QUESTION: Where are the lawyers? I can’t believe they’re nowhere to be found throughout the whole country. So much money is left on the table that they can recoup.
RESPONSE: The lawyer’s just don’t get it. They will learn over time and nothing can be done until that proverbial time and place.
One problem is lawyers work from a case precedent perspective. I met with a high profile lawyer last year to excite some interest in these endeavors.
My experience as “one of them” is based on over 20 years prior experience as an institutional investor) and falls often on legal deaf ears (Kop, Terbeek and Rabin are attorneys who are an exception).” I remarked recently that this type of law is on the cutting edge. What I mean to say is the penchant case law is in the process of being made. I was shut down hard and told the law is established and there is no cutting edge – EVER!
We are losing this fight folks and lenders are making huge gains as time goes on. Attorneys who get it can call us to discuss their clients’ needs. But most of our approach has gone against the grain of counsel and traditional thinking:
• The “Stay” against a Sheriffs writ the day of a lock out.
• Obtained a judgment against the plaintiff in a UD hearing
• Have had a million dollar loan dismissed in a UD hearing
• Reduced a loan amount by $500,000 in lieu of a sale
• Obtained $50,000 cash for keys in lieu of a UD filing.
• Decided a dismissal of the entire mortgage in trial
What the lenders are doing here is willful, interpretive and a knee jerk reaction that is peripheral to the current code and statutes. Recent discussions with attorneys have since said this is without a doubt a cutting edge example of new procedural methods and approach that have yet to be challenged. SEC and HUD are in conflict and markets remain confused. The security is further confused under a UCC filing and the investors interest is fractionalized as are the other interests in the cash flow. The lender is not a lender but an interested third party acting as a counter party and representing it otherwise as the holder in due course. Add this to the fact all collateral is critical to enforce the rights of some other party unknown to the Trustor until time of reversion in a recovery. That party is a highly restricted, a Real Estate investment trust.
Look, most attorneys want to see laws established, set forth and argue where laws are obviously violated (most not all). They will challenge that law as to a ceiling or threshold, but according to existing law. In my opinion, they just do not want to pursue something yet to be established. Lenders are backed by a huge $$$ lobbying effort fighting a-lop sided battle whereby limited case law exists.
Attorneys seek a nice retainer prior to jumping in and will then launch a traditional effort. Too many times, they toss our findings to return to negotiating the same modification offering a borrower little if any value.
THIS IS SUCH A CROCK OF $ # I %. This observation is after we established a breach and fraudulent intent in many cases as an expert. Our expert opinion is in multiple areas of lending and securities practices under a private registration.
The practices and procedures according to the law remain convoluted even to the best attorneys.
We see this happen even after having shown an abundance of evidence. That evidence we assure you will not be brought forth in a RESPA or TILA audit. We will however certify that audit for accuracy and have a past Attorney General or past Federal Magistrate.
Don’t stop fighting.
Mortgage and Secondary