- This topic has 50 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:23 AM #11282
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM #121891
Anonymous
GuestOh, and I did send a message to the mom through “administrative assistant” asking her if she’s gonna foreclose or what. Haven’t heard back from her.
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM #122038
Anonymous
GuestOh, and I did send a message to the mom through “administrative assistant” asking her if she’s gonna foreclose or what. Haven’t heard back from her.
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM #122060
Anonymous
GuestOh, and I did send a message to the mom through “administrative assistant” asking her if she’s gonna foreclose or what. Haven’t heard back from her.
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM #122114
Anonymous
GuestOh, and I did send a message to the mom through “administrative assistant” asking her if she’s gonna foreclose or what. Haven’t heard back from her.
-
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM #122136
Anonymous
GuestOh, and I did send a message to the mom through “administrative assistant” asking her if she’s gonna foreclose or what. Haven’t heard back from her.
-
December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM #122801
Anonymous
GuestCan I get some help here?…So no one understands the process of a second foreclosure?
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM #122815
LeaSD
ParticipantThe first, second, third mortgage or deed (mattering if you are in a mortgage state or a deed of trust state) is the order in which your position is to the title of the property. Whatever position you are in – to get to title you must make whole anyone who is in front of you and anyone behind you gets wiped out. Therefore for the mother to foreclose on the property in the second position, she needs to pay off the first lien holder. If there was anyone in the third position (let’s say a contractor did work on the house and did not get paid so s/he put a mechanics lien against the property) this person in the third position would get wiped out and now only have an unsecured debt against the person.
If you lease was signed PRIOR to the mortgage holder and of record then your lease would actually be in front of their lien and in a foreclosure they would have to recognize your lease. Of course if it is a month to month with either party allowed to cancel with 30 days notice- they step into the same rights as the original lessor. If your lease was signed after the mortgage – they do not have to honor your lease but nothing would prevent you and the party that forecloses to make new arrangements.
My take – it is a mess – why waste time dealing with it – take control and choose to rent a place without all the drama.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM #122962
LeaSD
ParticipantThe first, second, third mortgage or deed (mattering if you are in a mortgage state or a deed of trust state) is the order in which your position is to the title of the property. Whatever position you are in – to get to title you must make whole anyone who is in front of you and anyone behind you gets wiped out. Therefore for the mother to foreclose on the property in the second position, she needs to pay off the first lien holder. If there was anyone in the third position (let’s say a contractor did work on the house and did not get paid so s/he put a mechanics lien against the property) this person in the third position would get wiped out and now only have an unsecured debt against the person.
If you lease was signed PRIOR to the mortgage holder and of record then your lease would actually be in front of their lien and in a foreclosure they would have to recognize your lease. Of course if it is a month to month with either party allowed to cancel with 30 days notice- they step into the same rights as the original lessor. If your lease was signed after the mortgage – they do not have to honor your lease but nothing would prevent you and the party that forecloses to make new arrangements.
My take – it is a mess – why waste time dealing with it – take control and choose to rent a place without all the drama.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM #122988
LeaSD
ParticipantThe first, second, third mortgage or deed (mattering if you are in a mortgage state or a deed of trust state) is the order in which your position is to the title of the property. Whatever position you are in – to get to title you must make whole anyone who is in front of you and anyone behind you gets wiped out. Therefore for the mother to foreclose on the property in the second position, she needs to pay off the first lien holder. If there was anyone in the third position (let’s say a contractor did work on the house and did not get paid so s/he put a mechanics lien against the property) this person in the third position would get wiped out and now only have an unsecured debt against the person.
If you lease was signed PRIOR to the mortgage holder and of record then your lease would actually be in front of their lien and in a foreclosure they would have to recognize your lease. Of course if it is a month to month with either party allowed to cancel with 30 days notice- they step into the same rights as the original lessor. If your lease was signed after the mortgage – they do not have to honor your lease but nothing would prevent you and the party that forecloses to make new arrangements.
My take – it is a mess – why waste time dealing with it – take control and choose to rent a place without all the drama.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM #123042
LeaSD
ParticipantThe first, second, third mortgage or deed (mattering if you are in a mortgage state or a deed of trust state) is the order in which your position is to the title of the property. Whatever position you are in – to get to title you must make whole anyone who is in front of you and anyone behind you gets wiped out. Therefore for the mother to foreclose on the property in the second position, she needs to pay off the first lien holder. If there was anyone in the third position (let’s say a contractor did work on the house and did not get paid so s/he put a mechanics lien against the property) this person in the third position would get wiped out and now only have an unsecured debt against the person.
