You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
-
Hank,
Since the house is not her ASSET anymore – it does not need to be included in the BK.
We LOVE getting feedback about what we’re dong right and what’s were dong wrong at http://www.CREWealth.com
Let us know what we can do to make your learning experience better. What topics would you like to see in the Learning Center? On conference calls?
Thanks
JackieAnyone have any ideas on this one or faced a similar situation?
Have had a subj to property for about 15 mos with all going smoothly – until yesterday the mortgagee (lady who sold me the property) called to say she is thinking of filing BK to clear some credit card debts because shes hounded daily by creditors calling, however her lawyer says her having a mortgage will have to be included in the BK.
Two questions really:
1 – Since she’s more concerned with the calls than paying the debts, how can she shut down the calls? (then she wouldn’t worry about the BK)
2 – Who does she keep the subj to mortgage out of the BK?Thanks,
Hank
Hank,
I’ve been in a similar situation where the seller of a subject to later files BK.
All I had to do was show the BK attorney my DEED to the property, and case was closed.
Even though the loan is still in her name, she does not legally own the asset anymore so it does not need to be included in the BK.
I hear the craziest things – usually from an attorney – or even worse a realtor or a mortgage broker.
Just last week, I got a call from someone I bought a house from subject to 8 years ago. She was frantic because she said the loan was still in her name and she wanted to buy another house. The mortgage broker told her it was ILLEGAL for me to buy a house and leave the loan in place. ILLEGAL! I said show me the law! Anyway, on that one, the house was sold 4 years ago and the loan was paid off.
Often these mortgage brokers, realtors or attorney don’t even know what they were talking about and their comments make us look like criminals.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
