[ucodegen]

If that document appears Kosher (i.e. the property owners signed away their right to collect rents, in case of default AND default has taken place i.e. you have a copy of NOD), I think you are on good legal ground to send your rent to the Assignee (the one who sent that letter).

Only if both signatures are on the paper.

[ucodegen]

Until foreclosure goes through, the person you are currently renting from owns the property. Your rental contract is with this person, not the holder of the second paper.

The owner of the second paper has to go through the process and become the owner before the rent can be legally demanded by them. The holder of the second paper as a contract with the purchaser, but not you. The two of them have to work it out, and you should presently be paying the ‘owner’ not the second.

You may want to warn the second that demanding payment direct from you as well as taking any action against you before their foreclosure completes.. is illegal(They have a lien against the property, but don’t own it). Taking action against you for not paying the second before the forclosure is also illegal. Any attempt for the second to collect directly against you under threat of eviction is considered extortion.

You may also want to mention to the holder of the second, that they should work it out with the owner and not involve you. The second should mention to the owner that the second is a recourse loan, meaning that the holder of the second can go after other assets of the owner after foreclosure for the balance or deficit. The holder of the second may want to work out a signed agreement with the owner (signed by both) that the second gives up the right to pursue for any deficit in return for having the rent assigned and payed directly to the holder of the second while the property is going through the foreclosure process.

NOTE: I am assuming that the ‘assignment of rent’ was only signed by the second

Once foreclosure completes, the second can not go after you for any payments made to the owner prior to foreclosure.

I think the holder of the second paper was trying to ‘shortcut’ the process.

And don’t short the rent like you did.. not a good idea. The owner can evict you for this, but not the holder of the second paper.

[ucodegen]

Until foreclosure goes through, the person you are currently renting from owns the property. Your rental contract is with this person, not the holder of the second paper.

The owner of the second paper has to go through the process and become the owner before the rent can be legally demanded by them. The holder of the second paper as a contract with the purchaser, but not you. The two of them have to work it out, and you should presently be paying the ‘owner’ not the second.

You may want to warn the second that demanding payment direct from you as well as taking any action against you before their foreclosure completes.. is illegal(They have a lien against the property, but don’t own it). Taking action against you for not paying the second before the forclosure is also illegal. Any attempt for the second to collect directly against you under threat of eviction is considered extortion.

You may also want to mention to the holder of the second, that they should work it out with the owner and not involve you. The second should mention to the owner that the second is a recourse loan, meaning that the holder of the second can go after other assets of the owner after foreclosure for the balance or deficit. The holder of the second may want to work out a signed agreement with the owner (signed by both) that the second gives up the right to pursue for any deficit in return for having the rent assigned and payed directly to the holder of the second while the property is going through the foreclosure process.

NOTE: I am assuming that the ‘assignment of rent’ was only signed by the second

Once foreclosure completes, the second can not go after you for any payments made to the owner prior to foreclosure.

I think the holder of the second paper was trying to ‘shortcut’ the process.

And don’t short the rent like you did.. not a good idea. The owner can evict you for this, but not the holder of the second paper.

[ucodegen]

Until foreclosure goes through, the person you are currently renting from owns the property. Your rental contract is with this person, not the holder of the second paper.

The owner of the second paper has to go through the process and become the owner before the rent can be legally demanded by them. The holder of the second paper as a contract with the purchaser, but not you. The two of them have to work it out, and you should presently be paying the ‘owner’ not the second.

You may want to warn the second that demanding payment direct from you as well as taking any action against you before their foreclosure completes.. is illegal(They have a lien against the property, but don’t own it). Taking action against you for not paying the second before the forclosure is also illegal. Any attempt for the second to collect directly against you under threat of eviction is considered extortion.

You may also want to mention to the holder of the second, that they should work it out with the owner and not involve you. The second should mention to the owner that the second is a recourse loan, meaning that the holder of the second can go after other assets of the owner after foreclosure for the balance or deficit. The holder of the second may want to work out a signed agreement with the owner (signed by both) that the second gives up the right to pursue for any deficit in return for having the rent assigned and payed directly to the holder of the second while the property is going through the foreclosure process.

NOTE: I am assuming that the ‘assignment of rent’ was only signed by the second

Once foreclosure completes, the second can not go after you for any payments made to the owner prior to foreclosure.

I think the holder of the second paper was trying to ‘shortcut’ the process.

And don’t short the rent like you did.. not a good idea. The owner can evict you for this, but not the holder of the second paper.

[ucodegen]

Link on the suspected arsonist being killed..

