New York foreclosure attorney

No Right to A Mortgage Modification

March 24, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

foreclosure defense attorney A foreclosure proceeding was brought in Suffolk County before Supreme Court Justice Jerry Garguilo. Rivera had executed the mortgage and the personal obligation and he had failed to make his mortgage payments in a timely manner. Rivera had applied to Aurora Loan Services for a mortgage modification. They had taken the position he did not qualify for a mortgage modification.

It Is Alleged The Mortgage Company Acted in Bad Faith

Rivera brought a proceeding before Judge Garguilo claiming that Aurora Loan Services had acted in bad faith because they failed to offer him a mortgage modification or any other agreement to allow him to keep his house from being foreclosed on. It was presented to the court that Rivera was in bad health and could not appear in court. Rivera had a son-in-law by the name of Saburro. He was a loan officer. He came to court and testified Rivera was in bad health and that is why he did not appear in court. Saburro also testified Aurora Loan Services had repeatedly offered Rivera trial mortgage modifications. And at the end of each mortgage modification they would pull the rug out from under Rivera and advise him the mortgage modification was not going to be made permanent.

Judge Holds No Bad Faith

Justice Garguilo found that there were no trial mortgage modifications made. Judge Garguilo took the position the foreclosing bank has no obligation to modify a mortgage. Aurora’s failure to offer Rivera a mortgage modification was not unconscionable and it did not amount to bad faith. Aurora simply had no legal obligation to give Rivera a mortgage modification. It was a totally discretionary decision on their part. Judge Garguilo went on to state in his decision “it was clear the case was not one where a lender wrongfully accepted large sums of money and then refused home retention relief.” The court therefore ruled Aurora Loan Services did not act in bad faith because they did not provide Rivera with a mortgage modification.

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense lawyer representing homeowners throughout the Metropolitan New York area whose homes have been foreclosed on by financial institutions.

Filed Under: Foreclosure Defense, Mortgage Modification Tagged With: defective foreclosure lawsuits, foreclosure attorney, mortgage modification attorneys, New York foreclosure attorney

Foreclosure Case Dismissed: Bank Does Not Obtain Personal Jurisdiction Over The Defendant

March 20, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

foreclosure defense attorney Justice Frances Francois Rivera sitting in a Supreme Court Part in Kings County recently had a case involving JP Morgan Chase Bank and a Mr. Birica. JP Morgan Chase Bank had started a foreclosure lawsuit in Kings County. The lawsuit claimed that Mr. Birica was the owner of the property involved in the foreclosure. It further stated in the Summons and Complaint he was also the individual who executed the personal loan documents and mortgage documents with regard to the property. The attorneys for JP Morgan Chase took the position Mr. Birica had defaulted on his payments with regard to the mortgage.

Vacating the Default Judgment

Mr. Birica brought an application to vacate the default and he submitted a Notice of Appearance and Verified Answer to the Complaint in the foreclosure lawsuit brought by JP Morgan Chase. In addition, he brought an application to dismiss JP Morgan Chase’s Complaint based on the theory that Chase lacked legal standing to bring the lawsuit and they had failed to properly serve the Summons and Complaint in the foreclosure proceeding on her.

The attorneys for Birica submitted a motion to the court which claimed she did not receive a copy of the Summons and Complaint in a timely manner. She therefore was unable to answer it. She claimed she resided in Rye, New York and the Summons and Complaint was served to an address in Queens, New York. The attorneys for Chase presented documentation that their process server had served Birica at an address in Rego Park by delivering a copy of the Summons and Complaint to her daughter and by thereafter mailing a copy to the address in Rego Park.

Judge Francois Rivera in ruling on the applications made by the attorneys for Birica found JP Morgan Chase did not meet its burden of proof establishing the Summons and Complaint in the foreclosure proceeding were properly delivered or mailed to Ms. Birica’s dwelling. He therefore dismissed the foreclosure lawsuit.

Conclusion

Financial institutions are held to a very high standard with regard to obtaining personal jurisdiction of individuals in foreclosure lawsuits.

