bostonbubble.com Forum Index bostonbubble.com
Boston Bubble - Boston Real Estate Analysis
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

 
Go to: Boston real estate bubble fact list with references
More Boston Bubble News...
DISCLAIMER: The information provided on this website and in the associated forums comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, expressed or implied. You assume all risk for your own use of the information provided as the accuracy of the information is in no way guaranteed. As always, cross check information that you would deem useful against multiple, reliable, independent resources. The opinions expressed belong to the individual authors and not necessarily to other parties.

Court ruling leaves owners of voided foreclosures with few r

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bostonbubble.com Forum Index -> News & Reference Suggestions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
news



Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 0
Location: Greater Boston

PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:17 pm GMT    Post subject: Court ruling leaves owners of voided foreclosures with few r Reply with quote

Use this forum thread to discuss the following link.

Description: Court ruling leaves owners of voided foreclosures with few rights
URL: http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/real_estate/x1876835776/Court-ruling-leaves-ow ...truncated...
Info/Broken?: http://www.bostonbubble.com/link_info.php?id=3692

Subscribe to New Links: RSS Feed
Suggest a Link: New Topic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FreedomCM
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 6:36 pm GMT    Post subject: What's next? Reply with quote

Quote:
I don't understand..... why aren't the banks who offered the homes for sale on the hook ?
The 'homeowners' or dwellers ought to be able to sue the banks for fraud. Or, they ought to be able to pursue the Title Insurance company, if they used one.

Read more: http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/archive/x1876835776/Court-ruling-leaves-owners-of-voided-foreclosures-with-few-rights#ixzz1bFp2m2gq



These are good questions. Does anyone know what are the answers for MA?
Back to top
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1824
Location: Greater Boston

PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 6:48 pm GMT    Post subject: Re: What's next? Reply with quote

FreedomCM wrote:
Quote:
I don't understand..... why aren't the banks who offered the homes for sale on the hook ?
The 'homeowners' or dwellers ought to be able to sue the banks for fraud. Or, they ought to be able to pursue the Title Insurance company, if they used one.

Read more: http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/archive/x1876835776/Court-ruling-leaves-owners-of-voided-foreclosures-with-few-rights#ixzz1bFp2m2gq



These are good questions. Does anyone know what are the answers for MA?


I vaguely recall reading, though am by no means certain, that title insurance is very difficult to get for foreclosures, which might explain the second question. As for why the banks which sold the foreclosures aren't on the hook... that is an excellent question that I'd like to know too. Perhaps they will ultimately be on the hook and this was just the first prerequisite to arriving at that. Perhaps this is also complicated by many of the original lenders being out of business now. If the original mortgage was sliced, diced, and resold improperly (e.g., if MERS is ruled invalid), the mortgage holder who foreclosed may have come into possession of the mortgage improperly and the original lender may no longer exist. Who's on the hook then?

- admin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
FreedomCM
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:12 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Astute Observation by Honcho
2011-10-19 06:25 PM
Thanks for the link. It is fairly complex reasoning but not a major issue for actually innocent buyers (bona fide purchasers).

The court found here that the buyer was not an innocent purchaser because the chain of title was clear that the “bank” didn’t have record title at the time of the purchase. It was subsequent to the purchase that the bank recorded the confirmatory deed showing a transfer of title to the “bank” was filed in the public record. Had the confirmatory assignment been filed in the public record prior to the purchase, this guy wins his case (even if the bank had no authority to foreclose at the outset).

I want to dig into it a little more before really saying whether it is a good or bad decision or what the lasting effects would be on the title insurance or foreclosure purchaser industry.

It’s still a little shocking that the bank found it equitable to take property away from a person who paid real value at a foreclosure sale and gave the property back to a person who had not made their mortgage payments. There may be more going on here than what is in the decision….


from a RE lawyer who defends the banks in CA from MERS related lawsuits, posted at:
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/blog/comments/payment-affordability-in-irvine-hits-an-11-year-high/
Back to top
JacobS



Joined: 01 Dec 2011
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:42 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, I was about to looking to look into cheap land for sale , but after seeing this...I guess I'll wait for better times.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bostonbubble.com Forum Index -> News & Reference Suggestions All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Forum posts are owned by the original posters.
Forum boards are Copyright 2005 - present, bostonbubble.com.
Privacy policy in effect.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group