I am a lawyer. I think Homeowners facing Foreclosure should contact an attorney. However, I tried putting myself in the shoes of someone trying to seek out information to defend a foreclosure complaint. I first looked at the summons that is attached to the complaint in Ohio. It directs you to Save The Dream. It gives you a telephone number; I called the number. I asked straight up how do I find an attorney to help me. The person on the other end of the telephone did not know. They did not provide that type of assistance, but he was able to set up an appointment at an office near me. He gave me the address, but I declined the assistance.
I then located the address on the internet and the agency that was located at the address was a Credit Counseling Center. I did not speak with anyone at the Center, but I have discussed a number of foreclosure cases with people who have gone to credit counseling. The Credit Counseling Agency does not provide the names of attorneys who could provide assistance. They provide credit counseling that will guide the individuals through the various governmental programs that will assist the Homeowner Facing Foreclosure. These credit counselors assist the Homeowners while the Homeowners work with the Lender/Plaintiff. (While the Homeowners need a lifeline, all they are given is an opportunity to take swimming lessons.).
In Northeastern Ohio there are a number of billboards encouraging people to contact an agency for assistance. The telephone numbers on most of the billboards, lead the person to Neighborworks, the National Federation of Credit Counseling, ESOP (Encouraging and Strengthening Ohio's People). I was at a meeting with several individuals from ESOP, and I wanted to know how they put people in contact with attorneys. The individuals I met with had no attorney resources to whom they could refer a Homeowner facing Foreclosure. The ESOP representatives had no where to turn when their loan modification options for Homeowners facing Foreclosure ran out. I gave them a number of my business cards and suggested that I could be a resource. It has been almost a year and those representatives have never needed my assistance.
I have run into attorneys who work for Legal Aid Societies. These attorneys are diligent, hard working and caring people. They eductae themselves on the issues and are prepared to place the Lender/Plaintiff in a position to offer a reasonable loan modification. The problem: in order to qualify for assistance from legal aid your income has to be below a certain level. Those Homeowners may obtain a level playing field, but the Lender/ Plaintiff can simply run the numbers and say that the Homeowner facing Foreclosure does not qualify. Those Homeowners Facing Foreclosure who have income to support a loan modification or otherwise defend the foreclosure complaint do not qualify for assistance from the attorneys at the Legal Aid Society.
Homeowners Facing Foreclosure, who contact a governemental agency for assistance, are told that by participating in a loan modification program the foreclosure complaint will be stopped. I originally thought that this was misinformation purposefully provided to Homeowners Facing Foreclosure. Upon closer inspection the HUD guidelines require the Lender to take no further action to proceed toward a judgment in foreclosure or toward the Sheriff Sale. The Federal Governmental Agency that provides the assistance states that the Lender is not to proceed, but no one tells the Court that the Homeowner is pursuing a loan modification. No one tells the Homeowner that they need to contact the Court. As a result, the Homeowner Facing Foreclosure pursues a loan modification which remains active until the foreclosure judgment or Sheriff's sale has occurred. Now, that the Homeowner facing Foreclosure has "waived" most of their rights as a result of not participating in the foreclosure litigation, the Homeowner facing Foreclosure will receive notification that the loan modification has been denied.
Homeowners Facing Foreclosure, who are fortunate enough to find one of the many websites/ blogs that provide information to the Homeowners, must be overwhelmed with all of the inform that is provided. As an attorney, I find the information provided helpful. However, if I place myself as a Homeowner facing Foreclosure, I do not know where to start. Most of the information is at the Calculus Level, and I am looking for the answer to 2+2. Even the websites providing information encourage the Homeowner to contact an attorney and provide lists of trusted attorneys. But that information is not front and center, and therefore must be overlooked.
I must assume that being a Homeowner Facing Foreclosure trying to find help places so much pressure, fear and anxiety upon the Homeowner that it is difficult to know where to turn. I encourage Homeowners to educate themselves, seek assistance from all agencies available, but to also participate in the legal system.
Monday, June 18, 2012
Monday, June 11, 2012
Free Foreclosure Defense Advice Continues
I recently posted my willingness to offer free foreclosure defense advice to anyone who showed up at my office on Thursday evenings at 6:00 p.m. In reviewing the post again, the message was not clear and the size of the text made it difficult to read, so maybe that is why no one has showed up on the first two Thursdays beginning at 6:00p.m.
