A homeowner’s home loan, recorded naming Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. (MERS) as the beneficiary, was bundled in a pool and sold on the secondary mortgage backed bond market. The homeowner became delinquent on his loan and contacted the lender to determine who to pay the overdue amount. Before the lender responded to the borrower, an agent of the beneficiary recorded a notice of default (NOD). The property was later sold at a foreclosure sale. The homeowner sought to recover title to his home, claiming the beneficiary had no authority to foreclose since the loan had been resold on the secondary mortgage market by MERS, making it impossible to ascertain the actual owner of the beneficial interest in the note. The lender claimed MERS had authority to foreclose since it was the named beneficiary on the trust deed identifying the home as security for the loan. A California appeals court held MERS as the named beneficiary could foreclose on the homeowner’s property since MERS had the authority to initiate foreclosure as the trust deed’s named beneficiary. [Robinson v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (2011) 199 CA 4th 42]
You are citing an old case, and this is mostly not true in California. MERS is an entity with no employees. It is a database that they lenders developed to hold their data. However, MERS is frequently incorrect, it doesn’t have the original notes, and it’s being sued continually across the nation to the point of bankruptcy.