Recently, courts in both Florida and NJ decided they would make up new state SOL statutes that govern foreclosure to insure the lender can win. The usual modus operandi in our dishonest courts with crooked, incompetent judges.
Both courts decided that a dismissal of the case would result in an automatic deceleration of the loan because once the case is dismissed, it would place the parties back to where they were before the complaint was ever filed.
A new complaint could then be filed using a new default date and that's it. Now, I'm not going to even get into why this logic is just stupid on its face. But, if your loan is FHA, take a look at what I came across in the HUD Handbook:
Clearly, a dismissal of a complaint has NOTHING to do with whether the loan is decelerated. This paragraph gives only 3 options for deceleration. Dismissal of a complaint isn't one of them.
It is so critical that we not make payments of any kind nor agree to any repayment plan IF we feel we could have a defense under the SOL. For anyone who is unaware of this, wow, what a difference a payment or an agreement could make.
In addition, the filing of a complaint does not accelerate the loan since the loan must be accelerated BEFORE a foreclosure complaint is filed. If you read your complaint, there should be an Acceleration section where it says something like:
The key word of course is exercised. Take note of the past tense The lender has already accelerated the loan. A lender can conceivably accelerate and never foreclose. The 2 events are not necessarily tied together.
In one of my NOIs, it states: "If the default is not cured by the date . . . . . . the sums secured by the mortgage may be accelerated w/o further notice." Both the FL & NJ courts mentioned that borrowers can produce no proof as to when the loan was accelerated. Perhaps not. Seems no notice is required. But in order to foreclose, the loan had to be accelerated, so we know the date of acceleration was at least one day before the filing of the complaint.
IMO, all of this language kills the court's "new" SOL argument dead. Keep this in mind if you reach the SOL or are close to getting there. The courts just make up shit for the bank, so we need to check everything and everywhere to see if there is anything out there that contradicts their nonsense rulings.
Please comment anyone if you think I'm missing something in my analysis.
..
Both courts decided that a dismissal of the case would result in an automatic deceleration of the loan because once the case is dismissed, it would place the parties back to where they were before the complaint was ever filed.
A new complaint could then be filed using a new default date and that's it. Now, I'm not going to even get into why this logic is just stupid on its face. But, if your loan is FHA, take a look at what I came across in the HUD Handbook:

Clearly, a dismissal of a complaint has NOTHING to do with whether the loan is decelerated. This paragraph gives only 3 options for deceleration. Dismissal of a complaint isn't one of them.
It is so critical that we not make payments of any kind nor agree to any repayment plan IF we feel we could have a defense under the SOL. For anyone who is unaware of this, wow, what a difference a payment or an agreement could make.
In addition, the filing of a complaint does not accelerate the loan since the loan must be accelerated BEFORE a foreclosure complaint is filed. If you read your complaint, there should be an Acceleration section where it says something like:
"By reason of the defendant's default, plaintiff exercised the contractual right, provided by the mortgage, to accelerate the debt."
The key word of course is exercised. Take note of the past tense The lender has already accelerated the loan. A lender can conceivably accelerate and never foreclose. The 2 events are not necessarily tied together.
In one of my NOIs, it states: "If the default is not cured by the date . . . . . . the sums secured by the mortgage may be accelerated w/o further notice." Both the FL & NJ courts mentioned that borrowers can produce no proof as to when the loan was accelerated. Perhaps not. Seems no notice is required. But in order to foreclose, the loan had to be accelerated, so we know the date of acceleration was at least one day before the filing of the complaint.
IMO, all of this language kills the court's "new" SOL argument dead. Keep this in mind if you reach the SOL or are close to getting there. The courts just make up shit for the bank, so we need to check everything and everywhere to see if there is anything out there that contradicts their nonsense rulings.
Please comment anyone if you think I'm missing something in my analysis.
..
Last edited by a moderator: