Posts Tagged ‘Daily Business Review’

Florida Court of Appeals Tells Judges: Stop Being Compassionate

Tuesday, October 6th, 2009

As discussed today in the Daily Business Review (see article below), the Third District Court of Appeals criticized a Miami Dade circuit judge for extending a foreclosure by one month. In essence, the Court reversed the judge’s opinion by stating that a courtroom is no place for compassion!

While it is inappropriate for an attorney to criticize the appellate court for possibly being uncompassionate, it is fair to say that a good foreclosure defense will go a long way in preventing a judge from having to attempt to be compassionate. Rather the Rules of Civil Procedure, the Florida Constitution, and the idea that the bank comes to the foreclosure with unclean hands will go a lot further than begging the court for mercy.

Typically circuit court judges were permitting extensions of foreclosure dates in order for homeowners to be able to complete a mortgage modification or a short sale. Ironically enough, if the banks didn’t drag their feet in approving short sales and approving modifications, the judges would never have been put in this terribly uncomfortable position in the first place.

Thus, in an ironic twist, we thank the appellate court for further justifying what we do every day and that is to defend homeowners with legitimate legal defenses in a foreclosure. The banks have done enough things incorrectly that will provide a trial judge an opportunity to delay a sale, should they want to, through the use of appropriate legal arguments.

The only unfortunate aspect of the appellate court’s ruling is that unrepresented clients will now be further churned and spit through a process that is only accelerating because of the increased workflow and reduction in court staff due to budget cuts. It is ironic that the bank even brought this action to the appellate court but it was through abuse by the homeowner that ultimately frustrated the bank in pursuing this appeal. Frankly, I would always prefer to have a strong legal argument than to beg for compassion from the court. So now you know the truth, don’t ever expect judges to be compassionate– even if it was their true desire.

From deep in the trenches,

Roy Oppenheim

Foreclosure Cases Appeal court takes judge to task for ‘benevolence’

October 06, 2009

By: Susannah A. Nesmith


Benevolence and compassion” have no place when it comes to setting foreclosure sales, a state appellate court ruled in a stern order.

The 3rd District Court of Appeal judges said they “thoroughly disapprove” of a decision by Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Valerie Manno Shurr to give an extra month to a couple trying to sell their home before a foreclosure sale, Senior Judge Alan R. Schwartz wrote for the panel last week.

Manno Shurr declined to comment on the decision, citing judicial rules that prohibit her from talking about specific cases. But in court, she made her position clear.

“People are having a hard time now. They are having a difficult time. Everybody knows it. Businesses are failing. People are losing money in the stock market. You know, unemployment is high,” Manno Shurr said. “Everybody knows that we are in a bad time right now, and I hate to see anybody lose their home.”

The appellate court found her reasoning flawed and said her decision granting extra time was “an abuse of discretion in the most basic sense of that term” because the bank had a right to the sale.

Several attorneys expressed outrage over the opinion but declined to go on the record, saying it could potentially be detrimental to them to openly criticize the judge or the court.

Mike Christiansen of Mastriana & Christiansen, a Fort Lauderdale attorney who has practiced real estate law for more than 30 years, was surprised by the tone of Schwartz’s remarks.

“It’s astounding to me, in the extraordinary times in which we find ourselves, that the court did not assert strong leadership and support the simple notion of compassion in cases where people and families are losing their homes,” he said.

“Compassion is what distinguishes a robotic application of the law from real justice. And justice is what we should — and do — expect from judges.”

Barry Simons of the Law Office of Barry L. Simons in Miami, attorney for Joseph and Blanca Doyle, declined to comment on the ruling against his clients.

Charles M. Rosenberg, attorney for Republic Federal Bank, said his client decided to appeal Manno Shurr’s decision in part because the bank felt Miami-Dade trial judges “needed some guidance.”

“With all of the foreclosures being filed in this county, we thought that the trial judges needed some guidance from the court of appeal on under what circumstances they could grant extensions because it’s very common for people to run into court at the last minute asking for extensions,” he said.

With the foreclosure sale of the Doyle home scheduled for the day after the opinion was published, the appellate court’s ruling had little practical impact other than to chastise the judge and provide some guidance.

