Let them get … - Posted by Redline
Posted by Redline on April 25, 2007 at 12:47:08:
82% of nothing. Let the bank REO departments swell with inventory. When the banks end up losing way more money then we’ll see what happens.
Homeowners in foreclosure have just been thrown to the wolves.
RL
Re: Equity theft prevention nonsense … - Posted by LeonNC
Posted by LeonNC on April 25, 2007 at 10:16:11:
At 82% it seems they are sentencing the owner to foreclosure and creating a mess for the banking system. I don’t have a problem with that but I bet a lot of sub-prime borrowers and lenders will.
What good does that law do? The homeowner is going to lose thier equity, if any, more than likely anyhow, the banks inventory will pile up, and the investors will keep on keeping on. Who benefits? The genius making the law who has HIS or HER own best interest and career in mind?
I’ve been wrong before but a lot of these laws and witch hunts don’t make sense to me. That being said, my gut tells me there’s more at stake than just the homeowners best interest. I haven’t met many people in my life regardless of their job who care more about others than they do themself.
I know it’s a little whacky but I once started asking some people if the entire population of the world was at stake, would you sacrifice yourself in place of the rest of the world. I stopped asking after the first three people said NO. Not a very large poll but it was large enough to shake some sense into me about asking that question again.
Regards,
Leon
Re: Prediction … - Posted by Levi
Posted by Levi on April 24, 2007 at 22:33:02:
I hope they take those shows off the air. Then maybe I won’t be competing with every bozo with a borrowed hammer when trying to buy properties.
Re: Florida - Posted by IB (NJ)
Posted by IB (NJ) on April 26, 2007 at 08:34:07:
So are you saying that properties under judicial foreclosure can’t be purchased by Investors? How about properties under tax foreclosure?
Ib
test cases - Posted by Marc Donovan
Posted by Marc Donovan on April 28, 2007 at 07:31:57:
An attorney would not be able to predict the outcome any more than you would. It will require some cases to get to the superior courts before anyone can predict the effects of the law.
Does not matter if you are honest. It only matters what a jury thinks after they have been given the story from the attorney general. Too bad Johnnie Cochran is not around anymore.
Re: Prediction … - Posted by Joe Kaiser
Posted by Joe Kaiser on April 25, 2007 at 01:14:23:
Imagine the properties you could be selling to them.
Every market has an angle a savvy investor can exploit. I say sell to the
bozos with the borrowed hammers for the time being.
Do you notice how easy it is to sell fixers at the moment?
Joe
Re: Florida - Posted by Barry (FL)
Posted by Barry (FL) on April 26, 2007 at 22:56:44:
No, I didn’t say that. You need to be very careful though as the law is very specific as to what disclosures you have to make to the seller.
Is a tax foreclosure judicial? Answer that and you have your answer.
HTH
Barry
Hated your movie, btw (nt 
- Posted by Joe Kaiser
Posted by Joe Kaiser on April 25, 2007 at 14:02:11:
You got it … - Posted by Redline
Posted by Redline on April 25, 2007 at 12:44:30:
That’s what I’ve been doing … easy money.
disclosures? - Posted by Marc Donovan
Posted by Marc Donovan on April 28, 2007 at 07:26:21:
I see no disclosures in the law. It is very short and very vague and leaves everything up to the jury to decide. Very bad law. Note that it specifically allows banks to swindle homeowners - we must have a hefty banker’s lobby here.
501.2078 Violations involving individual homeowners during the course of residential foreclosure proceedings; civil penalties.–
(1) As used in this section:
(a) “Homeowner” means any individual who is the owner of the property subject to a residential foreclosure proceeding.
(b) “Residential foreclosure proceeding” means any action in a court of this state in which a party seeks to foreclose on a mortgage encumbering the mortgagor’s primary dwelling.
(c) “Victimize” means any course of action intended to dupe, swindle, or cheat a homeowner subject to a residential foreclosure proceeding. The factors that a court shall review when determining whether a course of action is victimizing a homeowner are:
The compensation received relative to the risk and the amount of work involved.
The number of homeowners involved.
The relative bargaining position of the parties.
The relative knowledge and sophistication of the parties.
Representations made in the inducement.
The timing of the agreement.
(2) Any person, other than a financial institution as defined in s. 655.005, who willfully uses, or has willfully used, a method, act, or practice in violation of this part, which method, act, or practice victimizes or attempts to victimize homeowners during the course of a residential foreclosure proceeding, and in committing such violation knew or should have known that such conduct was unfair or deceptive, is liable for a civil penalty of not more than $15,000 for each such violation.
(3) Any order of restitution or reimbursement based on a violation of this part committed against a homeowner in a residential foreclosure proceeding has priority over the imposition of any civil penalty for such violation pursuant to this section.
(4) Civil penalties collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the Legal Affairs Revolving Trust Fund of the Department of Legal Affairs and allocated solely to the Department of Legal Affairs for the purpose of preparing and distributing consumer education materials, programs, and seminars to benefit homeowners in residential foreclosure proceedings or to further enforcement efforts.
(5) This section does not apply to:
(a) The act of encumbering the dwelling subject to a residential foreclosure proceeding with a substitute or additional lien.
(b) A deed in lieu of foreclosure, a workout agreement, a bankruptcy plan, or any other agreement between a foreclosing lender and a homeowner.
(c) A foreclosure sale, eminent domain proceeding, forfeiture, or any other legal process.
yah well … - Posted by Redline
Posted by Redline on April 25, 2007 at 17:19:15:
I would’ve done a MUCH better job, and I wouldn’t have trashed an ENZO in the process!
“Undercover brother can’t drive!”
LOL
Re: You got it … - Posted by Jeanne
Posted by Jeanne on April 26, 2007 at 14:23:49:
Somebody should consider sending me a Money-Making Idea or How-to Article on selling to those people with borrowed hammers.
Jeanne
Re: disclosures? - Posted by Barry (FL)
Posted by Barry (FL) on April 28, 2007 at 12:26:05:
You are correct. It’s been awhile since I’ve read the legislation as I don’t deal with judicial foreclosures. Most of the law deals with the collection of overage funds of a judicial foreclosure. If you look at:
45.033 Sale or assignment of rights to surplus funds in a property subject
to foreclosure.?
If executed prior to the foreclosure sale, includes a financial disclosure
that specifies the assessed value of the property, a statement that the assessed
value may be lower than the actual value of the property, the approximate
amount of any debt encumbering the property, and the approximate
amount of any equity in the property. If the instrument was executed after
the foreclosure sale, the instrument must also specify the foreclosure sale
price and the amount of the surplus.
Specifies all forms of consideration paid for the rights to the property
or the assignment of the rights to any surplus funds.
If I were dealing with folks in foreclosure you can bet that I’d be giving them a disclosure as outlined in sections 45.033 paragraphs 1 & 3
Hope that clears it up.
Barry (FL)
Re: disclosures? - Posted by Bob Smith
Posted by Bob Smith on April 28, 2007 at 08:12:32:
The odd thing is that financial institutions are exempt outside the context of a residential foreclosure. Banks should be exempt only when dealing with debts owed to them. That said, it’s not likely to be a problem since banks don’t buy houses.