We’ve been alerted by several homeowners about Frank Waldo’s Fraud Stoppers website, videos and literature that contain lies and disinformation harmful to homeowners.
          Frank Waldo who owns Fraud Stoppers sold worthless securitization audits performed by Certified Forensic Loan Audits, who was recently put out of business for scamming homeowners. The courts have repeatedly held these securitization auditors are “charlatans” and their “paperwork empty gimmickry:”….
          And now this fraud is admitting to homeowners that “the CFLA audit is no good.” What a whore! Is he going to return the funds to homeowners who bought this useless garbage he was peddling? I think not.
          Frank Waldo also claims that the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas stated in LANDMARK NATIONAL BANK v. KESLER that “the splitting of the note and mortgage creates an immediate and fatal flaw in title”. This alleged quote posted by Frank Waldo doesn’t exist. Scammers, like Frank Waldo make up quotes from court cases in an attempt to back up their lies, frivolous rhetoric and arguments.
          The truth; courts around the country have held that a deed of trust ” ‘split’ from the note through securitization, DOES NOT render the note unenforceable. JOHNSON V. HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, 2011 WL 4373975, at *7 (S.D.Cal. Sep.20, 2011); CERVANTES V. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, 656 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2011) (The “split the note” theory has no sound basis in law or logic.).
          Sadly, for another homeowner a federal court found this homeowners arguments supplied by Frank Waldo to be “meritless:” “Plaintiffs apparently learned their securitization theory from Frank Waldo, as nearly half of the Complaint is verbatim from his website:”… And here’s another homeowner who lost using his nonsense and scam audit:… Regrettably, I could post dozens more, just like this one.
          And worse still, some poor soul made the drastic mistake of giving this fraud her confidential settlement agreement; and this scumbag posted it on his website; proving this woman breached the agreement and will be forced to return any funds she received back to the bank. Why would anyone trust this moron? If they do, they certainly will meet the same sad ending that the others have.
          Frank Waldo also disseminates other lies and complete nonsense: Real facts regarding the Daly case can be found here:
          Sadly, homeowners have already succumbed, or will succumb to Frank Waldo’s Fraud Stoppers slick marketing campaigns and lose their homes as many already have; but Mortgage Fraud Examiners will continue to expose these scammers, and others like them.


  1. It seems that we know what is wrong with everyone else, but WHAT is the solution to the fact that a Mortgage Company gets the hoe owner to sign both a Mortgage AND a Promissory Note (PN). The PN is much like a check obligation in that they then sell the PN to investor(s) which, in fact pays of the Mortgage AND removes the Mortgage Company from a position of collecting on that “check” again from the homeowner. Does anybody have a solution?


    1. The sale of a note DOES NOT pay off the mortgage. The note is a promise to pay contract. The mortgage is the collateral (property); which the homeowner agreed the lender and/or its assigns could take if the borrower breached the note.


  2. “The note and mortgage are inseparable; the former as essential, the latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries the mortgagn with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity.*” Carpenter v. Longman, 83 U.S. 271 (1873).
    It would appear that when the note and mortgage are Separated, the note becomes an unsecured instrument much the same as an unsecured credit card. In fact, a recent article came Indicated that a New Jersey court found that when The note and mortgage are separated, anyone attempting to enforce either one must possess both.


    1. You have your facts wrong, every court in the country that has heard the argument, holds that the note is enough: JOHNSON V. HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, 2011 WL 4373975, at *7 (S.D.Cal. Sep.20, 2011) (refusing to recognize the “discredited theory” that a deed of trust ” ‘split’ from the note through securitization, render[s] the note unenforceable”).


      1. There is also a need to be cognizant of the fact the the judicial system is fictional. Court case decisions are not necessary based upon “law”, but on “opinions” from those who are/have the power to decide what is right or wrong. We can not expect truth from a “system” that inherently false.


  3. I have paid Fraudstoppers after Holmes & Gault who did it audit on my property that was taken illegally and a small court in East Tawas I owned my home for 18 years never missed a payment actually there’s two legal pieces of property I own Fraudstoppers said they help me register a complaint in federal court for losing with Bank fraud committed by Bank of America. without even going to court but yet I can’t get through to Tony or Frank or anyone I spoke of maybe I need to go to her attorney generals office ?


      1. Don’t know what those scammers are going to do now that CFLA has been put out of business for scamming homeowners.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s