I will be in my office and will answer any question anyone has regarding the foreclosure complaint and legal process. It seems like most homeowners try to defend the complaint on their own and become confused and/or miss some important step along the way. Homeowners facing foreclosure often wait until the Sheriff's Sale is approaching or after they have received an eviction notice before they contact an attorney. (I am amazed at how many homeowners will send money to a "loan modifciation" company located out of state before they will consult with a local attorney.)
I do not believe a Homeowner is adequately equipped to defend the foreclosure on their own, but if the Homeowner is going to attempt to do it on their own, then I can at least be here as a resource. It would seem that there have been so many "Foreclosure Rescue Scams" that homeowners have become wary and refuse to even talk to attorneys. Hopefully, I can help some.
I will be in my office and will answer any question anyone has regarding the foreclosure complaint and legal process. It seems like most homeowners try to defend the complaint on their own and become confused and/or miss some important step along the way. Homeowners facing foreclosure often wait until the Sheriff's Sale is approaching or after they have received an eviction notice before they contact an attorney. (I am amazed at how many homeowners will send money to a "loan modifciation" company located out of state before they will consult with a local attorney.)
I do not believe a Homeowner is adequately equipped to defend the foreclosure on their own, but if the Homeowner is going to attempt to do it on their own, then I can at least be here as a resource. It would seem that there have been so many "Foreclosure Rescue Scams" that homeowners have become wary and refuse to even talk to attorneys. Hopefully, I can help some.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
FREE FORECLOSURE DEFENSE ADVICE
FREE
FORECLOSURE
DEFENSE
ADVICE
I DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT ANY HOMEOWNER SHOULD ATTEMPT TO
DEFEND THE FORECLOSURE COMPLAINT ON THEIR OWN, BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO IT YOU MIGHT AS WELL DO IT RIGHT.
NO COFFEE; NO DOUGHNUTS, JUST ME ANSWERING QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE REGARDING YOUR LITIGATION.
THURSDAY EVENINGS AT 6:00 P.M. BEGINNING May 31, 2012
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Appearance counsel for Homeowners
I am not suggesting that Attorneys start doing this. Instead, I am just floating an idea for people to comment on and critique. There are probably a number of ethical rules that would prevent someone from actually doing it. But what would happen if attorneys who practiced foreclosure defense just showed up at the Courthouse. These attorneys could sit in the Courtrooms from 9:00 to 11:00 and again at 1:00 to 2:00. When a case was called the attorney would wait to make certain that the Defendant did not stand or that another attorney was not present to represent the Defendant. When it was clear that no one was there on behalf of the Defendant, the Attorney would simply state that he was there on behalf of the Defendant; that he had not had an opportunity to speak with Defendant regarding the matter but that he would ask the Court for an additional 30 days within which to file an answer. The Court rarely requires Civil Rule 6 "good cause" and the Court would likely grant an extension of time.
The Attorney would then have 30 days to contact the Defendant and see if the Defendant was interested in defending the foreclosure. If the defendant was not interested, the attorney had obtained an additional 30 days for the Defendant to determine his next move. No harm no foul.
If the Attorney was succesful in contacting the Defendant and the Defendant was interested in defending the foreclosure, then the Attorney could offer his services. The attorney would not be causing delay merely for the sake of delay, as almost every foreclosure case that I have reviewed has some portion that has a defensible issue. I am certain that the Supreme Court and Disciplinary Counsel would be concerned about the undue pressure that would result from this type of direct contact (soliciatation) by an attorney with a potential client. Maybe we should request an ehical opinion on the issue?
I do not see a great difference between the above and "appearance counsel" who have no authority and no contact with the client prior to walking into the Courtroom on behalf of the Plaintiff. If the defendant does not appear, the appearance counsel is able to complete his task; hand the proposed entry to the court. If the Defendant does appear, then appearance counsel stands there siliently while the Court resets the matter giving the Defendant time to either file an answer or retain an attorney.
