82 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 16 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

New Lamps for Old

By       (Page 10 of 12 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   No comments
Message David Petrovich

Once the note's ownership presents itself for Eminent Domain compensation, the current value of the private property is negotiated and then an amount of money is determined to be fair compensation.

I cannot emphasize this enough: Fair compensation can only be paid to the lawful owners of the toxic mortgage notes, subject to the rules for Eminent Domain taking. The lawful owners must demonstrate they possess 100% of the rights required by law to enforce the negotiable instrument / mortgage note.

Unlike the Wall Street model that prematurely, and perhaps unjustly, rewards the alleged note-holders, my idea for a nonprofit public benefit agency seeks to expose many - if not most - of the program mortgage notes as invalid or voidable, and eventually extinguished via quiet-title actions.

The process of Eminent Domain to identify and then qualify the rightful owners of the toxic mortgage notes will require an alleged owner provide proof, as required by the Uniform Commercial Code, that it has 100% of the rights required to enforce the note as owner of the mortgage note and is entitled to payment for the condemnation compensation. Fair compensation. But what's fair?

Many people who advocate Eminent Domain Mortgage Retirement or Replacement believe (perhaps mistakenly) that current fair-market value is a percentage of the remaining debt owed or some portion of a home's fair-market value. But a prerequisite to determining the outstanding debt, if any, is an accurate financial and legal accounting of the history of the mortgage note, and full disclosure of any and all payments that should have been applied to the original debt, including insurance proceeds or payments made by third parties.

What if the note's owners had already been paid in full by a third party or an insurance-policy disbursement but hadn't credited the payment received to the borrowers' debt? This loan-servicing tactic raises the question of how much the borrower still owes to the rightful owner of the note - if anything at all.

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

David Petrovich Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Executive Director: Society For Preservation of Continued Homeownership (SPOCH), a 501c3 tax exempt, charitable and educational consumer advocacy.

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Wall Street's Achilles Heel may be hidden in plain sight

Foreclosure Crises Needs Private-Public Programs

New Lamps for Old

Eminent Domain - a Gift Horse or Trojan Horse?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend