InnoVest Resource Management's Foreclosure Forum

Home Discussion Board "Hands-On" Training Title Holding Trust Annual Reunion Speaking Schedule Store Foreclosure Fundamentals Code References 50 State Foreclosure Basics Foreclosure Glossary Foreclosure Statistics 75+ Yrs Interest Rates Fillable Forms Archived Articles Dingbat Retirement Plan Links Contact / Map | Priceline Tips About Us Home

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] Re: Lien Posted by Rod Ciferri on July 31, 2011 at 10:13 AM In Reply to: Lien posted by Robert on July 31, 2011 at 9:25 AM : There is a recorded lien on the property. You are crazy to assume that the lien cannot be perfected. : If a non-judicial foreclosure sale was started then there is no way to determine that the lien is invalid. : That would take a trial. If you want to cash someone else out of their problem and take on the problem go for it. : Consult an attorney though if you are paying more than on month rent for the quit claim. This is very simplified, but, here goes: Yes, if the lien is a traditional one (backed up by original documents held by the right parties), then I have little chance of prevailing. If one of the more modern ones, I can assume the one who foreclosed ("lender" with credit bid) cannot prove ownership. When the unlawful detainer comes (it would more properly be a forcible detainer), I can deny everything - forcing the lender to prove it is entitled to possession which would put title into issue. I don't believe that the lender can prove title in the loans that were handled by MERS. In fact, I believe the whole idea of using MERS was to obscure who actually owns title so that the lender would not be civilly and criminally liable. They face worse consequences by admitting they are the owner than just letting the property go. Meanwhile, I have a quitclaim deed from the owner executed after the sale and recorded before their trustee's deed. Judicial notice of the foreclosure documents by the lender will only prove something was filed, but not the information contained therein. Additionally, the "lender" would be deemed to have whatever knowledge its agent MERS had, preventing it from being a bona fide purchaser and getting a conclusive presumption of title. By contrast, I will have taken title from a bona fide purchaser. Since title would be in issue in the forcible detainer action, if I win, the forcible detainer judgment can be used as collateral estoppel precluding any other lawsuits by anyone whose agent was MERS (they would be "privies"). Would a title company insure title? If not, I might not be able to sell, yet it could be a rental property indefinitely. I believe the homeowner loses a wrongful foreclosure case involving a MERS loan because he is in the position of plaintiff, and, thus has the burden of proof (and usually an obligation to tender the loan balance). In the position of defendant putting title into issue, the tables are turned and the "lender" has to prove title. I don't believe he can. That's why a lender never cross-complains against a homeowner in a wrongful foreclosure case. They know they are not a real party in interest and consequently cannot maintain a suit as plaintiff in which title is in issue. I would only do this on the most "underwater" loans I can find. I wouldn't be interested in the properties most on this board would be interested in. Follow Ups: Re: Lien Robert 2:04 PM, 07/31/11 (7) Re: Lien Rod Ciferri 4:51 PM, 07/31/11 (6) Re: Lien Robert 5:45 PM, 07/31/11 (5) Re: Lien Rod Ciferri 6:21 PM, 07/31/11 (4) Re: Lien BIG 6:35 PM, 07/31/11 (3) Re: Lien Rod Ciferri 6:49 PM, 07/31/11 (2) Re: Lien Robert 11:42 AM, 08/01/11 (1) Re: Lien Rod Ciferri 8:36 PM, 08/01/11 (0) Post a Followup: Name : E-Mail : Subject : Comments: : : There is a recorded lien on the property. You are crazy to assume that the lien cannot be perfected. : : If a non-judicial foreclosure sale was started then there is no way to determine that the lien is invalid. : : That would take a trial. If you want to cash someone else out of their problem and take on the problem go for it. : : Consult an attorney though if you are paying more than on month rent for the quit claim. : This is very simplified, but, here goes: : Yes, if the lien is a traditional one (backed up by original documents held by the right parties), then I have little chance of prevailing. If one of the more modern ones, I can assume the one who foreclosed ("lender" with credit bid) cannot prove ownership. : When the unlawful detainer comes (it would more properly be a forcible detainer), I can deny everything - forcing the lender to prove it is entitled to possession which would put title into issue. I don't believe that the lender can prove title in the loans that were handled by MERS. In fact, I believe the whole idea of using MERS was to obscure who actually owns title so that the lender would not be civilly and criminally liable. They face worse consequences by admitting they are the owner than just letting the property go. : Meanwhile, I have a quitclaim deed from the owner executed after the sale and recorded before their trustee's deed. Judicial notice of the foreclosure documents by the lender will only prove something was filed, but not the information contained therein. Additionally, the "lender" would be deemed to have whatever knowledge its agent MERS had, preventing it from being a bona fide purchaser and getting a conclusive presumption of title. By contrast, I will have taken title from a bona fide purchaser. : Since title would be in issue in the forcible detainer action, if I win, the forcible detainer judgment can be used as collateral estoppel precluding any other lawsuits by anyone whose agent was MERS (they would be "privies"). : Would a title company insure title? If not, I might not be able to sell, yet it could be a rental property indefinitely. : I believe the homeowner loses a wrongful foreclosure case involving a MERS loan because he is in the position of plaintiff, and, thus has the burden of proof (and usually an obligation to tender the loan balance). In the position of defendant putting title into issue, the tables are turned and the "lender" has to prove title. I don't believe he can. That's why a lender never cross-complains against a homeowner in a wrongful foreclosure case. They know they are not a real party in interest and consequently cannot maintain a suit as plaintiff in which title is in issue. : I would only do this on the most "underwater" loans I can find. I wouldn't be interested in the properties most on this board would be interested in. [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] WWWAdmin 2.0a © 1997 Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company, All Rights Reserved

Information provided by this website is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. Please consult your investment advisor and/or attorney before entering into any transaction. Read our privacy policy.

Copyright © 1997-date("Y"), InnoVest Resource Management
http://www.foreclosureforum.com

InnoVest Resource Management, 4569-A Mission Gorge Place, San Diego CA 92120-4112
(619) 283-5444, Fax (619) 283-5455