If Attorneys could act as "appearance counsel", then the biggest obstacle to defending the foreclosure complaint would be avoided; getting the Homeowner facing foreclosure to take some inital action. Almost every Homeowner Facing Foreclosure wants to defend their home. The Homeowners are simply too scared to take the initial step. One or two "appearance counsel" could prevent foreclosures in an entire county. A network of "appearance counsel" across the entire State could combine their efforts and a handful of Foreclosure Defense Attorneys could prevent foreclosures in the State of Ohio. With foreclosures piling up in the Courts, the Ohio Supreme Court would have to extend the time for the Courts to resolve a foreclosure case. As prosecuting foreclosures to a conclusion became more time consuming fewer law firms would agree to handle foreclosures. Finally, the banks would have to make legitimate business decisions on a case by case basis. No more governmental programs. Bankers simply deciding that some cash flow is better than no cash flow.
Again, this is only an idea that has been posted for suggestions, comments, and ethical reviews. While we are waiting for a decision on the propriety of "appearance counsel" for Defendants facing foreclosure, maybe we can get Homeowners tol start contacting an attorney for help.
The Attorney would then have 30 days to contact the Defendant and see if the Defendant was interested in defending the foreclosure. If the defendant was not interested, the attorney had obtained an additional 30 days for the Defendant to determine his next move. No harm no foul.
If the Attorney was succesful in contacting the Defendant and the Defendant was interested in defending the foreclosure, then the Attorney could offer his services. The attorney would not be causing delay merely for the sake of delay, as almost every foreclosure case that I have reviewed has some portion that has a defensible issue. I am certain that the Supreme Court and Disciplinary Counsel would be concerned about the undue pressure that would result from this type of direct contact (soliciatation) by an attorney with a potential client. Maybe we should request an ehical opinion on the issue?
I do not see a great difference between the above and "appearance counsel" who have no authority and no contact with the client prior to walking into the Courtroom on behalf of the Plaintiff. If the defendant does not appear, the appearance counsel is able to complete his task; hand the proposed entry to the court. If the Defendant does appear, then appearance counsel stands there siliently while the Court resets the matter giving the Defendant time to either file an answer or retain an attorney.
If Attorneys could act as "appearance counsel", then the biggest obstacle to defending the foreclosure complaint would be avoided; getting the Homeowner facing foreclosure to take some inital action. Almost every Homeowner Facing Foreclosure wants to defend their home. The Homeowners are simply too scared to take the initial step. One or two "appearance counsel" could prevent foreclosures in an entire county. A network of "appearance counsel" across the entire State could combine their efforts and a handful of Foreclosure Defense Attorneys could prevent foreclosures in the State of Ohio. With foreclosures piling up in the Courts, the Ohio Supreme Court would have to extend the time for the Courts to resolve a foreclosure case. As prosecuting foreclosures to a conclusion became more time consuming fewer law firms would agree to handle foreclosures. Finally, the banks would have to make legitimate business decisions on a case by case basis. No more governmental programs. Bankers simply deciding that some cash flow is better than no cash flow.
Again, this is only an idea that has been posted for suggestions, comments, and ethical reviews. While we are waiting for a decision on the propriety of "appearance counsel" for Defendants facing foreclosure, maybe we can get Homeowners tol start contacting an attorney for help.
Another Public Service Announcement: Answer the Complaint
The complaint in Ohio has a Summons attached to the front of it and both the Summons and Complaint are served upon the Defendant to begin the civil action. The Ohio Supreme Court provides the standard form for the Summons to be used by the Ohio Courts of Common Pleas. The Summons contains the following language:
You have been named a defendant in aforeclosure complaint. You are hereby summoned and required to do the following:
1. Within 28 days after service of this summons you must serve (deliver or mail) a copy of your Answer or your Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Plead upon the Plaintiff(s)' Attorney. If the Plaintiff does not have an attorney, you must serve the Answer or Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Plead on the Plaintiff. The 28 days is mandatory. It includes the date you received this summons and excludes the date that you serve the Plaintiff's attorney or the Plaintiff.
2. You must also file your originalAnswer or your original Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or OtherwisePlead with the Clerk of Court's Office within 3 days after you serve the Plaintiff(s)' attorney or Plaintiff, as appropriate.
The standard form also provides the following information:
We urge you to seek legal counsel. You may contact the Save the Dream hotline by calling 1-888-404-4674. Additional information and resources can be found at http://www.savethedream.ohio.gov/.
Most homeowners are not trained in the law. To the Courts and Attorneys the above instructions are very simple direct and easy to follow. To a homeowner who has been dreading this day for quite some time, the fear and panic makes it difficult to read. Once the Homeowners calms down, the above instructions are still very difficult to understand. The Homeowner does not understand, even though it clearly says so, that the 28 days begins to run when the summons is received by the Homeowner. Instead, the Homeowner will count 28 days from the date typed on the summons and determine that either the time has passed or there is very little time to react.
