ATTORNEYS. Need some non criminal info.

[Apache]

Need some info on property foreclosure. My sister-in-law and her husband (who BTW is a total bum) had their house foreclosed about 5 years ago. She said that it shows on their credit reports and to her knowledge, everything pertaining to the foreclosure was complete and that they had moved on.

She called lastnight and said that they had just been served with a summons. Both her and her husbands names are listed as defendants in a foreclosure proceeding. However, listed above their names and is the first named defendant is a name she says she doesn’t even know. Throughout the document, this unknown persons name appears as one who borrowed money from a bank (plantiff) and purchased the property that my sister-in-law had owned (and subsequently was foreclosed). Apparently this person failed to meet his contract obligation and the bank was foreclosing. Additionally, her nor her husbands name appear anywhere in the document other than being listed as defendants.

Her questions to me were (just because I was a cop, I get all the legal questions in the family), why does their names appear on someone elses foreclosure? Will this appear on their credit reports, in addition to their own foreclosure? Can the bank (plaintiff in this foreclosure) attempt to collect from them?
Note: Plaintiff in summons was NOT the plaintiff that foreclosed on my sister-in-law.

Thanks in advance.

[Syzygyone]

Sounds like  screw up but I don't profess to know SC state law, if it is in SC.  If your sister and her husband were foreclosed 5 years ago, they should be outside of the current active list of ownership or equity interest holders.  The entity or person who bought from that foreclosure should have purchased free and clear of any liens and all other interests were foreclosed.  The new purchaser obviously defaulted on the new mortgage so it is being foreclosed anew.  But, since foreclosure procedures vary from state to state, I'd strongly suggest our sister see an attorney who can probably have her removed from the case with just a phone call or letter.

GL!

[gofaster]

Just so I understand correctly, let me rehash the events.

Your sister ("Sister") owned property and became delinquent in the payments to the bank holding the mortgage agreement ("Bank").  Bank foreclosed on the mortgage agreement.  Bank auctioned property to a buyer ("Dude") who borrowed money from Bank to purchase the property.  Dude breached the loan agreement with Bank and Bank has now either (a) cancelled the sale to Dude, thereby Sister is still the defendant in the original foreclosure proceeding or (b) initial sale was completed (evidenced by Dude taking possession of the property) and Dude should be the defendant in the second foreclosure proceeding.

The real question is, did Dude ever take possession of the property?  Was that sale completed?  If he didn't, then that would explain why Sister would be named, since she is still in default on her mortgage agreement to Bank.  Usually a sale isn't complete until the buyer takes possession of the property (via a legal document such as a sale agreement or title transfer, etc.).

[Apache]

Thanks guys.

Yes, the first thing I told her was to get an attorney, knowing even when I was saying it, she couldn't afford one. I told her to seek her area's legal assistance (she lives in SC but not in the county I live in).

Gofaster, you are correct, to my knowledge, of the sequence of events. However, I don't know if this inidividual who has apparently defaulted bought it from auction or not. I am told that there have been several occupants of said residence but they could have been renting the property from this person. I do know that, in the summons, this person (Dude), bought the property in early 2001. Whether a legal document was obtained or not, I am unaware.

PS. To make clear. Plaintiff (Bank) in the summons is NOT the bank that foreclosed on my sister-in-law.

[Syzygyone]

It still sounds like a title screw up.  Given Gofasters great lawschool type example, I am loathe to enter into a substantive legal dicussion, expecially on this BBS, about the possibility of cancelled foreclosure sales.  In my experience, that doesn't happen.  But, like I said, I don't know SC law.  So, my thoughts are irrelevant.  Anyway, the point is she needs a local attorney.  If she can't afford an attorney, you can also have her contact a local law school which usually has a legal assistance program that can handle this time of thing.  Absent that, many metro areas have a Lawyer Referral Service.

Again, wish her good luck!

Man, don't you just hate lawyers!

[Apache]

Thanks so very much for the help guys. I'll pass on the info to her with an emphasis on getting legal assistance. I hope she doesn't just ignore this. That attitude is what got them in the position they're in now.

BTW, I don't hate lawyers, I'm used to 'em lol.

Again, thanks

[Drifter1234]

Apache,

Do not mean to Hijack your thread.

