Showing posts with label Jason Picht. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jason Picht. Show all posts
Friday, December 10, 2010
Fewer Foreclosures on the Horizon
One of the first bits of good news we've had in a while! Read this article.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Robo-Signing Not Sufficient to Stop Foreclosure in FL
According to HousingWire.com:
"A Florida appeals court this week affirmed a bank’s right to foreclose even if alleged robo-signing occurred.
The ruling is good news for mortgage servicers — setting out that lack of knowledge of information in foreclosure documents isn’t sufficient reason to set aside the foreclosure. However, a trial court’s broad discretion in vacating judgments doesn’t mean that other trial judges will see these cases the same way.
In Freemon v. Deutsche Bank, Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that an allegedly faulty affidavit didn’t constitute fraud in the case. “Freemon’s motion does not demonstrate fraud or show why any of the alleged facts would entitle her to relief sufficient to set aside a default judgment,” the court ruled this week. “Freemon nowhere contends that she did not default on her mortgage, nor does she allege that the amounts due and owing, set forth in the affidavit and incorporated in the final judgment, are incorrect.”
In November 2007, Deutsche Bank filed to foreclosure against the homeowner, Veldrin Freemon, alleging she owed more than $570,000 on the mortgage note. Freemon didn’t answer the foreclosure complaint and a default judgment was entered. She later contested the case and it was delayed for six months.
A foreclosure sale was reset for September 2009, and the property was sold back to the bank. When the bank sought to repossess the home after the sale, however, Freemon filed for relief from the judgment, alleging that an affidavit in the case was fraudulent.
The allegation of fraud was based on a deposition in another foreclosure case from a Litton Loan employee who was signing foreclosure affidavits without personal knowledge of their contents.
The court ruled that the deposition was insufficient to prove fraud and disagreed with Freemon’s characterization of the Litton Loan affidavit from Denise Bailey.
Freemon claimed that Bailey claimed personal knowledge of the matters in the affidavit yet she did not know who inputted information into the computer regarding the loan in question. “Mere lack of personal knowledge regarding the facts and figures in an affidavit will not justify vacating a judgment that has already been entered,” said the Ben-Ezra & Katz law firm, in an analysis of the court’s ruling.
Bailey attested that she had personal knowledge of the amounts and charges due, the court said in its opinion. “In her deposition in another case, she testified that she was the records custodian for Litton Loan," the court said in the ruling. "In signing the affidavits of indebtedness, she acquires her knowledge of the amounts due by inputting the mortgagor’s name into the computer, which contains all of the mortgage information."
"Bailey’s affidavit in this case is not inconsistent with her testimony in the other case. Freemon has not shown any fraud, nor has she shown that the information about this loan, i.e., the amounts due and the default, are in any way incorrect.”
In its analysis of the ruling, Ben-Ezra & Katz said the appeals court also pointed to the trial court's broad discretion in such cases.
“That means that whether a trial court decides to vacate or not vacate a judgment, its decision will stand on appeal unless the trial court abused its discretion,” the law firm wrote. “This opinion is not an instruction to trial court judges that they should deny similar motions to vacate in all cases. Rather, it is a green light for them to vacate or not vacate based on their sound exercise of judicial discretion applied to the facts of each case.”"
"A Florida appeals court this week affirmed a bank’s right to foreclose even if alleged robo-signing occurred.
The ruling is good news for mortgage servicers — setting out that lack of knowledge of information in foreclosure documents isn’t sufficient reason to set aside the foreclosure. However, a trial court’s broad discretion in vacating judgments doesn’t mean that other trial judges will see these cases the same way.
In Freemon v. Deutsche Bank, Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that an allegedly faulty affidavit didn’t constitute fraud in the case. “Freemon’s motion does not demonstrate fraud or show why any of the alleged facts would entitle her to relief sufficient to set aside a default judgment,” the court ruled this week. “Freemon nowhere contends that she did not default on her mortgage, nor does she allege that the amounts due and owing, set forth in the affidavit and incorporated in the final judgment, are incorrect.”
In November 2007, Deutsche Bank filed to foreclosure against the homeowner, Veldrin Freemon, alleging she owed more than $570,000 on the mortgage note. Freemon didn’t answer the foreclosure complaint and a default judgment was entered. She later contested the case and it was delayed for six months.
A foreclosure sale was reset for September 2009, and the property was sold back to the bank. When the bank sought to repossess the home after the sale, however, Freemon filed for relief from the judgment, alleging that an affidavit in the case was fraudulent.
