Mortgage Crisis

Ibanez Update: Massachusetts Land Court Decision Invalidates Foreclosures Based On Post-Sale Assignments

by Rich Vetstein on August 27, 2009

in Foreclosure, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Mortgage Crisis, Mortgages, Title Defects, Title Insurance

Breaking News (1.7.11): Mass. Supreme Court Upholds Ibanez Ruling, Thousands of Foreclosures Affected

Update (2/25/10)—Mass. High Court May Take Ibanez Case

Breaking News (10/14/09)–Land Court Reaffirms Ruling Invalidating Thousands of Foreclosures. Click here for the updated post.

In late March of this year in the case of U.S. Bank v. Ibanez, Massachusetts Land Court Judge Keith C. Long issued one of the most controversial rulings in recent years which has called into question hundreds if not thousands of foreclosure titles across Massachusetts. The Ibanez decision is what happens when you mix equal parts of a deteriorating real estate market with Wall Street’s insatiable demand for mortgage back securities with sloppy lending practices and outdated state foreclosure statutes.

The Facts

In the Ibanez case, the Land Court invalidated two foreclosure sales because the lenders failed to show proof they held titles to the properties through valid assignments. In modern securitized mortgage lending practices, the ownership of a mortgage loan may be divided and freely transferred numerous times on the lenders’ books, but the documentation (i.e., the assignments) actually on file at the Registry of Deeds often lags far behind. The Land Court ruled that foreclosures were invalid when the lender failed to bring  the ownership documentation (the assignments) up-to-date until after the foreclosure sale had already taken place. This was true even if the lender possessed an assignment with an effective date (i.e., backdated) before the first foreclosure notice.

The net effect of the Ibanez decision is to call into serious question the validity of any foreclosure where the lender did not physically hold the proper paperwork at the time it conducted its auction. This has already caused significant uncertainty in the ownership of many properties that have already been foreclosed and are awaiting foreclosure.

In deciding the case, Judge Long took a very pro-consumer approach to the foreclosure law, persuaded that the apparent title defect would chill a foreclosure sale and harm debtors:

None of this is the fault of the [debtor], yet the [debtor] suffers due to fewer (or no) bids in competition with the foreclosing institution. Only the foreclosing party is advantaged by the clouded title at the time of auction. It can bid a lower price, hold the property in inventory, and put together the proper documents any time it chooses. And who can say that problems won’t be encountered during this process?

Also of significance was that Judge Long rejected a customary Massachusetts conveyancing standard which provides that recording out of order assignment documents does not create a title defect. I think Judge Long got it wrong as he elevated form over substance and didn’t give enough credence to the legal principle that the note follows the mortgage, but hey, I’m just a lowly attorney.

What now?

The Ibanez ruling is not final as the lenders have filed a motion to reconsider with the Land Court. And now the heavy hitters have gotten involved. The Real Estate Bar Association of Massachusetts has taken the unusual step of filing a friend of the court brief, urging the Land Court to reconsider its decision.

On the consumer side, the National Consumer Law Center and well known consumer class action attorney Gary Klein have joined the fray and filed a brief. Attorney Klein has also filed a class action in federal court to challenge completed foreclosures and future foreclosures on the same facts as the two foreclosures voided in Ibanez.

As of now, Judge Long of the Land Court has not made a final decision which should come in a matter of weeks. I will update you when the ruling comes down. Either way, in my opinion, given the widespread impact of this case, it is destined for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. It’s hard to say how the SJC will come down on this.

What can you if you are affected by the Ibanez ruling?

Well, if you are a homeowner facing foreclosure, consider Ibanez an early Christmas present. You now have a powerful tool to argue for the invalidation of the foreclosure sale. (I won’t comment on the fact that you still owe the lender money).

If you are contemplating purchasing a property out of foreclosure or are selling a previously foreclosed property, pray that there’s an existing title insurance policy on the property, and ask the title company to insure over the issue. Some are willing to do this. Others are not. The other option (albeit expensive) is to hire an attorney to file a Land Court “quiet title” action to validate the proper assignment of the mortgage loan, assuming you can track the documents down and they were not backdated. In Ibanez, the lender couldn’t produce the assignment until 14 months after the auction. The last option, and unfortunately probably the safest bet, is to sit, wait and see how the Land Court and appellate courts will rule ultimately. Not the answer you probably want to hear, but it’s reality.