Even though two things are required, the Homeowner will do the suggested optional item set forth above. The Homeowner will contact Save the Dream. The telephone number is listed right on the summons, certainly they know more about the process than the Homowner. Contacting Save the Dream does not fulfill either of the above requirements. I do not mean to disparage Save the Dream. All I am saying at this point is that the Homeowner may feel some relief; a counselor is available to help, but the complaint remains unanswered. The Homeowner is still in default.
Other Homeowners will find the name and telephone number of Plaintiff's attorney and call the attorney. Other Homeowners will contact the bank directly. These Homeowners will again feel some relief; they will receive an application for assistance. The Homeowners are talking to individuals; the individuals actually seem helpful and the Homeowners are given something that they can do and easily understand; answer questions about their finances; explain their financial predicament; provide pay-stubs and tax returns. The process is almost refreshing at first. The Homeowner has been wanting to discuss these impossible issues with someone. However, the Homeowner is still in default; an answer has not been filed with the Court.
The loan modification process, whether through a governmental agency, the bank, or the Plaintiif's attorney takes much longer than expected. The Homeowner seems to become emotionally invested to continuing with the loan modification process. Despite how many times the paperwork is insufficient; the paperwork is lost; the paperwork needs updated, the Homeowner continues to turn in the paperwork and continues to contact the Bank, the agency or the attorney.
The loan modification process also makes the Homeowner ignore the foreclosure complaint. Some homeowners probably ignore the legal process purposely. It's too scarey or complicated to think about. Many other homeowners truly believe that they are participating in the foreclosure litigation; after all they contacted save the dream, they called the bank, they wrote to the attorney. Another group of homeowners have been increasing in numbers; Homeowners who understand that they must file an answer, ask the people working with the homeowner on the loan modification if they must still file an answer to the complaint, and the Homeowners are mislead. Some homeowners are outright lied to about the need to file answer. Other Homeowners are told that it really is not needed and that a loan modification will resolve everything. Why spend money on an attorney when the homeowner needs to demonstrate his ability to pay his mortgage or come up with a downpayment for the loan modification.
Homeowners fall into the trap of not filing an answer to the complaint and rely upon the loan modification process to resolve the matter. However, the Bank eventually files a motion for default, and the Court issues a default judgment and a Decree in Foreclosure.
The bank files a praecipe for order sale and the backlog of cases in many counties results in a number of many months before the order of sale is sent to the Sheriff. Sometime between the default judgment and the advertisment for the Sheriff's Sale, the Homeowner is either denied a loan modification or presented a loan modification which they can not possibly afford. Now what to do. It is at this point many Homeowners contact an attorney.
Unfortunately, most attorneys tell the homeowner there is nothing that can be done. Its too late.
While there are still many things that can be done at this point (a motion for relief from judgment; a motion for stay of execution), this post is already too long and written in a stream of conscience format.
The Homeowner who has received a summons and complaint should realize that many attorneys offer free consultations. Homeowners should also realize that attorneys defending foreclosures offer reduced fees and payment plan. Contact an attorney.
If the Homeowner chooses to follow some other path, the Homeowner must prepare an answer to the compalint. There are many sample answers available. An answer should set forth the Caption. The first three inches of the complaint where it identifies the court; the name of the plaintiff vs. the name of the defendant; the case number. It should then plainly state ANSWER. The answer must then admit or deny each numbered paragraph of the complaint. After the answer is prepared, the Homeowner must mail a copy to the bank's attorney; file the original with the Court and then have a copy stamped with the filing date for your records.
You can then safely contact whoever you want to attempt to modify your loan. When calling you should record the date and time of your call; the number that you called, the individuals full name who you spoke to, along with any identification number provided. You should keep careful, neat and organized notes of each of your telephone converstaions. You should keep all of your notes in a single designated notebook. The length of time involved will surpass any of your expectations. The homeowner should also keep a copy of any document that you complete and send to anyone in the loan modification process. You should also track through a delivery confirmation, fax transmittal sheet, or fed Express tarcking information the receipt of the loan application.
The take away from all this should be: Answer the Complaint. No matter what anyone else tells you, the Homeowner nust answer the complaint.