The allegation of fraud was based on a deposition in another foreclosure case from a Litton Loan employee who was signing foreclosure affidavits without personal knowledge of their contents.
The court ruled that the deposition was insufficient to prove fraud and disagreed with Freemon’s characterization of the Litton Loan affidavit from Denise Bailey.
Freemon claimed that Bailey claimed personal knowledge of the matters in the affidavit yet she did not know who inputted information into the computer regarding the loan in question. “Mere lack of personal knowledge regarding the facts and figures in an affidavit will not justify vacating a judgment that has already been entered,” said the Ben-Ezra & Katz law firm, in an analysis of the court’s ruling.
Bailey attested that she had personal knowledge of the amounts and charges due, the court said in its opinion. “In her deposition in another case, she testified that she was the records custodian for Litton Loan," the court said in the ruling. "In signing the affidavits of indebtedness, she acquires her knowledge of the amounts due by inputting the mortgagor’s name into the computer, which contains all of the mortgage information."
"Bailey’s affidavit in this case is not inconsistent with her testimony in the other case. Freemon has not shown any fraud, nor has she shown that the information about this loan, i.e., the amounts due and the default, are in any way incorrect.”
In its analysis of the ruling, Ben-Ezra & Katz said the appeals court also pointed to the trial court's broad discretion in such cases.
“That means that whether a trial court decides to vacate or not vacate a judgment, its decision will stand on appeal unless the trial court abused its discretion,” the law firm wrote. “This opinion is not an instruction to trial court judges that they should deny similar motions to vacate in all cases. Rather, it is a green light for them to vacate or not vacate based on their sound exercise of judicial discretion applied to the facts of each case.”"
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
More Foreclosures Coming...
If you thought... or hoped... or dreamed... or begged that the foreclosure crisis would be over soon, that appears to have just been wishful thinking.
According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2.7% of current mortgage balances transitioned into delinquency during the third quarter of this year.That’s up from 2.6% that became newly delinquent in the second quarter. The rise follows a full year of declines in delinquencies.
DSNews reports that "according to the New York Fed’s report, about 457,000 individuals received home foreclosure notices on their credit reports between July 1 and September 30, 2010. Officials say this represents a 5.5% decrease from the second quarter and a 6.4% drop from a year earlier." However, unless modification efforts become more successful, those figures will likely rise given the new wave of delinquencies.
All in all, we still have a long way to go until we are out of the foreclosure mess and see real estate return to normal (home values increasing by about 1-2% more than inflation). Joe Manausa thinks that we have another five years to go before values return to the levels we saw this summer. I'm inclined to agree (or maybe even be more pessimistic). What do you think?
According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2.7% of current mortgage balances transitioned into delinquency during the third quarter of this year.That’s up from 2.6% that became newly delinquent in the second quarter. The rise follows a full year of declines in delinquencies.
DSNews reports that "according to the New York Fed’s report, about 457,000 individuals received home foreclosure notices on their credit reports between July 1 and September 30, 2010. Officials say this represents a 5.5% decrease from the second quarter and a 6.4% drop from a year earlier." However, unless modification efforts become more successful, those figures will likely rise given the new wave of delinquencies.
All in all, we still have a long way to go until we are out of the foreclosure mess and see real estate return to normal (home values increasing by about 1-2% more than inflation). Joe Manausa thinks that we have another five years to go before values return to the levels we saw this summer. I'm inclined to agree (or maybe even be more pessimistic). What do you think?
Monday, November 8, 2010
Is Your RMBS Fungible?
Say what?! OK, let's give some quick definitions:
RMBS - Residential Mortgage Backed Security(ies)
Fungible - (esp. of goods) being of such nature or kind as to be freely exchangeable or replaceable, in whole or in part, for another of like nature or kind.
I asked this question because of its uniqueness. Before today, you probably didn't know what fungible meant (don't worry, neither did I). But in reading a very interesting article on the topic on HousingWire, I was compelled to share my findings with you all.
I would strongly encourage you to read the article, but in brief, it says that investors did not properly discern the difference in risk between different mortgage backed securities, and thus are now reaping greater losses than they otherwise would (or should) have had they demanded an appropriate return for the risk they consumed.
