Broker Liability in Phoenix Arizona
What is Right is Right
Posted on September 15, 2011 in Arizona Law Regarding Business DisputesA new group has made even Karl Marx do ‘back flips’ in his state owned grave. Politicians get asked all the time to sign pledges — about war, abortion, taxes and countless other issues. Now, a coalition of far left legal groups is asking people to sign a new pledge “to support the whole Constitution.”
These groups have dishonored the document for years-and-years by appointing those Judges who ‘legislate from the bench’ and think the Constitution… lives and changes… which is code language for’ we are smarter than the Founding Fathers.’
These groups need to read the Federalist Papers.
Only one who believes in original intent is worthy of an appointment to the bench, otherwise you are saying that our culture i.e. South Park, Kardasians and Jersey Shore, should be our social benchmarks.
Arizona Trial & Business Law
William A. Miller, Esq.
William A. Miller, PLLC
8170 North 86th Place, Suite 208
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
New Law Regarding Arizona Foreclosure
Posted on February 24, 2011 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real EstateUnder Arizona Senate Bill 1259, we may become the first state to require lenders to prove they have the legal right to foreclose by proving up a list of all owners of the deed of trust, under a bill passed yesterday by our Senate.
The law, which is headed to the House after being approved 28-2 in the Republican-dominated Senate, would allow foreclosure sales to be voided if
lenders that didn’t originate the loan can’t produce the full chain of title. This is in line with our statutes, which permit nonjudicial foreclosures, meaning property can be forfeited with a court order.
Lawmakers in states including New York, Oregon and Virginia
also have proposed legislation to address concerns among consumer advocates that lenders or mortgage servicers are using incomplete or false paperwork to repossess properties in default. The attorneys general of all 50 states are jointly investigating how the mortgage-servicing industry operates.
The stakes are high and this is the least the banks can do before they re-take a home or commercial property. Call Bill Miller at 602-319-6899 with questions about your legal rights. He has been an Arizona trial lawyer for over 24 years and has successfully defended many wrongful foreclosure proceedings.
Arizona Trial & Business Law
William A. Miller, Esq.
William A. Miller, PLLC
8170 North 86th Place, Suite 208
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
Who’s on First
Posted on August 20, 2010 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real EstateMortgages bundled into securities were a favorite trick of Wall Street at the height of the big bubble. The securities changed hands frequently, the French bought billions, and the investment banks profiting from mortgage payments were often not the same parties that made the loans. At the heart of this disconnect was the Mortgage Electronic Registration System, or MERS, a company that serves as the mortgagee of record for lenders, allowing mortgage pools to transfer without the necessity of recording. The point was investment banker fees without responsibility or accountability to the home owner!
MERS was made for the banks, but courts are now slamming down the impact of all of this financial juggling when it comes to mortgage ownership. To foreclose on real property, the plaintiff must be able to establish the chain of title entitling it to relief. As MERS has acknowledged that MERS is a “nominee”—an entity appointed by the true owner simply for the purpose of holding property in order to facilitate transactions. Recent court opinions stress that this defect is not just a procedural but is a substantive failure, one that is fatal to the plaintiff’s legal ability to foreclose.
The latest decisions came down in California on May 20, 2010, in a bankruptcy case called In re Walker, Case no. 10-21656-E–11. The court held that MERSbecause it was a mere nominee; and that as a result, plaintiff Citibank could not collect on its claim. The judge opined:
Since no evidence of MERS’ ownership of the underlying note has been offered, and
other courts have concluded that MERS does not own the underlying notes, this
court is convinced that MERS had no interest it could transfer to Citibank.
Since MERS did not own the underlying note, it could not transfer the
beneficial interest of the Deed of Trust to another. Any attempt to transfer
the beneficial interest of a trust deed without ownership of the underlying
note is void under California law.
While not binding on courts in other jurisdictions, the ruling could serve as persuasive precedent there as well, because the court cited non-bankruptcy cases related to the lack of authority of MERS, and because the opinion is consistent with prior rulings in Idaho and Nevada Bankruptcy courts on the same issue. Call Bill Miller at 480-948-3095 a long standing Arizona Trial and Real Estate Lawyer located in Scottsdale.
Arizona Trial & Business Law
William A. Miller, Esq.
William A. Miller, PLLC
8170 North 86th Place, Suite 208
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
NEW PHONE & FAX
Posted on December 10, 2008 in Arizona TrialsGreetings: My new phone and fax numbers are: 480-948-3095- phone 480-948-3137- fax The cell is the same. 602-319-6899 Thanks and Merry Christmas!
Read MoreAnother Arizona Meltdown
Posted on December 4, 2008 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real EstateThe meltdown of title-insurance company LandAmerica Financial Group Inc. has left scores of real-estate investors and entrepreneurs scrambling to recover money in what were supposed to be a short-term and no-risk arrangement. The investors, from Arizona retirees to a public company, had $400 million on deposit with the LandAmerica subsidiary to take advantage of a…
Read MoreArizona Real Estate Con Men
Posted on November 3, 2008 in Broker Liability in Phoenix ArizonaHave you been the victim of a “real estate con”? A real estate con is normally set up and performed by a confidence man. The first known usage of the term “confidence man” was in 1849; it was used by the press during the trial of William Thompson. Thompson chatted with strangers until he asked if…
Read More