Supplemental and Friend-Of-The-Court Briefs Filed In Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Ass’n (Fannie Mae)

by Rich Vetstein on January 31, 2012 · 10 comments

in Fannie Mae,Foreclosure,Massachusetts Real Estate Law,Mortgage Crisis,Mortgages,Title Defects,Title Insurance

Post image for Supplemental and Friend-Of-The-Court Briefs Filed In Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Ass’n (Fannie Mae)

For interested legal observers of the foreclosure crisis, it really doesn’t get any better than this.

Supplemental and amicus curie legal briefs have been filed in much awaited case of Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Ass’n, and they make for great reading. The briefs were filed in response to the SJC’s concern, mid-appeal, over whether an adverse ruling against foreclosing lenders will have a disastrous impact on foreclosure titles and, if so, whether its ruling should be applied prospectively rather than retroactively. Click here for our past posts on the case.

Notably, the Federal Housing Finance Association, the congressional conservator of the bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, filed a rare amicus brief and laid a shot across the SJC’s bow. It suggested that the congressional bailout law would trump an adverse decision by the SJC to the extent that it interfered with Fannie and Freddie’s mission to secure the health of U.S. secondary mortgage market. This is the first time that I’m aware of the federal agency intervening in a particular foreclosure case.

Not surprisingly, Fannie Mae, FHFA, and REBA (Real Estate Bar Ass’n) and the other industry groups argue against a retroactive application of an adverse ruling, claiming that it would have a disastrous effect on homeowners with foreclosures in their titles.

Eaton (which cited thid Blog), the legal services groups and foreclosure defense groups say that the sky will not fall down if the unity rule is applied retroactively; indeed, foreclosures in Mass. have increased post-Ibanez. They also argue that the law is the law, and it’s the lenders fault for creating a securitization scheme in violation of the law, so they should have to deal with the repercussions.

I have also attached REBA’s and Attorney Glenn Russell’s (lead counsel in U.S. Bank v. Ibanez) submissions on the recent Land Court ruling in Wells Fargo v. McKenna where the Land Court Judge Gordon Piper held that Massachusetts does not require the unity rule.

A final decision is expected in February or March.

Click here for the particular brief:

Real Estate Bar Ass’n (REBA) Brief      REBA Letter re. McKenna case

Land Title Ass’n Brief

WilmerHale Legal Services Brief

Appellee Henrietta Eaton Brief (citing this Blog)

Fannie Mae Brief

Federal Housing Finance Ass’n Brief

Ablitt Schofield PC Foreclosure Law Firm Brief

McDonnell Property Analytics Brief

Professor Adam Levitin Brief

National Foreclosure Defense Group Brief

Attorney Glenn Russell Foreclosure Defense Brief (Part 1 and Part 2)

______________________________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate litigator and attorney. Please contact him if you are dealing with a Massachusetts foreclosure title dispute.

 





Related Posts:

{ 10 comments }

Buyer Loses $31,000 Deposit After Refusing To List Current Residence For Sale As Financing Condition

by Rich Vetstein on January 30, 2012 · 1 comment

in Massachusetts Real Estate Law,Mortgages,Offer To Purchase,Purchase and Sale Agreements,Real Estate Litigation

Post image for Buyer Loses $31,000 Deposit After Refusing To List Current Residence For Sale As Financing Condition

Standard Mortgage Contingency Language At Issue

I recently came across a very interesting and scary case from the Appeals Court, Survillo v. McDonough No. 11–P–290. Dec. 2, 2011. (It’s technically an “unpublished” opinion but it’s available to the public). The case underscores how carefully attorneys must craft the mortgage contingency to protect the buyer’s deposit in case financing is approved with adverse conditions.

“Prevailing Rates, Terms and Conditions”

The buyers, Mr. and Mrs. Survillo, submitted the standard Offer To Purchase the sellers’ home in Walpole. The offer provided it was “Not subject to the Sale of any other home.” The sellers accepted the offer. The buyers received a conditional pre-approval from a local bank for a first mortgage in the amount of $492,000. The pre-approval also stated that anticipated loan was “[n]ot based on sale of any residence.”