If you are not familiar with the securitization of assets in general, the basic principal is that assets are bundled together in a pool. The pool is then divided into different "tranches". Each tranch has a level of risk associated with it. There are senior and junior tranches. Junior tranches, as the name implies, are subordinate to senior tranches and are the first to bear losses. The junior tranches also contain the most risky part of the pool of assets. Ordinarily, investors would require higher yields for purchasing the riskier tranches.
The point of the HousingWire article is that investors failed to do so. One expert put it this way, "Good investors were priced out of the market by the quest for yield when the curve started to flatten and the galloping demand emerged from CDOs. CDOs just waved the loans in, thanks to the rating agencies' idea of limited correlation via geographic distribution. And foreign investors did not bother to become experts in the 50-state patchwork that is U.S. real estate law and bankruptcy code. Because everyone else was inhaling this shit.”
Crass, but accurate. Remember, you get what you pay for, and if you aren't adequately compensated for the risk you bear, then you may just end up holding a big pile of... well, you know.
RMBS - Residential Mortgage Backed Security(ies)
Fungible - (esp. of goods) being of such nature or kind as to be freely exchangeable or replaceable, in whole or in part, for another of like nature or kind.
I asked this question because of its uniqueness. Before today, you probably didn't know what fungible meant (don't worry, neither did I). But in reading a very interesting article on the topic on HousingWire, I was compelled to share my findings with you all.
I would strongly encourage you to read the article, but in brief, it says that investors did not properly discern the difference in risk between different mortgage backed securities, and thus are now reaping greater losses than they otherwise would (or should) have had they demanded an appropriate return for the risk they consumed.
If you are not familiar with the securitization of assets in general, the basic principal is that assets are bundled together in a pool. The pool is then divided into different "tranches". Each tranch has a level of risk associated with it. There are senior and junior tranches. Junior tranches, as the name implies, are subordinate to senior tranches and are the first to bear losses. The junior tranches also contain the most risky part of the pool of assets. Ordinarily, investors would require higher yields for purchasing the riskier tranches.
The point of the HousingWire article is that investors failed to do so. One expert put it this way, "Good investors were priced out of the market by the quest for yield when the curve started to flatten and the galloping demand emerged from CDOs. CDOs just waved the loans in, thanks to the rating agencies' idea of limited correlation via geographic distribution. And foreign investors did not bother to become experts in the 50-state patchwork that is U.S. real estate law and bankruptcy code. Because everyone else was inhaling this shit.”
Crass, but accurate. Remember, you get what you pay for, and if you aren't adequately compensated for the risk you bear, then you may just end up holding a big pile of... well, you know.
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Folly of Banks
Bank Bailouts. You've heard about them. You're angry over them. And most of your voting next week is probably going to be heavily influenced by them.
In case you were wondering, the price tag for all those bailouts was $204,808,576,320. Just to clarify, that is over $204 BILLION dollars. Not used to seeing that many numbers stacked together? Me either. Pretty startling, huh? And if you're curious to see who received our money and how much, click HERE.
CitiGroup and Wells Fargo remain the biggest beneficiaries of the bailout with each receiving $25 billion which they have not yet paid back. Citi has parlayed that bailout into profits of $4.43 billion (Q1), $2.7 billion (Q2), and $2.15 billion (Q3).
Almost as egregious as the money sent to bailout banks has been the amount of funds drawn from the Treasury by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That sum stands at $148 billion and could more than double in the next three years, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).
Those are the facts. On their own they are probably enough to convince you of the accuracy of this blog title. But there is more. Every day, banks lose tens of thousands of dollars on each property they foreclose on if they refuse to negotiate a short sale. And they often refuse to negotiate short sales.
NOTE: According to CDPE.com, 7 out of 10 homeowners facing foreclosure never speak to a real estate professional, so it is not all the banks' fault. If you or someone you know has started to miss mortgage payments, please call me (850-251-6643).
So back to the folly of banks... Here is a case in point. I recently listed and sold a foreclosure at 3008 Huntington Woods Blvd. It was a quaint, if outdated, 1398 sq ft home with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, and a 2 car garage. Before it went into foreclosure, the house went under contract as a short sale at $135,000. Nonetheless, the lender refused to consummate the short sale and proceeded with foreclosure anyway. Four months later, I sold the house for....
$115,000. Yup, that's right, $20,000 less than their contract price from just four months earlier. It happens every day and for those banks that took taxpayer money, it costs us. That, my friends, is the folly of banks.
