The mortgage foreclosure mess

[Tilted]

What MA Foreclosure Court Ruling Really Means

Right, wrong, or whatever - this isn't good for the housing market. For one thing, I agree with Mr. Miller as he is quoted in this piece, in that some people in default on their mortgage might get the idea that they could get lucky (and, e.g., get a free house) if they contest foreclosure proceedings. That's just going to gum up the process and slow the pace at which the foreclosure inventory can get worked through. For another thing, it calls the whole securitization process into (further) question, and the housing market has long depended on that mechanism to create and maintain its bubble.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

What MA Foreclosure Court Ruling Really Means

Right, wrong, or whatever - this isn't good for the housing market. For one thing, I agree with Mr. Miller as he is quoted in this piece, in that some people in default on their mortgage might get the idea that they could get lucky (and, e.g., get a free house) if they contest foreclosure proceedings. That's just going to gum up the process and slow the pace at which the foreclosure inventory can get worked through. For another thing, it calls the whole securitization process into (further) question, and the housing market has long depended on that mechanism to create and maintain its bubble.

O'Malley screwed the lost note hopefuls in Maryland several years ago with his emergency foreclosure legislation:

"Legal junkies may also be amused to note that this law specifically allows that "proof of ownership" of a loan required to be provided with the docket file may be certified copies of mortgages, notes, and assignments in lieu of the originals."

Calculated Risk: Maryland Foreclosure Law Changes

Besides, Maryland has your deed online with your address, legal description, and the amount borrowed.

How can you contest that as being lost?

 

[philibusters]

Bad for the housing market, but the banks and lending industry messed up with things like MERS. It was a good idea that got a little too streamlined and moved too quickly. You can only move that the pace of society is moving and can't jump ahead of the courts and such.

 

[n0n1m0us3]

...

Besides, Maryland has your deed online with your address, legal description, and the amount borrowed.

How can you contest that as being lost?

Do you have a link for this?

 

[Lenny]

Do you have a link for this?

It took about two seconds to find this.

Is this what you wanted?

 

[Annoying_Boy]

Do you have a link for this?

MDLandRec.Net A Digital Image Retrieval System for Land Records in Maryland

You need to request a free account from the state. Will take several days most likely.

You're welcome.

 

[philibusters]

MDLandRec.Net A Digital Image Retrieval System for Land Records in Maryland

You need to request a free account from the state. Will take several days most likely.

You're welcome.

It has your deed and the original mortgage. However, what happens is that the mortgage is sold from one bank to another and that doesn't get in the system they use MERS for that. MERS stands for Mortgage Electroinic Resource System or something like that.

So you can always find your deed so saying your own the property in MarylandLandRec, but figuring out who has the right to collect your mortgage payment can be downright tricky.

 

[n0n1m0us3]

It took about two seconds to find this.

Is this what you wanted?

Thank you for your efforts but I'm not sure that's what I wanted.

MDLandRec.Net A Digital Image Retrieval System for Land Records in Maryland

You need to request a free account from the state. Will take several days most likely.

You're welcome.

Thanks for the link. I didn't know they had this information online. While I have a hard copy of my deed I'd still like to see what is online. Ah the age of information.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

Thank you for your efforts but I'm not sure that's what I wanted.


Thanks for the link. I didn't know they had this information online. While I have a hard copy of my deed I'd still like to see what is online. Ah the age of information.

It's the same deed, just scanned and put online.

And if you refi, they'll put that one there too.

 

[Tilted]

O'Malley screwed the lost note hopefuls in Maryland several years ago with his emergency foreclosure legislation:

"Legal junkies may also be amused to note that this law specifically allows that "proof of ownership" of a loan required to be provided with the docket file may be certified copies of mortgages, notes, and assignments in lieu of the originals."

Calculated Risk: Maryland Foreclosure Law Changes

Besides, Maryland has your deed online with your address, legal description, and the amount borrowed.

How can you contest that as being lost?

