Ex-in-laws (3rd party creditors) want to foreclose on my condo

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]I think I am screwed.
I read the separation agreement again and found this:

22. REIMBURSEMENT AND OTHER MONETARY WAIVERS.
A. Except as may be specifically provided to the contrary in this Agreement,
as part of the division of the community property each party waives all rights of reimbursement
for the following:
(4) All rights of reimbursement pursuant to Family Code section 2640,
or otherwise, for separate property contributed to the acquisition, maintenance or
improvement of community property or the other party’s separate property;
[/quote]

This may have the effect of negating your 2640 stipulation if the MSA was signed AFTER the stipulation. I would still want an atty to review it if I were you. I don’t think your ex is off the hook for the notes she signed with you, now both secured by (presumably) filed trust deeds.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]My initial goal for starting this thread was to understand if my ex-in-laws have a legal right to proceed with foreclosing while I STILL make payments to them (as well as the first lender) EVERY MONTH.[/quote]

Without seeing the terms of your actual trust deed, no one can answer that. However, your question here SHOULD BE, what’s in it for them to do so??

Piggs, raise your hands if you, as a subordinate TD holder, would keep a regular and timely I/O borrower on the hook for $833 mo indefinitely who is not paying down any principal on his $200K encumbrance under these likely future scenarios:

(1)If your borrower decides to walk from the first TD tomorrow, you would have to come up with a min of $155K (incl arrearages and trustees fees) upon foreclosure to cure the 1st TD holder and then market the property in the =<$340 range (minus RE commission/closing costs) to obtain your $155K back and then whatever was left over would have to satisfy the $200K note; (2) If your borrower decides to walk on your TD, you can hire a trustee on the 90th delinquent day to initiate foreclosure proceedings. By the 120th day, you have successfully foreclosed and paid your trustee $4K to $8K (or more). Now you are receiving a letter from the 1st TD holder with payment coupons based upon a *new* loan amount with poss late charges thrown in (with whom you are now involuntarily taking on said debt "subject to"); (3) If your borrower decides to walk on BOTH loans, you and B of A can race each other to the podium. Any Pigg want to wager on who decides to foreclose first?? As a 2nd TD holder, what kind of deal would you make with this particular borrower under these circumstances if he approached you for some kind of "relief?" How much on the open market do you think you could get if you sold this trust deed? Is it marketable if TWO borrowers signed the promissory note, TWO borrowers signed the trust deed, but ONE borrower may have "quitclaimed" the property to the other??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]My initial goal for starting this thread was to understand if my ex-in-laws have a legal right to proceed with foreclosing while I STILL make payments to them (as well as the first lender) EVERY MONTH.[/quote]

Without seeing the terms of your actual trust deed, no one can answer that. However, your question here SHOULD BE, what’s in it for them to do so??

Piggs, raise your hands if you, as a subordinate TD holder, would keep a regular and timely I/O borrower on the hook for $833 mo indefinitely who is not paying down any principal on his $200K encumbrance under these likely future scenarios:

(1)If your borrower decides to walk from the first TD tomorrow, you would have to come up with a min of $155K (incl arrearages and trustees fees) upon foreclosure to cure the 1st TD holder and then market the property in the =<$340 range (minus RE commission/closing costs) to obtain your $155K back and then whatever was left over would have to satisfy the $200K note; (2) If your borrower decides to walk on your TD, you can hire a trustee on the 90th delinquent day to initiate foreclosure proceedings. By the 120th day, you have successfully foreclosed and paid your trustee $4K to $8K (or more). Now you are receiving a letter from the 1st TD holder with payment coupons based upon a *new* loan amount with poss late charges thrown in (with whom you are now involuntarily taking on said debt "subject to"); (3) If your borrower decides to walk on BOTH loans, you and B of A can race each other to the podium. Any Pigg want to wager on who decides to foreclose first?? As a 2nd TD holder, what kind of deal would you make with this particular borrower under these circumstances if he approached you for some kind of "relief?" How much on the open market do you think you could get if you sold this trust deed? Is it marketable if TWO borrowers signed the promissory note, TWO borrowers signed the trust deed, but ONE borrower may have "quitclaimed" the property to the other??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]My initial goal for starting this thread was to understand if my ex-in-laws have a legal right to proceed with foreclosing while I STILL make payments to them (as well as the first lender) EVERY MONTH.[/quote]

Without seeing the terms of your actual trust deed, no one can answer that. However, your question here SHOULD BE, what’s in it for them to do so??

