder in due course may substitute a trustee.  The trustee George Tran Claims he substituted holds bare legal title on behalf of the holder in due course.  Unless the holder in due course authorized the Deed of Reconveyance George   appears to have constructed a fraudulent conveyance which when challenged in foreclosure action will more than likely be exposed at its best as a civil fraud.

George appears to believe that he may substitute a trustee without the authority of the holder in due course, where said substitute trustee then issues a Deed of Reconveyance, which is an action that will come back to haunt him, when the financial institution finally pursues its foreclosure process on his property in Utah. 

Oh the substitute for trustee that agreed to George’s action, may consider looking up the word “conspiracy” and “fraudulent conveyance”.

George’s “Free and Clear in 90 Days” is a falsity which will lead those who participate down the slippery road of statutory fraud, which is not a lawful way to overcome the legal fictions originated by the Financial Institution that issued the bifurcated financial services agreement, known to most as a mortgage.

George Tran the truth

George Tran

starts off on the wrong foot by calling himself a creditor. If he is a creditor then I'm a Proctologist. The word creditor is defined in law and not by every wannabe that comes hopping down the bunny trail. You cannot define yourself as something you are not and force everybody else to believe it.

George Tran makes the second mistake in his free e-book by claiming that we can use Title 18 against our creditors. Title 18 is known as the criminal code because all criminal acts and their penalties are defined in Title 18. Title 18 does not grant anyone the right or power of private attorney general as does Title 15 for instance. Title 15 is the Federal Consumer protection codes.
Anybody can bring suit against creditors, lenders, credit bureaus and others who treat them wrong in consumer transactions. Only the Department of Justice and United States District Attorneys can bring charges for illegal acts under Title 18.
The George Trans of this United States of America cannot use Title 18 to get their homes free and clear.

George Tran provides more false and misleading information when he starts talking about Habeas Corpus. Habeas Corpus is a writ used to attempt to get prisoners released from custody when it is believed or proven that they are being held illegally. It has nothing to do with U.C.C. or consumer transactions of any kind.


George Tran provides more false and misleading information when he tells us we can use Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to help us cheat our lenders out of the money they loaned us. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern the actions of the United States Federal Court system and how it and those who use it must do business in Federal Courts.


George Tran held a sort of press conference on talkshoe last night and I'm sure he got a great number of listeners including myself. I recorded his nonsense and will be letting you hear excerpts from it soon.

What George Tran apparently also don't know is that just about all mortgage contracts carry what is known as a Due on Sale clause. If you get stupid enough to listen to the George Trans of this world and attempt move your mortgaged home into a corporate shelter thinking that will protect you again you need to think again. The Due on Sale clause allows the lender to foreclose and take the property if it is sold without paying the lender in full Try George Tran's dumb ideas and you will find out about that Due on Sale Clause very quickly.

If you want to try the George Tran BS go ahead with my blessing. And when they come after your house remember that my Creditwrench methods can show you how to get out of foreclosure the right way.

I can't help you much unless you are getting foreclosed on your primary residence. There is little protection for those who are in foreclosure on investment or rental property.

I deal with consumer issuess but not with business related problems. I teach the secrets of the collections industry and how to defeat debt collectors and their abusive collection practices. I'm not a lawyer and I'd be ashamed to admit it if I were so I can't give you legal advices. All I can do is teach you how to deal with debt collectors and their lawyers. My students have won a total of 172 federal cases against debt collectors and their attorneys with never a loss. More wins are on the way. I work with mortgage foreclosures as well. I have saved many homes from foreclosure. I can help you too and you are going to need lots of help if you try George Tran's dumb ideas. So if you trust George Tran to tell you how to beat your creditors out of their money and get your home for free then learn the hard way that it is just BS and not valid at all then get foreclosed on just give me a call and I can help you.
I don't follow the parade, I lead the parade. It ends at the federal courthouse and the last float is a huge handbasket full of lawyers and debt collectors. All of them are demanding to know why they are in that handbasket and where they are going.

Bill Bauer

Creditwrench

(405) 237-2174



Be sure to join our Friday evening Conference calls and learn the Creditwrench system of dealing with foreclosures and credit card defaults.
>br/>

The call in number is (712) 432-2174. The pin number is 508548 and the # sign
The call starts each and every Friday evening at 7:00 P.M. Central Time.