Listen to This! 6PM EDT — Trial Practice in Unlawful Detainer Actions

Thursdays LIVE! Click in to the WEST COAST Neil Garfield Show

with Charles Marshall

Or call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays

Once the sale has occurred, the trustee on the deed of trust issues a deed to either the party who initiated the foreclosure process or to a third party bidder. Then the “winner” of the bidding process takes the deed to land registry and records it. Then if the homeowner is still residing in the property the “new owner” files an unlawful detainer action in order to gain possession.

That is the process in nonjudicial states. What many fail to realize is that the unlawful detainer lawsuit is the first time that the attorneys representing the “claimant” have been required to allege and prove a claim. So it is the first time that the homeowner can actually defend against false allegations.

The unlawful detainer action is simple — if the claimant has “perfected title” then he is entitled to possession. But can a claimant perfect title when the claimant was not the owner of the debt? Can a “credit bid” be accepted from someone who is not a beneficiary under a deed of trust as defined by state statute?

Today’s Show will cover the following topics, all related to unlawful detainer lawsuits following a non-judicial foreclosure sale:

– Issuing written discovery on the UD Plaintiff when that Plaintiff is the so-called Beneficiary of the ‘loan’, not a Third-Party purchaser;

– Issuing discovery on the UD Plaintiff when that Plaintiff is a Third-Party purchaser;

– Responding to discovery from either a ‘Beneficiary’ or a Third-Party Purchaser;

– Trends in Negotiating final settlements  and Move-outs from Subject Properties following a non-judicial foreclosure Sale, covering both the situation which applies when the UD Plaintiff is a ‘Beneficiary’, and when the Plaintiff is a Third-Party Purchaser.

4 Responses

  1. Java — judicial states seem to be ignored. Yet they are still there – doesn’t matter. .

    The issues are so complex — I just don’t see it here. You cannot claim “bogus” and not know “WHY.” Doesn’t work. You need the details how the “bogus” got there – – no matter how complex and boring those details may be. It is just not happening. I think they all planned it that way, and settlements were structured to divert attention from digging any further for cause. It is tedious. And, it is not happening. Not by settlements or lawsuits. No details -no digging as to “WHY.” WHY.?????

    You can point out to a court that is something is wrong -but if you cannot point out why – the court does not care – whether judicial or non- judicial. THAT is what is not addressed. . No one cares about what they call – “ERRORS.” No one cares. It will not win. YOU NEED TO ANSWER – “WHY” it happened. If you do not – you are simply left with what the Court calls “errors.” Not good enough. And to get those “details” one must be lucky — have to have obtained before the settlements — otherwise all else is heavily BLOCKED.

    That’s the way it is.

  2. What about Judicial states ??? Is this also for mortgages in judicial?? I just don’t understand how a servicer who owns nothing and lent nothing can fraudclose on behalf of Fannie Mae. Why does Fannie not have to show themselves !!!!!!

  3. In Los Angeles county there’s a cattle call in eviction court w rental tenants. Mediation is offered to tenants and homeowners but bankster “lawyer” automatically just gives 30 days from my experience and others. Seems to be rubber stamp as was in FL judicial process.

  4. In judicial states, a credit bid is only allowable if you are the creditor. Haven’t heard much about this lately. Then the creditor, I’d there is one, shows up on the chain of title, until they sell the property. Not like car dealers, who don’t own the cars they sell.
    Any comments on this?

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: