Family lawyer encourages squatting in home they were evicted and foreclosed on; family picks lock and forcefully enters home while police watch

singExpect more of this.  Homeowners are breaking into their homes after they have been foreclosed upon.  With potentially fraudulent foreclosures, we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg.   This family owed over $880,000 and they assume that they have the right to reclaim their home.

These guys are idiots.  They claim that there is a dispute for $25,000 and that is why they should have never been evicted.  Let's just assume they only owe $850,000.  An investor picked up this house for $697,000 and put another $40,000 and then sold for $800,000.  They could have picked up this house for less than what they owed from the investor.  Instead, they are fighting to stay in a home which they owe more than what it is worth.  Doesn't make sense to me.  They should buy the house down the street and pay $800,000.

The real issue comes in the precdent that they are setting.  If they do get their homes through the courts, it could set off a mass reclaiming of foreclosed homes, via WSJ:  
“This is only the beginning of this,” the Earls’ attorney, Michael Pines tells KABC News. “I chose this family because we needed to get back in before the investor and the real-estate broker defrauded a new family by having them move in, which would have created a bigger mess. (The Earls) have done absolutely nothing wrong.”

The Earls say it’s unclear who owns the loan. Foreclosure documents list GRP Financial Services. HousingWatch says that the original lender was Washington Mutual Bank which became JPMorgan Chase. The loan went to Bank of America on the same day that Chase sent the homeowners a notice of default. The Earls argue that Chase never properly assumed the loan and thus did not have the right to sell it off. And in turn, the investors, Conejo Capital Partners, did not properly purchase the property.

They broke in and are proceeding to squat in there,” listing agent Chris Garvin of Troop Real Estate, tells HousingWatch. Mr. Garvin bought the home on the courthouse steps on behalf of Consejo.

The family’s attorney disputes that. “They may claim we’re violating the law,” he tells the Ventura newspaper. “We’re claiming they violated the law. Typically the authorities will say this is a civil dispute, but the question is, who owns the home? Because whoever doesn’t is trespassing.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

October retail sales come in strong, especially auto sales

Tea Party Buffalo Pictures

How to spot a fake Tea Partier