WHAT A MESS! - Posted by ACCENT

import · November 16, 2006, 9:09pm

Posted by ACCENT on November 17, 2006 at 23:27:08:

Max-Va,
ABC bank did have title insurance, however they had no claim since they were paid off by the third-party bidder.

import · November 16, 2006, 9:09pm

Posted by ACCENT on November 16, 2006 at 22:09:43:

Below is a record of events that transpired on a foreclosure that I was following. My question to all takers is, what exactly did the third party bidder buy?

RECORD OF EVENTS

On January 15, 1999 a grant deed was recorded and John became owner of real property located in Los Angeles.
On May 1, 2005 John irrevocably granted 95% legal and equitable title to his property, to Ted as trustee of his (John?s) trust. Even though notarized, the grant deed conveying said property wasn?t recorded.
On October 5, 2005 after entering a normal real estate transaction and for valuable consideration, John grant deeded his property to Bill.
On the same day, as security for the performance of obligations created in a promissory note that he had signed, Bill subsequently executed a deed of trust in favor of ABC Bank.
On October 31, 2005 both the grant deed from John to Bill and the deed of trust from Bill to ABC bank were recorded.
On July 18, 2006 Ted as trustee of John?s trust recorded the grant deed he received from John back on May 1, 2005.
On August 11, 2006 Bill recorded a quitclaim deed, conveying all right, title, interest and claim to the real property to Ted as trustee of John?s trust, making sure to attach a copy of John?s earlier recorded grant deed to Ted as trustee of his trust as an exhibit.
On November 1, 2006 which was several months after Bill had defaulted on his obligations and after ABC Bank complied with all statutory laws regarding California?s non-judicial foreclosure process, the property was sold to a successful third party bidder at the auction.
On November 10, 2006 the trustee?s deed upon sale was recorded and title was perfected.

My question again, what exactly did the third party bidder buy?

import · November 21, 2006, 3:55pm

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by Rick, the Probate Guy

Posted by Rick, the Probate Guy on November 21, 2006 at 16:55:34:

Did you ever receive a better explanation than what you got on Ward’s site? It doesn’t look like anyone here has a clue about chain of title.

import · November 20, 2006, 9:53pm

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by Jack

Posted by Jack on November 20, 2006 at 22:53:26:

excepting a few special circumstances which I am sure do not apply here, Line items #3, #6, and #7 are irrelavent. The third party bought the entire property subject to all encumbrances of record prior to the recording of the 10/31/2005 DOT and Deed.

import · November 18, 2006, 6:47pm

I’ll Play - Posted by Natalie-VA

Posted by Natalie-VA on November 18, 2006 at 19:47:32:

I’m no lawyer, but I say he bought the entire property subject to any prior liens. I don’t think it matters who owned it. The bank doesn’t get paid, they foreclose.

–Natalie

import · November 17, 2006, 9:18pm

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by Max-Va

Posted by Max-Va on November 17, 2006 at 22:18:56:

I am no lawyer or expert.
After reading this three times.
I believe he owns 5% interest in the property. However the ABC bank should have required title insurance and a claim would be filed.
Your right this is a mess.

import · November 21, 2006, 4:51pm

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by ACCENT

Posted by ACCENT on November 21, 2006 at 17:51:32:

IMHO, Jim V. gave the best explanation.

import · November 21, 2006, 4:49pm

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by ACCENT

Posted by ACCENT on November 21, 2006 at 17:49:31:

IMHO,Jim V. gave the best explantion.

import · November 21, 2006, 10:10am

Re: WHAT A MESS! - Posted by ACCENT

Posted by ACCENT on November 21, 2006 at 11:10:07:

Jack,
Can you please explain your thinking.