ABOUT Neil Garfield and Livinglies

Our mission is to educate lawyers about what is different with these loans and foreclosures impacting our society and keeping with that mission we also encourage you to attend educational workshops offered by other competent legal educators listed below that contemplate the legal consequences involving securitization, predatory lending and servicing and the evolving practice of foreclosure defense and offense:

Click to view: Lawyers – What You Need to Know

Purchase Attorney Workbooks

What Lawyers Are Saying About Neil Garfield’s Seminars

READ THIS: excellent-MERS-analysis-illegal-scheme-to-avoid/evade-state-law-taxes-fees-fines-penalties

REQUIRED READING: appraisal-fraud-and-industry-standards-described-in-2003-official-white-paper-red-flags-described-in-detail-with-excellent-diagrams-explanations-and-descriptions-of-best-practices

Covered-in-the-Garfield Continuum Workshops-you-can-look-this-stuff-up-in-wikopedia


Will you be ready to represent them?

The conspiracy to defraud homeowners will be thrown to its knees, and lenders will be called upon to produce the note or let the property go. This is the best opportunity lawyers have ever had to earn higher fees, do justice for their clients and improve the image and reputation of our profession.

If you know anything about mortgage backed securities, the answer is clear. Precedent setting orders/opinions in New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Florida, Ohio and other states have already decided in favor of the homeowners – with more following every day.

Welcome to the emergence of mortgages interwoven the new world of derivatives, asset backed securities, credit market vehicles, ratings and appraisal practices, issuance of negotiable instruments, and administrative rules and regulations on the state and federal level.

Are your legal skills up to the challenge? Or are you malpracticing, unaware of this legal new world order called securitization?

If your practice has anything to do with bankruptcies, foreclosure, or real estate, be prepared to be sued yourself for not knowing the myriad state and federal laws that protect homeowners from predatory lenders. Further, there is now a proven legal strategy for not only protecting homeowners, but establishing legally that they already own their homes free and clear of all mortgage encumbrances.

WORKSHOPS COMING UP TO 9.5 CLE CREDITS(FL), 8.0 for CA Lawyers attending the upcoming Florida Workshops

  • List of Approved Jurisdictions

SNEAK PREVIEW OF WORKBOOK AND SEMINAR TOPICS: introduction-to-attorney-workbook

A California attorney can claim California MCLE credit for education activities attended/taken outside California, provided that:

the attorney is outside California when attending/taking the activity;

the activity is the type of activity that can be approved for California MCLE credit;

the activity is approved by an Approved Jurisdiction.
If the criteria above are met, neither the provider nor the member needs to submit the activity to California for approval. California (and other states) credit can be claimed by the attorney, based on the fact an approved jurisdiction approved the activity.

Florida is an approved jurisdiction

What Lawyers Are Saying About Neil Garfield’s Seminars

Neil F. Garfield, M.B.A., J.D., 63, is the winner of dozens of academic awards, a popular speaker, and author of technical treatises on law and economics. He has come out of retirement with a bang and financial institutions should take note. He knows them from the inside out, who the deciders are, and how they arrived at a catastrophic scheme to defraud people, agencies, institutions and governments all over the world.

For more information on Neil Garfield visit his website at











Money and Debt




A Case that Could Have been Won and Probably Still can be overturned:


From the Scriptures: Respect and Ownership


Most states have adopted the Uniform Commercial Code without making any revisions. The UCC is an outgrowth of the Uniform Code arising from the Hague conventions. Thus the laws concerning indorsement, transfer, accommodation and assignment date back hundreds of years from common law from over 30 countries. Variance in application of these laws carries with it the probability of undermining the confidence that people will have in knowing that contractual obligations will be enforced and that they are protected by legal conventions that are accepted all over the world. In the context of the mortgage meltdown, the ONLY defensive positions that can be taken by those who would enforce securitized notes and mortgages, given the predatory practices employed and the failure to disclose the inflated pricing and valuation on both sides of the transaction — the investor who put up the money for the loan, and the borrower who signed the papers — is to run contrary to established law.An indorsement in blank generally means nothing without more. It does not convert the instrument to a bearer instrument. An accommodation indorsement fails to provide “cover” which is necessary for one to claim being a holder in due course. The following is an old treatise comparing laws from various jurisdictions. The inescapable conclusions are that the laws that were taught in law schools 100 years ago, 50 years ago and even 25 years ago are all the same. The only party capable of claiming the status of holder in due course is the investor who purchased certificates that gave him/her/it a share of a pool of assets which consisted of, in its purest form, a pool of notes and mortgages that were corrupted by the promise (unknown to the borrower or the investor) to apply payments to parties OTHER THAN the holder in due course. This has the obvious effect of separating the stream of revenue from the original obligor (and co-obligors acquired along the way) from the security instrument (the mortgage) which si a recorded document, as should be any assignment thereof. The parties holding the mortgage and the parties to whom the revenue stream is pledged are different, diverse, and in most cases unknown as they are dependent upon conditions subsequent that were undisclosed to either the borrower or the investor (overcollateralization of the asset backed securities, cross guarantees between tranches, insurance against loss, credit default swaps etc.). Hence the obligation was converted from a secured credit transaction to an unsecured unliquidated contingent contract obligation, subject to affirmative defenses and counterclaims, including the quieting of title, from the borrower.

Conflict of Laws as to Bills and Notes

Spread the word