Is it save to assume that if a deed of trust does not have a prepayment rider that there is in fact no prepayment penality?
I’m in CA it that makes a difference.
Thanks,
Dave
PS. Your censor found the domain name part of my true email address ‘offensive’, so I am using a fake email address. Does this site have something against Time Warner? It’s a big main stream service provider in my area.
Dave:
Typically a prepayment penalty (or rider) involved in paying off a Note (Mortgage, Trust Deed or otherwise) would be language that would have to be stated within the Note and /or Mortgage (or Trust Deed, contract, etc.)
If no such language exists - it would be very difficult for a lender to claim that such a prepayment penalty is due upon paying a Note off early.
Is it possible (legally) for the prepayment writing to be in the note and not the deed of trust, and still be valid?
This is probably an issue more when buying a house subject-to existing liens. Specifically, buyer gets a reinstatement quote for the foreclosing loan without looking at the note (bad idea I know, but it happens), reinstates, takes title, fixes and flips. Then, when reselling to a homebuyer paying off existing lien(s) finds on the payoff demand a whopping prepayment penalty?oops.
Ideally, investor would get the note AND deed of trust, look very closely at what she is getting into THEN buy subject-to IF it makes sense. But, since some lenders are a pain in the kester wrt providing a copy of the note (borrower never seems to have a copy) it would be nice to only rely on the recorded (read easy to get hold of) deed of trust as the exclusive document in determining the existence of a prepayment penalty.
But, obviously, it isn?t wise to rely on the deed of trust exclusively if there isn?t some law requiring the prepayment penalty be there to be valid.