Please contact Richard D. Vetstein, Esq. for more information.

[click to continue…]

{ 17 comments }

Massachusetts Property Values: An Appraiser’s Outlook And Predictions On Future Massachusetts Property Values

by Rich Vetstein on July 31, 2009

in Appraisals, Massachusetts Property Values, Mortgage Crisis, Rental Housing

I’m pleased to have Donald J. Griffin, MAI, SRA, an experienced appraiser with Don Griffin Appraisals, Inc., who is here to guest blog about a topic very much on the mind of Massachusetts homeowners, buyers and sellers:  Massachusetts property values.

Don Giffin, MAI Appraiser

What Happened?  The Last Three Years

The Massachusetts real estate market was artificially stimulated by forces outside the normal supply demand model. This led to artificially increased values, mostly at the lower end of the value range in communities at the lower end of the income range. Once the stimulation was terminated, around 2006, and market forces returned to normal, the correction process began. The Massachusetts market has to absorb all of the artificially induced value, before it can start to act in a normal supply demand model.  Any particular property will be affected by the market that it is in, therefore to answer the question, “How much has my property value declined?”, look at the community it is in, and the location of its value in the community’s range of value, i.e. low medium and high. In general a high end valued home in a community with high incomes will see little to no loss, while a low end valued home in a community with low income will see high declining value. Most communities will continue an upward trend in average value. The upper end in both markets will continue to feel the pressure of the recession and tight credit for 12-18 months until the recession’s negative effects are mostly dissipated and we have moved into a strong growth mode. Properties at the low end of the value range in all communities will wait a long time to attain the values seen in 2006.

The Broad Strokes

In general, decline in real estate value is a result of an imbalance in supply and demand.  More sellers than buyers, cause reduced prices. If possible sellers wait, hoping the market will improve.

The Impact of the Sub-Prime And Credit Crisis On Massachusetts Property Values

There have been many articles written describing the sub prime mortgage market in relation to the collateralized mortgaged backed security market. For our purposes I will simply state that the effect was to increase demand for real estate, mostly at the low end of the value range. I say the low end because the goal was to bring marginal buyers into the market by lowering the bar for qualification for a mortgage.

This did not affect the middle and upper income value ranges in Massachusetts as much, since high income earners were already in the market.

However, there was an “upsurge effect.” When a low value owner sold for a profit, they moved up to the middle market, creating a secondary effect on the middle and upper markets.

From 2003 to about 2006 we can document an upsurge in Massachusetts property values, which we attribute to the excess demand entering the market during this period.

Case Study, Arlington, MA:  The Middle Market

I’ll use Arlington, Massachusetts as a sample middle market community. I’ve tracked the average sales prices of single family homes from 2003 through 2009 Year to Date, shown here:

arlington graph

Case Study, Wellesley, MA:  The High End Market

I’ll use Wellesley, Massachusetts as a sample upper market community where I’ve tracked the average sales prices of single family homes from 2003 through 2009 Year to Date, shown here:wellesley graph

What Markets Have Been Affected?

In general, middle market Massachusetts communities, such as Arlington, have seen declines at the low end, with recent increases at the middle value ranges, mostly correcting the effects of the oversupply caused by the subprime mortgages. The upper value range in a middle market community has mostly seen steady growth in value, but is now starting to feel the impact of the recession.

High income communities, such as Wellesley have seen similar changes. The YTD value declines at the upper level are more pronounced and reflect not only the recession but also the lack of ready loans for jumbo mortgages.

Property Value Predictions:  What Does The Trend Tell Us?

Following the trend lines we would predict that the lower and middle value ranges in most Massachusetts communities will continue an upward trend in average value. The upper end in both markets will continue to feel the pressure of the recession and tight credit for 12-18 months until the recession’s negative effects are mostly dissipated and we have moved into a strong growth mode.

_______________________________

Thanks so much for the informative post, Don.  We look forward to your future contributions to the Massachusetts Real Estate Blog. As you can see, Donald J. Griffin, MAI, SRA really knows his stuff. So please contact him for your appraisal needs.

Richard D. Vetstein

{ 2 comments }

Massachusetts Foreclosures Down Almost 60%, A Good Sign or Statistical Aberration?

by Rich Vetstein on June 30, 2009

in Foreclosure, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, Mortgage Crisis, Mortgages

The Boston Globe is reporting that foreclosures in Massachusetts took a steep dive in May, the second consecutive month they have fallen, according to data released yesterday by Boston real estate tracking firm Warren Group.

According to the Globe, there were 582 foreclosure deeds recorded in May, a 58.6 percent decrease from 1,405 during the same month in 2008, and a 24.3 percent drop from April.

Others attribute the drop to the so-called Ibanez decision by the Massachusetts Land Court in late March that invalidated two foreclosures because the lenders failed to show proof they held titles to the properties. The Ibanez decision is a product of the Massachusetts conveyancing practice struggling to keep up with modern mortgage lending practices. The ownership of a loan may be divided and freely transferred numerous times on the lenders’ books, but the documentation (i.e., the assignments) actually on file at the Registry of Deeds often lags far behind. The Land Court ruled that foreclosures were invalid when the lender brought the ownership documentation (the assignments) up-to-date after the foreclosure sale had already taken place — even if the effective date of the assignment was before the first foreclosure notice. The ruling, which is ultimately expected to head to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, has prompted concern throughout the conveyancing and mortgage industry, and is stalling sales of foreclosed properties, real estate specialists say.

Based on discussions I have had with other real estate attorneys, up to 20% of all foreclosure titles in Massachusetts may be affected by the Ibanez decision.

This is causing so much angst in the industry that title insurers are refusing to insure foreclosure titles affected by the problem. That means in cases where this issue is present, the lender cannot foreclosure, and the real estate sits barren for the indefinite future. This is bad for the lender who is trying to get rid of a non-performing asset, for the potential buyers interested in purchasing foreclosed properties, and certainly for the neighborhoods affected by blighted foreclosed properties.

Here is a copy of a portion of a memo sent by Stewart Title Company to its local title agents suspending authorizations to issue title insurance over titles derived from foreclosures which are affected by this problem:

Date: April 22, 2009
To: All Massachusetts Issuing Offices
RE: Recent Land Court Decisions Requiring Suspension of Authorization to Insure Massachusetts Titles Based on Foreclosures with Post-Foreclosure Assignments

Dear Associates:

As you may be aware, the Land Court issued two recent decisions that call into question the validity of several titles coming out of foreclosure.

The result of these two decisions is that titles based on foreclosures by an Assignee lender are potentially fatal unless the Assignment in question was executed and held by the foreclosing lender prior to the commencement of foreclosure under M.G.L. c. 244, §14. Foreclosures based on Assignments that were dated after the foreclosure sale were deemed invalid even if the Assignments were “backdated” (i.e., contained an “effective date”) prior to the first c. 244, §14 notices.

Accordingly, subject to certain exceptions discussed later in this Bulletin, until further developments in these cases and the law upon which these cases were decided, Stewart Title Guaranty Company is suspending authorization to insure titles derived from foreclosures where the recorded Assignment into the foreclosing Lender is not dated prior to the date of the first publication under c. 244, §14.

I will be monitoring the Land Court decision through what will surely be an appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court, the highest appellate court in Massachusetts.

Update (Aug. 27, 2009):  I have been informed by attorneys involved in the Ibanez case that the lenders have filed a motion to reconsider the Land Court’s ruling. Also, the Real Estate Bar Association of Massachusetts has taken the unusual step of filing a “friend of the court” brief, urging the Land Court to reconsider its decision. The National Consumer Law Center and well known consumer class action attorney Gary Klein has also joined the fray. As of now, Judge Long of the Land Court has not made a final decision. I will update you when the ruling comes down. Either way, this case is going up to the Supreme Judicial Court, and probably on direct appellate review.

{ 2 comments }