Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alberta's Child
Wrong, contractual arrangement between the two makes the seller guarantee performance. Are he can be made to prefect the deal by a court.
39 posted on 04/18/2011 7:53:22 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: org.whodat
In the case of a collateralized mortgage, we have no idea what the contractual arrangement between the buyer and seller is. And in addition to that, there's a huge question (which was the underlying dispute in the Utah case I referenced) as to which court is the proper authority to adjudicate that kind of dispute.

In the Utah case, Bank of America is trying to force the matter into the Federal court system by claiming that it is now a "securities" issue subject to Federal oversight rather than a "real estate" issue subject to provisions of Utah law.

The irony of all this is that it can be traced all the way back to the infancy of mortgage bonds (then called collateralized mortgage obligations, or CMOs) in the 1970s. Most Wall Street investment banks were very reluctant to get into the business (which is why Salomon Brothers dominated the industry through the mid-1980s) because nobody ever really addressed the issue of whether CMOs were subject to real estate law or securities law. I guess they still haven't!

40 posted on 04/18/2011 7:59:48 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson