Comments on: Wow, judges now nixing lenders’ foreclosure claims entirely in court http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html Finance, Economics and Markets Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:37:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57976 Anonymous Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:42:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57976 It has nothing to do with neighbour B. Is neighbour B's house in forclousure? If Neighbour B is having the same problems then he should seek to have his problems resolved by the courts too who should then render the same verdict as it did for neighbour A. Now, if neighbour B is happy paying his mortgage and not having any problems at all why should Neighbour A getting his mortgage dismissed unfair to Neighbour B? It has nothing to do with neighbour B. Is neighbour B’s house in forclousure? If Neighbour B is having the same problems then he should seek to have his problems resolved by the courts too who should then render the same verdict as it did for neighbour A. Now, if neighbour B is happy paying his mortgage and not having any problems at all why should Neighbour A getting his mortgage dismissed unfair to Neighbour B?

]]> By: Edward Harrison http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57418 Edward Harrison Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:48:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57418 This is the question no one has an answer to. We are hitting new legal ground here. This is the question no one has an answer to. We are hitting new legal ground here.

]]> By: fuguez http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57413 fuguez Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:57:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57413 What happens if that mortgage has been synthesised into multiple MBS's? What happens if that mortgage has been synthesised into multiple MBS’s?

]]> By: Edward Harrison http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57407 Edward Harrison Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:07:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57407 Mark and Lavrenti, while I applaud the opportunity for a leveling of the playing field for the David v. Goliath battle that foreclosure generally is, I have to question whether a whole cloth abrogation of a claim to a mortgage is the right legal decision. I have yet to get a look at the fine details or see the actual opinion. But, from what I know, the NY judgment seems dubious to me. The Kansas judgment looks more interesting and likely to get a hearing more quickly since it has moved through the state courts already. And the point Mark makes about how to apply the NY case to neighbour A and b in a fair unbiased way is a good one. This is a huge can of worms that will get a legislative "fix" as you suggest, Lavrenti. Personally, I imagine the Supreme Court could overturn Kansas on appeal and that all hell would break loose when people see this as a politicized judgment. This is what I am waiting to see. I will look to post something on the debtor revolts in Iowa and elsewhere that took place in the Great Depression because the comparison could be revealing. Anything like that in Britain, Mark? Mark and Lavrenti, while I applaud the opportunity for a leveling of the playing field for the David v. Goliath battle that foreclosure generally is, I have to question whether a whole cloth abrogation of a claim to a mortgage is the right legal decision. I have yet to get a look at the fine details or see the actual opinion. But, from what I know, the NY judgment seems dubious to me.

The Kansas judgment looks more interesting and likely to get a hearing more quickly since it has moved through the state courts already.

And the point Mark makes about how to apply the NY case to neighbour A and b in a fair unbiased way is a good one. This is a huge can of worms that will get a legislative “fix” as you suggest, Lavrenti.

Personally, I imagine the Supreme Court could overturn Kansas on appeal and that all hell would break loose when people see this as a politicized judgment. This is what I am waiting to see.

I will look to post something on the debtor revolts in Iowa and elsewhere that took place in the Great Depression because the comparison could be revealing.

Anything like that in Britain, Mark?

]]> By: LavrentiBeria http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57406 LavrentiBeria Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:00:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57406 I wouldn't get too excited, Ed. While the legal precedents set here are truly the first positive development coming out of this whole affair, the judges involved must have forgotten that they live in a dictatorship. By the time that the legal system has gotten through with these rulings we’ll have statutes nullifying their effect. The Congress hasn’t exactly proven itself unresponsive to the interests of lenders, now, has it? It may take a few weeks but someone will be introducing new legislation that will “fix” the whole issue of nominees, agents and the like so that the status quo of plaintiffs simply making an assertion about documentation will be tantamount to there being an affirmative finding. Don’t think, so? I see. I wouldn’t get too excited, Ed. While the legal precedents set here are truly the first positive development coming out of this whole affair, the judges involved must have forgotten that they live in a dictatorship. By the time that the legal system has gotten through with these rulings we’ll have statutes nullifying their effect. The Congress hasn’t exactly proven itself unresponsive to the interests of lenders, now, has it? It may take a few weeks but someone will be introducing new legislation that will “fix” the whole issue of nominees, agents and the like so that the status quo of plaintiffs simply making an assertion about documentation will be tantamount to there being an affirmative finding. Don’t think, so? I see.

]]> By: Mark Wadsworth http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57405 Mark Wadsworth Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:06:00 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/10/wow-judges-now-nixing-lenders-foreclosure-claims-entirely-in-court.html#comment-57405 It's different in England. I had a <a href="http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2009/03/are-securitisation-companies-above-law.html" rel="nofollow">guest post by Carmen Butler</a> who attempted the same thing in England and the case appears to have been dismissed, in English land law, the courts always prefer the big guy to the little guy. But if this catches on, then does it not cause moral hazard? Sure the banks and people who buy securitised mortgages will be more careful in future, but it seems a tad generous to just retrospectively waive massive debts like this, notwithstanding the borrowers did not understand what they were getting into. And it seems a tad unfair that Neighbour A who has a mortgage of $100,000 and never misses an instalment has to keep paying but Neighbour B who owes $400,000 gets off scot free. It’s different in England. I had a guest post by Carmen Butler who attempted the same thing in England and the case appears to have been dismissed, in English land law, the courts always prefer the big guy to the little guy.

But if this catches on, then does it not cause moral hazard? Sure the banks and people who buy securitised mortgages will be more careful in future, but it seems a tad generous to just retrospectively waive massive debts like this, notwithstanding the borrowers did not understand what they were getting into.

And it seems a tad unfair that Neighbour A who has a mortgage of $100,000 and never misses an instalment has to keep paying but Neighbour B who owes $400,000 gets off scot free.

]]>