Beach V. Ocwen

Owners Ass'n v. Pelzer, 292 S.C. 343, 347, 356 S.E.2d 411, 414 (Ct.App.1987). The business judgment rule only applies to intra vires acts, not ultra vires ones. Kuznik, 342 S.C. at 605, 538 S.E.2d at 28. A homeowners association is bound to follow its covenants and bylaws and cannot defend something that violates those documents on the basis that is a reasonable alternative. Seabrook Island Prop. Owners Ass'n, 292 S.C. at 348, 356 S.E.2d at

A second mortgage loan officer, Sarah Harris, agreed to a $450,000 mortgage for a 20-year period at 8% interest rate after appraisal based on an income approach using 10.9% capitalization rate. Although not certain of her judgment, she considered Alexander’s projected figures realistic, but required him to personally sign the note as additional protection to the bank against loss.

On June 1, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a debtor may not void, or “strip off,” a wholly underwater second lien in Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings. In doing so, the Supreme Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit’s affirmation of a decision from the Middle District of Florida, which had granted the debtors' motions to void the underwater second liens.

One issue that we looked into whether we would be able to object to the motion based on a statute of limitations argument. Our research indicates that we would not be able successful in taking this approach because

A.B. 163 was presented by Assemblyman Edgar Flores. The purpose of this bill was to add further regulations on certain loan services in order to verify the customer’s ability to pay back those loans. Assemblyman Flores used examples to illustrate the need for this bill. For example, he stated that if a person took out a high interest deferred deposit loan and did not pay on the due date (i.e. day 35), there should be a default on those loans on day 36. The problem with current statute is that several companies will use a loophole within existing statute that gives them the ability to trigger that default date whenever they choose. Often times, they will let the loan continue until the contract's expiration date. When this happens, the loan interest continues and carries on for the rest of the

It was common prior to the subprime crisis, for lenders to pressure borrowers into with extremely high interest rates. Often borrowers were charged additional fees for services and products that they had never used and that never existed, lenders imposed expensive penalties on defaults (Keren, 68.) Various tactics and methods were used to strip vulnerable borrowers of their value, leaving them in debt and worse off than they previously were. As stated previously, these victims can find no refuge in the state because the state absolves itself from private

This case involves a foreclosure action brought against the mortgagor, Tanya R. Bass (Bass), by the mortgagee’s successor, U.S. Bank, who was transferred the rights of the promissory note. The note was originally established in October 2005 between Tanya Bass and Mortgage Lenders Network USA for $139,988 with monthly installments of $810.75. Bass would be in default of the note if she failed to make timely payments of the full amount.

Analysis (the court's decision and reasoning on this issue) On her article Susan Beblavi suggest that the shareholders in the In re Citigroup Inc., filed an amended complaint against Citigroup declaring that, the former and current officers and board members acted wrongly. She also adds, on November 4, 2007, the financial institution took “$8 to $11 billion write-downs on mortgage-backed assets. In re Citigroup Inc. S’holder Derivative Litig., 2011 US Dist. Lexis 52941 (S.D.N.Y. May 17,

A generation ago, lenders held onto mortgage loans until they were repaid, and retained a relationship with the borrower and an interest in their financial wellbeing. That changed considerably at the start of the 21st century. The modern, high-risk mortgage market gained its first head of steam in the 1990s, and its origin lies primarily in a string of deregulatory policy decisions over the last three decades. High-risk lending passed through two boom periods, the first one in the late 1990’s as well as the larger, second one in the 2000’s. The first boom was marked by a surge in subprime refinance lending. The second included both subprime home purchase loans and refinance loans and they grew rapidly after 2001 (Marcuse, 2009, p.351). Together a new class of alternative or

The increasing occurrence of strategic default should encourage lenders to alter their foreclosure strategies and pursue defaulters for monies for any remaining liability after the property is sold. Unlike homeowners that involuntarily default on their mortgage, for reasons such as unemployment, major health issues or the death of a primary wage earner, homeowners that chose to strategic default are more likely to have a reliable income stream and possess other assets. If the lender pursues and obtains a judgment against the strategic defaulter, it remains a lien on the debtor’s non-exempt assets for up to twenty years, this includes wage garnishment (Gomez, 2010). In Monmouth County, New Jersey, for example, the average mortgage default was between

One of many judgment articles: I am a Judgment Broker, not a lawyer, and this article is my opinion, please consult with a lawyer if you need legal advice.

As a topic for this research paper, I decided to analyze the ethics behind the recent mortgage crisis in the United States. Banks were approving people for loans very easily, to people they knew would not be able to pay them back. Thus, many people were buying homes, missing payments, getting foreclosed on, and ruining what credit they had. Throughout this paper I intend to show how the practices that the banks were using were unethical. I will show who stakeholders were, and analyze them through Utilitarian and Kantian standpoints.

Since the housing market bust, there has been an explosion in the number of federal investigation of mortgage fraud scheme across the country. Mortgage Fraud is a violation of state and

Lord Diplock once observed that Britain has become a ‘property owning, particularly a real mortgage to a building society owning, democracy’. A mortgage in relation to Lindley MR in Santley v Wilde , “is a transaction under which land or chattels are given as security for the payment of a debt or the discharge of some other obligations”. Lord Justice Munby stated that it means a charge on property to secure the repayment by a debtor to his creditor of monies lent. It is also a loan for a property that ought to be paid inside of a predefined timeframe i.e., it involves a transfer of a legal interest for the borrowers land (mortgagor) to the lender (mortgagee) with the procurement that the lenders interest terminates then loan and interest are reimbursed. The mortgage transaction was described by Maitland as “one long suppressio veri and suggestion falsi”.

A mortgagee has some duties to the mortgagor which are in the nature of trusteeship. That has led a number of judges, such as Lord Hardwicke, LC, in Casborne v Scarfe to describe a mortgagee as a trustee. A mortgagee has some power to do as he pleases with the mortgaged property, leading a number of judges to deny that a mortgagee is a trustee. Examples are Pawlett v A-G. , and Sinfield v Sweet . Pennycuick, J. In Marquis Cholmondeley v Lord Clinton , Plumer, MR, warned of the deleterious effects of similes and described the relationship of mortgagor and mortgagee as “perfectly anomalous and sui generous.” Subsequently the courts put forward different analogies: (i) before the date of redemption, he is tenant in mortgage; (ii) after