John T.; Property Law

John has told us about how so much of our civil law is rooted in old property law. The ruling in Mass., maybe will generate enough interest for him to dust of his law books.
Cee

Once again proving the old adage: Bad facts make bad law.

Dean

Many of our laws in the USA are based on British Common Law. So, a minority of colonists here, rebelled against the British Government, formed a new one based on the Articles of Confederation, and we now - to a degree - are still using laws from the government "we" rejected.

As to the ruling in Massachusetts? They don't set precedent for the entire USA, and for that I'm glad.

But for those who bought foreclosed properties and now might lose them? That's what title-insurance is for. If anybody buys a property with a Quit-Claim deed, instead of a Warranty Deed, then they should of know there could be problems into the future.

I cant get the link to open, Im in Ft Meade Florida at the January Florida Flywheelers on a very slow n weak wireless 3G signal. Yep the oldest common law developed out of the English Feudal system concerning how to acquire and hold real property interests. Later the upstart contract law dealt with enforcement of agreements to transfer property interests etc

I love this retirement and RV lifestyle woooooooo hoooooooo

John T

John, if you haven"t been following the mortgage securitisation debacle (naked capitalism is a good source; 4closurefraud gets a little shrill, though) it"s a fascinating decision, in my view long overdue, altho other lower courts have been waking up (shaken/forced awake?)...
It"s of course too big to be recognized by either the Bar or the Administration; I expect some kind of pronunciamento decreeing it"s all minor oversights, nothing material to get upset about (pat pat on the head) and go home and watch Jeopardy or something...
Until it"s all plastered over, though, anyone who deals with a property that"s gone through the Wall Street machine had better do a lot of research...Capitalism at it"s unfettered best!!!
(I"m all for Capitalism, but it does need a little oversight).

Bad facts also sometimes make a great defense case.
They amaze me with quotes like, "he only fired once which proves it was not premeditated and therefore cannot be first degree murder" (is the victim dead or not?)

I'm not familiar with the particulars of the Massachusetts case, but the mortgage companies set themselves up for a huge fall. If you look at almost any foreclosure notice in your local newspaper, you'll see that the mortgage is held by "Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems as nominee for Bank X". MERS was set up as an electronic clearinghouse for mortgages, since it can take days or weeks to process and transfer paper documents. In theory the mortgage companies were supposed to follow up with the paperwork, but in many cases this didn't happen. Everyone was making so much money at the time they didn't care. Then when the sh** hit the fan, all the sudden the companies had to foreclose on thousands of mortgages, for which the paperwork didn't exist in many cases. They then tried to short-circuit the process with "robo-signers", people whose job was just to sign any document that was placed on their desk. They got caught and they got busted.

Now I have no sympathy for someone who takes out a mortgage they can't afford. But it is the greed of the finance companies that created this problem. They shouldn't get a pass by the courts just because they don't want to be bothered with following the letter of the law. And as for the buyers of houses with questionable foreclosures, they too have legal recourse against the finance companies that sold them property with bad deeds. Basic contract law.

John T,
After helping my brother-in-law drive his 40 ft monaco dynasty motor home to Florida over Christmas, through the bad windy weather around Alanta, I've decided I'll never drive close to a motor home again. It measures 9 ft 8 inches from mirror to mirror. It was like driving a semi and they let anyone drive one without a CDL, scary!

Enjoy your retirement. I've been retired 7 years and life if Good
George

Title insurance is a must, but it's only worth so much. When you get tossed from a house that you have title insurance on, will that insurance cover your moving expenses, the cost of any improvements you've done, storage for all your household goods and rent while you try and find another pace to live, etc., etc.?

By coincidence, my son was looking at buying a bank owned property when this ruling was handed down. He didn't end up making an offer on that property for other reasons, but there was some serious re-thinking the property because of this as well.

If a property was taken away from someone illegally, you sure can't blame them for wanting to recover it, but that makes buying these properties riskier - which means the prices will probably go down further to cover the additional risk.

A property financed and the paper held by a local bank, or the paper sold to a bank's normal buyer, say an insurance co or state pension fund, and then foreclosed by that normal buyer (never resold and sliced and diced in the Wall St securitization machine) should be OK, barring any sloppy work by the atty's foreclosing...
It's the Wall St securitization machines' mortgages and Trust Deeds, that were lumped into Trusts and then sliced and diced to final end buyers that're in trouble re' questions of incorrect documentation, determining who, if anyone, has the standing to foreclose, etc., (if no one, the note is still owed to someone, and could be collected as an unsecured note)...
As MarkB-MI says above, courts are EXTREMELY reluctant to overturn foreclosure decrees, relegating harmed parties to civil suits for damages, expensive and time-consuming...
I expect, to save the industry and the banks, the Supremes will Decree it's all a tempest in a teapot and all the foreclosures are AAA (pun intended).