All Forum Posts by: Tom Gimer

The lien needs to be paid and/or released. A third party likely purchased that debt from the original lender (uncollectible by typical debt collector standards) for pennies on the dollar. And that lien is a huge title problem waiting to happen for anybody who thinks it disappeared when an accounting decision was made.

It's a tough situation for the borrower. Track down the new owner of the debt to complete the short sale and wake a sleeping creditor who doesn't need to play ball; or ignore it somehow (bad title company) and the new parties in interest get foreclosed from first lien position by somebody just waiting for the opportunity to squeeze everyone.

Jay, the holder of the second would be a defendant in the first mortgage foreclosure action. Without notice and the opportunity to defend their position, the second lien would survive. 

Is that what you’re asking? Probably not!

Wrap the existing mortgage, as suggested... or take a balloon second for your equity. That way you could foreclose.

Some posters have no idea how networked wholesalers do business.

Many contracts we receive are accompanied or followed by assignments the same day. No marketing required. No investorlift, no Craigslist, no email blasts, no BS contingencies included. 

In fact when I see the contract, the neighborhood and the purchase price, I have a decent idea who the assignee will be. 

No. Large investment in a failed area,

City should be paying investors to take those chances.

Most are looking for contracts to use/the best contract terms to include and also identifying investor-friendly title companies in the areas they are trying to work. 

Some are looking to network with more experienced investors to bounce ideas off of and/or potentially JV with.

I think BP is a great resource for all of the above. 

But I do agree with the sentiment of your post.

The process would be, I believe, to file for a temporary restraining order, followed by a permanent injunction, to enforce the deed restriction. If successful the process would end with a court order requiring the mobile home to be removed.

The question would be easier to answer if the actual language was provided so it could be determined that the restriction runs with the land and bind subsequent owners.

 The law on restrictive covenants is very state-specific and developed through case law over time. You can't get a truly helpful answer here without sharing the exact and complete language in all the instruments, information concerning the parties involved in the original transaction, and details on what has transpired since.

I actually can't tell from the question what the goal is. Is the goal finding someone to blame and punish, or avoiding/striking the deed restrictions themselves?

A title report would be necessary to confirm whether or not there is anything preventing a current sale by the owner of record. I'm guessing BK or receivership is on the horizon... and despite what has been suggested above, those events would prevent a sale. 

Before long JKV will be on the radar of all the major title underwriters and their title agents will need underwriter permission to close deals in which they are involved.

"It's sad that you need this explained to you. Perhaps read slower."

"Please do try to read and understand better this time."

Condescending a**hole comments. Heaven forbid somebody disagrees with your analysis.