You have been named a defendant in aforeclosure complaint. You are hereby summoned and required to do the following:
1. Within 28 days after service of this summons you must serve (deliver or mail) a copy of your Answer or your Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Plead upon the Plaintiff(s)' Attorney. If the Plaintiff does not have an attorney, you must serve the Answer or Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Plead on the Plaintiff. The 28 days is mandatory. It includes the date you received this summons and excludes the date that you serve the Plaintiff's attorney or the Plaintiff.
2. You must also file your originalAnswer or your original Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or OtherwisePlead with the Clerk of Court's Office within 3 days after you serve the Plaintiff(s)' attorney or Plaintiff, as appropriate.
The standard form also provides the following information:
We urge you to seek legal counsel. You may contact the Save the Dream hotline by calling 1-888-404-4674. Additional information and resources can be found at http://www.savethedream.ohio.gov/.
Most homeowners are not trained in the law. To the Courts and Attorneys the above instructions are very simple direct and easy to follow. To a homeowner who has been dreading this day for quite some time, the fear and panic makes it difficult to read. Once the Homeowners calms down, the above instructions are still very difficult to understand. The Homeowner does not understand, even though it clearly says so, that the 28 days begins to run when the summons is received by the Homeowner. Instead, the Homeowner will count 28 days from the date typed on the summons and determine that either the time has passed or there is very little time to react.
Even though two things are required, the Homeowner will do the suggested optional item set forth above. The Homeowner will contact Save the Dream. The telephone number is listed right on the summons, certainly they know more about the process than the Homowner. Contacting Save the Dream does not fulfill either of the above requirements. I do not mean to disparage Save the Dream. All I am saying at this point is that the Homeowner may feel some relief; a counselor is available to help, but the complaint remains unanswered. The Homeowner is still in default.
Other Homeowners will find the name and telephone number of Plaintiff's attorney and call the attorney. Other Homeowners will contact the bank directly. These Homeowners will again feel some relief; they will receive an application for assistance. The Homeowners are talking to individuals; the individuals actually seem helpful and the Homeowners are given something that they can do and easily understand; answer questions about their finances; explain their financial predicament; provide pay-stubs and tax returns. The process is almost refreshing at first. The Homeowner has been wanting to discuss these impossible issues with someone. However, the Homeowner is still in default; an answer has not been filed with the Court.
The loan modification process, whether through a governmental agency, the bank, or the Plaintiif's attorney takes much longer than expected. The Homeowner seems to become emotionally invested to continuing with the loan modification process. Despite how many times the paperwork is insufficient; the paperwork is lost; the paperwork needs updated, the Homeowner continues to turn in the paperwork and continues to contact the Bank, the agency or the attorney.
The loan modification process also makes the Homeowner ignore the foreclosure complaint. Some homeowners probably ignore the legal process purposely. It's too scarey or complicated to think about. Many other homeowners truly believe that they are participating in the foreclosure litigation; after all they contacted save the dream, they called the bank, they wrote to the attorney. Another group of homeowners have been increasing in numbers; Homeowners who understand that they must file an answer, ask the people working with the homeowner on the loan modification if they must still file an answer to the complaint, and the Homeowners are mislead. Some homeowners are outright lied to about the need to file answer. Other Homeowners are told that it really is not needed and that a loan modification will resolve everything. Why spend money on an attorney when the homeowner needs to demonstrate his ability to pay his mortgage or come up with a downpayment for the loan modification.
Homeowners fall into the trap of not filing an answer to the complaint and rely upon the loan modification process to resolve the matter. However, the Bank eventually files a motion for default, and the Court issues a default judgment and a Decree in Foreclosure.
The bank files a praecipe for order sale and the backlog of cases in many counties results in a number of many months before the order of sale is sent to the Sheriff. Sometime between the default judgment and the advertisment for the Sheriff's Sale, the Homeowner is either denied a loan modification or presented a loan modification which they can not possibly afford. Now what to do. It is at this point many Homeowners contact an attorney.
Unfortunately, most attorneys tell the homeowner there is nothing that can be done. Its too late.
While there are still many things that can be done at this point (a motion for relief from judgment; a motion for stay of execution), this post is already too long and written in a stream of conscience format.
The Homeowner who has received a summons and complaint should realize that many attorneys offer free consultations. Homeowners should also realize that attorneys defending foreclosures offer reduced fees and payment plan. Contact an attorney.