I went last weekend to watch my brother graduate from the SC law enforcement acadamy in Columbia.  Was impressed that SC required all their Law Enforcement Officers to attend one standardized academy.

Drftr

[gofaster]

Originally posted by Apache
I am told that there have been several occupants of said residence but they could have been renting the property from this person. I do know that, in the summons, this person (Dude), bought the property in early 2001. Whether a legal document was obtained or not, I am unaware.

PS. To make clear. Plaintiff (Bank) in the summons is NOT the bank that foreclosed on my sister-in-law.

Ok, so I think what happened was:

Sister defaulted on loan agreement to Bank.  Bank went to auction and sold to Dude, who obtained financing from a second bank ("Bank2").  Since it appears that Dude had rented the property, I'm going to assume that he did take possession after purchasing from Bank and did enter legal rental agreements with tenants, which would prove that Sister was released from her interest in the property by Bank.  Dude then defaulted on loan agreement with Bank2 and now Bank2 is foreclosing on Dude.

How Sister got involved sounds like a title search company simply pulled the names of the last 2 owners and gave the information to Bank2.  With the foreclosure by Bank, the Bank assumed the liabilities of the property, thereby discharging Sister of her responsibilities, when Bank took title and sold same to Dude.

Sister can get out of the proceedings by simply filing a response with the court clerk that she no longer has any interest (control, title, ownership, liens, what have you) in the property and include an order that the judge can sign to that effect.

And, being the cop you are, you can run a check for warrants on all of them.

[Apache]

Originally posted by Drifter1234
Apache,

Do not mean to Hijack your thread.

I went last weekend to watch my brother graduate from the SC law enforcement acadamy in Columbia.  Was impressed that SC required all their Law Enforcement Officers to attend one standardized academy.

Drftr

Hijacking was fine Drftr. Discussion was pretty much over. I agree with your thought. Not sure now, but the SCCJA was ranked number #1 in the nation. Lol, little old SC.

I just noticed. Talk about irony!. I was raised in Pensacola. Went to Escambia High. You originally from there?

[Apache]

Originally posted by gofaster
Ok, so I think what happened was:

Sister defaulted on loan agreement to Bank.  Bank went to auction and sold to Dude, who obtained financing from a second bank ("Bank2").  Since it appears that Dude had rented the property, I'm going to assume that he did take possession after purchasing from Bank and did enter legal rental agreements with tenants, which would prove that Sister was released from her interest in the property by Bank.  Dude then defaulted on loan agreement with Bank2 and now Bank2 is foreclosing on Dude.

How Sister got involved sounds like a title search company simply pulled the names of the last 2 owners and gave the information to Bank2.  With the foreclosure by Bank, the Bank assumed the liabilities of the property, thereby discharging Sister of her responsibilities, when Bank took title and sold same to Dude.

Sister can get out of the proceedings by simply filing a response with the court clerk that she no longer has any interest (control, title, ownership, liens, what have you) in the property and include an order that the judge can sign to that effect.

And, being the cop you are, you can run a check for warrants on all of them.

hehe, Gofaster.

Yep, thats sounds like thats what happened. Man you guys are good. Knew I could count on the community.

Many thanks. I think she'll feel a little better after I talk with her tonight. I'm sure I'll have to convince her not to sit on this though. Man, some people.

[gofaster]

Yeah, definitely don't sit on it.  The sooner she gets out of the loop, the less official-looking mail she'll have to worry about.

[Corwin]

I'm curious why your sister would still appear in title.  Foreclosure is the process by which a lender goes from being a lienholder (under a deed of trust) to an owner (deed holder).  When she lost the property,  title transferred to the lienholder (bank) who then would have conveyed it under deed to the new owner.  If he borrowed against it there would be a new deed of trust between him and whomever he secured financing through.  She would have been out of the loop.

I don't know the SC code but what I have seen happen is vultures buying the note rather than the property.  It can cut their cost of a title policy, etc. as they can use the original title policy that ran with the note your sister signed.    The note purchaser could have borrowed secured by the note and that would explain why they both appear on the notice.  If your sister vacated the property he may have rented it without ever taking the formal steps to re-assert his title.

Not sure that's what happend - just a athought.  See an attorney fer sure.