“Although we thus thoroughly disapprove of the order, in view of the fact that the postponed sale is due to take place within a short time of this decision, no useful purpose will be served by formally quashing the order or ordering the sale to take place on an earlier date with all the procedural complications which would then result,” Schwartz wrote, stressing, “There are to be no further postponements of the sale.”

Judges David Gersten and Barbara Lagoa concurred.

More than 100,000 open foreclosure cases are in Miami-Dade, according to Clerk of the Courts Harvey Ruvin. Many are taking years to resolve.

In the Doyles’ case, the bank filed suit to foreclose on their 8,300-square-foot home in Pine-crest in January 2008 and got a $2.5 million foreclosure judgment in November, according to records.

The case was delayed when the Doyles filed for bankruptcy, but a federal judge tossed their case as frivolous. The Doyles were barred from filing another bankruptcy case for six months, and the extension Manno Shurr granted got them past that date.

“The immediate reason we filed was because of their abuse of the bankruptcy system,” said Rosenberg, a Carlton Fields shareholder in Miami. “We understand that the court should have discretion to grant extensions, but there has to be some reason for doing it.”

The Doyles did not file a second bankruptcy petition, and the house sold at auction Thursday. Rosenberg’s firm submitted a $1.3 million bid on property with an assessed value of $2.64 million.

Foreclosure attorneys were predictably divided on the opinion. Attorneys specializing in defending homeowners were concerned that it takes away judicial discretion and leaves homeowners already in financial straits even more vulnerable to the whims of lenders. Those who represent banks said it would help them deal with homeowners who are abusing the process.

Peter Ariz, a South Miami solo practitioner who represents homeowners, said extensions often are necessary because the banks he deals with won’t negotiate mortgage modifications quickly.

“The judges here have really been the only ones defending the consumers because they’ve allowed the borrowers the time to negotiate,” he said. “There’s a lack of compassion on the other end when it comes to the lenders.”

“I deal with banks that delay the modification process for months before finally offering a modification that actually raises the homeowner’s payments,” he said. “And then they file a foreclosure while they’re negotiating the modification. That’s just unconscionable.”

On the other hand, lender attorney Zoe Krikorian of Weisenfield & Associates in Miami hopes the ruling will speed Miami-Dade foreclosure cases.

“If there are legitimate reasons — people really trying to modify the loan, or they have a valid contract for a short sale — that’s one thing,” she said. “But many times, it’s just a delay tactic so people can stay in their houses longer without paying.”

She said the earliest sale date she could get for foreclosure judgments issued now is next April. And it often takes months to get a judgment after a case is filed. Plus, lenders usually wait for several months of missed payments before filing foreclosure suits.

“When we reset a sale, think about it. They’ve already had as long as two years since they stopped paying,” she said.

Miami-Dade civil judges “are each carrying dockets of three to four thousand foreclosure cases,” chief civil administrative Judge Jennifer Bailey said by e-mail.

“As a result of the explosion of foreclosures, judges are routinely confronted by emergency motions, and each judge tries to do justice in the case before him or her according to the law and equity.”

Statewide Solutions for Florida Foreclosures?

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Today’s Daily Business Review includes Roy Oppenheim discussing the possible Florida Supreme Court task force to regulate the process of foreclosure.  Read on for the full story.


dbr_logo_print_media_events

Florida Supreme Court
Task force hopes to standardize management of excessive foreclosures

Florida Supreme Court task force on home foreclosures plans to propose uniform case management and design a model mediation program to deal with the glut of foreclosure cases tying up the state’s legal system.

In an interim report released this week, the task force said uniform statewide solutions are needed “to avoid a patchwork of independent and confusing requirements.” But the task force is short on details, making it difficult for those working on foreclosure cases to comment on the proposals.

“At this point, it’s a little uncertain how things are going to proceed other than we expect some time in August to have a final recommendation from this task force,” said Fort Lauderdale attorney Eric Schwartz, who represents licensed mortgage lenders.

The 14-page report plus attachments notes the obvious: mortgage foreclosure filings have exploded. In three years, state courts have seen filings increase by 400 percent, and Florida has the fourth highest foreclosure rate nationally.

