Here is what is really wrong with foreclosure process

While I agree that in most cases there was no substantive transaction with homeowners or that the transaction was not correctly identified as to its components, I do not agree that there are no mortgages or notes.

*
They plainly exist and even if they are not supported by consideration or are otherwise procured by fraud, duress or other illegal means, they still exist. As long as they comply with requirements for facial validity they also have legal effect until a timely and proper challenge is made by the victim.
*
It is inappropriate to demand that a court be omniscient or even curious beyond the facts presented. The courts are limited to those facts and implications that have been presented, not those that could or should have been presented — at the time and place where the court record was open for receipt of such information. In nearly all cases the challenge to the initial presentation is nonexistent which results in the presentation being taken as true.
*
The real problem here is that in virtually 100% of all cases that are won by homeowners the reason is that the case should never have been filed in the first instance. This determination only comes at the tail end of litigation instead of where it belongs — at the beginning.
*
And this is caused by out-dated forms and procedures that allow for implications and presumptions of fact without the claimant ever being required to allege that the Defendant homeowner breached a duty owed to the Plaintiff and suffered a loss as a result of that breach.
*
The law is clear. It is the forms and accepted pleadings that are not clear. The attorney should be required to assert that due diligence had been performed and an officer of the named Plaintiff should be required to assert the existence and right to administer, collect and enforce the claim, along with the date of the breach and the fact that the Plaintiff had suffered a financial loss.
*
As we have seen in thousands of cases settled under seal of confidentiality, such a requirement (which is applied in all civil cases except foreclosure) would result in the elimination of most foreclosure cases. Instead, judicial resources are wasted in processing illegal foreclosures lacking in any merit or foundation. And thousands of homeowners lose their homes and lifestyle to parties who are receiving foreclosure proceeds as revenue instead of restitution.
*
The burden for such folly falls squarely on all defendants in foreclosure and the taxpayers who are paying for thousands of foreclosure cases that would never have been filed if basic pleading requirements were enforced. 

*

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: