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
Paul

As evidence in a NEW foreclosure case, a lender has listed a copy of the Mortgage, a cpy of the Note, and a copy of the notice (Letter of Acceleration and Default) of a PRIOR case, since dismissed for lack of prosecution.

 

Is this acceptable in Court?  Doesn't the lender have to send you a NEW notice of default in the new case?  Or once you are in default, can the bank somehow demonstrate that the default was never fully cured, so they didn't need to send you a new one?

 

thanks for any help.

Quote 0 0
Moose
This is not legal advice, but dismissing a case for wont of prosecution does not reflect a ruling on the merits of the facts presented.

It's a useful tactic if the plaintiff finds they have jumped too soon and the evidence they have at that time is flimsy. Rather than go to court and possibly face a dismissal on the facts, there is nothing lost but time in letting it DWOP.

It's also possible counsel for the servicer got fired and they didn't get a replacement until now.

Moose

Quote 0 0
Paul
Not a new attorney (at least not when 2nd action was filed), as they both were Stern.  Plaintiff NOW has new counsel, but I suspect it's the "they realized they didn't have the proper paperwork" thing you mention.

I guess I'm trying to specifically determine if they can use, as evidence, a Letter of Default from a prior, dismissed case, or if they have to have sent me a new one, in THIS case.  I'm guessing they will try to say that although my loan was modified (and I again fell behind), that I never "cured the default," and so the original notice stands?

Quote 0 0
Bill

It really depends on the jurisdiction.  It is important to read the cases.  In my jurisdiction a dismissal for lack of prosecution (no action for 60 days) is a dismissal WITH prejudice.

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...