Creditors' Rights Blog

Understanding the Essentials of Note Enforcement
What a Debt Collector Must, Must Not and Would Be Wise to State in Debt Collection Communications
Realtor Wins Chance to Prove Sellers Acted in Bad Faith when they Accepted Offer to Purchase Home One Day After Listing Agreement Was Terminated
Cash-for-Keys Offer by Servicer Following Foreclosure Sale Not Unlawful Debt Collection Activity
Borrower Must Follow Procedural Requirements to Maintain Foreclosure Challenge
Anti-Modification Provision Protecting Mortgages Secured by Principal Residences Affirmed by U.S. Court of Appeals
Given the increased emphasis on compliance with consumer-protection laws in recent years, it is expected that banks and mortgage companies will be familiar with all the federal laws and regulations impacting lending and servicing.  However, it is also important to remember that the individual States often have their own regulatory framework that must be adhered to.
South Carolina now becomes the most recent state to have a legal decision weighing in on the validity of MERS documents, but not in the usual fashion as we have seen in most states. In fact, the result of the case does not resolve the issue as to whether MERS documents are valid in South Carolina at all.
The ongoing saga whether a debt collector attempting to reach the debtor by telephone may leave a message has taken a new twist.  The decision in a recent case may be rather harsh, but it at least provides a bright line for debt collectors to follow, at least in the Eastern District of New York.
The increase in foreclosures after the 2008 financial crisis led to an increased response from lenders to assist borrowers. The most common form of aid provided to borrowers since that time has been the use of a loan modification. A large number of loan modifications have been entered into between lenders and borrowers in states across the county and South Carolina is no different.

Pages