That's not the issue here (i.e. with this ruling and similar situations that it might be seen as exemplary of). The question isn't whether there's a recorded mortgage, the question is whether it was actually assigned to the trustees of the securitization holding entity before those trustees (e.g. in these cases, U.S. Bank NA and Wells Fargo) foreclosed on the property. This ruling indicates that the assignments don't even necessarily have to have been recorded before the forelcosure, but they do have to have been effectuated in some tangible, demonstrable way. What had happened was the entity that recorded the mortgage, in one case, and the entity that had first been assigned the mortgage, in the other, had never actually assigned those mortgages to the trust that ended up holding them, and only did so after the properties had been foreclosed on. Which means, when the trustees foreclosed, they didn't legally hold the mortgage and thus had no legal right to foreclose (with a minor exception, Massachusetts doesn't require mortgage holders to get judicial authorization before foreclosing).

Now, that's not because the banks were up to hanky panky, it's just that so many of these assignments, transfers, and securitizations were being done, that they didn't bother to make sure all of the paperwork I's and T's were dotted and crossed. If they didn't have to foreclose, it wouldn't have mattered, and they might have thought it wouldn't matter anyway. As it turns out, at least in Massachusetts, it does matter.

 

[Tilted]

I didn't know they had this information online. While I have a hard copy of my deed I'd still like to see what is online. Ah the age of information.

Yeah, it's super cool. You can kinda do title searches online now - beats the heck out of having to go down to the court house and spending a couple of hours there pulling deeds, finding reference numbers, pulling more deeds, etc., and paying for a copy of every record you need.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

That's not the issue here (i.e. with this ruling and similar situations that it might be seen as exemplary of). The question isn't whether there's a recorded mortgage, the question is whether it was actually assigned to the trustees of the securitization holding entity before those trustees (e.g. in these cases, U.S. Bank NA and Wells Fargo) foreclosed on the property. This ruling indicates that the assignments don't even necessarily have to have been recorded before the forelcosure, but they do have to have been effectuated in some tangible, demonstrable way. What had happened was the entity that recorded the mortgage, in one case, and the entity that had first been assigned the mortgage, in the other, had never actually assigned those mortgages to the trust that ended up holding them, and only did so after the properties had been foreclosed on. Which means, when the trustees foreclosed, they didn't legally hold the mortgage and thus had no legal right to foreclose (with a minor exception, Massachusetts doesn't require mortgage holders to get judicial authorization before foreclosing).

Now, that's not because the banks were up to hanky panky, it's just that so many of these assignments, transfers, and securitizations were being done, that they didn't bother to make sure all of the paperwork I's and T's were dotted and crossed. If they didn't have to foreclose, it wouldn't have mattered, and they might have thought it wouldn't matter anyway. As it turns out, at least in Massachusetts, it does matter.

That's all well and good, but from what I've seen from most of these "lost note" stories and cases is the bank can't produce "the original note" that the homeowner signed. So while they transferred the loan all over the place, nobody seems to have the "original note" as required by law.

So if you make it legal to present a copy of "the note," then the homeowner has no defense.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

One of the early pioneers that started slaying the mortgage snakes.

"Yet, time and again, loan servicers and others have sought plaintiff status, often by using affidavits stating that the actual notes had been lost, she said. “I’ve seen paperwork filed by lawyers saying, ‘We anticipate assignment’” of the debt, she said with a scoff."

'Angel' of foreclosure defense bedevils lenders - Business - Real estate - Mortgage Mess - msnbc.com

If you scan foreclosure cases you'll routinely find a "lost note affidavit" in the cases here in Maryland.

And O'Malley made that legal to close the loophole.

 

[Tilted]

That's all well and good, but from what I've seen from most of these "lost note" stories and cases is the bank can't produce "the original note" that the homeowner signed. So while they transferred the loan all over the place, nobody seems to have the "original note" as required by law.

So if you make it legal to present a copy of "the note," then the homeowner has no defense.

But, as I indicated, that has nothing to do with the issue in play here. Being able to present a copy of 'the note', or even the original note that the homeowner signed, would not have helped the trustees in this case - or in other similar situations. The issue isn't whether or not they can prove there's a note, or a mortgage, or whether the homeowner signed it, or agreed to anything. The issue is whether or not an assignment, to the proper entity, actually did take place before that entity foreclosed.

