Here is a copy of an article from 
Mortgage Servicing News
County and state officials are turning up the heat on MERS, as recent
 lawsuits filed in Florida and Delaware challenge the validity and 
accuracy of the mortgage industry-controlled loan registry.
        
    
  The most recent lawsuit was filed by a county clerk in Florida, and
 seeks class action status to represent the state's 67 counties. The 
complaint alleges the use of MERS does not comply with state property 
laws and has cost municipalities millions in unpaid recording fees.
Jim
 Fuller, the clerk of Duval County, filed suit against Merscorp Inc. and
 its wholly owned subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, 
Inc., on Oct. 31, claiming civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment, as well 
as fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation. The suit also seeks a 
hearing to determine the validity of tracking note transfers on the MERS
 System and a court injunction to prohibit the use of MERS in Florida.
“MERS
 has usurped the rights and privileges of the Florida Clerks of Court by
 establishing, maintaining and inducing lenders to use its private 
recording system, which unlawfully interferes and competes with the 
public recording system,” the suit, filed in state circuit court, reads.
Merscorp spokesperson Janis Smith said the suit's allegations are inaccurate and false.
“The
 MERS System is not a legal system of record or a replacement for public
 land records. No interests are transferred on the system—they are only 
tracked,” Smith, Merscorp vice president of corporate communications, 
wrote in a response to emailed questions. “MERS does not have or 
maintain any document recording system, public or private, and does not 
do anything to compete with or supplant the public records for land 
located in the County records.”
Tim Volpe, a Jacksonville, 
Fla.-based attorney serving as outside counsel for Duval County, claims 
that when MERS is named on county land records, it creates an illegal 
disconnect between the mortgage document and the promissory note that 
allows the owner of the promissory note to change without being recorded
 in land records—keeping borrowers in the dark about who holds their 
debt.
“Both the note and mortgage are to be recorded. The 
principle issue we're trying to get at is the punitive distinction of 
MERS being the mortgagee while the note is shifted from one to another 
up through the typical securitization process,” Volpe said in a phone 
interview. “The principle concern about the disconnect is that the 
public records are not complete insofar as the true beneficial owner of 
the mortgage is not reflected in the public records.”
In previous 
challenges to mortgage liens filed in the name of MERS, the Reston, 
Va.-based company has relied on agency laws to defend its position as 
both the legal holder of the mortgage, and as an agent acting on behalf 
of the owner of the promissory note.
Smith said MERS is the true 
owner of the mortgage, and is not, in the complaint's words, a “straw 
man” placeholder listed in public records.
“The 'owner of the 
loan' is the party who has possession of the promissory note, but the 
promissory note is not, and has never been, and is not required to be 
disclosed or filed in the public records,” she wrote.
Following a 
subpoena issued against MERS earlier this year, on Oct. 27, Delaware 
Attorney General Joseph “Beau” Biden filed a lawsuit claiming MERS 
engages in deceptive trade practices. The complaint cites a review of 
100 foreclosures in New   Castle County during 2010 that showed 
discrepancies between MERS records and the entities that participated in
 the foreclosure.
In a press statement, Smith said the claims in 
the Texas case are without legal or factual merit and that MERS complies
 with state laws. In a separate statement about the allegations in 
Delaware, Smith said the MERS business model is “straightforward and 
transparent,” adding that “[T]he lawsuit they filed was unexpected, and 
we disagree with the allegations made in their complaint.”