Show Me The Note Q&A

i DECLARATION By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the authorship owner thereof (unless to the extent explicitly otherwise stated) and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification.

The result of this research concludes that the result of the research shows that the legal result of not registering the Deed of Mortgage Rights (APHT) to the credit agreement made by the parties before the Notary / Land Titles Registrar(PPAT) is the creditor having no priority position. Where the form of legal protection that can be given to Creditors as a form of anticipation is not registered APHT is by the signing of the deed of power sell at the time of the credit agreement. The creditor's right to the guaranteed item in the case of APHT is not registered ie not giving the right to each other over the other creditor. The purpose of the imposition of Mortgage right is in order to provide protection and legal certainty to all parties (especially Creditor) as well as to fulfill the principle of publicity. The grant of this right is intended to provide the preferred position to the creditor concerned (preferred creditors) other than the creditors. As collateral for repayment of Debtor's debt to the Creditor in connection with the loan/credit agreement concerned. Deposit Rights will not be born without the registration of APHT. But in practice, there is still some unscrupulous PPAT register APHT to the Land Office for various reasons.ofcourse, this will harm the creditors as a lender.

U.S. Bank Committs Fraud on the Court, 2021

U.S. BANK COMMITS FRAUD ON THE COURT PER FRCP 60 AND BREAKS CHAIN OF TITLE. Homeowners across the United States are filing quiet title actions and winning as the Fraud on the Courts has finally been proven. U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. Did you know? More than a few stumbles have been made in court by people who did not understand what this "bank" is. First, it is NOT a bank. Federal banks are chartered by the Federal Reserve Board. This "bank" lost its bank charter years ago. Although it was purchased by U.S. Bank N.A., U.S. Bank Trust N.A. is a totally separate operation and corporation. U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. is chartered as a Federal Trust Company by the OCC -- Office of the Controller of the Currency. U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. has assets of around $10 million, which is insignificant compared to U.S. Bank N.A.. It is the primary reason they are totally separate. If these Delaware Statutory Trusts which hold trillions of dollars in mortgage loans ever BLEW UP, U.S. Bank N.A. is free and clear of the blast damage. Investors suing U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. over billions of dollars of investments can fight each other over the 10 mil. LSF or Lone Star Funding is the Depositor. It buys the defaulted mortgage notes and deposits them into the trust vehicle. Then the trustee, U.S. Bank Trust N.A. issues the security certificates back to the Depositor, who together with the Underwriter sells them to qualified investors. Who are the qualified investors other than rich people? The qualified investors are retirement funds, pension funds, 401(K) plans, small banks, credit unions and the like. Yes, the very places that got burned on REMIC trusts. Sound familiar? This time though the money does not come from the income stream of mortgage payments. It comes from the income stream of foreclosing and taking your house. This works very easily as 90 percent of those foreclosed do not put up any defense at all. Do not be part of the 90 percent. Do not be a sheep. https://parkplacesecurities.com/caliber.html

2019

The Breakdown of Mortgage Servicing and Loss Mitigation Faced with a wave of unanticipated delinquencies coming out of the housing crisis, servicers built systems quickly and inflexibly, often held together with rubber bands, bandages, spit, glue, and a bit of duct tape. Their personnel were often ill-equipped to handle the new demands, making mistakes in dealing with distressed borrowers. Laurie Goodman, The Urban Institute servicing and securitization This chapter discusses the role mortgage servicing played after the foreclosure crisis appeared to be over. First, though, we set the stage by identifying the genesis of current problems within the history of the crisis itself, notably issues with mortgage servicers, the companies that collect payments for trustees of mortgage-backed securitized trusts and other loan holders. Servicers not only collect borrowers' payments, passing them on to investors, but also manage defaults, with foreclosure law firms serving as subagents. Handling defaults is part of the function the industry calls "loss mitigation." That term encompasses measures taken to work out or renegotiate terms with borrowers to avoid foreclosure. The typical options include repayment plans, mortgage modifications, short sales, forbearance plans and deeds in lieu of foreclosure. 1 Complex contracts called "pooling and servicing" agreements govern the relationship between the entities. During the crisis, servicers were most often affiliated 1 Repayment plans allow the homeowner to become current by paying the existing mortgage payment and an additional sum. Mortgage modifications are agreements that change the original terms of the loans. Short sales are sales of a property in foreclosure for less than the homeowner owed in which the lender accepts the sale price in full payment of the mortgage balance. Forbearance plans are agreements that allow debtors to stop making payments for a defined period of time. Deeds in lieu of foreclosure is a form of loss mitigation that allows the homeowner to deed the property back to the lender in full payment of the mortgage lien.