The issue here had nothing to do with a legal requirement to present an 'original note'. You're talking about a different issue, which itself may also be a widespread problem.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

But, as I indicated, that has nothing to do with the issue in play here. Being able to present a copy of 'the note', or even the original note that the homeowner signed, would not have helped the trustees in this case - or in other similar situations. The issue isn't whether or not they can prove there's a note, or a mortgage, or whether the homeowner signed it, or agreed to anything. The issue is whether or not an assignment, to the proper entity, actually did take place before that entity foreclosed.

The issue here had nothing to do with a legal requirement to present an 'original note'. You're talking about a different issue, which itself may also be a widespread problem.

Here's what I'm talking about: Joe buys house from bank X and Maryland puts his note online at MdLandRec. Joe then refi's imaginary equity out of the house a year later from bank Y and the state puts that note online too.

18 months later Joe stops paying both notes because the house across the street just sold for $100k less than he now owes and even though he can make the payment, he chooses not to.

During this time bank X sells Joe's loan to bank Z.

So Joe gets a lawyer and goes to court when the bank tries to take Joe's house.

Lawyer says "bank Z prove that you own the loan that you claim you bought from bank X."

Lawyer: "Show us some paperwork."

Of course Bank Z can't because it was mishandled, so they can't prove anything, Joe could have paid the house off for all anyone knows without paperwork and judge tosses them all out of the court room.

So the banks and politicians get O'Malley to write into the emergency foreclosure law the thingy about "lost notes."

Now it doesn't matter who owns what, has paperwork, or whatever.

You can bring Joe into court with his original deed stating he owns the property and ask him to prove that he's making payments or has paid the place off.

Off course Joe can't, case closed, bank whatever takes the house because all they have to do is file a "lost note affidavit" during the foreclosure process.

And that's why you never see Joe in court protesting his foreclosure.

 

[Gilligan]

I'm just real curious to know if there are any data that show that this 'robo signing' or any other fast-track or short-cut foreclosure shenanigans actually resulted in anyone losing their home that had not well and truly defaulted on their loan??? I'm going to stick my neck out and bet a dollar the answer to that question is 'virtually none..zip..nada'.

Funny how the media ignores that issue. The whole story seems to me to be a classic 'red herring' tale and in the end its nothing but a tired and meaningless remake of that old western: "Ya want to kill 'im fast, boss?..or do ya want me to kill 'im slooooow..?"

Dead is dead fer crying out loud.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

I'm just real curious to know if there are any data that show that this 'robo signing' or any other fast-track or short-cut foreclosure shenanigans actually resulted in anyone losing their home that had not well and truly defaulted on their loan??? I'm going to stick my neck out and bet a dollar the answer to that question is 'virtually none..zip..nada'.

Funny how the media ignores that issue. The whole story seems to me to be a classic 'red herring' tale and in the end its nothing but a tired and meaningless remake of that old western: "Ya want to kill 'im fast, boss?..or do ya want me to kill 'im slooooow..?"

Dead is dead fer crying out loud.

How many times has that stupid looking head been sewn back on in here now?

Bank Of America's Mistaken Foreclosure Reportedly Ruins Couple's Finances

 

[Gilligan]

How many times has that stupid looking head been sewn back on in here now?

Bank Of America's Mistaken Foreclosure Reportedly Ruins Couple's Finances

Anecdotes are never a substitute for a substantive answer. I asked "how many?"..better yet.."how many as a percentage of the total number of foreclosures and how does that 'error rate' compare to pre-recession times?"

Anecdotes are what idiots point to, the media thrives on and morons make policy on.

 

[n0n1m0us3]

How many times has that stupid looking head been sewn back on in here now?

Bank Of America's Mistaken Foreclosure Reportedly Ruins Couple's Finances

Homeowners Win Fights Over Mistaken Foreclosures - Developments - WSJ

 

[n0n1m0us3]

Anecdotes are never a substitute for a substantive answer. I asked "how many?"..better yet.."how many as a percentage of the total number of foreclosures and how does that 'error rate' compare to pre-recession times?"

Anecdotes are what idiots point to, the media thrives on and morons make policy on.

You are so stupid as to be practically retarded. The fact that it is happening is not enough to pull that head of yours out of your butt, you need numbers but I'm sure if you got those they would be insufficient as well since it doesn't fit with your dogmatic view.