15-4- 9718 Anim Inv. Co. v. Shaloub, N.J. Super. Chan. (Jerejian, J.S.C.) (13 pp.) Defendants borrowed $178,000 from Mina Investment Co. in September 1990, executing a mortgage in favor of MERS as nominee for Mina the same day. Defendants defaulted on the mortgage in November 1990.
The mortgage was assigned to plaintiff in 1997. Notice of intent to foreclose was sent by plaintiff’s servicer in February 2015. Suit was commenced in September 2015. Defendants moved for summary judgment in February 2016. Both parties assumed that the case was governed by N.J.S.A. 2A:50-56.1(c), which provided that an action to foreclose a residential mortgage could not be commenced after 20 years from the date on which the mortgagor defaulted.
Based on that assumption, plaintiff argued that the date of default was the maturity date stated in the mortgage – Oct. 1, 1995 – and that the running of the statute of limitations commenced on the maturity date, providing it until Oct. 1, 2015, to file timely a complaint. Defendants argued that the date of default was Nov. 1, 1990, the date they failed to make their first monthly payment and, accordingly, the running of the statute of limitations commenced on Nov. 21, 1990, 20 days after they failed to make their first monthly payment, resulting in the expiration of statute of limitations on November 22, 2010.
The court found that N.J.S.A. 2A:50-56.1 of the Fair Foreclosure Act, which took effect on Aug. 6, 2009, applied retroactively to this action. It then found that N.J.S.A. 2A:50-56.1(a) was applicable and under that provision, the statute of limitations was triggered by the date fixed for making of the last payment or the maturity date, i.e., Oct. 1, 1995. Thus, applying the plain language of the limitations period described in subsection (a), an action to foreclose on the mortgage at issue was timely if commenced no later than six years from Oct. 1, 1995. Because the complaint was filed after the running of the six-year statute of limitations pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:50-56.1(a), the court found that it was untimely and plaintiff was time-barred from filing a foreclosure complaint. Therefore, the court granted defendants’ motion. [Filed June 30, 2016]
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: foreclosure statute limitations new jersey, new jersey foreclosure |
This theme is very informative and give’s me hope in the worst day of my life, I’m a 62 years old man that work so hard to secure the future of my Nine children’s and twenty two grand children’s, I buy this small building that was unfit for human occupancy, due the multiples building violations, and disrepair. After I buy it I spend about $300.000.00 dollars renovating, abating the violations and bring it back to life, so I can get the “Certificate Of Occupancy ” from the Township of Bloomfield in New Jersey. I am current in my mortgage with my private lender , while I was sending him my mortgage payment through the office of my attorney, He was telling the court that I did not pay, I offer my proof of payment to the court, but the court did not accepted, in stead the court took the collection of the rents from me and give to my opponent together with the full control and management of the building, on August 26, 2008, on January of 2009, my bank send me bank statements showing the deposit of my mortgage payments all at one’s. I bring that to the attention of the court telling the judge that this man had deposit two years later, the same checks that all along he been telling the court that I never paid. I did that on record and in open court, for my surprise, the court did nothing to this man. In stead on August 24, 2009 the court issue another court order telling me that I must sign the Dee over to him with in three days. I appeal, the court of appeal remanded the case and send it to Plenary Hearing. The new judge just defended the decision of the previous judge and issue an order for foreclosure against me. This man Mark J. Diletto has been collecting the rents for Nine Years, and he was ordered to pay Taxes, the Mortgage, and Insurance. In addition all this time he been using the parking spaces and the one of the store, for his own Car Dealer Business. We been hold prisoners in our own home. After I renovated this building I have not have the opportunity to enjoyed, neither my family. He has been enriched himself with my work and my hard earning savings, I do not know what to do, or how can I appeal this foreclosure. I do need urgent help before the sheriff evict my family and I. !!! Please help Us !!! My name is Luis A Suazo the address of this building is: 404 Bloomfield Ave, Bloomfield New Jersey 07003 My phone # 973 545 7778, My fax # 973 337 5297 Email address: chilealex50@hotmail.com Docket NO: F- 24353-10
[…] See: https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2016/07/15/new-jersey-courts-retroactively-applies-fair-foreclosure… […]
so lets look at what happen a the closing of the mortgage CONTRACT SHELL WE.
1/ MORTGAGE AND NOTES, SAYS A ( SPECIFIC LENDER) GAVE YOU MONEY, ( AS WE KNOW THAT DIDNT HAPPEN. )
2/ HOME OWNER WAS TOLD AT CLOSING AND BEFORE CLOSING THAT THE NAMED LENDER WOULD SUPPLY THE FUNDS AT CLOSING, AND WAS ALSO TOLD BY THE CLOSING AGENT , THE SAME LIE.
3/ THERE ARE 2 PARTYS TO A CLOSING OF A MORTGAGE AND NOTE, 1/ HOMEOWNER, 2/ LENDER.
