– GSR – I was trolling Trustee’s Deeds this morning, and an odd one caught by eye. A unit at the GSR was bought by – get this – the GSR! It got me curious, so I pulled up the YDT stats from the Assessor, and they have bought 23 other units either as REOs or short sales. Average price is about $12,000 per room. 11 other rooms have sold, averaging about $16,000. There may be more in the queue, since the Assessor s’s data lags a bit. True believers!
– Magna Charta – A new tactic in trying to void default is the Magna Charta Defense. Can anyone explain this mumbo jumbo to me? You bought a house at the peak of the market with 50% down, got hosed by your bad decision, and invoke the friggin’ Magna Charta? This is a new low.
– Montreux- Just how much trouble are they in? Enter Jacksick into Recorder’s site and watch huge list of personal defaults generate, Montreux Development LLC just got a NOS on a $700,000 loan on a few lots. They also seem to have been selling off some small blocks of lots for about $100,000 each (sometimes to related entities).
2745 Lake Ridge Shores is one of the incredible hulks behind the rarefied gates of Lake Ridge. Purchased for $675,000 in September 2006, and refied with a $1,360,000 construction loan in October 2007, the liens started getting recorded by July 2008. The listing history on Zillow is pretty interesting, starting at $2.3M in April 2008. The NOD was recorded in August 2009 on a missed February 2009 payment (the owner was still paying the bank while stiffing the contractors). The NOS was filed in March 2010 and the TD recorded in March 2011. It just listed for $180,000.
– NODs were up more than 50% to 641 in August from 427 in July and 414 in June, the highest level in a year. That can’t be good. NOS were way down to 363 in august from 457 in July and 452 in June. TDs were also down to 284 from 226 in July and 385 in June. Double click on this chart for the data set.
Out of Town Shopper
What is the situation at Montreaux?
Their real estate web page has been redirected to a general realty site, and the realty link from the development home page only lists a few properties.
I am interested in buying there at some point, but am afraid of unknowns in that very costly enclave.
Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.
P.S. I appreciate and rely on this blog.
gobagheera
If you want a full listing for Montreux, I’d suggest you use Mitch Argon’s website. They have a direct link for all Montreux homes on MLS here:
http://www.freenevadamove.com/montreux-golf-course-homes-for-sale-reno-nv.php
I currently reside in Montreux and like it very much.
Gadfly
Mike,
Here is some literature on the Common Law Lien strategy evinced in the linked “Magna Charta Defense” document.
http://www.famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Indiv/AdaskAlfred/CmnLawLn5.pdf
As you will see, it is not so much a default defense as strategy to encourage the bank not pursue a forced sale because the home owner, through the “Federal Claim of Common Law Lien,” has purportedly become the first lien holder on the property and would thus be paid in full for the amount of the lien. The purported lien is for the owner’s “equity” that is lost through the trustee’s sale for a price below “fair market value.”
The whole claim is predicated on the belief that the merger of courts of law and courts of equity in the U.S. was a procedural merger, not a substantive merger, and that an action at law (the lien) controls over an action at equity (the mortgage lien and sale). Without being too harsh, it is all bunk. But, that is my opinion, and since I am not really a practicing attorney, my opinion on this may be little better than a lay opinion, so let’s go on look at this further.
The Magna Charta is referenced merely as a Common Law source for guarantee of civil rights. Its reference does not pertain directly to the purported lien but rather to the claim that USC Title 42 (Civil Rights Act) Section 1986 prevents government officials from NOT enforcing a citizen’s rights guaranteed under charter documents, including the Magna Charta, that are part of the Common Law tradition.
So, we have a lien that has been filed and purports to be superior to all other liens (or at the least, the lender’s lien(s)). Such a lien, of course, clouds the title until the lien can be removed. Removal will likely require, at the least, a hearing on a motion to show cause why the lien should be removed (I think – I may be way off base on the procedural stuff since I do not actually do it). And to muck up the matters further, the home owner is claiming that non-enforcement of the lien violates her civil rights under Title 42 and, among other things, the Magna Charta.
Personally, I do not see a winning endgame for the home owner, but perhaps a practicing attorney (or a retired attorney or two who may still frequent the board) might shed more light on all this.
Gadfly
Oops. The last clause of the last sentence of the third paragraph should read, “so let’s look at this further,” rather than, “so let’s go on look at this further.”
Cardozo
I think the bank will just go ahead and foreclose on its (first in time) deed of trust. If Ms. Common Law Lienholder wants to file an action in court to restrain the bank’s foreclosure, she can givit it the ol’ college try. Somehow I think the 800 lawyers in the B of A Legal Department will be able to mount a sustainable defense to the restraining action.
lurker
gadfly has way too much time on his hands. must be an unemployed prof.
Gadfly
Lurker,
I wish — then I would not have to deal with all those pesky students! But alas, my time to comment will soon diminish as I actually have to start grading student work next week. The horror! The horror!