Not enough lawyers.

[lawyerintraining]

http://www.foreclosureindustry.com/2010/10/3-reasons-why-there-are-still-not-enough-lawyers-to-help-borrowers/

Seems there is two sides to the debate.

[FalconJimmy]

http://www.foreclosureindustry.com/2010/10/3-reasons-why-there-are-still-not-enough-lawyers-to-help-borrowers/

Seems there is two sides to the debate.

In this article, she deals with the idea that there are not enough lawyers to REPRESENT PEOPLE FACING FORECLOSURE.

This is something that's gotten a lot of attention in the media, primarily due to mortgage servicers being unable to produce original loan documentation.

However, the basic reality is that people facing foreclosure, in virtually all cases, are people who haven't been paying their notes as they are contractually obligated to do.

As she pointed out, generally, the best you can do is go into court and say, "hey, the bank's paperwork is messed up!"  Then, the judge will give the bank more time to straighten their paperwork up.

The client gets to live in the house a little longer.  The bank keeps trying.  More often than not, the bank gets its act together and the client is out on the streets.

Tough to get attorneys interested in prolonging the inevitable.  Especially when you consider that clients who can't pay their mortgage are unlikely to be in a position to pay for a day in court.

[haus]

I imagine that many states that require judicial foreclosures (e.g. New York) will soon be changing their laws to allow the court system to be bypassed, which will help speed up the large amount of foreclosures that are pending (If I recall correctly at the current rate for the courts clearing foreclosures there are over a decade of foreclosures in the pipeline). Once the courts are no longer required to be part of the process, the demand for lawyers will drop considerably.

[FalconJimmy]

I imagine that many states that require judicial foreclosures (e.g. New York) will soon be changing their laws to allow the court system to be bypassed, which will help speed up the large amount of foreclosures that are pending (If I recall correctly at the current rate for the courts clearing foreclosures there are over a decade of foreclosures in the pipeline). Once the courts are no longer required to be part of the process, the demand for lawyers will drop considerably.

I fear you are 100% right.  Not because this represents an advancement or better justice, but because it's what's best for the financial institutions and they have a lot more sway than consumers, especially broke ones.

[Duncanjp]

Falcon is exactly right for the vast majority of those facing foreclosure. They haven't been defrauded by their lenders: they stopped making their payments. And there isn't a lot that an attorney can do for those people other than procrastinate the inevitable. But in cases of true fraud, what a person really needs is title insurance, not an attorney. I see it constantly in my business, unfortunately. One of the many scams I'm seeing involves unconscionable people in default who record a fraudulent deed of trust against their property, naming bogus parties like The Financial Recovery Group, as trustee, and Real Property Investors, an unincorporated association, as beneficiary. This makes the chain of title look like the owners in default managed to refinance the defaulted deed of trust. Shortly thereafter, they file a fraudulent rescission of the notice of default and a reconveyance of the genuine deed of trust. Two months later, the bogus beneficiary conducts a short sale and some undereducated title examiner working for a title company doesn't have the wits to recognize the pattern or to question why the beneficiary is conducting a bloody short sale two months after funding the blickety-blank-blank loan. (I'm trying to keep my temper in check here because this subject infuriates me.) So the examiner sees the recon in the chain and blows off the defaulted loan without questioning it, and then the crooks sell the property to the unsuspecting buyer and race off to Jericho with the sale proceeds. The buyer moves in and a short time later the original beneficiary on the true deed of trust forecloses and evicts the buyer. But the victimized buyer doesn't hire an attorney. He tenders a claim with his title insurance company, and the title company ends up sending the buyer a check for the full price of the property. This kind of fraud, I'm sad to say, is rampant. And while you can blame the title companies when they fail to spot the fraud in time to stop it, the fact is, lay people have great difficulty recognizing fraud when it's happening because so many of them just don't have the education and the critical thinking skills that come with it to decipher when a con game is in progress.

In sum, victims of fraud often don't need attorneys. They just need title insurance from a financially sound title company. Those who would invest money in real property without buying title insurance assume a heck of a large risk.

[FalconJimmy]

Wow, Duncan.  It never ceases to amaze me the creativity of the crooks sometimes.  Just wow. 

[lawyerintraining]

Due Process might slow down attempts to take property without right to courts though. Unlike a car which can be repo'd (in theory) without "violating the piece"(secured transactions) it would be virtually impossible to do the same with a house. Even a renter who refuses to pay rent  has to be given an eviction notice, and that requires a court.

That plus the courts will make it HARDER(not easier) to take homes. For the same reason there is estopell and adverse possession, courts don't want large numbers homeless and/or crambed into welfare projects. At some point it'll somehow become "racist" too(wait&watch)

[EdinaRah]

There will always be areas of law where there aren't enough attorneys.

Do you want to be gainfully employed for the foreseeable future?  Specialize in ERISA --if you can show any taste for it (it's boring) or competency (it's complicated) you will be appreciated. ERISA was in demand during the boom and it still is now.