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arson25oct25,1,6061487.story?coll=la-headlines-california

[ucodegen]

Link on the suspected arsonist being killed..

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arson25oct25,1,6061487.story?coll=la-headlines-california

[ucodegen]

Link on the suspected arsonist being killed..

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arson25oct25,1,6061487.story?coll=la-headlines-california

[ucodegen]

I would go with:

c) If it is the latter, her rental agreement is now (m-to-m) given her 2 years of residency, Will she only have a month to get out? Can she talk with the bankruptcy trustee and try and stay.

Because the primary lender on the property is in first order of succession for recovery of funds. She is down on the bottom. She should take the approach with the lender that having her as a tenant means that the property would be taken care of and there is significant less chance of vandalism while the bank goes through the foreclosure process. She should also bring up that this now puts her in a position where she may need to look for a new place on short order, so a rent reduction may be in order.

You may want to get both lenders and owner in the same room and determine who the rent payments go to. With the landlord in default, I don’t think the banks would like continuing funds to be directed to the landlord.

[ucodegen]

I would go with:

c) If it is the latter, her rental agreement is now (m-to-m) given her 2 years of residency, Will she only have a month to get out? Can she talk with the bankruptcy trustee and try and stay.

Because the primary lender on the property is in first order of succession for recovery of funds. She is down on the bottom. She should take the approach with the lender that having her as a tenant means that the property would be taken care of and there is significant less chance of vandalism while the bank goes through the foreclosure process. She should also bring up that this now puts her in a position where she may need to look for a new place on short order, so a rent reduction may be in order.

You may want to get both lenders and owner in the same room and determine who the rent payments go to. With the landlord in default, I don’t think the banks would like continuing funds to be directed to the landlord.

[ucodegen]

I would go with:

c) If it is the latter, her rental agreement is now (m-to-m) given her 2 years of residency, Will she only have a month to get out? Can she talk with the bankruptcy trustee and try and stay.

Because the primary lender on the property is in first order of succession for recovery of funds. She is down on the bottom. She should take the approach with the lender that having her as a tenant means that the property would be taken care of and there is significant less chance of vandalism while the bank goes through the foreclosure process. She should also bring up that this now puts her in a position where she may need to look for a new place on short order, so a rent reduction may be in order.

You may want to get both lenders and owner in the same room and determine who the rent payments go to. With the landlord in default, I don’t think the banks would like continuing funds to be directed to the landlord.

[ucodegen]

Concentrate on a short sale for home #1. You could knock off close to 40K on the HELOC. As for Home #2, looks like short sale would not help.. you’ll have to take the full 25K in 1099s. The bank holding the HELOC may drag its feet on house #1.

Make sure you don’t sign any further loan documents as a condition of short sale on #1. This could trap you. Take the approach that immediate short sale will limit losses. This is also where a good loss mitigation person might help. Sorry, I’m not one..

PS: You may want to talk to both a tax attorney and a loss mitigation person. The former for specifics on the neg-am loan and recourse. The loss-mit for negotiating the short sale. Time is critical.

[ucodegen]

Concentrate on a short sale for home #1. You could knock off close to 40K on the HELOC. As for Home #2, looks like short sale would not help.. you’ll have to take the full 25K in 1099s. The bank holding the HELOC may drag its feet on house #1.

Make sure you don’t sign any further loan documents as a condition of short sale on #1. This could trap you. Take the approach that immediate short sale will limit losses. This is also where a good loss mitigation person might help. Sorry, I’m not one..

PS: You may want to talk to both a tax attorney and a loss mitigation person. The former for specifics on the neg-am loan and recourse. The loss-mit for negotiating the short sale. Time is critical.

[ucodegen]

Concentrate on a short sale for home #1. You could knock off close to 40K on the HELOC. As for Home #2, looks like short sale would not help.. you’ll have to take the full 25K in 1099s. The bank holding the HELOC may drag its feet on house #1.

Make sure you don’t sign any further loan documents as a condition of short sale on #1. This could trap you. Take the approach that immediate short sale will limit losses. This is also where a good loss mitigation person might help. Sorry, I’m not one..

PS: You may want to talk to both a tax attorney and a loss mitigation person. The former for specifics on the neg-am loan and recourse. The loss-mit for negotiating the short sale. Time is critical.

[ucodegen]

A little more info here:
http://www.ocregister.com/money/loan-lender-says-1628627-mortgage-sale

[ucodegen]

A little more info here:
http://www.ocregister.com/money/loan-lender-says-1628627-mortgage-sale

[Author]

Posts