All Forum Posts by: William D.

Shawn, my guess is that the letters were the notice of defaults and the real estate agent was doing either a BPO or a property inspection to see if it is vacant. Calendar the letters and check the recorder in 30-45 days to see if an LP was recorded. Some lenders send the notice of default with a contractual 30-day cure period and then refer it to foreclosure. Again, this is only a guess.

I would be careful about withholding rent in a residential context. But, If you wanted to make things interesting you could run down to the recorders office and record your rental agreement. The lender would most likely make you a party to the foreclosure as a defendant (in your context as lessee not borrower) and you would get notices and be able to raise equitable defenses. You would have to be comfortable with your name being connected to a lawsuit. Most people are not but at least you would be able to follow the action and assure yourself of any PTAFA rights.

Just to chime in on finding the heirs, generally, if someone dies they will probate the will (assuming there is a will) in order to get title to the property into the intended beneficiary. The will gets filed in probate court and is a public document. You can then determine who the heirs are and who the executor is by viewing the will.

If there is no will and the property was not survivorship with another owner then the only way for title to come out of the estate is through a court approved deed. This means you will contact the court and the fiduciary and not the children.

The distinction is subtle but can save a lot of time sending letters and making phone calls to people who are not even in a position to negotiate.

Keith, thanks for the link. I listened to it while having my morning coffee. Here is my response to the host. In that case you have an individual owner quit claiming into a 100% owned LLC; thus they have the same interest and motivations because the LLC is really just an entity shell. In that case I can see why a WD is useful because the grantee is basically the original owner. There is no threat of a breach of a covenant because they breach would be prosecuted by your LLC against you individually and that wouldn't happen.

I guess my original post was not really attacking the merits of the WD v. the QCD it was more to let pro se grantors (like Sarah) see that you legally shouldn't just sign a WD at a notary's office and give it to your boyfriend for consideration where there are encumbrances on the title. The reason for that is because (as I noted above) you are making certain promises. Sarah arguably could be exposed to liability to her boyfriend for conveying via a WD and having encumbrances on the property. I would sleep better if I were her attorney and she signed a QCD.

It is kind of an academic issue but still an issue nonetheless. I am interested in the Nevada case he references and will see if I can find it later today. Seems like you have a hardline title company trying to squeeze an insured (like most insurance companies).

If they disbursed escrow three month ago and your deed wasn't recorded something is definitely wrong. I've seen crazy things happen like staff quitting or deeds being mailed to the wrong places but 3 months is a long time. I would call up and patiently stay on the phone until you talk to someone who can tell you exactly what is going on. You can cross check this info against the info on record in your town/county recording office.

Your boyfriend doesn't want a quit claim deed? I never understand people's logic on this point. He is willing to take title to the property subject to the mortgage but wants a warranty deed? The grantor in a warranty provides covenants such as the property being free and clear of encumbrances. Whoever is giving him advice isn't really seeing the big picture. A QCD should be fine and once he is properly advised should see why a WD doesn't really provide anymore security than a QCD.

Nicholas, I am talking about the pre-origination status of title. In your case you conveyed the property subsequent to the loan origination. Thus, your wife took title subject to the mortgage deed. When you originally gave the mortgage you held the entire fee and could encumber the entire fee. If Sarah only has a 50% fee the bank will not loan against the property unless her boyfriend (assuming he is put on title prior to origination) also mortgages the property.

1. The bank will absolutely never allow two people to be on title and only one on the mortgage. If they did, their security instrument would only cover 50% of the property. Thus, if you defaulted on your note and the bank foreclosed they would only be able to foreclose on half of the property.

Here is the scenario:

Person A is a divorcee who is underwater on her primary residence. It is a national lender who services the loan and she wants to list the property with a broker. She wants to short sell the property to person B who is her boyfriend and spends time at the house? Thus, if the lender approves the short sale to person B he will take title in his name alone; however, Person A may move in with Person B after the sale?

Anyone see any issues with this situation from a legal or contractual point of view? I am not familiar with what the national lenders are putting into their short sale agreements. Thanks in advance for any insight.

FYI, I am aware I should seek legal advice from a lawyer and all laws vary from state to state. I am merely looking for people's general opinions on the situation.

Technically it has to be served by an indifferent person (obviously not you). It is best to use the marshal although it could be served by someone else. It should cost you 40-50 bucks. Use the marshal and and remember to count your days to quit properly or the housing clerk may make you restart even if the tenant doesn't pick up on it.

It will most likely have to be a cash deal because the end buyer wont be able (most likely) to get financing to purchase the LLC.