3/ Offer and acceptance , Consideration,= SO HOMEOWNERS SIGN A MORTGAGE AND NOTE, IN CONSIDERATION of the said lender’s promises to pay the homeowner for said signing of the mortgage and note.
4/ but the lender does not, follow thru with his CONSIDERATION. I.E TO FUND THE CONTRACT. AND THE LENDER NAMED ON THE CONTRACT, KNEW ALL ALONG THAT HE WOULD NOT BE THE FUNDING SOURCE. FRAUD AT CONCEPTION. KNOWINGLY OUT RIGHT FRAUD ON THE HOMEOWNERS.
5/ THERE ARE NO STATUES OF LIMITATIONS ON FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT, OR ANY OTHER FRAUD.
6/ SO AS NEIL AND AND LENDING TEAM, AND OTHERS HAVE POINTED OUT, SO SO MANY TIMES HERE AND OTHER PLACES,
THERE COULD NOT BE ANY CONSUMMATION OF THE CONTRACT AT CLOSING,BY THE TWO PARTY’S TO THE CONTRACT, IF ONLY ONE PERSON TO THE CONTRACT ACTED IN GOOD FAITH,
AND THE OTHER PARTY DID NOT ACT IN GOOD FAITH OR EVEN SUPPLIED ANY ( CONSIDERATION WHAT SO EVER AT CLOSING OF THE CONTRACT.) A MORTGAGE AND NOTE IS A CONTRACT PEOPLE.
7/ SO THIS WOULD GIVE RISE TO THE LAW OF ( RESCISSION).
. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.
AND THE BANKS CAN SCREAM ALL THEY WANT, IF THE PRETENDER LENDER THAT IS ON YOUR MORTGAGE AND NOTE, DID NOT SUPPLY THE FUNDS AT CLOSING, AS WE ALL KNOW DID HAPPEN, THEN THE MORTGAGE CONTRACT IS VOID. AND THERE WAS NO CONSUMMATION AT THE CLOSING TABLE, BY THE PARTY THAT SAID IT WAS FUNDING THE CONTRACT.
CANT GET MORE SIMPLE THAT THAT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract
Contract law
Part of the common law series
Contract formation
Offer and acceptance Posting rule Mirror image rule Invitation to treat Firm offer Consideration Implication-in-fact
Defenses against formation
Lack of capacity Duress Undue influence Illusory promise Statute of frauds Non est factum
Contract interpretation
Parol evidence rule Contract of adhesion Integration clause Contra proferentem
Excuses for non-performance
Mistake Misrepresentation Frustration of purpose Impossibility Impracticability Illegality Unclean hands Unconscionability Accord and satisfaction
Rights of third parties
Privity of contract Assignment Delegation Novation Third-party beneficiary
Breach of contract
Anticipatory repudiation Cover Exclusion clause Efficient breach Deviation Fundamental breach
Remedies
Specific performance Liquidated damages Penal damages Rescission
Quasi-contractual obligations
Promissory estoppel Quantum meruit
Related areas of law
Conflict of laws Commercial law
Other common law areas
Tort law Property law Wills, trusts, and estates Criminal law Evidence
Such defenses operate to determine whether a purported contract is either (1) void or (2) voidable. Void contracts cannot be ratified by either party. Voidable contracts can be ratified.
Misrepresentation[edit]
Main article: Misrepresentation
Misrepresentation means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party and has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.
There are two types of misrepresentation: fraud in the factum and fraud in inducement. Fraud in the factum focuses on whether the party alleging misrepresentation knew they were creating a contract. If the party did not know that they were entering into a contract, there is no meeting of the minds, and the contract is void. Fraud in inducement focuses on misrepresentation attempting to get the party to enter into the contract. Misrepresentation of a material fact (if the party knew the truth, that party would not have entered into the contract) makes a contract voidable.
According to Gordon v Selico [1986] it is possible to misrepresent either by words or conduct. Generally, statements of opinion or intention are not statements of fact in the context of misrepresentation.[68] If one party claims specialist knowledge on the topic discussed, then it is more likely for the courts to hold a statement of opinion by that party as a statement of fact.[69]
This article leaves out the “acceleration of the loan” that advances the maturity date as stated in almost ALL of the Notes and Mortgage. A 2015 case in N.Y. goes into the “acceleration and de-acceleration of the Note.”
lETS HOPE THAT THE “ROBO-JUDGES” AT FLA’S 3RD DCA READ THIS OPINION. I HOPE AND PRAY THAT THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT WILL DO THE RIGHT THING AND UPHOLD FLORIDA’S 5 YR. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. ENOUGH OF JUDGES LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH. THEY ARE THERE TO UPHOLD THE LAW. THESE 3RD DCA JUDGES SHOULD BE RECUSED FROM EVERY SINGLE FORECLOSURE CASE. THEY ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK IN THE COUNTRY. THEY ARE SO PRO BANKSTERS IT IS RIDICULOUS. “HOMEOWNERS” LIFES MATTER”