A defense we are using quite regularly with success is that lenders are failing to comply with their pre-suit requirements. This issue was recently covered in the New York Times.
Far too often judges still just think…
YOU DIDN’T PAY YOUR MORTGAGE…GET OUT!
Judges fail to recognize that in many cases the bank that’s foreclosing received very real financial benefits for the privileged of using taxpayer dollars to 
fund the mortgages and for the bank to make billions on its operations. There are so many examples of this dynamic, which requires all parties to understand that by and large the money used to fund mortgages is not “The Bank’s” after all…it is in one form or the other federal dollars. (That means taxpayer money)
But that money the banks are permitted to use comes with very real contractual strings attached. Strings and contractual obligations that “The Banks” have become very comfortable just ignoring. The frustrating thing is that our local judges need to take a step back and understand that foreclosure is not just about a homeowner not making a payment. It often includes many more substantive issues.
When Hayward Ferrell of Huber Heights, Ohio, fell behind on his mortgage payments several years ago, his bank did not meet with him to try to work out a plan to make the loan easier to pay, he says.
“They never sat me down and said, ‘It looks like you are going to lose this, so why don’t you do this?’ ” he said. “They never did that.” The lender, U.S. Bank, foreclosed on the house in 2009.
Not engaging with borrowers who have missed payments may not seem like the strongest grounds for litigation against a bank. Yet that is the basis for an innovative lawsuit against U.S. Bank, a division of U.S. Bancorp, one of the largest banks in the country. The legal action could mean fresh legal problems for other big mortgage banks, as well. It is the latest threat to emerge from a barrage of cases that have forced big banks to pay tens of billions of dollars in recent months.