If you lease was signed PRIOR to the mortgage holder and of record then your lease would actually be in front of their lien and in a foreclosure they would have to recognize your lease. Of course if it is a month to month with either party allowed to cancel with 30 days notice- they step into the same rights as the original lessor. If your lease was signed after the mortgage – they do not have to honor your lease but nothing would prevent you and the party that forecloses to make new arrangements.
My take – it is a mess – why waste time dealing with it – take control and choose to rent a place without all the drama.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM #123060
LeaSD
ParticipantThe first, second, third mortgage or deed (mattering if you are in a mortgage state or a deed of trust state) is the order in which your position is to the title of the property. Whatever position you are in – to get to title you must make whole anyone who is in front of you and anyone behind you gets wiped out. Therefore for the mother to foreclose on the property in the second position, she needs to pay off the first lien holder. If there was anyone in the third position (let’s say a contractor did work on the house and did not get paid so s/he put a mechanics lien against the property) this person in the third position would get wiped out and now only have an unsecured debt against the person.
If you lease was signed PRIOR to the mortgage holder and of record then your lease would actually be in front of their lien and in a foreclosure they would have to recognize your lease. Of course if it is a month to month with either party allowed to cancel with 30 days notice- they step into the same rights as the original lessor. If your lease was signed after the mortgage – they do not have to honor your lease but nothing would prevent you and the party that forecloses to make new arrangements.
My take – it is a mess – why waste time dealing with it – take control and choose to rent a place without all the drama.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:10 PM #122820
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t know the process of a second foreclosure but isn’t the threat of having to move on short notice reason enough to leave now and set up somewhere more stable. Forget the “what you might get for free” and just bail after you’ve gotten the time you have paid for. Don’t pay the January rent and move in January, give them notice now. I think that whatever lease you are in has been broken by them a few times over. Regardless of the procedure, if your landlord doesn’t pay for the house, eventually it isn’t his house. A Sept. NOD means time is running out anyway, there are only a few months left, just take your dollars elsewhere.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM #122845
Anonymous
GuestTG, thanks for the reply. You’re right, this situation is not worth the worry. It’s time to get out. My son is fine with moving. It seems I was projecting my concerns about his ability to adapt to new surroundings onto him even though he has never had a problem before. No worries.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:30 PM #122849
bubba99
ParticipantMom’s best bets are to foreclose from the second position, or let to let the first foreclose and simply bid on the property. This would effectively wipe out any thirds, and in the second position, she would get any “overages” from the sale. Her paying the first to keep it out of foreclosure is a mistake.
From your perspective, if mom can actually pay off the first via a new loan, or at auction, no need to move. She will probably still want a good renter.
But mom really needs to get some professional help to make any of this work, and possible protect herself from what is becomming an abusive son who might see “other” solutions to his problem. There seems to be no limit to the damage family arguments can cause to the family members.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:30 PM #122994
bubba99
ParticipantMom’s best bets are to foreclose from the second position, or let to let the first foreclose and simply bid on the property. This would effectively wipe out any thirds, and in the second position, she would get any “overages” from the sale. Her paying the first to keep it out of foreclosure is a mistake.
From your perspective, if mom can actually pay off the first via a new loan, or at auction, no need to move. She will probably still want a good renter.
But mom really needs to get some professional help to make any of this work, and possible protect herself from what is becomming an abusive son who might see “other” solutions to his problem. There seems to be no limit to the damage family arguments can cause to the family members.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:30 PM #123022
bubba99
ParticipantMom’s best bets are to foreclose from the second position, or let to let the first foreclose and simply bid on the property. This would effectively wipe out any thirds, and in the second position, she would get any “overages” from the sale. Her paying the first to keep it out of foreclosure is a mistake.
From your perspective, if mom can actually pay off the first via a new loan, or at auction, no need to move. She will probably still want a good renter.
But mom really needs to get some professional help to make any of this work, and possible protect herself from what is becomming an abusive son who might see “other” solutions to his problem. There seems to be no limit to the damage family arguments can cause to the family members.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:30 PM #123078
bubba99
ParticipantMom’s best bets are to foreclose from the second position, or let to let the first foreclose and simply bid on the property. This would effectively wipe out any thirds, and in the second position, she would get any “overages” from the sale. Her paying the first to keep it out of foreclosure is a mistake.
From your perspective, if mom can actually pay off the first via a new loan, or at auction, no need to move. She will probably still want a good renter.
But mom really needs to get some professional help to make any of this work, and possible protect herself from what is becomming an abusive son who might see “other” solutions to his problem. There seems to be no limit to the damage family arguments can cause to the family members.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:30 PM #123095
bubba99
ParticipantMom’s best bets are to foreclose from the second position, or let to let the first foreclose and simply bid on the property. This would effectively wipe out any thirds, and in the second position, she would get any “overages” from the sale. Her paying the first to keep it out of foreclosure is a mistake.
From your perspective, if mom can actually pay off the first via a new loan, or at auction, no need to move. She will probably still want a good renter.
But mom really needs to get some professional help to make any of this work, and possible protect herself from what is becomming an abusive son who might see “other” solutions to his problem. There seems to be no limit to the damage family arguments can cause to the family members.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM #122989
Anonymous
GuestTG, thanks for the reply. You’re right, this situation is not worth the worry. It’s time to get out. My son is fine with moving. It seems I was projecting my concerns about his ability to adapt to new surroundings onto him even though he has never had a problem before. No worries.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM #123017
Anonymous
GuestTG, thanks for the reply. You’re right, this situation is not worth the worry. It’s time to get out. My son is fine with moving. It seems I was projecting my concerns about his ability to adapt to new surroundings onto him even though he has never had a problem before. No worries.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM #123073
Anonymous
GuestTG, thanks for the reply. You’re right, this situation is not worth the worry. It’s time to get out. My son is fine with moving. It seems I was projecting my concerns about his ability to adapt to new surroundings onto him even though he has never had a problem before. No worries.
-
December 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM #123091
Anonymous
GuestTG, thanks for the reply. You’re right, this situation is not worth the worry. It’s time to get out. My son is fine with moving. It seems I was projecting my concerns about his ability to adapt to new surroundings onto him even though he has never had a problem before. No worries.
-
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:10 PM #122968
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t know the process of a second foreclosure but isn’t the threat of having to move on short notice reason enough to leave now and set up somewhere more stable. Forget the “what you might get for free” and just bail after you’ve gotten the time you have paid for. Don’t pay the January rent and move in January, give them notice now. I think that whatever lease you are in has been broken by them a few times over. Regardless of the procedure, if your landlord doesn’t pay for the house, eventually it isn’t his house. A Sept. NOD means time is running out anyway, there are only a few months left, just take your dollars elsewhere.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:10 PM #122990
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t know the process of a second foreclosure but isn’t the threat of having to move on short notice reason enough to leave now and set up somewhere more stable. Forget the “what you might get for free” and just bail after you’ve gotten the time you have paid for. Don’t pay the January rent and move in January, give them notice now. I think that whatever lease you are in has been broken by them a few times over. Regardless of the procedure, if your landlord doesn’t pay for the house, eventually it isn’t his house. A Sept. NOD means time is running out anyway, there are only a few months left, just take your dollars elsewhere.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:10 PM #123047
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t know the process of a second foreclosure but isn’t the threat of having to move on short notice reason enough to leave now and set up somewhere more stable. Forget the “what you might get for free” and just bail after you’ve gotten the time you have paid for. Don’t pay the January rent and move in January, give them notice now. I think that whatever lease you are in has been broken by them a few times over. Regardless of the procedure, if your landlord doesn’t pay for the house, eventually it isn’t his house. A Sept. NOD means time is running out anyway, there are only a few months left, just take your dollars elsewhere.
-
December 22, 2007 at 2:10 PM #123065
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t know the process of a second foreclosure but isn’t the threat of having to move on short notice reason enough to leave now and set up somewhere more stable. Forget the “what you might get for free” and just bail after you’ve gotten the time you have paid for. Don’t pay the January rent and move in January, give them notice now. I think that whatever lease you are in has been broken by them a few times over. Regardless of the procedure, if your landlord doesn’t pay for the house, eventually it isn’t his house. A Sept. NOD means time is running out anyway, there are only a few months left, just take your dollars elsewhere.
-
-
December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM #122948
Anonymous
GuestCan I get some help here?…So no one understands the process of a second foreclosure?
-
December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM #122973
Anonymous
GuestCan I get some help here?…So no one understands the process of a second foreclosure?
-
December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM #123028
Anonymous
GuestCan I get some help here?…So no one understands the process of a second foreclosure?
-
December 22, 2007 at 12:56 PM #123044
Anonymous
GuestCan I get some help here?…So no one understands the process of a second foreclosure?
-
December 23, 2007 at 8:41 AM #123139
The OC Scam
ParticipantMarion,
The foreclosure process can take a long time. In my case the first defaults came after 4-5 months no payments by the owner in March 06 and the auction didn’t occur until September 07.
In todays declining market the house will take atleast 6 months to sell even if it is priced low.
Our home had a second and first however the first loan holder paid off the second loan at the auction.
-
December 24, 2007 at 6:34 AM #123455
moneymaker
ParticipantIt seems to me that when equity is quickly disappearing whoever owns the second should go for a lien rather than foreclose. Does this make sense?It may take longer to get the money, but wouldn’t the first have to pay off the second’s lien in order to take possession in a foreclosure.