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense attorney with more than 45 years of legal experience. His office has helped scores of families in the Metropolitan New York area stay in their homes. Elliot has previously been the President of the Commercial Lawyers Conference of New York, a creditors Bar Association, and he has extensive experience in litigating foreclosure defense cases and helping his clients obtain mortgage modifications.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: defective foreclosure lawsuits, foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, New York foreclosure attorney, New York foreclosure defense lawyers

Foreclosure Fraud – Part II

March 18, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

Rent to Buy Scams

A common foreclosure scam involves individuals approaching a homeowner whose home is in foreclosure and offering to have them refinance the home at a much lower interest rate. Unfortunately, the way this scam works is the homeowner is presented with documents that involve the transfer of the deed from the homeowner to the alleged foreclosure counseling company. The homeowner eventually finds out that he or she does not own their home and is now renting their home from the alleged foreclosure counseling company. Eventually the counseling company brings an eviction proceeding to evict the homeowner from their home and they thereafter try to sell the property or bring another rent paying tenant into the property.

The rent to buy scams also sometimes involve the tricking of the homeowner into signing documents that are presented to be applications for a home loan. However these applications actually are documents utilized to transfer the title of the property. Homeowners should be especially wary of signing any type of blank forms. In this type of scam the scammer presents a blank form to the homeowner and says “don’t worry we will fill it out and work with the bank to obtain a lower interest loan.” When the form is eventually filled out it turns out to be a document transferring title to the house.

Hire Attorneys Experienced in Defending
Homeowners In Foreclosure Lawsuits

The best way to ensure you are not being scammed and that your rights are being protected is to hire an attorney with a significant background in real estate and foreclosure defense matters to represent you with regard to foreclosure related issues concerning your home. When you hire a qualified attorney, you should request that you receive copies of all documents and paperwork in your file to make sure that the attorney is doing all that is necessary to protect your rights and interests.

Elliot Schlissel is an attorney with more than 45 years of experience representing clients in real estate related legal matters. Elliot and his team of attorneys have one of the busiest foreclosure defense law firms in the Metropolitan New York area. Elliot helps his clients stay in their homes, obtain mortgage modifications and take all other necessary actions to avoid losing their homes in foreclosure.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: defective foreclosure lawsuits, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure defense, foreclosure fraud, foreclosure proceedings, New York foreclosure attorney

Beware of Mortgage/Foreclosure Fraud – Part I

March 11, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

foreclosure defense attorneys The number of homes going into foreclosure on a national basis has been decreasing. However, the number of homes in the Metropolitan New York area that have been placed into foreclosure by financial institutions has not been going down during the past few months.

Homeowners who find themselves with financial difficulties can be vulnerable to fraudulent mortgage and foreclosure schemes. In California, a woman by the name of Jewel Hinkles swindled approximately 1300 homeowners out of $5,000,000 through a group of companies which she claimed were in the business of buying distressed properties from the homeowners. This is one of many examples of fraudulent foreclosure/mortgage schemes that have been perpetrated on individuals finding themselves in financial difficulty and unable to make mortgage payments on their home.

Avoiding Foreclosure Scams

The most important thing to take into consideration in avoiding being defrauded is if a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is fraudulent! Foreclosure proceedings are subject to public disclosure in the courts. It is therefore easy for criminals who seek to scam homeowners by obtaining information about their foreclosure and making false representations to the beleaguered homeowner.

Another type of foreclosure scam which is common involves alleged foreclosure counseling companies. Sometimes these companies solicit business with flyers dropped off in homeowners’ mailboxes or they actually come knocking on the door of homeowners whose homes have been placed into foreclosure by financial institutions.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: defective foreclosure lawsuits, defective mortgages, foreclosure defense, foreclosure defense attorneys, New York foreclosure attorney, predatory lending

Foreclosures Hit Long Island Hard

February 18, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

foreclosure defense attorney The foreclosure crisis on Long Island is much more serious than in the rest of the country. On a national basis, approximately 2% of all homes were in foreclosure during the month of January 2014. However, on Long Island, 6.3% of all homes were in foreclosure. That is three times the national average.

Long Island real estate has not recovered as fast as the rest of the nation for a variety of reasons. The court rules concerning foreclosures are designed to protect homeowners. However, the legal protection afforded homeowners impacts on the length of a foreclosure process through the courts in New York. During the 2013 calendar year, 663 homes were sold at auction in foreclosure on Long Island.

Rising Home Prices

Home prices have been rising on Long Island. The rising home prices allows more homes to be sold quickly and should have an impact on reducing the number of homes in foreclosure. The average home price, excluding homes on the east end of Long Island, during the last quarter of 2013 were sold for approximately $360,000. This is up approximately 3% from 2012.

Superstorm Sandy Impacts Homes on Long Island

The large number of homes on Long Island damaged by Superstorm Sandy has had a significant impact on the number of homes going into foreclosures. Many homeowners spent all of their savings bringing their homes back to liveable condition after Superstorm Sandy. However some of those homeowners overspent and fell behind on their mortgages while trying to rectify the problems caused by Superstorm Sandy to their homes.

Delinquency Rates on Long Island Are High

It is estimated approximately 10% of all mortgage loans on Long Island are more than 90 days past due. This is double the national average of 5% of mortgage loans which are 90 days past due.

Elliot Schlissel and his associates maintain one of the busiest foreclosure defense law firms in the Metropolitan New York area. Elliot has been interviewed on radio and in newspapers concerning foreclosure defense issues and is widely considered to be one of the best and well known foreclosure defense lawyers in the Metropolitan New York area.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: financial crisis, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure defense, foreclosure proceedings, New York foreclosure attorney, New York Foreclosure Defense Attorney

Hidden Expenses When Buying A Home – Part II

February 13, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

foreclosure defense attorney Renovations to the Home

It is usually necessary for new homeowners to do small to moderate renovations to their new home. Things such as painting, changing fixtures, modifying kitchens and bathrooms, can amount to tens of thousands of dollars very quickly. It usually costs homeowners anywhere from 1 to 2% of the purchase price of a home to do minor modifications or renovations to the home to make it more livable and/or suitable for their life.

New Appliances

So you have just bought your new home. When you look at your kitchen, do you really want all of the old appliances? If you are going to buy new appliances, this is the right time. However, appliances are not inexpensive. Purchasing new appliances or upgrading old appliances can run into thousands of dollars.

Termite Inspections

If your home is made of wood, you need to have a termite inspection. Termites have been around since the beginning of time. In many areas of the country, forests were originally cut down to make room for the development of communities. When they cut the forests down, the termites didn’t leave. They went into the ground and they feasted on the new homes that were built.

A large portion of the homes in the northeast of the United States during the course of their lifetime will be subject to termite infestation. Before purchasing a new home it is important you have a termite inspection to make sure your home is termite free. If termite damage exists, the termite damage should be repaired before you close on the purchase of your home. In addition to termites, there are other wood destroying insects that you need to be concerned with. Carpenter ants also can cause significant damage to homes. The cost of termite inspections and/or repairing the damage done by termites can be an unforeseen expense when purchasing a new home.

Escrow for Taxes and Insurance

When you close on a home, the bank will usually require you deposit a certain amount of money in escrow related to your annual tax and insurance payments. Banks require 1/12 payments each month to be made by the homeowner related to the hazard insurance costs on their property and the real estate and school taxes that are due on their property. At the time of closing, banks normally pick up at least one month’s taxes in advance and the balance of the month from the date of closing until the first date of the next month.

Elliot Schlissel and his associates are foreclosure defense lawyers. They litigate foreclosure lawsuits on behalf of homeowners and help them obtain mortgage modifications. Elliot and his associates have been helping homeowners keep their homes for more than 45 years.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense, Mortgage Modification Tagged With: costs of purchasing a home, foreclosure, mortgage modification, New York foreclosure attorney, real estate

Deficiency Judgments After Foreclosure

February 7, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

Deficiency Judgments

A deficiency judgment can be taken against you when your property is sold at a foreclosure sale for less money than you owe on the mortgage. By example, if you owe on your mortgage $500,000 and your property sells in foreclosure for $300,000, the financial institution can take a deficiency judgment against you for the balance of the $200,000 that you owe. Lenders will go after deficiency judgments, generally speaking, if they feel you have an ability to pay the balance of the judgment off.