But instead of receiving increased infrastructure or funding, the court system has suffered cutbacks as the economy plummeted, and judges are juggling a backlog.

Supreme Court Justice Barbara Pariente said the court must try to balance the interests of lenders and borrowers when drafting a plan, and she emphasized the need for statewide standards.

Pariente, who had not seen the report when she was interviewed, said she does not know what the answer is but knows it’s important that the process be efficient and guarantee each borrower who wants a day in court can have one.

She also knows task force recommendations won’t make everyone happy.

“We’re studying it. We hope to be proactive to create a statewide order,” Pariente said.

The 15-member task force chaired by Miami-Dade Civil Administrative Judge Jennifer Bailey voted to design an alternative dispute resolution program for foreclosures that would be considered by the state’s high court. The program would be limited to cases filed in court because judges lack jurisdiction over other disputes.

The task force plans to offer recommendations that would be cost-effective and affordable while staying consistent with existing laws and policies. A pending issue is the “clarification of legal and ethical obligations of circuit judges in hearing uncontested securitized mortgage foreclosure cases.”

Homeowner defense attorney Roy Oppenheim of Oppenheim Pilelsky in Weston seized on that point, claiming the constitutional rights of distressed homeowners may be sacrificed at the hands of overworked judges.

“Why do we need clarifications if judges are really, really doing their jobs?” he asked. “It’s saying in a nice way that judges are not fulfilling constitutional obligations to protect those people not represented by counsel.”

On Sunday, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reported foreclosure lawyers for lenders are giving false statements in court and the lies and errors are slipping past overworked judges.

The task force created nearly two months ago by Chief Justice Peggy Quince to assess whether the court system could find more efficient ways to handle foreclosures plans to deliver a final report Aug. 15.

Bailey said the goals of case management and alternative dispute resolution are to ensure cases that can settle do so early to avoid clogging courthouses.

Bailey compared the court system to a highway running at maximum capacity.

“With foreclosure cases, it’s like that highway during a hurricane evacuation in a rainstorm with two lanes closed for construction because of the budget cuts that have affected the court system,” she said. “Our job is to create off-ramps for those cases … and try to keep the traffic moving because it’s not just affecting foreclosure cases. It’s affecting every case filed.”

Whether mediation would be mandatory or case specific is still being debated. Miami-Dade County opted for mandatory mediation last month after a circuit court in the Florida Panhandle did the same.

Bailey said the task force is developing criteria for what would be subject to alternative dispute resolution.

The task force also is trying to determine where the court process breaks down and how to better move cases. It could propose administrative orders and forms to use statewide.

The biggest complaint is a lack of communication between the two sides, Bailey said. The task force intends to provide the circuits with a uniform set of forms that also would give circuits flexibility.

“Coming up with one static plan that doesn’t allow for any ingenuity would be unintelligent,” Bailey said. “The idea is to come up with a basic plan that we would build on that’s relatively uniform throughout the state.”

The task force is soliciting public input but won’t hold any public hearings because of time and budget constraints.

Oppenheim called the lack of public hearings “garbage.”

“It’s the biggest problem to hit Florida in 50 years, and they’re not going to have public meetings,” he said incredulously.

If mandatory mediation is recommended, Oppenheim said he would want lenders to pay for it to ensure everyone has their day in court.

“I really get a sense that our judicial system has become a gigantic collection agency for the banks,” he said. “There definitely needs to be some creativity and some oversight here.”

Schwartz of Weitz & Schwartz in Fort Lauderdale would be happy to see uniformity among circuit courts, saying the hodgepodge of administrative orders around the state makes it difficult for practitioners who work in a variety of jurisdictions.

But he wants mediation to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

“It takes two to tango, and oftentimes we have files where the defendants are totally unresponsive and are not living at the property any longer,” Schwartz said. “To have [mediation] applied in those types of circumstances would be a waste of everyone’s time and money.”

He advocates having procedures in place allowing parties to request mediation. He opposes Miami-Dade Circuit Court’s policy requiring lenders who file homestead residential foreclosure actions to pay $750 to the Tallahassee-based Collins Center for Public Policy for mediation in addition to foreclosure filing fees.

In a speech last Friday in Fort Lauderdale, Pariente worried the public would stop “seeing courts as protectors but facilitators for the powerful.”

Bailey said the task force is trying to put together the best system for what is “fundamentally a problem that extends so far beyond what the court system is designed to respond to. There are community stabilization issues, huge economic issues, homelessness issues, job issues, mortgage fraud issues, bank regulatory issues, most of which is outside our control. We’re just where the buck stops,” Bailey said.

“The really hard work is now ahead,” Schwartz acknowledged.

Jordana Mishory can be reached at (954) 468-2616.

Loan Auditors and Foreclosure Defense: The Real Story

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

The Daily Business Review’s Terry Sheridan called Oppenheim Law to talk about how loan auditors are becoming a hot commodity in helping homeowners with today’s foreclosure maze.  

Here is the full story as seen in the May 5th issue of the Daily Business Review.

logo

Loan auditors review contracts for mistakes, but critics question usefulness
A mid growing efforts to help home owners avoid foreclosure, loan auditors are elbowing for a seat at the table.

Attorneys and home owners hire the companies for $500 to $1,000 to comb through mortgage documents for questionable disclosures or improper fees that could be used to delay or prevent foreclosure. And some loan auditors say they will trace ownership of a loan note. The document is critical, because without that paper trail, a lender can’t foreclose.

“They are the latest cottage industry to spring up because of the housing and financial downturn,” said real estate and foreclosure attorney Roy Oppenheim of Oppenheim Pilelsky in Weston.

How many auditors exist isn’t certain, and the companies aren’t licensed or regulated. As for their services, no one seems able to agree on how useful audits are.

Oppenheim says at some time he may use an auditor. But for now, his clients don’t want to spend the money.

“We get hired to handle a foreclosure, not a counterclaim against a bank,” he said.

On the other hand, foreclosure defense attorney Peter Ticktin of the Ticktin Law Group in Deerfield Beach said he believes fighting the banks on behalf of his clients is exactly why auditors are essential.

Ticktin set up Florida Mortgage Auditing about nine months ago. Audits of loan documents in about 1,000 foreclosure cases since then have revealed problems in almost all of them, he said.

The ultimate proof that the audits are successful will come in stopping the foreclosures. That hasn’t happened yet but lenders have been required to substantiate fees and the investigations have resulted in other findings. Several of the cases are being litigated and are currently in discovery. That’s a sign of progress, Ticktin said. “We haven’t lost yet.”

But attorney George Castrataro in Wilton Manors said he has yet to find an auditing company that doesn’t have what he believes is a conflict of interest by being involved with attorneys or real estate companies. So he’s hired mortgage brokers to review about 20 to 30 loans so far.

Ticktin says Castrataro is “being silly.”

Ticktin has a liaison to the auditing firm within his offices but the actual auditors are outside the office.

He says if the loan auditors worked for the bank, that would be a conflict of interest. But the loan auditors are rendering a legal service to Ticktin and giving him the legal information he needs to oppose a motion for summary judgment or otherwise pursue a case.

But loan auditors who deal directly with the public are practicing law without a license, Ticktin says.

Lender Tim Frederick, president of the Mortgage Bankers Association of the Gold Coast in West Palm Beach, described loan auditing companies as a “new gimmick” that can be construed as helping people but that also capitalizes on the financial crisis.

Some auditors stretch claims of how effective they are, Oppenheim said. Some contend they track ownership of a mortgage note through the complex securitization process –– something a lawyer would do through court-ordered discovery.

And auditors have been involved with loan modification companies that illegally charge upfront fees in attempts to prevent foreclosure, he said.

Auditors fall under the definition of “foreclosure-related rescue services” and, if fees are demanded upfront, can be sued by the state under the state’s Foreclosure Rescue Fraud Prevention Act.

A Florida Bar spokeswoman said loan auditing companies had not yet emerged as a concern. But the Bar has posted an ethics alert about loan modification companies, which often work with loan auditors.

