Posted on 11/17/2007 8:23:04 AM PST by AndyJackson
In a decision piggy-backing on Judge Boyko’s recent Deutsche Bank ruling (announced on this site Tuesday), Judge Rose has thrown out another batch of foreclosures, making the following summary remarks:
“This court is well aware that entities who hold valid notes are entitled to receive timely payments in accordance with the notes. And, if they do not receive timely payments, the entities have the right to seek foreclosure on the accompanying mortgages.
However, with regard the enforcement of standing and other jurisdictional requirements pertaining to foreclosure actions, this court is in full agreement with Judge Christopher A Boyko for the Northern District of Ohio who recently stressed, ‘That the judicial integrity of the United States District Court is ‘Priceless.’”
The ruling is another HUGE victory for consumer advocate attorneys and homeowners in general.
A pdf file of the full ruling is available here.
Jacksonville Legal Aid attorney April Charney remarked to us regarding the two Ohio decisions:
As to the real ramification of the Ohio decision, aside from slowing the foreclosure trains, is that the fact that there were no “original” assignments rendering the sales of the mortgages to the trusts, in violation of the true sale obligations imposed by securities law. ”
For more comments by April and us on this foundational issue of these rulings, see our next post. There we also address some criticisms and critiques we’ve received since our original coverage.
While the plaintiffs in each of the above-captioned cases have pled that they have standing and that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction, they have submitted evidence that indicates that they may not have had standing at the time the foreclosure complaint was filed and that subject matter jurisdiction may not have existed when the foreclosure complaint was filed. Further, this Court has the responsibility to assure itself that the foreclosure plaintiffs have standing and that subject-matter-jurisdiction requirements are met at the time the complaint is filed. Even without the concerns raised by the documents the plaintiffs have filed, there is reason to question the existence of standing and the jurisdictional amount. See Katherine M. Porter, Misbehavior and Mistake in Bankruptcy Mortgage Claims 3-4 (November 6, 2007), University of Iowa College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract-1027961 (“[H]ome mortgage lenders often disobey the law and overreach in calculating the mortgage obligations of consumers. … Many of the overcharges and unreliable calculations… raise the specter of poor recordkeeping, failure to comply with consumer protection laws, and massive, consistent overcharging.”)
Therefore, plaintiffs are given until not later than thirty days following entry of this order to submit evidence showing that they had standing in the above-captioned cases when the Case 3:07-cv-00286-TMR-MRM Document 24 Filed 11/15/2007 Page 4 of 7 1The Court views the statement “the complaint must be accompanied by the following” to mean that the items listed must be filed with the complaint and not at some time later that is more convenient for the plaintiff. -5- complaint was filed and that this Court had diversity jurisdiction when the complaint was filed. Failure to do so will result in dismissal without prejudice to refiling if and when the plaintiff acquires standing and the diversity jurisdiction requirements are met. See In re Foreclosure Cases, No. 1:07CV2282, et al., slip op. (N.D. Ohio Oct. 31, 2007) (Boyko, J.)
ping
Is your source good?
Are all these foreclosures the result of people being given open ended loans for homes they cannot actually afford?
So, do the rest of us that do pay our mortgages get to pay for those who default?
It was a scam, on all fronts. Lenders, brokers (mortgage and real estate) and borrowers all knew that the borrowers weren't actually qualified. But, if prices had continued to go up (paid for by whom, no one has answered), then the system would have remained solvant. We are dealing with the last lenders and last buyers in line and bam, the house of cards is coming down.
Folks have long predicted that sooner or later this would happen. The miracle is that it continued for so long. The other wonder is how fast it is all unraveling.
I think not. This is a business loss and comes off the profits of the owners of the company that does this business.
In many ways. Interest rates will be higher. Home equity will decline with prices. Folks who thought that they had a lot of money in pension funds which owned this stuff will find that they don't. Banks will pay lower interest rates to its depositors and charge higher interest to its customers to pay for the legal liabilities for all the false promises, incompetence and fraud in settling claim by those who are either homeless or penniless, etc. Oh, and inflation has to soar to avoid locking up the economy.
Other than that you are probably fine.
“So, do the rest of us that do pay our mortgages get to pay for those who default?”
....yes I expect that the lenders will find some way to pass along their losses.
Of course, just as you get to pay higher prices at the store to pay for all the stuff these same thieving bums shoplift.
Another popular misconception. Businesses do not pay for losses, judgements, higher wages, or increased taxes. We do. Costs are always passed on to the consumer. Businesses will make their profit.
Re mortgage securities I think we are at the stage the captain of the Titanic was at early into the event — a mere scrape, he says. There is both a primal legal risk — it may be that the securities have no value at all, being invalid contracts, and there is — so some indicators I have seen would suggest — a significant problem of sloppiness. The kind of sloppiness that favors over-booking of the same asset, again and again in multiple securities, and also that overstates (from sloppy transfer of data fields from one house to the next) the fees and interest accrued on an individual security.
It is only a temporary victory. The judges are telling the foreclosers that they have to be more rigorous in proving their ownership rights re the mortgage notes. As soon as they do that, the foreclosures will resume.
Lender accepts stated income and loans 100% on an adjustable rate at a low start level for two years.
After two years, payment increases dramatically and owners can't make payment.
They try to refinance, but value of the house went down and they can't refi enough to payoff original 100% loan.
They default and get foreclosed.
So it is all a case of greed on the lenders part and stupidity for trusting what the sales person/lender is spinning on how the borrower can pay for the Brooklyn Bridge.
Who gives a darn with crooks. That is exactly what these lending institutions were involved in. Real Estate lending is one of the biggest shams in American history.
Bull. Business get sold, auctioned, their property, rights, brands, interest get sized and take all the time for losses.
Costs are not ‘always’ passed on. Have you been hit up by the Studebaker Company lately? Still working those South Sea Company debts off?
It’s a riotous circus, not a funeral march.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.