Deficiency judgments are not automatic. The attorneys for the foreclosing bank must engage in further legal action to obtain a deficiency judgment against you. In cases where the financial institution does not believe that you have the capability of paying a deficiency judgment, they generally won’t go after a deficiency judgment.

How To Avoid Deficiency Judgments?

There are a variety of ways of avoiding a deficiency judgment. One of these involves selling your home at a short sale and having the bank agree they will not go after you for any deficiency between the amount the property is sold for and how much you owe. The second route to avoiding a deficiency judgment is filing a bankruptcy.

Deficiency judgments are taken against you in New York State Courts. If you file a bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court, under federalism, the federal court that you file the bankruptcy in is a higher court than the New York State court. You can discharge any deficiency owed by you with regard to your mortgage by filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in a Federal Court. In addition to avoiding a deficiency judgment, you can also avoid credit card debts, personal loans and other financial obligations by filing a bankruptcy.

Foreclosure Lawyer

There are a specific set of laws dealing with deficiency judgments in foreclosure lawsuits. These statutes are complicated. Each and every foreclosure situation is a separate individual case with different facts and different circumstances. The purpose of this article is to educate you that deficiency judgments can occur. Should you have concerns about a deficiency judgment or other issues in foreclosure legal action, it is important you contact an experienced, knowledgeable foreclosure defense lawyer to represent you.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: deficiency judgments, foreclosure defense, foreclosure defense attorneys, foreclosure defense lawyers, foreclosure proceedings, New York foreclosure attorney

Can’t Read or Write English? Not An Excuse in a Foreclosure Proceeding

February 3, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

Justice Thomas Whelan, sitting in the Supreme Court of Suffolk County, was recently presented with a case involving a litigant who could not read or write in the English language, and also did not understand what was involved in the service of process in starting a foreclosure lawsuit against him. One West Bank brought a foreclosure proceeding against Navaro. They took this action because Navaro did not pay her mortgage obligations. Navaro brought an application to the court seeking to dismiss One West’s lawsuit against her. One West had moved for a default judgment within a year of the case being removed from the foreclosure conference mediation part. One West was able to establish even though they had delayed for approximately a year, they had a reasonable excuse for the delay and their claim in foreclosure was valid.

Ignorance of the Law – No Excuse

Navaro brought a cross motion. She sought to remove the default. She claimed a reason for failing to submit a written answer to the summons and complaint after being served was because she could not read and write in the English language. In addition, she claimed she did not understand her responsibility to submit a written answer to the summons and complaint served upon her in the foreclosure proceeding. The court denied Navaro’s cross motion. Justice Whelan held confusion or ignorance of the law and/or the legal process did not in and of itself constitute a reasonable excuse for failure to answer the summons and complaint or appear in court regarding the case. The court granted One West’s motion to obtain a default judgment and to appoint a receiver to compute the amount owed and subsequently thereafter sell the house.

Conclusion

If you get served with a summons and complaint and you are not sure what you need to do, hire a foreclosure defense lawyer. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse in a foreclosure proceeding.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense Tagged With: foreclosure, foreclosure defense attorneys, foreclosure defense lawyers, New York foreclosure attorney, New York foreclosure defense lawyers

Under Water Homes on Long Island Rising!

January 24, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

The number of homes that are under water on Long Island (where the owners owe more than the home’s value) are going down. Approximately 43,000 homes on Long Island are under water with regard to their mortgages. This amounts to about 8% of the homes on Long Island. This is down from 50,000 or 9 1/4% of the homes which were under water at the end of 2012.

Real Estate Values Increasing

Housing values have started to increase on Long Island. With the increase of housing values, more and more homes are developing equity greater than the value of the indebtedness on these homes. As a result of rising housing values, there have been fewer short sales on Long Island in 2013. A short sale is a transaction in which the home is sold for less than the amount owed on the mortgage. In addition to fewer short sales, there have been fewer sales in foreclosure proceedings in 2013 than there were in 2012 on Long Island. A smaller percentage of the homes on Long Island are under water when compared to homeowner rates on a national basis in the United States.

