Attorney and Attny Gen about Subject-2 complaint - Posted by DavidGOR
Posted by DavidGOR on April 07, 2006 at 19:15:21:
2 months ago, out of the blue, a seller has recently hired an attorney and
contacted the Attorney general about my practices of
buying a house Sub-2. I bought it THREE years ago.
(The seller was saying that they couldn’t get financed
for another house. The seller didn’t even bother to
contact me about how to show the mortgage was being paid.)
Out of the blue I got a letter from the attorney and the
Attorney General. The attorney threatened to sue if not remedied.
The AG wanted my side of story (rebuttal to complaint).
Of course the seller signed a POA and Sellers Mortgage
Disclosure. The Disclosure says …I’m buying Subject-To
the existing loan… and …the loan will stay in their
name until it is paid off or assumed by a future buyer.
I replied to the attorney and AG with impeccable logic
explaining all the past, present, and future benefits the
seller obtained and will obtain (5 pages).
I decided I didn’t want to roll in the mud with a dirty
attorney (I’d get dirty and he has the fun) so the house
I didn’t hear from them until recently.
The Attorney General asks me for response to a rebuttal
that the attorney wrote the the AG.
Among other things, the attorney wrote:
"…I think the Attorney General is missing the “Big Picture"
aspect of this investment scheme.”
“…stripping the seller of equity” (I explained how
there was zero equity in the previous letter)
“This type of transaction placed the trustee in a position
to handle buyers assets for his own business advantage”
(The attorney was ignorant about transfer of beneficial
interest. I didn’t bring it up in my first rebuttal.)
“A trustee of a trust owes the beneficiary of the trust
the duty to act in the beneficiary’s best interests,
to avoid self-dealing, and prohibits the commingling
of trust funds with those of the trustee’s assets.”
(Again, ignorant attorney)
“I have complained to the Attorney General in the past
about this scheme, which, in its present form, most
certainly acts to deceive the lenders of this State and
take advanage of an economically vulnerable population.”
My only question: Does the attorney have anything on me
for “commingling of trust funds”? I personally was the
trustee and my LLC had 100% beneficial interest.
Also, is there anyone who has written (and would share)
to an attorney and/or Attorney General showing how a Subject-To is beneficial to all parties?