Can they be foreclosed? Not according to this Alabama Judge.
Oh, you mean like a huge percentage of those notes in private securitizations that were never transferred properly as required by Trust Law and the PSA? Yes, that - in the instant case, the court found that indeed all the arm-waving from the bank was immaterial - they never complied with the PSA.
And for all those who said there was no standing by the homeowner, you're wrong again. I've said since the beginning of this mess that in point of fact there would have been no money lent at all without these agreements, therefore, the existence and compliance is an inherent part of the bargain and the homeowner is in fact a third-party beneficiary since the loan would have never funded without it.
And finally, the coup-de-grace:
Permanently enjoined. As in "can never foreclose." Not "dismissed without prejudice" (e.g. "come back and file again with proper paperwork") but rather you blew it, it's not fixable, and you're done.
Time for more crow, this time for all those crooners in the banking industry who ran the line of crap at myself (on my forum) and elsewhere (including in Congressional testimony) that none of this mattered and that even when blatant and outrageous violations of the law and PSAs occurred there was no right of action created thereupon for the homeowner.
Join us on our
Share this page with your friends
on your favorite social network: