Foreclosure Notes

June 29, 2013 By

In Pennsylvania, a lender is required to send certain notices to the homeowner before it files a foreclosure lawsuit. These notices are often sent by a bank, its servicer or the bank’s law firm. It is wise to open mail regardless of whether you recognize the sender’s name due to the time-sensitive nature of the notices.

Pennsylvania law requires that these notices meet strict legal specifications and our legal team can examine each notice to determine whether the lender is complying with Pennsylvania law. The notices are:

ACT 6 Notice (Intent to Foreclose)

This is the Official Notice of Intent to Foreclose sent to the homeowner from the lender prior to initiation of any foreclosure proceedings. It is not sent until the homeowner is at least 60 days behind on his mortgage payments. The lender must send this notice to the homeowner by first class mail to his last known address and, if different, to the property secured by the mortgage. It officially notifies the homeowner that the mortgage is in default and unless action is taken to cure the default within 30 days, the lender intends to accelerate the mortgage payments (the outstanding balance of the original mortgage becomes due immediately).

ACT 91 Notice (Take Action to Save Your Home from Foreclosure)

This notice, also sent from the lender, informs the homeowner that he/she has 30 days from the date of the ACT 91 Notice to (1) cure the default or (2) contact a HEMAP Consumer Credit Counseling Agency. (3) If the homeowner takes no action within the 30-day period, the lender will instruct her attorney to file a lawsuit and proceed with foreclosure. The ACT 91 Notice provides information about HEMAP (The Housing Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program) and a list of Consumer Credit Counseling Agencies including contact information. The ACT 91 Notice, however, IS NOT sent to homeowners with FHA Title 2 Loans, homeowners more than 24 months delinquent or with past due amounts greater than $60,000.00, or when the home is not owner occupied.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: , , , , ,

Philadelphia Judge Denies Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment

April 1, 2013 By

My clients own a home in the Chestnut Hill neighborhood in Philadelphia. Their lender is Suntrust Mortgage Company, an Atlanta based lender with offices in the Southern and Eastern U.S. and in the Cayman Islands.

Suntrust sued my clients in a foreclosure lawsuit in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. In January, Suntrust filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing to the court that a trial was not necessary because the loan documents themselves prove that the homeowners are in default. The banks frequently file these motions in which they argue that the bank should have the absolute right to foreclose. A closer inspection of the loan documents, however, established that the bank may not have properly applied the mortgage payments to the principal and interest when the payments were made. This created a question of fact because my clients’ mortgage payments conflicted with the bank’s payment ledgers.

The trial court agreed, on February 27, 2013 the judge denied the bank’s motion for summary judgment. The clients continue to reside in the home and I am awaiting notification of a trial date.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Federal Court Foreclosure Practice

March 27, 2013 By

I have a case pending in Federal District Court in Philadelphia against Bank of America (the servicing bank) and HSBC (HSBC controls the trust that holds my client’s mortgage). The basis of the lawsuit is that the banks lied to my client when they told him that he should let his loan go into default if he wanted a loan modification. As crazy as this may sound, this is a technique used by the banks over that last couple of years. Of course, this sets up a homeowner for a foreclosure lawsuit. This all happened before he retained me, and as luck would have it, my client did exactly what the bank told him to do—he went into default and the bank filed a foreclosure action against him in Delaware County, Pennsylvania.

I filed a lawsuit for fraud and promissory estoppel (i.e., my client relied on the bank’s statement that he should go into default). The bank filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit, claiming that it was not reasonable for my client to rely on such a promise.

At oral argument on February 14, 2013, it was clear that this was the first time that the Federal Court judge became aware that the bank engaged in tactics like this. Since most foreclosure-based lawsuits are filed in the state courts, this is not surprising. For a good part of the hearing, which lasted about an hour, I felt as if I was educating the Court about 1) the bank practices which led to the housing crisis and 2) the ridiculousness of the loan modification process. Instead of issuing an opinion, the judge ordered Bank of America to look into settling the entire matter, which would include withdrawing the foreclosure complaint and providing a loan modification.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

US Department of Justice Continues to Pursue Wells Fargo Bank

February 28, 2013 By

Wells Fargo Bank may be the largest mortgage loan originator in the country, but the Department of Justice says that Wells Fargo continues to violate the terms of a settlement reached in July, 2012. On October 9, 2012, prosecutors in New York filed a new mortgage-based civil action against Wells Fargo, seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages for alleged mortgage fraud violations under the False Claims Act. The action asserts that Wells Fargo engaged in a long-standing and reckless trifecta of deficient training, deficient underwriting and deficient disclosure, all while relying on the convenient back stop of government insurance. Essentially, it is claimed that Wells Fargo originated bad loans, and then relied on government insurance through the Federal Housing Administration to pay the claims when those mortgages fell into default.

Wells Fargo, however, claims that the recent action is barred because the alleged conduct was already part of the July, 2012, settlement, and Wells Fargo claims that the slate was wiped clean. In court filings on November 1, Wells Fargo asked a trial judge to declare that the government’s second lawsuit is a breach of the July, 2012, settlement terms.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense, Mortgage Modification Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,
«Previous Page

Our Services

img

Our Latest News Posts

Firm Newsletter: April 2019

April 3, 2019 By

Click here to download a printable pdf of this newsletter. Supreme Court Victory Leads to Arbitration Award It certainly seemed like a long-time coming, but our firm was successful in taking our client’s case all the way to the Pennsylvania … [Read More...]

Diagnosing Traumatic Brain Injuries

June 1, 2018 By

Nearly 50,000 patients die annually from traumatic brain injuries. Now a new study led by the University of Pennsylvania reveals that tiny blood vessels in the brain can offer clues to better treatment, according to an article from UPI’s Health … [Read More...]