The parties then entered into the standard form purchase and sale agreement (P & S), with the typical mortgage contingency provision for a $429,000 mortgage loan:

“In order to help finance the acquisition of said premises, the [buyers] shall apply for a conventional bank or other institutional mortgage loan of $492,000.00 at prevailing rates, terms and conditions. If despite the [buyers] diligent efforts a commitment for such loan cannot be obtained on or before October 5, 2009, the [buyers] may terminate this agreement by written notice to the [sellers] and/or the Broker(s), as agent(s) for the [sellers], prior to the expiration of such time, whereupon any payments made under this agreement shall be forthwith refunded and all other obligations of the parties hereto shall cease and this agreement shall be void without recourse to the parties hereto “

Change In Circumstances: Lender Requires Piggyback Loan & Buyers List Their Residence

Due to the buyers’ debt to income ratios, the lender required that the loan be structured as a “piggyback” — a first mortgage of $417,000 and second mortgage of $73,400, and with the condition that the buyers listing their primary residence for sale prior to the loan closing. The buyers absolutely did not want to list and seller their residence, so they wanted out of the deal.

On the last day of the extended financing deadline, the buyers timely notified the sellers that they had “not received a loan commitment with acceptable conditions,” and attempted to back out of the agreement under the mortgage contingency provision. Ultimately, with the buyers refusing to sell their home, the bank denied the buyer’s the mortgage application based on the fact that the “borrower would be carrying three mortgage payments and the debt to income is too high.”

Focus On “Prevailing Terms” Language

The sellers refused to return the deposit, and litigation over the deposit ensued.

The Court framed the case as follows: “Before the extended mortgage contingency deadline of October 21, the buyers received a commitment from the bank for two mortgages totaling $492,000. The P & S’s mortgage contingency was accordingly satisfied unless the bank’s requirement that the buyers list their home for sale was not a “prevailing” term or condition.”

The court started with the assumption that “the typical loan condition for most borrowers is to require them to sell an existing home before the new loan closes. The condition here required only that the buyers list, not sell, their home and it was accordingly not a typical condition.” The buyers argued that because the condition was unusual, it was not a “prevailing” condition within the meaning of the contingency clause of the P & S, despite the fact that the condition was more favorable to them than the standard condition. The court flat out rejected that argument, citing prior rulings that terms of a mortgage contingency presuppose that the buyers will accept commercially reasonable loan terms. If less is required, the condition becomes an option. The court also noted that the buyers failed to notified the sellers that they were unwilling to list or sell their existing home, nor did they insert a proviso to that effect into the mortgage contingency clause. Subsequent events suggested that if the buyers had timely disclosed their intentions to the bank, the loan would have been disapproved, which may well have given the buyers the shelter they sought under the mortgage contingency clause.

The court ruled against the buyers who had to forfeit their $31,000 deposit.

An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth A Pound of Cure

I’m not sure who is to blame here, the buyer’s attorney or the buyers themselves. Probably both.

From a legal drafting approach and as the court pointed out, the buyer’s attorney could have insisted on language into the mortgage contingency provision that the buyers’ financing could not be conditioned on the listing or sale of the buyers’ present residence. After all, the language was in the Offer, so it could have easily been carried over into the P&S. There was no indication from the decision that this was raised or negotiated.

It also seems apparent that the buyers were not particularly up front with anyone on their insistence that they would not list and sell their current residence. If they had been more forthcoming about that, perhaps they could have avoided this situation.

A commenter on Boston.com also places some blame on the loan officer:  “Not all pre-approvals are created equal. For a few minutes of work and adherance to a common standard of practice by the mortgage professional, a true pre-approval is supported by a credit report, the main criteria for ability to qualify for a mortgage. This is generated in a few seconds, and the pre-approval letter usually states subject to verification of income, assets, and property appraisal. Had this been done, THE DEBT TO INCOME RATIO ISSUE WOULD HAVE SURFACED EARLY.”

Based on the loan amount, this mistake or gamble cost the buyers around $31,000 plus legal fees. Ouch!

________________________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney. Please contact him if you need assistance with a Massachusetts purchase or sale transaction.

 





Related Posts:

{ 1 comment }

New Trends Emerging In Massachusetts Short Sale Legal Practice

by Rich Vetstein on January 24, 2012 · 0 comments

in Foreclosure,Massachusetts Real Estate Law,Offer To Purchase,Purchase and Sale Agreements,Realtors,Short Sales

The Offer to Purchase Has Become Much More Important

With a glut of distressed property still on the market and lenders realizing foreclosures aren’t very cost-effective, analysts are predicting a healthy spike in short sales for 2012. Short sales are quite unique in terms of deal dynamics, and should be handled differently than the typical transaction.

Massachusetts real estate attorneys and Realtors, however, are set in their ways when it comes to real estate contracts. For decades, we’ve been using the standard form Offer to Purchase and Purchase and Sale Agreement from the Greater Boston Real Estate Board or some variation thereof. We have also developed a predictable process in which the parties sign the Offer, conduct property inspections, sign the Purchase and Sale Agreement, obtain financing, order title, and get to closing.

With the recent proliferation of short sales, we have had to … yes, that dreaded word, CHANGE, the way we do things. Some agents and attorneys still do things the “old way” for short sale transactions, but they are doing themselves and their clients a disservice by doing so.

In this post, I will outline –  and explain — the “newer and better” way of handling the legal contracts in a Massachusetts short sale transaction.

The Offer to Purchase: Now The Operative Contract Document

We are seeing a shift to making the offer the operative contract in a Massachusetts short sale transaction. And for good reason. A short sale, by definition, is subject to a critical contingency: obtaining short sale approval from the seller’s lender(s). No short sale approval, no deal. Experienced short sale attorneys and real estate agents (and their clients) don’t want to spend the time and incur the expense of drafting a comprehensive (and contingent) purchase and sale contract when there is no guaranty of getting short sale approval. Furthermore, short sale lenders will accept a signed offer from the buyer during the approval process.

When we were first doing short sales, there were several instances where we drafted up purchase and sale agreements and then the short sale approval fell through. We had to charge the client for the drafting work or eat the cost. No one was happy.

The better way has proven to be the following:

  • Build all contingencies into the Offer to Purchase, namely, Short Sale Approval and Financing (we’ll talk about home inspections later)
  • Use a standard rider with short sale contingency language, with a deficiency waiver
  • Seller to use best efforts in obtaining short sale approval
  • Buyer agrees to be bound for set approval period  (60-90 days) in exchange for seller taking property off the market and not accepting back up offers. Negotiate deposit amount, usually 1% of purchase price. Buyer will obtain his financing and loan commitment during this approval period.
  • Negotiate extension rights, with corresponding protection for Buyer’s financing/rate lock
  • Upon short sale approval, purchase and sale agreement is signed within 5-7 days and full 5% deposit made
  • Closing within 30 days of short sale approval. (Most short sale approvals are only good for 30 days)
  • Waiver of home inspection or inspection prior to offer acceptance. Sellers should never agree to allow a home inspection contingency giving the Buyer a right to terminate. If the buyer doesn’t want to pay for an inspection up front, he is not a serious short sale buyer.

Change Is Hard…

I recognize that this is a departure from the “normal” way we document residential real estate contracts, but trust me, it’s a better way, and will actually decrease the time it will take to obtain short sale approval, because the parties are not waiting around for the P&S to be negotiated and signed and the buyer (and his attorney) don’t have to do unnecessary work.

Another important piece here is that the Buyer must get his financing in order, ready to go by the time short sale approval comes through. Lenders must recognize the unique short sale process and work with borrowers to get a firm loan commitment issued timely. Also, there’s no need for a lender to insist that the borrower have a signed purchase and sale agreement for underwriting approval. Under the process that I’ve outlined and under established Massachusetts case-law (McCarthy v. Tobin), the Offer is a legal and binding contract for the sale of the subject property and is sufficient for underwriting purposes. If it’s ok for the short sale lender, it should be ok for the buyer’s lender.

Help Is An Email Away

If you are a Realtor and need some guidance on the new Short Sale Offer, email me here and I will send you the form Rider. Also, if you need a referral for an excellent short sale negotiator, I highly recommend Andrew Coppo at Greater Boston Short Sales LLC.

__________________________________________________________

Richard Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts short sale attorney. For more information, please contact him at info@vetsteinlawgroup or 508-620-5352.





Related Posts:

{ 0 comments }

2012 Massachusetts Real Estate Market Survey

by Marc Canner on January 22, 2012 · 3 comments

in Massachusetts Property Values,Real Estate Taxes,Realtors,Refinances

January in the real estate industry is typically the time for the new year market outlook. For this coming year many of us have seen the template on the macro-economic data which most impacts the real estate industry: 8.5 % unemployment in the latest report, 30 year mortgage rates at record lows at or below 4.0%, and 15 year mortgage rates at or below 3.25%.