If the Homeowner chooses to follow some other path, the Homeowner must prepare an answer to the compalint. There are many sample answers available. An answer should set forth the Caption. The first three inches of the complaint where it identifies the court; the name of the plaintiff vs. the name of the defendant; the case number. It should then plainly state ANSWER. The answer must then admit or deny each numbered paragraph of the complaint. After the answer is prepared, the Homeowner must mail a copy to the bank's attorney; file the original with the Court and then have a copy stamped with the filing date for your records.
You can then safely contact whoever you want to attempt to modify your loan. When calling you should record the date and time of your call; the number that you called, the individuals full name who you spoke to, along with any identification number provided. You should keep careful, neat and organized notes of each of your telephone converstaions. You should keep all of your notes in a single designated notebook. The length of time involved will surpass any of your expectations. The homeowner should also keep a copy of any document that you complete and send to anyone in the loan modification process. You should also track through a delivery confirmation, fax transmittal sheet, or fed Express tarcking information the receipt of the loan application.
The take away from all this should be: Answer the Complaint. No matter what anyone else tells you, the Homeowner nust answer the complaint.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
A PSA (Public Service Announcement) aboutPSAs(Pooling and Servicing Agreements)
I recently saw a book review/ interview in which the author stated that Mortgage Backed Securities have been around since Mitt Romney's father, George Romney, was involved in one of the first mortgage backed securities. I was also reviewing HUD regulations and loan modifications and ran across modification programs in the early 1990's. Apparently, Mortgage Backed Securities have been around forever and are not necessarily the root of all evil.
At some point Mortgage Backed Securities became prevelant and dominated the finance of real estate transactions. Talking heads spoke of a housing bubble and the eventual bursting of the bubble. Those involved in Mortgage Backed Securities eventually invented financial products to protect themselves against the risk of the bubble bursting. Real Estate transactions began ocurring at a more rapid pace and less credit worthy individuals became involved in these transactions.
As more information becomes available, more time is spent writing and talking about how we got here and who is to blame. If they are not casting blame, the articles discuss extreme measures that should be taken by Homeowners against Banks or Politicians. All of this adds to the collective "noise" that has allowed the Banks to continue to do wrong. The Banks' wrong was not the MBS or the financial items used to diminish the Banks' risks. The Banks' wrong which continues today is failing to take responsibility for their losses. When they were making money the Banks did not do things "by the book", "did not crosss their T's and dot their I's". Now the Banks are attempting to avoid the results of these failures.
Robo-signing is really just the result of Banks trying to recreate or create numerous transactions that should have been done years ago. The banks created Trusts to hold mortgages and sold an interest in these trusts as certificates. However, these Trusts required the notes and mortgages to be transferred to the Trust within a very limited period of time. If these transfers did not occur within these strict time periods, then the assets were not properly transferred to the Trust. If the assets were not transferred to the Trust, then the Trustee can not bring suit on the note or foreclose upon the mortgage. Further, the Trust or Trustee can not subsequently transfer the note or mortgage to an investor or a Government Sponsored Entity; Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac.
I strongly believe that Homeowners must engage counsel at an early stage. As soon as the complaint is filed a Homeowner should contact an attorney. Attorneys that do not regularly defend foreclosures should refer Homeowners to those attorney that do. In the last week I have filed a number of pleadings throughout Ohio, in which I argue that the Plaintiff Trust does not possess the Note or Mortgage, and that the Trustee can not seek to enforce a note or mortgage that is not an asset of the trust. I have relied upon the following authority to make this argument:
1. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement will set forth the governing law as the law of teh State of New York.
2. The New York Law of Estates, Powers, and Trusts, NY EPT LAW 7-2.4
*** any act of the Trustee in contravention of the Trust is void ***
3. I then provide provisions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement which provide the manner in which the note and mortgage are to be transferred from the Originator to the Sponsor, to the Depositor, and then to the Trustee,
4. I then cite cases Horace vs. LaSalle Bank NA; Hendricks vs. US Bank NA; and Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. vs. Williams for the proposition that a Plaintiff that fails to comply with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement can not bring suit.
These pleadings are currently pending in four different county courts of common pleas and a court of appeals. I will post the results as they occur.