-
December 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM #123484
little lady
ParticipantMaybe this will help,
Why Not Just Stop Paying Your Second Mortgage In California?
http://www.sandiegopredatorylending.com/?p=34 -
December 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM #123504
Anonymous
GuestThanks for all the info. guys. Mike raises an interesting question about the second putting a lien on the house instead of foreclosing. If someone can answer that, I’d be interested in hearing the answer.
-
December 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM #123649
Anonymous
GuestThanks for all the info. guys. Mike raises an interesting question about the second putting a lien on the house instead of foreclosing. If someone can answer that, I’d be interested in hearing the answer.
-
December 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM #123678
Anonymous
GuestThanks for all the info. guys. Mike raises an interesting question about the second putting a lien on the house instead of foreclosing. If someone can answer that, I’d be interested in hearing the answer.
-
December 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM #123732
Anonymous
GuestThanks for all the info. guys. Mike raises an interesting question about the second putting a lien on the house instead of foreclosing. If someone can answer that, I’d be interested in hearing the answer.
-
December 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM #123751
Anonymous
GuestThanks for all the info. guys. Mike raises an interesting question about the second putting a lien on the house instead of foreclosing. If someone can answer that, I’d be interested in hearing the answer.
-
December 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM #123631
little lady
ParticipantMaybe this will help,
Why Not Just Stop Paying Your Second Mortgage In California?
http://www.sandiegopredatorylending.com/?p=34 -
December 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM #123655
little lady
ParticipantMaybe this will help,
Why Not Just Stop Paying Your Second Mortgage In California?
http://www.sandiegopredatorylending.com/?p=34 -
December 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM #123711
little lady
ParticipantMaybe this will help,
Why Not Just Stop Paying Your Second Mortgage In California?
http://www.sandiegopredatorylending.com/?p=34 -
December 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM #123731
little lady
ParticipantMaybe this will help,
Why Not Just Stop Paying Your Second Mortgage In California?
http://www.sandiegopredatorylending.com/?p=34
-
-
December 24, 2007 at 6:34 AM #123601
moneymaker
ParticipantIt seems to me that when equity is quickly disappearing whoever owns the second should go for a lien rather than foreclose. Does this make sense?It may take longer to get the money, but wouldn’t the first have to pay off the second’s lien in order to take possession in a foreclosure.
-
December 24, 2007 at 6:34 AM #123627
moneymaker
ParticipantIt seems to me that when equity is quickly disappearing whoever owns the second should go for a lien rather than foreclose. Does this make sense?It may take longer to get the money, but wouldn’t the first have to pay off the second’s lien in order to take possession in a foreclosure.
-
December 24, 2007 at 6:34 AM #123679
moneymaker
ParticipantIt seems to me that when equity is quickly disappearing whoever owns the second should go for a lien rather than foreclose. Does this make sense?It may take longer to get the money, but wouldn’t the first have to pay off the second’s lien in order to take possession in a foreclosure.
-
December 24, 2007 at 6:34 AM #123703
moneymaker
ParticipantIt seems to me that when equity is quickly disappearing whoever owns the second should go for a lien rather than foreclose. Does this make sense?It may take longer to get the money, but wouldn’t the first have to pay off the second’s lien in order to take possession in a foreclosure.
-
-
December 23, 2007 at 8:41 AM #123288
The OC Scam
ParticipantMarion,
The foreclosure process can take a long time. In my case the first defaults came after 4-5 months no payments by the owner in March 06 and the auction didn’t occur until September 07.
In todays declining market the house will take atleast 6 months to sell even if it is priced low.
Our home had a second and first however the first loan holder paid off the second loan at the auction.
-
December 23, 2007 at 8:41 AM #123310
The OC Scam
ParticipantMarion,
The foreclosure process can take a long time. In my case the first defaults came after 4-5 months no payments by the owner in March 06 and the auction didn’t occur until September 07.
In todays declining market the house will take atleast 6 months to sell even if it is priced low.
Our home had a second and first however the first loan holder paid off the second loan at the auction.
-
December 23, 2007 at 8:41 AM #123367
The OC Scam
ParticipantMarion,
The foreclosure process can take a long time. In my case the first defaults came after 4-5 months no payments by the owner in March 06 and the auction didn’t occur until September 07.
In todays declining market the house will take atleast 6 months to sell even if it is priced low.
Our home had a second and first however the first loan holder paid off the second loan at the auction.
-
December 23, 2007 at 8:41 AM #123387
The OC Scam
ParticipantMarion,
The foreclosure process can take a long time. In my case the first defaults came after 4-5 months no payments by the owner in March 06 and the auction didn’t occur until September 07.
In todays declining market the house will take atleast 6 months to sell even if it is priced low.
Our home had a second and first however the first loan holder paid off the second loan at the auction.
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.