The alert warns lawyers that they can’t provide legal services for a homeowner while working as in-house counsel for a non-lawyer company, pay referral fees to non-lawyers, divide fees with a non-lawyer or be paid by a non-lawyer for services to distressed home owners.

In March, state Attorney General Bill McCollum sued Lincoln Lending Services in Miami-Dade Circuit Court for violations of the law.

According to the lawsuit, Lincoln Lending allegedly charged $2,700 for a forensic analysis to determine errors or fraud in customers’ original mortgage or closing documents. The company would charge a second fee of $999 to modify loans.

Loan auditors are “definitely a subject on our radar screen,” said Sandi Copes, McCollum’s spokeswoman in Tallahassee.

A call to Lincoln Lending was not returned.

And for good reason, said loan auditor Steve Dibert, president of MFI-Miami and MFI-Mod Squad in Boynton Beach.

“I have about 50 competitors in Florida but that’s like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford Pinto,” he said. “A lot of these [auditing] firms want to mass produce so they use automated [software] systems that are about 70 percent accurate.”

At US Lender Audit in Tampa, business development director Shawn Aaron said auditors seeking quick business growth are promoting the use of the software programs.

The programs may flag problems based on lending laws that didn’t exist when a loan was made, Aaron said.

“You can hire a layman to punch in ‘yes’ and ‘no’ and some numbers. And in 20 minutes, they spit out a report,” he said.

It’s critical that auditors also know the source of documents given them to analyze, he said. A home owner’s loan paperwork won’t be as complete as the lender’s. And even a lender’s documents must be examined to ensure they’ve complied with a lawyer’s discovery request and that everything is legible.

“If you’re getting faxed copies that are illegible, that’s not a real interpretation of what the lender or servicer has on file,” Aaron said.

Getting documents from lenders is at the heart of MFI-Miami’s work.

Since January, Dibert has launched investigations involving Wachovia, Hudson City Savings Bank in New York and more than a dozen loan modification companies.

In the Wachovia news release, Dibert said the bank tried to block MFI’s fraud investigations and refuses to provide home owners with copies of their loan-closing documents.

Many of the loans Dibert is analyzing were done as adjustable-rate mortgages that Wachovia acquired when it purchased World Savings Bank.

A Wachovia spokeswoman said the bank would have no comment about MFI’s allegations.

But audits alone aren’t likely to stop foreclosures, Oppenheim said.

“One out of 20 times you have a situation where an audit is appropriate,” he said. “And if [owners] haven’t made payments, they haven’t made payments.”

Nicki Struthers of Bradenton, one of Dibert’s first customers, said she waited too long and the audit was of no help.

Though Dibert found several loan violations that included a double charge for an appraisal, Struthers hesitated to pay for an attorney. When she finally consulted one, there was little that could be done. In January, Struthers lost her house in foreclosure.

“In my position, the audit didn’t do a lot for me,” she said. “But if I hadn’t waited until the final hour, that would have been a big hammer to swing at a lender.”

That hammer depends on more than timing, said foreclosure attorney Castrataro, who recently opened a law office in Wilton Manors after leaving the Legal Aid Service of Broward County.

If an owner’s attorney can present a professional loan audit during mediation, it can convince a lender “how bad a [loan] they have and how bad it’ll be if they proceed with the foreclosure,” Castrataro said.

But too often borrowers pay for an audit before seeking legal advice, he said.

“They come in with these audits … and believe this is the Holy Grail that will save them. We sit them down and tell them the case is still pretty bad –– maybe because they have insufficient income or they even contributed to providing fraudulent documents,” Castrataro said.

“And sometimes the audits are appropriate as part of a well-planned litigation strategy, not just to get information on their loan.”

Terry Sheridan can be reached at (954) 468-2614.

______________________

The Issue

With no sign of an abatement in mortgage fraud or foreclosures, companies that bill themselves as loan detectives have begun marketing a forensic analysis of mortgages. Their intent is to find fraud or improper handling of the loan in an effort to delay or stop foreclosures.

Here’s what you should know about them:
The state does not license or regulate the companies.
No upfront fees can be charged to help prevent foreclosures.
Some firms operate in conjunction with loan modification companies and have been prosecuted for seeking payment first.