Showing 40 posts in Mortgage.

Tips for Loan Servicers on Defending Consumer Claims in Federal Court and Making Successful Article III Standing Challenges

November 1, 2024 by Geoffrey K. Milne

Loan servicers and their counsel are often sued by consumers during contested mortgage foreclosure proceedings. The United States Supreme Court’s opinions in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins[1] and TransUnion v. Ramirez[2] continue to be an important precedent in defending consumer claims. More ›

The Texas Supreme Court Has Spoken: Mortgage Servicers May Rewind and Restart the Statute of Limitations Clock Within the Same Letter

February 29, 2024 by C. Charles Townsend, Jessica A. Riley

Last week, the Texas Supreme Court answered the Fifth Circuit’s certified question as to whether simultaneous rescission and reacceleration can reset the limitations period under Texas Law by holding that “a rescission that complies with the statute [Tex. Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 16.038] resets limitations even if it is combined with a notice of reacceleration.” Moore v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 23-0525, 2024 Tex. LEXIS 156, at *2 (Feb. 23, 2024). More ›

New York Court Finds an Action is Timely in Some Circumstances in CPLR 205(a) Decision

May 20, 2021 by Victor L. Matthews

The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court's First Department recently issued a decision addressing the calculation of the six-month timeframe permitted to file a new action, according to New York's Civil Practice Law & Rules (CPLR) 205(a) and following the termination of a prior action. The First Department concluded that an action is timely if it is brought within six months of the termination of time to appeal a denial of a motion to renew. More ›

New York Court of Appeals Decision Clarifies RPAPL Notice Requirements, Affirms Heightened Standard for Borrowers

April 1, 2021 by Ronald H. Park, Brian S. McGrath, Schuyler B. Kraus

Last year, as we reported, the Second Circuit requested that the New York Court of Appeals rule on two certified questions concerning predicate notices in foreclosure actions. On March 30, 2021, the Court of Appeals issued its decision in Schiffman on the questions certified by the Second Circuit concerning New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) §§ 1304 (90-day predicate notice) and 1306 (pre-foreclosure filing with the superintendent of banks). More ›

Following Fair Lending Investigation, NYS DFS Issues Report, Recommendations, and Mortgage Lender Best Practices

February 12, 2021 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) issued a report on February 4, 2021, detailing its investigation of the mortgage lending market in the Buffalo metropolitan area. The report includes findings about a "distinct lack of lending" by mortgage lenders, particularly nonbank lenders, in neighborhoods with majority-minority populations and to minority homebuyers in general. More ›

Second Circuit Finds HUD Assignees Immune from State Statute of Limitations Claims

January 21, 2021 by Fernando C. Rivera-Maissonet

The mortgage foreclosure world continues to experience change at a moment's notice. Lenders continue to defend against borrower actions seeking to discharge their mortgages as time-barred, which in turn has led to the development of several defenses supported by the appellate courts. Whether it is lack of standing to accelerate the mortgage debt, revocation, or re-affirmation of the debt, all of these defenses are not as interesting—and powerful—as full immunity from the statute of limitations. In Windward Bora, LLC v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, that's exactly what the Second Circuit found, and its decision could have a substantial impact for lenders in New York and elsewhere. More ›

In a Win for Mortgage Servicers, Massachusetts Supreme Court Finds Mandatory Notice of Right to Cure in Notice of Default is Not Potentially Deceptive

December 7, 2020 by Kevin W. Manganaro, Samuel C. Bodurtha

Massachusetts moved one step closer to resolving an ongoing debate over pre-foreclosure notices of default that started with the First Circuit's decision in Thompson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank back in February of 2019. Initially, the First Circuit concluded that a notice of default, which disclosed that borrowers "could still avoid foreclosure by paying the total past-due amount before a foreclosure sale," was potentially misleading because the mortgage only allowed reinstatement five days before the sale. Chase filed a petition for rehearing, joined by numerous amici, that demanded reconsideration of the First Circuit's decision on grounds that the potentially misleading language was in fact a mandatory disclosure under the Code of Massachusetts Regulations. More ›

New York State Enacts New Procedures for Residential Mortgage Forbearance Plans

June 24, 2020 by Mitra P. Singh, Brian S. McGrath

On June 17, 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed Senate Bills 8243C and 8428 into law, adding Section 9-x to the Banking Law. The section creates new procedures for mortgagors and servicers in relation to forbearances of residential mortgage payments affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. More ›

Rhode Island Supreme Court Demands Strict Compliance with Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac "Paragraph 22" in Foreclosures

June 15, 2020 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

In a case of first impression, the Rhode Island Supreme Court concluded in Woel v. Christiana Trust that mortgage default notices sent to borrowers must strictly comply with the notice requirements included in a mortgage. The Court held that a lender's notice of default does not strictly comply with the terms of the standard Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgage Paragraph 22, if the notice fails to inform the borrower of the right to reinstate after acceleration. More ›

Payment Deferral Now an Option for Borrowers in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac COVID-19 Forbearance Plans

May 14, 2020 by Samuel C. Bodurtha

We previously reported on the impact of the CARES Act on federally backed mortgage loans, including the immediate availability of a 180 – 360 day forbearance plan for borrowers impacted by the pandemic. One key feature of this legislation and accompanying guidance publications is that servicers of GSE loans are required to evaluate borrowers for repayment options—including reinstatement, a repayment plan, modification, or some other workout—at the conclusion of the forbearance period. The forbearance plans do not offer loan forgiveness, and borrowers and their servicers are expected to resolve the forbearance amount at the end of the plan. More ›

Search

Subscribe via Email

RSSSubscribe via RSS
TwitterFollow us on Twitter/X

Blog Editors

Blog Contributors

Archives