Since 2007, approximately 4.2 million people in the United States have lost their homes due to unpredictability. By early 2014, that number is expected to reach 6 million. Historically, foreclosure legal procedures (required for homeowners to repay their homes to lenders after temporary mortgage defaults) have been appealing to banks and lenders. They are well acquainted with the rules and procedures of prediction.
In the recent past, more and more homeowners have started fighting in the process of redemption by stopping redemption or stopping redemption altogether. The legal strategy adopted by these landlords is called foreclosure defence.
The easiest way to avoid predictions is to modify the mortgage. Upon modifying the mortgage, the homeowner agreed to renegotiate the mortgage terms to make the payment more reasonable to the lender.
The goal of the forecasting defence strategy is to prove that banks have no right to predict. The chances of success depend on the ability of the lawyer as the mortgage industry operates. The purpose of this strategy is to take advantage of the flaws in the system and assume illegal or immoral behaviour by the lender.
Predictive defence is a new concept, which keeps evolving with the growing trend of predictive matters. Although some courts have accepted the defence arguments of the forecast, others have considered them to be speculative, and have ruled that the decision is more beneficial to the bank than to the homeowner.
The victory of more and more homeowners in state and federal courts has changed the face of predictable homes, and thousands of other homeowners are optimistic about similar circumstances. Furthermore, since many large U.S. banks have acknowledged unconventional, unacceptable, or even illegal methods in mortgage, loan conversion, and forecasting, they have unnecessarily charged homeowners to deal with them. Provided ammunition.
An important strategy for forecasting is to clarify the ownership of mortgage and pledge notes to banks. If there is a problem in any of the chains, it can make lenders’ ability to effectively claim property ineffective.
The forecasting process varies from state to state, depending on whether your state uses a mortgage or trust agreement to purchase real estate. A mortgage or trust agreement outlines the transfer of property rights. It is not a promise to repay the loan itself. Instead, the language involved gives the borrower the right to acquire property if the borrower violates the terms of the promissory note.
If you sign a mortgage, it usually means that you live in a situation where a foreclosure is made. This means that the lender will have to file a lawsuit in a court of law. If you sign a trust deed, you will be in a situation where there are non-judicial predictions, which means that the lender does not have to go to court to file a recurring claim.
In a court case, homeowners have an advantage as they may be required to present evidence and meet the requirements from the lender in a preliminary court hearing. In a non-judicial situation, the lender is not required to prove anything, as the state’s civil code gives it the right to make predictions after a pre-arranged notice has been issued. Therefore, in a non-judicial situation, the homeowner must file a lawsuit against the lender to force him to provide proof of debt.
Whether you signed a mortgage or trust agreement, you also signed a promising note that promised to repay a certain amount within a certain amount. The bill enters directly into the credit and is recorded in the credit book as an asset with the promised payment amount. Mortgage deeds are public records and, by law, must be recorded in the county or town office. Each time a promissory note is allocated (ie vended to alternative party), the name of the new landlord of the note must be included in the note. Whenever a trust or mortgage transaction is transferred to another item, the transaction must be logged at the town or county office.
Here, the defence of the forecast can begin to reduce the bank’s claims on your property. For a mortgage, trust deed or pledge to be valid, the mortgagee must have the “perfection” of ownership chain. In other words, when you sign the document now that the case is closed, there must be a clear and unambiguous record of ownership. Any mistake in the title chain will cause a “defect” in the device, declaring it incorrect.
In fact, mistakes are common. As mortgages and contracts began to be bought and sold, the sheer scale of these transfers made it difficult for entities to record the cost, time and amount of each transaction in the county archives. However, in order to adopt a special method of recording, the bank set up the Electronic Mortgage Registration System (MERS), a private company, which is responsible for tracking the rights to services and state mortgage ownership. The marketing department has 66 million US mortgages in its records.
When the forecast is looming, Myers will nominate the party for the mortgage according to the record of the person who owns the mortgage or trust. However, some courts have rejected the notion that the MERS first has the power to assign law to the property of certain parties. The court may rule that Merris has no “identity”, meaning that the court does not recognize its right to predict, as Merris has no financial interest in the property or pledge notes.
And since MES basically ignores the county database storing system, it cannot independently verify the integrity of the proprietary chain. Here, the predictions can be appealed by questioning the integrity of the property chain and challenging the legal authority of the MERS to allocate the property.
Roughly courts may also challenge the MER’s eligibility for transmission of promissory notes, as it is likely that the promissory notes have been sold to other entities, or in most cases secured (stabilized by other loans) and in unknown numbers. Institutions have been sold. In the case of Carpenter v. Langen of the United States Supreme Court, it was decided that the trust deed should be attached to the promissory note. In other words, contracts and bills cannot be disjointed.
For a free consultation please go to https://www.mortgageauditsonline.com/
For information on foreclosure defense call us at (877) 399 2995. We offer litigation document review support, mortgage audit reports, securitization audit reports, affidavit of expert witness notarized, and more.
“I have been using Mortgage Audits Online for a few months and I am very pleased with the work. The audits are very detailed and prepared so a 4th grader can read them. I recommend these guys to all my friends in the business.”
“Thank you…Thank you…Thank you… Your company has created an affordable solution that is spot on as good if not better than audit reports that cost 3-4 times as much.”
“I certainly appreciate your courtesy and thank you in advance for the service. Please know too, that I am recommending Mortgage Audits Online to all of my law associates.”