2 November 2012
Answer: Although each case has unique facts that deserve
independent evaluation, probably not. Although
there has been much robo-signing in various contexts that has come to light in
recent years, this does not necessarily translate into a winning argument to
invalidate an assignment and a successful foreclosure defense. The robo-signing argument is typically a
loser. The most recent example/case
known to this author is Butler v.
Deutsche Bank. 2012 WL 3518560 at *9
(D. Mass., Aug. 14, 2012).
You also have to ask yourself: what facts do you actually
know about the signing of the assignment that you can in good faith allege in a
court case? (Keep in mind that
allegations raised in a court proceeding must be made in good faith.) Also, who are those that “know” the person is
a robo-signer?
Despite a consensus from courts, this argument and a strain
of similar buzz-word type arguments appear to have been raised frequently in
recent time and they continue not to be successful. Based on the tone of recent decisions issued
by judges that seem to be recognizing a pattern, it may get to the point that
these types of arguments could be regarded as frivolous and sanctions against
those that raise them may be issued.
Frankly, if you are thinking of raising any type of
“robo-signer” argument, the banks and their attorneys will likely regard it as
a sign that you are unfamiliar with the actual results of raising these types
of arguments.
It is understood that you may see confident statements
splashed all over the Internet concerning various arguments to avoid
foreclosure. And yes, there have been
some watershed decisions that have caused drastic changes to the foreclosure
process and in the law in this emerging “field” of foreclosure defense law in
the past four years. However, this does
not mean everyone can claim a robo-signer was involved in the transfer of their
mortgage and then avoid foreclosure. All
one needs to do is read Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly regularly to see how many
of these popular, buzz-word type arguments actually play out in the courts.
Understand that the author handles foreclosure defense as
part of an active legal practice and advocates zealously for his clients. And there are, at times, arguably often,
meritorious arguments based on good law to defense against a foreclosure. However, it is professionally unethical (and
personally and emotionally unhealthy) to write and speak too optimistically
about arguments that are typically not promising, or borderline frivolous. Please do not fall victim to these
statements. Rather, the best course of
action is to obtain a legal opinion from an attorney that you believe genuinely
has your best interests at heart.
In the event that you are looking to defend against a
foreclosure, please be mindful that it is a serious legal undertaking. In the large majority of cases it will entail
the engaging of competent legal counsel and the pursuit of meritorious claims
based on facts believed in good faith in order to be successful. The author suggests a thorough consultation
with a competent attorney that will provide a realistic assessment of your
legal situation before embarking on foreclosure defense litigation in
Massachusetts.
No comments:
Post a Comment