Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One more piece of the puzzle. Our realtor said it was a deed in lieu in 2010. Dont know if that changes anything but to answer your question...trustee attorney. holy hell...Ive gotta sue TWO lawyers ???? i need a drink.
Yes, deed in lieu of foreclosure, pretty standard stuff in a BK 7. Doesn't change anything for you.
Okay.. so now we know what happened. The bank is not the evil empire here.
Now you can properly explain to a competent attorney what happened and how you have been damaged and ask what can be done about mitigating your damages.
Is this the same property you were buying and suddenly discovered that it wasn't disclosed that there was a HOA and something about back dues?????? How wasn;t all this discovered back when all that was happening, or was that another problem property? Something sounds a bit hokie???
OP, I'm so sorry this is happening to you. I don't have any advice just I completely understand the whole small town thing. We got screwed on our real estate transaction as well due to the whole small town thing. Its not just the realtors its the businesses as well. People knock the big box stores but that is all we shop at for recourse. I wish you well and keep us updated. I hope it works out in your favor.
Yes, deed in lieu of foreclosure, pretty standard stuff in a BK 7. Doesn't change anything for you.
Okay.. so now we know what happened. The bank is not the evil empire here.
Now you can properly explain to a competent attorney what happened and how you have been damaged and ask what can be done about mitigating your damages.
Wow..thank you. I think I've the gist of things. Yes..we THOUGHT we were buying it from the bank. But looking back at the paperwork..it was in the trustee's name. But I'm confused about this..I can't find a deed where it went back into the banks name for the deed in lieu in 2010. Why did the bank sign over the deed into his name in July 2011?
Trustee did the comdemnation arrangements BEFORE the deed was signed over to him. The condemnation was filed april 2011 while still in the banks name. One month later the bank deeds it to the trustee. For some reason I'm thinking this is significant. He could say he isn't required to disclose anything that he knew happened while in the banks name? Am I on the right track? Son of *****..I hope not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacificFlights
Is this the same property you were buying and suddenly discovered that it wasn't disclosed that there was a HOA and something about back dues?????? How wasn;t all this discovered back when all that was happening, or was that another problem property? Something sounds a bit hokie???
One and the same. I guess this was just finding the HOA restrictions which they did get me a copy. had to pester them for it. There were back dues but we never heard anything else on that end. There was nothing for us to catch at that point. Something is most definately hokie!
This is very strange. Of course, real estate practices vary from state to state but around here in order to subdivide land you would need to immediately record two deeds with proper property descriptions. Essentially, the old property goes away and two new properties take its place.
Thanks Mike!
Honestly..I keep coming back to this. How can it be? How can you remove 2 acres from a 3 acre lot and the only record of it be a condemnation filed at the courthouse?? No legal description spelling out exactly what was removed. No 2 new deeds. Nothing but a condemnation. I'm looking at the condemnation. Its says under the address/property Deed book238 page 0007 instrument blah blah. This leads me to the plans for the township for the whole road with very detailed maps/construction. However..there is no legal description..it's a survey and plan for the roads.
Which would raise another question in my mind: if the new deed after sub-division (which in most areas is a Planning and Zoning function, or at least approval process) is not filed in a timely manner and the property transfers is that sub-division nullified?
I ask this because it happened here several years ago with a sub-division of a double lot. The owner never filed the change and then died. His heirs sold the property as unsub-divided and a developer showed up at the new owners with an option to buy the unrecorded new lot signed by the dead owner.
Wow..thank you. I think I've the gist of things. Yes..we THOUGHT we were buying it from the bank. But looking back at the paperwork..it was in the trustee's name. But I'm confused about this..I can't find a deed where it went back into the banks name for the deed in lieu in 2010. Why did the bank sign over the deed into his name in July 2011?
Trustee did the comdemnation arrangements BEFORE the deed was signed over to him. The condemnation was filed april 2011 while still in the banks name. One month later the bank deeds it to the trustee. For some reason I'm thinking this is significant. He could say he isn't required to disclose anything that he knew happened while in the banks name? Am I on the right track? Son of *****..I hope not.
One and the same. I guess this was just finding the HOA restrictions which they did get me a copy. had to pester them for it. There were back dues but we never heard anything else on that end. There was nothing for us to catch at that point. Something is most definately hokie!
Upon filing a BK7 a Trustee is assigned to the case and it is they who are responsible for selling assets to pay back creditors.
Now it is time for you to find a competent attorney.
Wow..thank you. I think I've the gist of things. Yes..we THOUGHT we were buying it from the bank. But looking back at the paperwork..it was in the trustee's name. But I'm confused about this..I can't find a deed where it went back into the banks name for the deed in lieu in 2010. Why did the bank sign over the deed into his name in July 2011?
This is what I am hearing for chain of title and events.
Sellers get divorced.
During the divorce they file bankruptcy as part of those proceedings.
The court likely discharges the sellers debt.
The sellers are still legally on title and deed, despite having no financial ties to property
The sellers do a deed-in-lieu to the bank to remove themselves off the title and deed, but the property has not been discharged from the court for sale and disbursement of assets.
The bank deeds it over to the trustee for disposal of the asset and to pay off any liens as decided by the bankruptcy court.
The trustee places the house up for sale as part of the court requirements and sells it to you. The trustee transfers the deed, probably a bargain and sale deed, to you. That type of deed has no warranties.
So, I don't think you can sue the Trustee since the condemnation was on the title report so it was clearly disclosed. Personally I am stunned that the legal description wasn't changed at that time of the condemnation. That makes no sense whatsoever. How is someone supposed to know what they are buying?
The issue at play is who had a fiduciary duty to you to inform you of this material fact. The fact that attorney assumed you knew because everyone in town knew doesn't count. I think the buck stops with your real estate agent and attorney. I think most states require some type of agency disclosure form. Ours states our fiduciary duties right on it. Did you get something like that?
Personally I am stunned that the legal description wasn't changed at that time of the condemnation. That makes no sense whatsoever. How is someone supposed to know what they are buying?
Thats what I was asking pages back, is the actual LEGAL boundaries of the property matching the ASSUMED boundaries?
How many times have we seen properties with nice neat lines but in reality the assumed boundaries, the assumed acreage, and the assumed continuity of the parcel wasn;t what it apeared?
Thats what I was asking pages back, is the actual LEGAL boundaries of the property matching the ASSUMED boundaries?
How many times have we seen properties with nice neat lines but in reality the assumed boundaries, the assumed acreage, and the assumed continuity of the parcel wasn;t what it apeared?
Many many times.
I'm looking at a property now. On MLS now for sale with 14 acres. Taxes quoted around about $13,600. However, when I went downtown, the advertised property is on two parcels totaling 39 acres with taxes of $13,600. I looked at the plat maps and nothing has been updated.
So before I even contemplate an offer, I want to see a new survey and updated plats.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
holy hell...Ive gotta sue TWO lawyers ???? i need a drink.