Piggs, raise your hands if you, as a subordinate TD holder, would keep a regular and timely I/O borrower on the hook for $833 mo indefinitely who is not paying down any principal on his $200K encumbrance under these likely future scenarios:

(1)If your borrower decides to walk from the first TD tomorrow, you would have to come up with a min of $155K (incl arrearages and trustees fees) upon foreclosure to cure the 1st TD holder and then market the property in the =<$340 range (minus RE commission/closing costs) to obtain your $155K back and then whatever was left over would have to satisfy the $200K note; (2) If your borrower decides to walk on your TD, you can hire a trustee on the 90th delinquent day to initiate foreclosure proceedings. By the 120th day, you have successfully foreclosed and paid your trustee $4K to $8K (or more). Now you are receiving a letter from the 1st TD holder with payment coupons based upon a *new* loan amount with poss late charges thrown in (with whom you are now involuntarily taking on said debt "subject to"); (3) If your borrower decides to walk on BOTH loans, you and B of A can race each other to the podium. Any Pigg want to wager on who decides to foreclose first?? As a 2nd TD holder, what kind of deal would you make with this particular borrower under these circumstances if he approached you for some kind of "relief?" How much on the open market do you think you could get if you sold this trust deed? Is it marketable if TWO borrowers signed the promissory note, TWO borrowers signed the trust deed, but ONE borrower may have "quitclaimed" the property to the other??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]My initial goal for starting this thread was to understand if my ex-in-laws have a legal right to proceed with foreclosing while I STILL make payments to them (as well as the first lender) EVERY MONTH.[/quote]

Without seeing the terms of your actual trust deed, no one can answer that. However, your question here SHOULD BE, what’s in it for them to do so??

Piggs, raise your hands if you, as a subordinate TD holder, would keep a regular and timely I/O borrower on the hook for $833 mo indefinitely who is not paying down any principal on his $200K encumbrance under these likely future scenarios:

(1)If your borrower decides to walk from the first TD tomorrow, you would have to come up with a min of $155K (incl arrearages and trustees fees) upon foreclosure to cure the 1st TD holder and then market the property in the =<$340 range (minus RE commission/closing costs) to obtain your $155K back and then whatever was left over would have to satisfy the $200K note; (2) If your borrower decides to walk on your TD, you can hire a trustee on the 90th delinquent day to initiate foreclosure proceedings. By the 120th day, you have successfully foreclosed and paid your trustee $4K to $8K (or more). Now you are receiving a letter from the 1st TD holder with payment coupons based upon a *new* loan amount with poss late charges thrown in (with whom you are now involuntarily taking on said debt "subject to"); (3) If your borrower decides to walk on BOTH loans, you and B of A can race each other to the podium. Any Pigg want to wager on who decides to foreclose first?? As a 2nd TD holder, what kind of deal would you make with this particular borrower under these circumstances if he approached you for some kind of "relief?" How much on the open market do you think you could get if you sold this trust deed? Is it marketable if TWO borrowers signed the promissory note, TWO borrowers signed the trust deed, but ONE borrower may have "quitclaimed" the property to the other??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=frenchlambda]My initial goal for starting this thread was to understand if my ex-in-laws have a legal right to proceed with foreclosing while I STILL make payments to them (as well as the first lender) EVERY MONTH.[/quote]

Without seeing the terms of your actual trust deed, no one can answer that. However, your question here SHOULD BE, what’s in it for them to do so??

Piggs, raise your hands if you, as a subordinate TD holder, would keep a regular and timely I/O borrower on the hook for $833 mo indefinitely who is not paying down any principal on his $200K encumbrance under these likely future scenarios:

(1)If your borrower decides to walk from the first TD tomorrow, you would have to come up with a min of $155K (incl arrearages and trustees fees) upon foreclosure to cure the 1st TD holder and then market the property in the =<$340 range (minus RE commission/closing costs) to obtain your $155K back and then whatever was left over would have to satisfy the $200K note; (2) If your borrower decides to walk on your TD, you can hire a trustee on the 90th delinquent day to initiate foreclosure proceedings. By the 120th day, you have successfully foreclosed and paid your trustee $4K to $8K (or more). Now you are receiving a letter from the 1st TD holder with payment coupons based upon a *new* loan amount with poss late charges thrown in (with whom you are now involuntarily taking on said debt "subject to"); (3) If your borrower decides to walk on BOTH loans, you and B of A can race each other to the podium. Any Pigg want to wager on who decides to foreclose first?? As a 2nd TD holder, what kind of deal would you make with this particular borrower under these circumstances if he approached you for some kind of "relief?" How much on the open market do you think you could get if you sold this trust deed? Is it marketable if TWO borrowers signed the promissory note, TWO borrowers signed the trust deed, but ONE borrower may have "quitclaimed" the property to the other??

