Ostrich farmer from Eastern Cape shows court his mortgage loan is now in TaiwanThis new case by a South African ostrich farmer against Standard Bank could open the floodgates for people to seek retribution from past unlawful judgement like mine and millions of others. If I was a banking executive - this would be a good time to resign and go into hiding. The people are waking up.
Click here to read the original article. http://news.acts.co.za/blog/2015/06/ostrich-farmer-from-eastern-cape-shows-court-his-mortgage-loan-is-now-in-taiwan
An ostrich farmer from Grahamstown (South Africa) has thrown the local court into a spin by apparently proving that his mortgage loan with Standard Bank has been on-sold to an investor in Taiwan. This is the first time a securitisation audit has been presented in a SA court. On the basis of the evidence presented, the farmer says Standard Bank has no right to be in court.
Ash Davenport, a 63 year-old ostrich farmer from outside Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape, may be about to make history in his effort to stave off attempts by Standard Bank to take possession of his 3,260ha farm over a R3 million loan he took out seven years ago.
Last week he threw the Grahamstown High Court into a spin when his attorney, Bev Carruthers of Port Elizabeth, plonked a securitisation audit in front of the judge. The securitisation audit suggests that his bank loan has been on-sold to a Taiwanese bank and is no longer owned by Standard Bank. That being the case, Standard Bank has no right to be in court. More than that, the audit suggests the bank has securitised (or on-sold) his bond for R5 million, not the R3 million he supposedly signed for.
The court reserved judgment as to whether to allow the audit to be presented as new evidence in a case that has been dragging on for close to seven years.
“I intend to fight this all the way,” says Davenport. “These banks have been getting away with this nonsense for too long. I had to pay R17,000 for the audit but it was worth it, since it provides proof that the bank has in fact been securitising mortgage loans and then coming after property owners when they have no right to.”
Securitisation audits are a new development in South Africa, but are common in the US. They effectively carry the same weight as a financial opinion by a company’s auditor, though the banks are trying to dismiss them as hearsay.
Standard Bank attempted to discredit the audit by Michael Carrigan, a certified mortgage securitisation auditor in the US, who managed to track the chain of title for Davenport’s mortgage bond all the way to Taiwan. The bank referred to Carrigan's evidence as “speculative at best” and claimed he did not have a grasp of South African law. It then reiterated that his loan had not been securitised.
Carrigan also provided a second audit for another Grahamstown resident, Jay Brown (not his real name), apparently proving that his Standard Bank mortgage loan had ended up with a bank in Thailand. Brown is also defending his property against repossession by the bank.
Bear in mind that the bank in both cases has denied – as all the major banks have done in thousands of other similar cases – that it had securitised these mortgage bonds. Brown went one step further, by settling his debt to the bank by way of a promissory note of his own – similar to a cheque or bank note – which he claimed is legally permissible in terms of the Bills of Exchange Act.
This is a rather interesting defence first developed in SA by the late Johan Joubert, who insisted that individuals should issue their own promissory notes in settlement of debts, just as the banks concoct money out of thin air on their computer terminals. Standard Bank has refused to accept Brown’s promissory note.
Davenport has taken a more traditional route, arguing his case based on whatever evidence he can get his hands on. He asked Standard Bank to produce a “wet ink” copy of his mortgage bond and what was produced looked a little strange. The lines, the type face and the signatures did not line up with another copy he had. To all intents and purposes, it looked as if the documents were manufactured after the event, according to Davenport. Like someone had literally cut and pasted sections from one document, pasted them onto another, and then made a photocopy. This made him even more suspicious, even more certain that his mortgage bond had been securitised and the bank was hiding something.
So how did Davenport end up in this position?
The first thing to understand is that he is an eastern Cape farmer with a sharp tongue who doesn’t take kindly to bankers in suits coming to take away a farm that he and his family have been working since 1956. At one time he was the Eastern Cape’s most prominent ostrich farmer. He was exporting his ostrich meat to Europe and making a decent living. In 2004, the Avian flu scare hit SA. A government vet (Davenport calls him a “prick”) was sent down from Pretoria to inspect his birds, and with a wave of his pencil decided they should all be slaughtered.
On a personal note:
In 2013, Standard Bank bribed a Supreme Court Judge, by providing him with a pre-written judgement against me, Michael Tellinger, after a 3-hour argument at the South Gauteng High Court. During this hearing advocate Shem Symon, representing STD Bank, admitted to all the points raised by me which included: (This can all be verified from the court records.)
STD Bank did not lend me anything.
They did not have any money to lend me in the first place
They created the money on their system with clever book keeping entries - creating the money out of THIN AIR
The Bank securitises their home loans - selling them on to third party securitisation agencies like Blue Granit, losing all rights to the contract
STD Bank was in possession of my Bill of Exchange for around R900,000 that they refused to monetise or return to me.
STD Bank accepts payment in Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes
Let the banking games begin...
In love and unity