Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Floyd

The Ohio Court of Appeals for the Sixth District reversed another foreclosure summary judgment on evidentiary issues in Aurora Loan Servs., L.L.C. v. Louis:

 

Aurora Loan Servs., L.L.C. v. Louis, L-10-1289, 2012-Ohio-384 (Ohio App. 6th Dist. 2012).

http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/6/2012/2012-ohio-384.pdf

 

This decision will look familiar.  Like so many others, the Court squarely vindicates Mr. Roper's suggested defensive strategies.

 

Once again, we have an example of an appellate court showing that Mr. Roper is correct.  We are still waiting for a single court to bless of on any of swindler Mike H.'s various bizarre wingnut theories.

 

Note that the defendant WINS without reference to any of the forensic loan audit scams, securitization audit scams or other ripoffs that the criminals are peddling to distressed borrowers.  The defendant simply pleads a few valid defenses and holds the plaintiff to basic evidentiary and proof standards!

Quote 0 0
HungarianProse
Floyd wrote:
The Ohio Court of Appeals for the Sixth District reversed another foreclosure summary judgment on evidentiary issues in Aurora Loan Servs., L.L.C. v. Louis:

Aurora Loan Servs., L.L.C. v. Louis, L-10-1289, 2012-Ohio-384 (Ohio App. 6th Dist. 2012).

http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/6/2012/2012-ohio-384.pdf


This decision will look familiar.  Like so many others, the Court squarely vindicates Mr. Roper's suggested defensive strategies.

Once again, we have an example of an appellate court showing that Mr. Roper is correct.  We are still waiting for a single court to bless of on any of swindler Mike H.'s various bizarre wingnut theories.

Note that the defendant WINS without reference to any of the forensic loan audit scams, securitization audit scams or other ripoffs that the criminals are peddling to distressed borrowers.  The defendant simply pleads a few valid defenses and holds the plaintiff to basic evidentiary and proof standards!

I have a very similar case with Aurora, this is a great find and very use full. One question i have, in this case and in any other case where  the home was foreclosed and sold and the homeowner wins on appeal,what happens next? I mean the house is sold...I understand that the case goes back to the circuit court, but what happens to the property?

Quote 0 0
Jim
Quote:
I have a very similar case with Aurora, this is a great find and very use full. One question i have, in this case and in any other case where the home was foreclosed and sold and the homeowner wins on appeal,what happens next? I mean the house is sold...I understand that the case goes back to the circuit court, but what happens to the property? 


That is an excellent question!  The answer varies a bit from state to state.

In most places, the vacation of an order of foreclosure would also tend to result in the vacation of the sale, but this is not universally true.

If, after the order of foreclosure is entered, there is a judicial sale and another judicial order confirming the order of sale, it is probably a good idea to also file a notice of appeal with respect to the order of sale.  The order of sale could then also be appealed in a consolidated action.  Bear in mind that a final order which is not timely appealed becomes a final and unappealable.

Usually, the purchaser at a foreclosure sale is the lender/servicer or some nominee straw buyer for the servicer.  In this instance, it is usually easier to unwind the sale.

Another problem can arise where the sale is to another outside party.  The outside party bidding at a foreclosure sale with a deed confirmed by a separate judicial order may have a fairly strong claim to the property even when the foreclosure judgment is vacated on appeal.

For this reason, in many jurisdictions it would probably be a good idea to record a certified copy of the notice of appeal, thereby putting ALL prospective buyers on notice of the pendency of the appeal.

Whether this is necessary of useful varies depending upon state statutes and case law.  But it could almost never hurt.  Recording the notice of appeal, perhaps along with an affidavit showing some particulars as to the property and the ongoing dispute is going to be very inexpensive compared to most other litigation related expenses and creates a very strong record that a buyer had constructive notice of the appeal.   Any buyer would then be rather clearly purchasing subject to the outcome of the appeal.

Please do NOT accept this as a definitive answer, but rather only a point of departure as to further research as to your jurisdiction.  
Quote 0 0
first post second 4close
aurora foreclosed on me 2 years ago. They were dismissed for lack of standing, and now, 16 months after that verdict, have refiled the case. Has anyone else seen this? First time it was Aurora Loans LLC, now it's Aurora Bank FSB, but the loan was Lehmans. Is there anything to the rumor that Citibank owns some of their assignments? Is any of that valid now? Thanks.
Quote 0 0
HungarianProse

first post second 4close wrote:
aurora foreclosed on me 2 years ago. They were dismissed for lack of standing, and now, 16 months after that verdict, have refiled the case. Has anyone else seen this? First time it was Aurora Loans LLC, now it's Aurora Bank FSB, but the loan was Lehmans. Is there anything to the rumor that Citibank owns some of their assignments? Is any of that valid now? Thanks.

Again, i have very similar case going right now, with the same "players". Not heard of citi's involvement as of yet. Aurora Bank is the servicer now as a successor to aurora loan LLC.

Quote 0 0
Bill
first post second 4close wrote:
aurora foreclosed on me 2 years ago. They were dismissed for lack of standing, and now, 16 months after that verdict, have refiled the case. Has anyone else seen this? First time it was Aurora Loans LLC, now it's Aurora Bank FSB, but the loan was Lehmans. Is there anything to the rumor that Citibank owns some of their assignments? Is any of that valid now? Thanks.

A dismissal for lack of standing is not a "verdict".  It is a dismissal without prejudice which allows the proper party with standing to refile the lawsuit.  The only unusual thing I really see with your situation is that they waited 16 months to refile.  You are now back at square one defending your home from foreclosure.  

Quote:
  Is there anything to the rumor that Citibank owns some of their assignments? Is any of that valid now? Thanks.

You really didn't post a coherent question.  Maybe you should reword the question so it is easier to understand.  In general, I would disregard any "rumors".  You need to find the facts in your case and go from there.  "Rumors and Theories" will tend to really get you side tracked and take away from focusing on more robust defenses.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...