[ucodegen]

[quote bearishgurl]Agreed. uco, I like your anal-retentive style :=][/quote]
Thanks. I have learned to be scarily anal-retentive (I hope there are not any physical side effects). I am an EECE by trade and schooling, currently mostly software, but my relatives on the father side are all attorneys. My SO is a corporate paralegal… I AM SURROUNDED.

Currently, having been laid off, and then brought back ‘hourly’ or PTOC but doing full time hours. I have been toying with the idea of either getting the MBA or going the legal route. Some of the games I am seeing being played out there, are pushing me to the legal route. It is almost like a ‘self defense’ reaction.

I really think that “frenchlambda” needs to see a good attorney (not the attorney who did the divorce though).

[ucodegen]

[quote bearishgurl]Agreed. uco, I like your anal-retentive style :=][/quote]
Thanks. I have learned to be scarily anal-retentive (I hope there are not any physical side effects). I am an EECE by trade and schooling, currently mostly software, but my relatives on the father side are all attorneys. My SO is a corporate paralegal… I AM SURROUNDED.

Currently, having been laid off, and then brought back ‘hourly’ or PTOC but doing full time hours. I have been toying with the idea of either getting the MBA or going the legal route. Some of the games I am seeing being played out there, are pushing me to the legal route. It is almost like a ‘self defense’ reaction.

I really think that “frenchlambda” needs to see a good attorney (not the attorney who did the divorce though).

[ucodegen]

[quote bearishgurl]Agreed. uco, I like your anal-retentive style :=][/quote]
Thanks. I have learned to be scarily anal-retentive (I hope there are not any physical side effects). I am an EECE by trade and schooling, currently mostly software, but my relatives on the father side are all attorneys. My SO is a corporate paralegal… I AM SURROUNDED.

Currently, having been laid off, and then brought back ‘hourly’ or PTOC but doing full time hours. I have been toying with the idea of either getting the MBA or going the legal route. Some of the games I am seeing being played out there, are pushing me to the legal route. It is almost like a ‘self defense’ reaction.

I really think that “frenchlambda” needs to see a good attorney (not the attorney who did the divorce though).

[ucodegen]

[quote bearishgurl]Agreed. uco, I like your anal-retentive style :=][/quote]
Thanks. I have learned to be scarily anal-retentive (I hope there are not any physical side effects). I am an EECE by trade and schooling, currently mostly software, but my relatives on the father side are all attorneys. My SO is a corporate paralegal… I AM SURROUNDED.

Currently, having been laid off, and then brought back ‘hourly’ or PTOC but doing full time hours. I have been toying with the idea of either getting the MBA or going the legal route. Some of the games I am seeing being played out there, are pushing me to the legal route. It is almost like a ‘self defense’ reaction.

I really think that “frenchlambda” needs to see a good attorney (not the attorney who did the divorce though).

[ucodegen]

[quote bearishgurl]Agreed. uco, I like your anal-retentive style :=][/quote]
Thanks. I have learned to be scarily anal-retentive (I hope there are not any physical side effects). I am an EECE by trade and schooling, currently mostly software, but my relatives on the father side are all attorneys. My SO is a corporate paralegal… I AM SURROUNDED.

Currently, having been laid off, and then brought back ‘hourly’ or PTOC but doing full time hours. I have been toying with the idea of either getting the MBA or going the legal route. Some of the games I am seeing being played out there, are pushing me to the legal route. It is almost like a ‘self defense’ reaction.

I really think that “frenchlambda” needs to see a good attorney (not the attorney who did the divorce though).

[waiting hawk]

Not wanting to jack the thread but I must say there are some smart gals/guys on here. Really good read.

[waiting hawk]

Not wanting to jack the thread but I must say there are some smart gals/guys on here. Really good read.

[waiting hawk]

Not wanting to jack the thread but I must say there are some smart gals/guys on here. Really good read.

[waiting hawk]

Not wanting to jack the thread but I must say there are some smart gals/guys on here. Really good read.

[Author]

Posts