Posted by BossLadyMD on 2/1/11 1:34pm
Msg #370864

Owner lost home despite never missing a payment

This article from Baltimore, MD gives new meaning to the phrase 'dropping the ball'. It took the new lien holder THREE long years to realize that the first mortgage was never paid off......sad

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/howard/bs-md-ho-atta-poku-20110201,0,530081.story

Reply by LindaP/OH on 2/1/11 2:55pm
Msg #370876

I certainly agree this is a sad situation, it sounds like he needed better counsel earlier on. My question would be: what happened to the money that should have been sent BY TITLE

Reply by LindaP/OH on 2/1/11 3:08pm
Msg #370881

Sorry, BAD FINGER!! Where did the money that was to pay off that original mortgage go?? At the time on finalization, the title company's responsibility is to make sure all debts against the property are paid off, they then provide a title insurance policy that SHOULD protect should anything like this happen. Sounds to me like the title company failed and should be held responsible (where's the money, do they have it??? Someone does!!) They have insurance to rely on if errors are made. It just goes to show that there are times when we should bite the bullet and hire GOOD legal counsel before things get out of hand. How sad for this man's family, he was evidently too trusting.

Reply by Ilene C. Seidel on 2/1/11 3:15pm
Msg #370883

I tell all my borrowers to expect a release from the old mtg company in 60-90 days and if they don't get it to follow up. And when they receive it put it in a safe place, it's gold.

Reply by BossLadyMD on 2/3/11 9:09am
Msg #371328

Great advice, Ilene! I do the exact same :) n/m

Reply by Doris_CO on 2/1/11 3:51pm
Msg #370889

The title company probably does not have insurance to cover this type of thing. I posted an article that was in our local paper a week or so ago. Someone within the title company took off with the proceeds and the old loan wasn't paid off. That title company didn't have any insurance or bond to cover the loss. See 370045

Reply by Doris_CO on 2/1/11 3:53pm
Msg #370890

Here's the link. Msg #370045

Reply by rolomia on 2/1/11 8:54pm
Msg #370957

Just my rant: Owner lost home despite never missing payment

The problem lies in the failure of consumers and banks alike to hold the government accountable for not being more proactive. Our elected officials should have already passed legislation to protect said consumers and financial institutions from such fraud. I'm smart enough to realize that neither banks nor consumers will ever join together (though they should) in a nationwide, class-action lawsuit against the government for not doing the job we elected them to do. The main goal here would have been to generate sufficient, negative media exposure to motivate our elected officials into passing laws to protect consumers from such scams and to put more teeth into enforcement measures. And, no deals for the criminals. If you're guilty, you don't get to bargain. If you don't tell prosecutors what they want to know, you should receive an automatic life sentence. But, if you cooperate, then, a lighter sentence. But, forget parole. That *itch Anderson got off with a light sentence. The reason our country is weak is because our justice system is weak. This crap would never have happened in certain other countries. They exercise the death penalty for lesser crimes than this.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 2/2/11 7:50am
Msg #370973

I just don't get this

The recorded mtg/dot would go to the title agent first (usually), and it wouldn't have 1st lien position. It would go to the lender next (where apparently nobody reads anything, either?)

This would be a claim on the Lender's policy (lack of 1st lien position), a violation of the Closing Instructions (i.e. contract) AND what about the CPL??? I seriously doubt these big lenders are closing w/out CPLs, but what do I know.

I just don't understand the hows & whys of these stories, the media keeps saying there's no recourse for the borrower or buyer. That wouldn't or shouldn't matter - it's the 2nd or new lender that has the necessary recourse, but it's never mentioned.

Baffles me.

Reply by James Powell on 2/2/11 10:29am
Msg #370997

Re: I just don't get this

It takes some reading between the lines (or searching further) to see what happened.

This was an internal payoff for WAMU. They held the original mortgage as well as the new mortgage. They were going to get their money no matter what the outcome.

A claim under the lender's policy would have protected the new lender in recovering their money. However, it still would not stop the foreclosure under the original mortgage and would not provide any protection to the homeowner.

There is some speculation the payoff could have been embezzled as well.

I find it disheartening that the FDIC is trying to get out this case by splitting legal hairs. It is obvious that this person was ignored when that had a valid complaint and the wrong should be redressed.

Here is a copy of the latest opinion, which also gives a more detailed background of the case.

http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Opinions/Poku%20v.%20FDIC,%2008-1198,%20Mem.%20Op%20AND%20Order.pdf

Reply by BossLadyMD on 2/3/11 9:15am
Msg #371329

Thanks James :) n/m