Should any attorney have additional authority or would like to discussthe matter in greater detail, please contact my office
At some point Mortgage Backed Securities became prevelant and dominated the finance of real estate transactions. Talking heads spoke of a housing bubble and the eventual bursting of the bubble. Those involved in Mortgage Backed Securities eventually invented financial products to protect themselves against the risk of the bubble bursting. Real Estate transactions began ocurring at a more rapid pace and less credit worthy individuals became involved in these transactions.
As more information becomes available, more time is spent writing and talking about how we got here and who is to blame. If they are not casting blame, the articles discuss extreme measures that should be taken by Homeowners against Banks or Politicians. All of this adds to the collective "noise" that has allowed the Banks to continue to do wrong. The Banks' wrong was not the MBS or the financial items used to diminish the Banks' risks. The Banks' wrong which continues today is failing to take responsibility for their losses. When they were making money the Banks did not do things "by the book", "did not crosss their T's and dot their I's". Now the Banks are attempting to avoid the results of these failures.
Robo-signing is really just the result of Banks trying to recreate or create numerous transactions that should have been done years ago. The banks created Trusts to hold mortgages and sold an interest in these trusts as certificates. However, these Trusts required the notes and mortgages to be transferred to the Trust within a very limited period of time. If these transfers did not occur within these strict time periods, then the assets were not properly transferred to the Trust. If the assets were not transferred to the Trust, then the Trustee can not bring suit on the note or foreclose upon the mortgage. Further, the Trust or Trustee can not subsequently transfer the note or mortgage to an investor or a Government Sponsored Entity; Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac.
I strongly believe that Homeowners must engage counsel at an early stage. As soon as the complaint is filed a Homeowner should contact an attorney. Attorneys that do not regularly defend foreclosures should refer Homeowners to those attorney that do. In the last week I have filed a number of pleadings throughout Ohio, in which I argue that the Plaintiff Trust does not possess the Note or Mortgage, and that the Trustee can not seek to enforce a note or mortgage that is not an asset of the trust. I have relied upon the following authority to make this argument:
1. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement will set forth the governing law as the law of teh State of New York.
2. The New York Law of Estates, Powers, and Trusts, NY EPT LAW 7-2.4
*** any act of the Trustee in contravention of the Trust is void ***
3. I then provide provisions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement which provide the manner in which the note and mortgage are to be transferred from the Originator to the Sponsor, to the Depositor, and then to the Trustee,
4. I then cite cases Horace vs. LaSalle Bank NA; Hendricks vs. US Bank NA; and Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. vs. Williams for the proposition that a Plaintiff that fails to comply with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement can not bring suit.
These pleadings are currently pending in four different county courts of common pleas and a court of appeals. I will post the results as they occur.
Should any attorney have additional authority or would like to discussthe matter in greater detail, please contact my office
Monday, March 5, 2012
Dual Tracking -- In Ohio It is Expected
I recently read a post regarding the California Act that will prohibit Banks from "dual tracking" foreclosure cases. This term of art that is developing describes the situation in which the Bank continues to work with the Homeowner to modify the mortgage while also proceeding with the foreclosure action. In Ohio, or at least in the cases I have seen, the Courts expect the Banks to continue to contact the Homeowners. The Courts will actually inform the Homeowners to keep in constant contact with the Bank and the law firm representing the Plaintiff in the foreclosure, because the Banks never tell the attorneys anything. Motions for default are denied or at least continued when a homeowner comes to Court the day of the hearing and says (1) I am working with the Bank and have made the final trial payment on my modification, (2) the Bank told me I did not need to appear, but I thought I should. If the Homeowner did not appear default judgment would have probably issued.
Several of my more recent clients have stated that (1) they were told that a modification would resolve the foreclosure, (2) they did not need to appear at Court, (3) they were eventually denied the loan modification only to find out that the Court granted judgment in favor of the Bank. In addition, those clients who have contacted my office as soon as they are served with the complaint, state that they are contacted by the Bank repeatedly until the answer is filed. This could be the Bank ethically deciding not to contact a party who is represented by counsel, but it is starting to feel more like the Bank contacts homeowners trying to lull them to sleep until a default judgment is rendered against the Homeowner.
It would appear that this is simply another step in the well conceived foreclosure process by the banks. Convince the Homeowners and the Public in general that everything is the fault of "irresponsible homeowners". Dual track the process so the embarrassed Homeowner is lead to believe that he/she can quietly fix the problem through a loan modification without going to Court. Obtain default judgment and deny the loan modification. I reecntly suggested on a Mandelman Matters comment that an effort should be made to quantify the number of Homeowners who were convinced that they did not have to file a responsive pleading in the Court based upon their communications with the Bank.