The increase in the value of homes on Long Island will have an affirmative economic effect which will create a rise in consumer confidence and result in economic growth in 2014. This is according to Anand Nallathambi, the President and CEO of Call Logic. Call Logic tracks information with regard to mortgages in the United States.

Conclusion

With fewer homes under water, financial institutions should be more reasonable in granting mortgage modifications. The rising value of homes gives banks greater equity incentive to grant mortgage modifications.

Elliot Schlissel is a foreclosure attorney. He represents homeowners whose homes are going into foreclosure and seek to maintain their homes. He assists homeowners in obtaining mortgage modifications. He has kept scores of Long Islanders who are facing foreclosure in their homes. Elliot is the former president of the Commercial Lawyers Conference of New York.

Filed Under: Foreclosure Tagged With: foreclosure attorney, foreclosure defense, mortgage modifications, New York foreclosure attorney

Negotiations with Bank Does Not Stop Foreclosure Lawsuit

January 14, 2014 by Elliot S. Schlissel

A foreclosure lawsuit was brought by Citi Mortgage against Vatash. Vatash submitted an answer with affirmative defenses to the summons and complaint served by Citi Mortgage. Citi Mortgage moved for summary judgment. In their application they sought to dismiss the answer brought by Vatash. Vatash claimed, in his answer, Citibank lacked standing to bring this foreclosure action. He also claimed Citibank’s motion was inappropriate because he was involved in discussions with Citi Mortgage concerning a loan modification. He took the position since loan modification discussions were ongoing, Citibank had no right to move forward with the foreclosure case.

Standing Argument Dismissed

Justice Thomas Whelan sitting in a Supreme Court Part in Suffolk County, ruled Vatash’s argument that Citi Mortgage didn’t have standing was procedurally defective. The ruling was based on the allegation that Vatash failed to assert lack of standing in his answer or in a pre-answer motion to dismiss. In addition, the court took the position the argument even if it had been submitted appropriately in the answer, was substantively without merit. The court held Citi Mortgage was the owner and holder of the note and mortgage upon its merger with the original financial institution which made the loan.

The court ruled in favor of Citi Mortgage’s application for summary judgment (an application to grant a judgment without the need for a trial because there are no issues of fact). The court took the position the opposition papers submitted by Vatash did not create an issue of fact or an adequate defense.

Negotiations Do Not Stop Foreclosure Cases from Moving Forward

The Court specifically held the fact that Vatash was engaged in negotiations and/or discussions with Citi Mortgage is not a defense to the foreclosure lawsuit. Citi Mortgage’s motion for summary judgment was granted.

Conclusion

There are a number of important issues which were dealt with in this case. To start with, a lack of standing argument must be plead in the answer to the Summons and Complaint. Secondly, discussions with a bank concerning mortgage modifications or other ways of resolving the case have no impact on the foreclosure lawsuit moving forward.

Elliot Schlissel is a foreclosure defense lawyer. His office has represented homeowners for more than 45 years on mortgage foreclosure lawsuits throughout the Metropolitan New York area.

Filed Under: Foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense, Mortgage Modification Tagged With: defective foreclosure lawsuits, foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure defense, foreclosure defense attorneys, mortgage modification, Mortgage Modification new york attorney, New York foreclosure attorney

No Right to A Mortgage Modification

Foreclosure Case Dismissed: Bank Does Not Obtain Personal Jurisdiction Over The Defendant

Foreclosure Fraud – Part II

Beware of Mortgage/Foreclosure Fraud – Part I

Foreclosures Hit Long Island Hard

Hidden Expenses When Buying A Home – Part II

Deficiency Judgments After Foreclosure

Can’t Read or Write English? Not An Excuse in a Foreclosure Proceeding

Under Water Homes on Long Island Rising!

Negotiations with Bank Does Not Stop Foreclosure Lawsuit

Contact Us

Categories

LINKS

OUR WEBSITES

Latest Blogs

Foreclosure Strategies

Foreclosure And Your Credit Score

CONTACT INFO

View Our General Web Site

View Our Child Protective Website

View Our Fathers Rights Web Site

View Our Wills & Trusts Website

View Our Bankruptcy Web Site