Technium Social Sciences Journal, 2021

Mortgage is a real means of securing the contract, the contracting parties, in many cases agree to finalize their agreement on a certain item by concluding a written contact, but in some cases the contracting parties can also be ensured in various ways to adhere to the rights and obligations arising from their contract. The creditor on the one hand as the pledgee and the debtor on the other hand as the pledgor are those who enter into a contract by which they create their rights and obligations arising from the contract which must be drafted in support of the provisions of the Law on Obligational Relationships. At the time of entering into the contract they can also enter into a mortgage contract as a real means of securing the contract, where the creditor is assured that if the debtor does not meet the main contractual requirement, then by mortgage as a real means of securing the contract he will realize the main requirement of the contract, i.e. through the mortgage as a real mean...

Standard situation: A and B move in together, but the home is conveyed into the name of B alone. A and B live together and share living costs. Can A claim to own a share in the home? • Not at law, if B is the sole name on the deeds / register. • A has to claim in equity. A cannot claim under an express trust of land, unless it is evidenced in writing: s.53(1)(b) LPA 1925. However, s.53(2) says " resulting, constructive or implied trusts " can arise without writing. EXPRESS TRUSTS s.53(1)(b) LPA 1925: " a declaration of trust respecting any land or any interest therein must be manifested and proved by some writing signed by some person who is able to declare such trust. " An express trust must be evidenced in writing. The ET should also declare the nature of the beneficial interests and the terms of the trust. Goodman v Gallant — if the conveyance of legal title declares the beneficial interests, that is conclusive (this only operates if C is a party to the conveyance): Goodman v Gallant [1986] • Facts: W and H had 50% each beneficial interest in the matrimonial home (H held legal title). They split. W and Mr. Gallant purchased H's 50% share for £6,700 — W contributed to this fee. The purchaser's declaration of trust stated they held the property as joint tenants. W and G split up and W sought to sever the joint tenancy. W claimed she should have a 75% interest (50% hers to start with, then 50% of the later contribution). • Held: W was only entitled to 50% of the beneficial ownership — the express declaration of trust was conclusive to their ownership rights, the extent of contribution was irrelevant. ss. 34 and 36 LPA: If there is no express declaration, then a statutory trust will be imposed when land is conveyed / transferred to two or more people. RESULTING AND 'COMMON INTENTON' CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS Ideally, people would sort out their property and financial arrangements formally before purchasing a house / moving in to their partner's property. However, this does not always happen (most arrangements having been agreed informally / not discussed). Where the relationship ends / mortgage lender tries to take possession of land following mortgage arrears, the courts must decide if the non-legal owner of the house has: (i) any right to the land; (ii) the extent of that right. If there is no express / statutory trust, to claim a share in the beneficial interest in the land a non-legal owner will need to establish that there was always an intention that she should have such an interest. C may: • Ask the Courts to declare him / her as the beneficiary under a RT or CT • May try to establish a right in the land through PE.

Law & Society: Private Law - Property eJournal, 2011

Mortgage securitization, subprime lending, a persistently weak housing market, and an explosion of residential mortgage defaults – today’s homeowners and banks face a new and challenging landscape. Recently, courts in several states have issued decisions that alter the terrain for mortgage foreclosures. In Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York, among other states, courts have dismissed foreclosure actions on the basis of what might seem to be highly technical deficiencies in the pleading or proof. The most well-known–and controversial–in this cluster of cases is U.S. Bank National Ass’n v. Ibanez, decided by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts this year. In Ibanez, the court held that two assignee banks failed to obtain legal title to foreclosed properties because they failed to prove that they held valid assignments of the foreclosed mortgages at the moment that the foreclosure proceedings were begun.

2012

Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, 2021

One of the executions of the mortgage object is the sale of the mortgage object through a public auction based on the executorial title contained in the Mortgage Certificate. Before the implementation is carried out by the creditor, a permit (fiat) is required by the local district court. The application for an auction for the execution of mortgage rights through a district court is closely related to obstacles, for example, a lawsuit from a third party (derden verzet) who feels he has the right to the object of execution even though it has nothing to do with creditors and debtors. This opposition made the Chief Justice of the District Court unable to grant the request for execution even though the creditor had a mortgage certificate that was encumbered but was forced to examine the relevant evidence in the trial forum to determine whether the resistance was sufficient reason or just a conspiracy with the debtor to delay the execution. Based on this explanation, the author wants to ...