Okay, well first of all, if anyone reads any one of those "cases of fraud" that addressed the problems with double closings and SUB2s you will quickly learn that they are all far from any normal sub2 or double closing. These news articles ALL depict large scale fraud schemes. These cases are so extensive and really have nothign to do with either.
The 'essence' of this thread is not 'is an sub2 and ethical transaction'. That is not anywhere near what was being discussed. Your...client...posted that ALL sub2's and double closings were fraud and could lead to prison time, according to his attorney. Ethics never came into the conversation. Your premise is wrong.
Regardless, I will address you statements.
You say that a Sub2 is not a legal act because the parties are not paying off the mortgage. If you are correct, the argument should stop there. You should be able to point me to some form of case law, or any law that outlines what is being done wrong. Which you do not. Instead you write,
"Both parties are running the risk of losing the property or being forced to pay the loan off in full if and when the bank enforces the due on sale clause which is present in almost every security instrument I have seen."
Well, if a Sub2 is against the law, wouldn't I run the risk of facing a more harsh punishment than this. I run the risk of having the loan called due???? OBVIOUSLY. I think we all know that this is a risk of doing a Sub2 deal. If you read the thread correctly than you would know that we are talking JAIL TIME. Do you have any case law pointing to that? I see that you posted some definitions of "Legal" and "ethics".. that doesn't really cut it for me. You advised your client that double closings and Sub2's are fraud and could lead to jail time. What did you base this off of?
So then you go into a long, draw out story, taking A LOT of time to address several different points (pretty typical) but never really answering anything. Overall we come to the fact that it is a grey area (duh!) that is hard to define and you would tell your clients not to do Sub2's. You would advise your clients to disclose everything in a deal and not do 'out of the box' deals. Thanks for that. If a client asked me if he should go bungy jumping, I would of course say no. Not to mention you never brought up double closings which Flipper claimed you said were also fraud. Conclusion, as I brought up in one of my first postings on this topic, "attorneys bring up a lot of issues but rarely come up with solutions". It's very easy for someone to sit on the sidelines and examine things that others might be doing wrong. Like I said, attorneys get paid for sitting in their offices, investors get paid for doing deals.
I thank you for PM-ing me to tell me that you posted to this thread. I wish you would have posted something that would have shined a little more light onto the subject, therefore constituting you PM-ing me to check the thread.