In case you were wondering, the price tag for all those bailouts was $204,808,576,320. Just to clarify, that is over $204 BILLION dollars. Not used to seeing that many numbers stacked together? Me either. Pretty startling, huh? And if you're curious to see who received our money and how much, click HERE.
CitiGroup and Wells Fargo remain the biggest beneficiaries of the bailout with each receiving $25 billion which they have not yet paid back. Citi has parlayed that bailout into profits of $4.43 billion (Q1), $2.7 billion (Q2), and $2.15 billion (Q3).
Almost as egregious as the money sent to bailout banks has been the amount of funds drawn from the Treasury by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That sum stands at $148 billion and could more than double in the next three years, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).
Those are the facts. On their own they are probably enough to convince you of the accuracy of this blog title. But there is more. Every day, banks lose tens of thousands of dollars on each property they foreclose on if they refuse to negotiate a short sale. And they often refuse to negotiate short sales.
NOTE: According to CDPE.com, 7 out of 10 homeowners facing foreclosure never speak to a real estate professional, so it is not all the banks' fault. If you or someone you know has started to miss mortgage payments, please call me (850-251-6643).
So back to the folly of banks... Here is a case in point. I recently listed and sold a foreclosure at 3008 Huntington Woods Blvd. It was a quaint, if outdated, 1398 sq ft home with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, and a 2 car garage. Before it went into foreclosure, the house went under contract as a short sale at $135,000. Nonetheless, the lender refused to consummate the short sale and proceeded with foreclosure anyway. Four months later, I sold the house for....
$115,000. Yup, that's right, $20,000 less than their contract price from just four months earlier. It happens every day and for those banks that took taxpayer money, it costs us. That, my friends, is the folly of banks.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
GMAC and BoA Moving Forward
Just three weeks after they announced a moratorium on their foreclosures in the 23 judicial states, GMAC and Bank of America are going to restart foreclosure proceedings.
James Olecki, spokesman for Ally (GMAC's parent company) said, “Our review and remediation activities related to cases involving judicial affidavits in the 23 states continues. As each of those files is reviewed, and remediated when needed, the foreclosure process resumes.”
DSNews reports that BoA says it has found no instances in which a homeowner was wrongly foreclosed upon and has begun the process of preparing 102,000 foreclosure affidavits that have been on hold for re-submission to the courts beginning next Monday.
To read more about this issue, click HERE.
James Olecki, spokesman for Ally (GMAC's parent company) said, “Our review and remediation activities related to cases involving judicial affidavits in the 23 states continues. As each of those files is reviewed, and remediated when needed, the foreclosure process resumes.”
DSNews reports that BoA says it has found no instances in which a homeowner was wrongly foreclosed upon and has begun the process of preparing 102,000 foreclosure affidavits that have been on hold for re-submission to the courts beginning next Monday.
To read more about this issue, click HERE.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
David J. Stern, PA
David J. Stern, PA, is one of the largest foreclosure law firms in the Country. Along with Marshall Watson, PA, and other "foreclosure mills", Stern's firm is now under investigation by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum.
Since word broke that DJSP had falsified thousands of foreclosure documents, FNMA (Stern's largest client) has stopped referring new foreclosure cases to the firm.
Now, Stern has stepped down from his position as chairman of DJSP Enterprises, and three top executives who had been with the company less than a year also resigned. Don't be surprised if executives at other firms follow suit.
To read more about this story, click HERE.
Since word broke that DJSP had falsified thousands of foreclosure documents, FNMA (Stern's largest client) has stopped referring new foreclosure cases to the firm.
Now, Stern has stepped down from his position as chairman of DJSP Enterprises, and three top executives who had been with the company less than a year also resigned. Don't be surprised if executives at other firms follow suit.
To read more about this story, click HERE.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Great REO Opportunities
Here are a few of my listings which would make great rental property:
1474 Nashville Drive
1997 Mobile Home
1611 square feet
3 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Only $20,100!
1972 Carp Lane
990 square feet
2 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Carpet and tile floors
Wood-burning fireplace
$69,900
2402 Talco Hills
990 square feet
2 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Carpet and tile floors
$69,900
(Photo is of neighboring unit)
1997 Mobile Home
1611 square feet
3 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Only $20,100!
1972 Carp Lane990 square feet
2 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Carpet and tile floors
Wood-burning fireplace
$69,900
2402 Talco Hills
990 square feet
2 bedrooms
2 bathrooms
Carpet and tile floors
$69,900
(Photo is of neighboring unit)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)