The legal issues in foreclosure-gate are complex and you need to have background in law to grasp the arguments. Right now, it seems the banks are losing some ground and will be required to handle documentation and transfers of notes better.
Judge Arthur M. Schack of New York State Supreme Court in Brooklyn has taken aim at an upstate lawyer, Steven J. Baum, referring to one filing as “incredible, outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous.”
But New York judges are also trying to take the lead in fixing the mortgage mess by leaning on the lawyers. In November, a judge ordered Mr. Baum’s firm to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and costs related to papers that he said contained numerous “falsities.” The judge, Scott Fairgrieve of Nassau County District Court, wrote that “swearing to false statements reflects poorly on the profession as a whole.”
Right now it seems both sides want to develop a system of foreclosure processing and try to stay out of court as much as possible.
Through a spokesman, Mr. Baum said, “The foreclosure process in New York State is extremely complex and subject to extensive judicial review. We believe this review respects the due process of anyone who challenges a foreclosure. Consumer activists and attorneys representing homeowners have their own agenda in this process, including degrading the legal work we conduct on behalf of our clients by using terms like ’foreclosure mill,’ which I find personally and professionally insulting.”
He added, “What is important now is that all parties attempt to work together to resolve issues amicably. The barrage of accusations and litigation does little to help the underlying problems.”
California is trust deed state and doesn't have judicatory foreclosure, unlike New York. But there are some cases that will go to the court if the bank want to go after the assets of the homeowner.
Read it all