This “service” outfit is no doubt trying to capitalize on the Ohio ruling made (last year; can’t recall the citation) that held that a judicial foreclosure on a mortgage was invalid due to the “defective” chain of title as to missing assignment(s) of a the mortgage from originating lender.
I see that you’re in San Diego. CA mortgages are actually deeds of trusts and it’s a rare lender that does not foreclose non-judicially (simpler, faster, cheaper, etc.).
I suspect that such companies (which was probably dreamed up within the last 12 months or less) got a copy of somebody’s pleading, is trying to replicate it and apply it to other semi-quasi-related cases, and using a starving, cheesy attorney who’s never owned a proper business suit.
OK, so I don’t sound too impressed with the concept.
I could take a lot of space here but I’ll keep it simple: if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
challenging foreclosure proceedings - Posted by Cork Horner
Posted by Cork Horner on August 22, 2008 at 21:05:48:
I have come across foreclosure services who enter into a jv with the homeowner and then engage a lawyer to file an injunction against the foreclosure. At the same time, a lawyer for the service initiates a lawsuit against the mortgage note holder to prove in court they have a legal claim authorizing them to foreclose on the property. According to these services, most lenders can’t find the documents they need so end up releasing any lien on the house rendering it free and clear.
Any comments either from the lawyer moderators here or others?
Injunction action=BIG expense - Posted by John Merchant
Posted by John Merchant on August 23, 2008 at 17:49:01:
In order to file an injunction action, the petitioner has to pay not only upfront court costs and attorney fees but also has to post a costs bond, all together an expensive proposition.
Therefore very few foreclosure injunction actions are ever filed.
Sounds to me like you’re hearing a fairy tale and this one would not have a happy ending.