Rather than run a standard metrics-based market forecast this year, I decided to survey a cross-section of Massachusetts real estate realtors and mortgage professionals to hear from them on the upcoming spring and the 2012 real estate market in its entirety. Overall, each of the real estate professionals I contacted were optimistic. They tend to see the low interest rates and improving economy as the drivers of a busy 2012 housing market. Thus, here is a compendium of professionals I surveyed:

“I am optimistic that interest rates will remain low at least until the presidential elections. The uncertainty that has constrained spending and lending will keep things from taking off until there is a clearer picture of what policies will be in place (intervention and regulation vs. deregulation and free markets).

The increasing debt woes of EU members creates short term demand for our mortgage bonds and treasuries which drives down interest rates. This won’t be fixed overnight.

The housing collapse hangover continues to cause problems. The economy and in particular the housing market is still too weak to suffer increased interest rates. Rates will remain low until the cash on the sidelines is invested, employment improves and housing sees some recovery. The Fed has shown that they will move to buy mortgage backed securities and treasuries if we see rates start to rise and I can’t see them sitting on their hands if rates rise and threaten to derail this slow economic recovery.

This is an incredible time to buy a home with prices low and the cost of money so low as well.”

–Loan Officer, Bank of Canton, Boston, Brookline and Route 128 suburbs

 “I expect the 2012 real estate market in the greater Boston area to be stable. Overall, buyers will continue to have the upper hand but I don’t think we are going to see any precipitous drop in either sales prices or the number of sales. If interest rates remain low it continues to be a good time to get into the market knowing that you are getting in somewhere close to the bottom.”

–Realtor, Keller Williams, Cambridge,

 “As we embark on the new year there are many reasons to be optimistic. Rates are expected to remain at all time lows for the next 12 months and there is plenty of inventory for home buyers. More importantly, we are starting to see better listing prices from sellers who are clearly more realistic about what to expect. Contrary to what the media would have consumers believe, there is plenty of financing available for qualified buyers – and it doesn’t always require 20% down. First time buyers are surprised to see how affordable it is to own their own home, and with programs available with as little as 3% down and no PMI I expect to see a big surge in this demographic.”

–Loan Officer, Fairway Mortgage, Route 128 Suburbs

 “I see a slow start to the Spring, but a steady stream of inventory equal to purchasers. The best place to be is in a move-up, as buyers will find a greater gain on their more expensive home in spite of possibly losing a bit on the sale side. It seems that there are more foreclosures on the horizon with stable amounts of short sales, another way for a buyers to make immediate gains. Buyers will still dictate values, relative to condition and inventory. The mortgage guidelines have become stricter, so getting a pre-approval from a reputable lender is increasingly important. Sellers should request to see one immediately from a prospective buyer and buyers should be educated about the borrowing and the buying process.”

–Realtor, Realty Executives, Framingham,

 “I have an above normal number of pre-approvals for January.  I’m starting to see movement in the market.  A lot of high-end buyers.”

–Loan Officer, Citizens Bank, Route 128 Suburbs,

“Brookline real estate should receive a spike upwards during the spring market like it always does. It looks like the economy has improved slightly which could also help the confidence of the buyers.”

–Realtor, Coldwell Banker, Brookline

 “I see purchases up 40% for the year, and refinances down slightly.”

–Loan Officer, Mortgage Network, Route 128 Suburbs

 “With 2011 now behind us, real estate agents and others related to the housing industry are hoping that 2012 will bring a significant improvement to the number of units sold and at least stabilization, if not an increase in the median sales price.”

2011 ended with a nice up-tick in sales according to the National Association of Realtors, however, sales remain depressed, as are several of the realtors I spoke with in the Metrowest and Central Massachusetts areas. Central Mass, in particular, seems to have borne the brunt of the home sales price reductions and sales lag. Unit sales within the Route 128 belt have held up nicely, although many homes have experienced a 5-10% appraised value drop, year over year.

Interest rates have held steady at near record lows. While this is good news for first-time home-buyers and relocating workers, as home affordability is better than at any time in recent memory, many sellers are frustrated.

As home prices continue to drop, more sellers are finding themselves with little or no equity in their homes.  This not only makes them reluctant to price their home to market and sell quickly, for many of them, current rules on Loan to Value, are making them unable to take advantage of today’s low interest rates and refinance.

So what will 2012 bring?  A slight improvement in unit sales, and perhaps a bottom in home prices (I hope!).  Here are my reasons for this conclusion:

  1. Job creation – Over the past several months, it appears that the job market is improving.  The Massachusetts unemployment rate dropped to 6.8% in December.
  2. Continued Low Interest Rates – While we may see an increase in 30 year fixed rates during the next couple of months, as the national economy shows signs of improvement, I do not expect a dramatic rise in rates.
  3. Helping Underwater Homeowners –
  4. Homebuilder Sentiment – Nationally, homebuilding company optimism is making a strong recovery.  Locally, several builders I have spoken with think 2012 will be their best year ever.  Prices may be down, but in many cases so are cost of materials and labor.

There are a few other reasons for optimism including an increase in household formation, as well as talk of programs to rent REO properties, which may help reduce vacant homes and stabilize prices.

–Loan Officer, Greenpark Mortgage, Metrowest and Worcester County

We have a lack of inventory in the greater Franklin area. More buyers and renters than properties on the market. A lot of sellers I talk to are waiting “until later in the year” to list. They need to get started on their preparations now because “later in the year” will be here before you know it!

–Realtor, Hallmark Sotheby’s, Franklin/495 Area

“I feel that the market will be very good for buyers and sellers this spring.

Buyer can take advantage of the great rates and prices. It’s a great time to upgrade to a bigger and better home. It’s also a great time to buy an investment property since rents are on the way up.

On the listing side we need more inventory since most of the homes on the market now are stale and overpriced. I’m a strong believer that if the home is priced well it will sell fast.”

–Realtor, Keller Williams Realty

__________________________________________

Marc E. Canner, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney with offices in Needham and Bedford, Mass. He is a principal of TitleHub Closing Services LLC and the Law Offices of Marc E. Canner.





Related Posts:

{ 3 comments }

Federal Judges Read Law Blogs (Including This One!)

by Rich Vetstein on January 18, 2012 · 0 comments

in Massachusetts Real Estate Law

Judge William G. Young

I just wanted to pass along a neat story from a colleague evidencing the growing trend of judges turning to law blogs in their research of opinions. Federal Judge William Young spoke yesterday at a real estate bar association meeting about his recent and somewhat controversial opinion in Culhane v. Aurora Loan Servicers which considered the very complex maze that is Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS). I covered the case in this blog post.

Judge Young discussed the process by which he and his law clerks “learned the law,” and said it included tuning into “the blogs,” mentioning this blog by name. (My colleagues at Rackemann Sawyer’s Land Use Monitor should also be included). Judge Young also apparently read my post dissecting his ruling, stating that “he calls them the way he sees them,” and “everyone is entitled to their opinion.” I’m flattered that Judge Young would even consider reading this blog, and for lack of a better phrase, I think it’s pretty cool!

With blogs providing timely legal analysis so much faster than the traditional law reviews published by law schools, it’s not surprising that judges such as Judge Young are turning to them as a resource. Kevin O’Keefe of legal blog publisher LexBlog has been tracking such instances for awhile now, and it’s widespread throughout the country, with judges even citing law blogs in written opinions. Lawyers should take note of this when preparing their cases.

I’m happy to be a resource for Massachusetts real estate law. If I can contribute in the slightest way to the administration of justice and the development of our jurisprudence, I am very grateful.

~Rich





Related Posts:

{ 0 comments }

Mandatory Upgrade Required For Home Oil Heating Systems Under New Massachusetts Law

by Rich Vetstein on January 13, 2012 · 1 comment

in Environmental Law,Green Technology,Massachusetts Real Estate Law,Safety

Under a new Massachusetts oil heating law which went into effect on September 30, 2011, every homeowner with an oil heating system is required to install an oil safety valve or an oil supply line with protective sleeve in their system. The cost is approximately $150 to $350 depending on the system. The required upgrade is to prevent leaks from tanks and pipes that connect to your furnace. The upgrade will reduce the risk of an oil leak so by making a relatively small expenditure now, you can prevent a much greater expense in the future.

Who Must Upgrade?

Owners of 1- to 4-unit residences that are heated with oil must already have or install an oil safety valve or an oil supply line with a protective sleeve. Installation of these devices must be performed by a licensed oil burner technician. Technicians are employed by companies that deliver home heating oil or are self-employed. It is important to note that heating oil systems installed on or after January 1, 1990 most likely are already in compliance because state fire codes implemented these requirements on new installations at that time.

Who Is Exempt?

Homeowners are exempt from taking these leak prevention steps if:

  • the oil burner is located above the oil storage tank and the entire oil supply line is connected to and above the top of the tank OR
  • an oil safety valve or oil supply line with protective sleeve was installed on or after January 1, 1990, AND
  • those changes are in compliance with the oil burning equipment regulations; a copy of the oil burner permit from the local fire department may be used to demonstrate compliance.

Why Comply?

Not only is complying with the new law required, it makes good financial and environmental sense. Homeowners who take these preventive measures can avoid the disruption and expense that can be caused by heating oil leaks. A leak may result in exposure to petroleum vapors in your home. If the leak reaches the soil or groundwater beneath your house, then a cleanup must be performed to restore your property to state environmental standards. Such a leak can cost many thousands to clean up. Leaks that affect another property or impact drinking water supply wells can complicate the cleanup and increase the expense. Each year, several hundred Massachusetts families experience some kind of leak.

What will an upgrade cost?

The typical cost of installing either an oil safety valve or oil supply line with a protective sleeve ranges from $150 – $350 (including labor, parts, and local permit fees).

___________________________________________________

Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. is an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney. Please contact him if you need assistance with a home purchase or sale.





Related Posts:

{ 1 comment }

From Asbestos to Radon: The Massachusetts Home Inspection Process, A Legal Perspective

by Rich Vetstein 01.13.2012 Condominium Law
Thumbnail image for From Asbestos to Radon: The Massachusetts Home Inspection Process, A Legal Perspective

The home inspection is one of the most critical aspects of every Massachusetts real estate transaction. Virtually every buyer in a standard purchase transaction (meaning not a short sale, foreclosure, or bank-owned property) will opt to perform a home inspection, and for good reason. You need to know whether there are any serious structural, mechanical [...]

Read the full article →

Breaking News: SJC Concerned Over Potential Disastrous Impact On Foreclosure Titles In Eaton v. Fannie Mae

by Rich Vetstein 01.09.2012 Fannie Mae

The Supreme Judicial Court has just issued an unusual order in the very important Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Association case, indicating its deep concern over whether an adverse ruling against foreclosing lenders will have a disastrous impact on foreclosure titles and, if so, whether its ruling should be applied prospectively rather than retroactively. The [...]

Read the full article →

Massachusetts Land Court Docket and Public Case Information Now Available Online

by Rich Vetstein 01.06.2012 Land Court

Great news from the Land Court — its new online public case information system is now live! The Land Court is pleased to announce the availability of publicly available case information via the internet. It is called eAccess and the website address is www.masscourts.org. Be sure to bookmark this important tool! The site allows users [...]

Read the full article →

Do I Need A Plot Plan For My Massachusetts Real Estate Closing?

by Rich Vetstein 01.06.2012 Boundaries
Thumbnail image for Do I Need A Plot Plan For My Massachusetts Real Estate Closing?

Plot Plans, also called Mortgage Inspection Plans, were once part of every Massachusetts real estate purchase closing. These days, some lenders do not require them and I will tell you why in this post. However, despite the limitations of a plot plan, I think it’s a good idea for buyers to purchase a plot plan [...]

Read the full article →

2011 Massachusetts Real Estate Law Year In Review

by Rich Vetstein 12.30.2011 Foreclosure
Thumbnail image for 2011 Massachusetts Real Estate Law Year In Review

It’s time again for our annual review of highlights in Massachusetts Real Estate Law for the past year. It’s been a very busy year. From the foreclosure fallout, to Occupy Boston, to the new homestead law, there’s been lots to report on. We’ll start in order of importance this year. SJC Decides Controversial U.S. Bank [...]

Read the full article →

Maximizing Massachusetts Short Sale Success: From Hardship Letter To Closing

by Rich Vetstein 12.25.2011 Fannie Mae
Thumbnail image for Maximizing Massachusetts Short Sale Success: From Hardship Letter To Closing

Tireless Determination The Key To Massachusetts Short Sale Success What Is A Short Sale? A short sale is special type of real estate transaction between a homeowner, his mortgage holder(s), and a third party buyer where the property owner’s mortgage balance exceeds the market value of the property — known as being “under water.” In [...]

Read the full article →

Inertia Is Not An Option: Superior Court Rules BofA Can’t Drag Heels On HAMP Loan Modification

by Rich Vetstein 12.24.2011 Massachusetts Real Estate Law
Thumbnail image for Inertia Is Not An Option: Superior Court Rules BofA Can’t Drag Heels On HAMP Loan Modification

First Reported Mass. Ruling On Home Affordable Modification Program Liability The fallout from the sub-prime and mortgage crisis continues in Massachusetts courts, and some judges are reacting in favor of sympathetic borrowers. In Parker v. Bank of America, Massachusetts Superior Court (Dec. 15, 2011), Judge Thomas Billings considered what is unfortunately now a very common [...]

Read the full article →

Massachusetts Real Estate Litigation: What You Can Expect Going To Trial, Part 2

by Rich Vetstein 12.20.2011 Adverse Possession

Part 2 of a two part series. For part 1 on filing the Complaint, Venue and Discovery click here. Expert Testimony We left off in our last post at the discovery state of litigation. We covered fact discovery of witnesses, but we didn’t address an important component of most real estate litigation cases: experts. Expert [...]

Read the full article →

Massachusetts Weekly Mortgage Rate Report (Dec. 20, 2011)

by Rich Vetstein 12.20.2011 Massachusetts Real Estate Law

A Guest Post by Brian Cavanaugh of SmarterBorrowing.com. Inquire within for current Mortgage Rates or Guidelines   bc@SmarterBorrowing.com  617.771.5021 Overall, I am expecting to see some movement in the markets and mortgage rates, especially if we get some surprising results from the week’s data or news about Europe’s financial crisis. Despite the holiday season, we need [...]

Read the full article →

Massachusetts Real Estate Litigation: What You Can Expect Going To Court, Part 1

by Rich Vetstein 12.17.2011 Condominium Law
Thumbnail image for Massachusetts Real Estate Litigation: What You Can Expect Going To Court, Part 1

For most folks, litigation and courtrooms are as foreign as Belgium. When a new clients comes to me with a potential litigation matter, I spend most of our first consultation discussing the process of litigation and how it works. Then inevitably we have to talk about the cost and expense, which for most lawsuits is [...]

Read the full article →

Weekly Massachusetts Mortgage Rate Lock Report (Dec. 12, 2011)

by Rich Vetstein 12.12.2011 Fannie Mae

Brian Cavanaugh of SmarterBorrowing.com is back with his Massachusetts Weekly Mortgage Rate Update. Scroll to the bottom for Brian’s valuable Massachusetts Mortgage Rate Lock Advice! Inquire within for current Mortgage Rates or Guidelines   bc@SmarterBorrowing.com  617.771.5021 Overall, I am expecting to see a much more active week in the financial markets and mortgage pricing than last [...]

Read the full article →

No Trespassing! Judge Evicts Occupy Boston Protesters From Taking Over Dewey Square

by Rich Vetstein 12.07.2011 Massachusetts Real Estate Law

Judge Rules That Occupy Movement Protesters Are Common Trespassers Today, Massachusetts Superior Court Justice Frances A. McIntyre issued a ruling clearing the way for the eviction of the Occupy Boston protest which has taken over Dewey Square in downtown Boston. Judge McIntyre had originally granted the protesters a temporary restraining order sustaining the protests, but [...]

Read the full article →

SJC Agrees To Hear Crucial Foreclosure Standing Case In HSBC Bank v. Matt

by Rich Vetstein 12.02.2011 Foreclosure

Court May Decide Lenders’ Standing In All Foreclosure Cases Involving Securitized Mortgages With all the hoopla yesterday surrounding Attorney General Martha Coakley’s monumental lawsuit against the big banks over foreclosure practices, the Supreme Judicial Court on November 29, 2011 quietly agreed to hear an appeal over whether a lender holding a securitized mortgage has standing [...]

Read the full article →

← Previous Entries

Real Time Analytics