Se Mortgage


The South East Mortgages team provides professional advice on mortgage and protection products from across the market. The BLP has the acceptance of mortgage lenders by the largest British lenders. Mortgages " Tuto Mortgage We can help by offering state-of-the-art mortgage and security products and understand your individual circumstances: They do not spend much effort and effort on creditors and sellers who seem appealing at first sight but would not eventually approve your request due to stringent subscription requirements. 2. you are saving cash by not overpaying for your mortgage products.

High prepayment fees and administrative expenses are avoided. 6. they have an understanding of the risk and benefit of the different repayments. Don't spend too much on protecting your wealth.

The mortgage administrators are careful: You can also use your own mortgage credit card if the mortgage is not in arrears.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided on April 30, 2012, in a ruling that contradicted both the plain-text form of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and a long series of precedents, that one per se claimant had filed an FDCPA lawsuit against a mortgage provider if the mortgage was not actually in arrears.

At Bridge v. Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB, the tribunal overturned the County Court's approval of the defendants' application to deny the plaintiffs' claims under the Freedom of Information Act (FDCPA). It found that the mortgage operator and the buyer of the mortgage were subordinated to the FTCPA (despite their argument and the plaintiffs' claims that the mortgage was not in default) because the mortgage operator handled the mortgage as if it was in arrears and tried to recover it as a defaulting loan.

According to the Bridge Court, it interprets the borrower definitions to cover mortgage providers who consider a credit to be in arrears, even if it is not. FDCPA's delineation of "collection agency" precludes those collecting receivables that are not in arrears and those collecting them. In the case of mortgage providers, this means that the service provider is either "in the shoe of a creditor" for whom it is serving the mortgage (in which case the FDCPA does not apply), or "becomes a collection agency, according to whether the claim was subrogated to service before the failure or whether the purported failure arose".

" However, the Bridge Court justified this by stating that a liability that is merely claimed to be in arrears is a liability that is governed by the FDCPA because the interpretation of recovery involves the recovery of "claims due or payable or asserted". "According to the Bridge Court, this means that "a debtor or servant is a collecting agency if he performs collecting functions on a claim which, as it turns out, is not actually due.

" For example, in the Sixth Circle, a mortgage operator who treated a mortgage as if it was in arrears is regarded under the FDCPA as a collection agency, regardless of whether the mortgage was actually in arrears or not. Bridge Court also found that the cause of the incorrect treatment of the mortgage as a fault, defect or wilful misconduct was irrelevant.

At Bridge, the mortgagee faced a difficulty with his mortgage house having paid one of its mortgage repayments each month. Solved the issue quickly, but before it was fixed, the mortgage was bought by a trustee and allocated to a new mortgage operator. This servant, who had been misinformed that the mortgage was in arrears, acted on the mortgage as if it were in arrears, tried to raise funds that had been said to be overdue, and engaged a lawyer's office to begin enforcement.

In the FDCPA action, the claimant claimed that the mortgage was not actually in arrears and the service provider consented that the mortgage was not actually in arrears, but the Bridge Court held that, although the mortgage was not actually in arrears, the service provider's acts in trying to recover it as if it were in arrears classified the service provider as a collection agency under the FDCPA.

Bridge Court found that no cession of the mortgage was logged to show that the trustee had bought the mortgage, which would have shown that it was a believer and that a new servant had started serving the mortgage for the believer. Bridge Court's interpretations contradict a long series of cases and even the Sixth County Sixth Precinct legend which (a) examines the factual state of negligence of the indebtedness to establish whether the respondent is a "debt collector" rather than a characterisation of the level of indebtedness, and (b) mortgage servants are not liable to the DCMA if they serve credit that was not in arrears at the point in their commencement of serving.

Whereas the Sixth Circuit is alone in this opposite FDCPA reading, mortgage providers may want to review their new mortgage originations and consider what might appear as default before starting a debt recovery attempt.

Mehr zum Thema