In a number of motions for relief from judgment I have been developing the idea that Ohio Courts already use a balancing test when determining excusable neglect under 60(B)(1), by finding the neglect more excusable based upon the strength of the defense. The standard for relief from judgment should also be lessened when there is eviednce presented that the Homeowner was contacted by the Bank and encouraged to participate in a loan modification instead of defending the foreclosure action.
An additional concern is that Banks are using the delay in bringing a property to Sheriff's Sale to their advantage. Homeowners seem to be given a false sense of security with the knowledge that the Sheriff's Sale may not occur for some time. The Homeowner believes that they have time to modify the loan. However, as the time from the decree of foreclosure goes beyond one year, the Homeowner faces a much more difficult task in obtaining relief from judgment. Several grounds for relief under Civil Rule 60(B) must be raised within one year. Homeowners repeatedly send in their financial papers, wait 6 weeks for a response, and repeat. A year goes by pretty quickly waiting for repeated responses. The loan modification is denied; Sheriff's Sale is approaching rapidly, and the Homeowner has lost several grounds for relief as a result of more than a year passing.
Homeowners need to aggressively defend the Foreclosure Complaint from the beginning. A concentrated effort needs to be made to advise these Homeowners.
The complaint and summons in Ohio now advise Homeowners of resources available from the Ohio Attorney General's Office. However, the Homeowner is not cautioned that these groups are not attorneys, cannot represent the Homeowner in Court, and can only assist with the loan modification process. Dual tracking and the Banks' overall strategy seem to be inadvertently assisted by referring Homeowners to these resources.
Several of my more recent clients have stated that (1) they were told that a modification would resolve the foreclosure, (2) they did not need to appear at Court, (3) they were eventually denied the loan modification only to find out that the Court granted judgment in favor of the Bank. In addition, those clients who have contacted my office as soon as they are served with the complaint, state that they are contacted by the Bank repeatedly until the answer is filed. This could be the Bank ethically deciding not to contact a party who is represented by counsel, but it is starting to feel more like the Bank contacts homeowners trying to lull them to sleep until a default judgment is rendered against the Homeowner.
It would appear that this is simply another step in the well conceived foreclosure process by the banks. Convince the Homeowners and the Public in general that everything is the fault of "irresponsible homeowners". Dual track the process so the embarrassed Homeowner is lead to believe that he/she can quietly fix the problem through a loan modification without going to Court. Obtain default judgment and deny the loan modification. I reecntly suggested on a Mandelman Matters comment that an effort should be made to quantify the number of Homeowners who were convinced that they did not have to file a responsive pleading in the Court based upon their communications with the Bank.
In a number of motions for relief from judgment I have been developing the idea that Ohio Courts already use a balancing test when determining excusable neglect under 60(B)(1), by finding the neglect more excusable based upon the strength of the defense. The standard for relief from judgment should also be lessened when there is eviednce presented that the Homeowner was contacted by the Bank and encouraged to participate in a loan modification instead of defending the foreclosure action.
An additional concern is that Banks are using the delay in bringing a property to Sheriff's Sale to their advantage. Homeowners seem to be given a false sense of security with the knowledge that the Sheriff's Sale may not occur for some time. The Homeowner believes that they have time to modify the loan. However, as the time from the decree of foreclosure goes beyond one year, the Homeowner faces a much more difficult task in obtaining relief from judgment. Several grounds for relief under Civil Rule 60(B) must be raised within one year. Homeowners repeatedly send in their financial papers, wait 6 weeks for a response, and repeat. A year goes by pretty quickly waiting for repeated responses. The loan modification is denied; Sheriff's Sale is approaching rapidly, and the Homeowner has lost several grounds for relief as a result of more than a year passing.
Homeowners need to aggressively defend the Foreclosure Complaint from the beginning. A concentrated effort needs to be made to advise these Homeowners.
The complaint and summons in Ohio now advise Homeowners of resources available from the Ohio Attorney General's Office. However, the Homeowner is not cautioned that these groups are not attorneys, cannot represent the Homeowner in Court, and can only assist with the loan modification process. Dual tracking and the Banks' overall strategy seem to be inadvertently assisted by referring Homeowners to these resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)