Holy Moses, this is a biggie folk~!
Sound the alarms…..
What is surprising about these cases is….the utter carelessness with which the plaintiff banks documented titles to their assets…
The holder of an assigned mortgage needs to take care to ensure that his legal paperwork is in order.
Foreclosure is a powerful act with significant consequences, and Massachusetts law has always required that it proceed strictly in accord with the statues that govern it.
Strict compliance is necessary.
(Not my words, those come from the opinion itself.)
US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co. lost a foreclosure case in Massachusetts‘s highest court that will guide lower courts in that state and may influence others in the clash between bank practices and state real estate law.
The state Supreme Judicial Court today upheld a judge’s decision saying two foreclosures were invalid because the banks didn’t prove they owned the mortgages.
” We agree with the judge that the plaintiffs, who were not the original mortgagees, failed to make the required showing that they were the holders of the mortgages at the time of foreclosure,” Justice Ralph D. Gants wrote. The court upheld a decision by Massachusetts Land Court Judge Keith C. Long in Boston.
Are you listening Florida Supremes and DCA’s? The banks must show they are the true owners of the note. What a novel concept.
Can Florida homeowners’ now have their homes back? I understand it is “librul” Massachusetts that made this ruling but ownership is ownership and that should not be a concept that is foreign to Florida.
I haven’t searched out interpretation and commentary on this decision today but the best I found yesterday appeared here:
https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/01/07/the-ibanez-case-and-housing-market-catastrophe-risk/
I’m interested to see what appears in the major papers tomorrow (Sunday), and also how it is covered during the next couple of weeks.
Clearly there are a lot of ripples yet to make their way across the pond.