.jpg)
reaffirmation and loan modification
Hi Larry:
The policy stems from the fact that the only loan a debtor is required to reaffirmed is an automobile. The rest of the reaffirmations are voluntary. Most attorneys don't sign off on real property (and auto) because of the possible liability back to the attorney who signed off on the agreement if later the client defaults and it really was a hardship on them.omeone needs to protect the Debtors from themselves, so much can go wrong and the debtor has already played the bankruptcy card so they will loose their property and be liable for the deficiency balance.
Law Office of Catherine Christiansen
17011 Beach Blvd. Ste 900, Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Tel: (714) 375-6651 Fax: (562) 490-8572
attorneychristiansen@gmail.com
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] reaffirmation and loan modification
I have seen numerous references on this list serve that our judges dont approve real property reaffirmations or something similar. I have told several clients this because the real property reaffirmation demands seems to be coming up more often.
My question; where do I find this policy, is this policy written down anywhere? I cant find any such reference in the Judicial Practices Survey or the local rules. The only mention I can find in the code is at 524(c)(6)(B); which seems to apply to pro se debtors.
Best regards
Larry Webb
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Check out my Blog
Larry@webbklaw. com
Law Offices of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ste 43
Camarillo Ca 93010
P 805.987.1400
F 805.987.2866
C 805.750.2150
From:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 8:01 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] reaffirmation and loan modification
This has been common. I would send a letter advising them of the court's policy in the CDC.
Jonathan Leventhal, Esq..
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours.
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C. is a Debt Relief Agency under federal law.
Note: The Leventhal Law Group, P.C. does not represent you until a written fee agreement has been signed by you and a representative of the Leventhal Law Group, P.C. and all fees listed in the agreement have been paid.
On Jul 28, 2013, at 12:08 PM, "stephen burton" wrote:
>Has anyone had any experience with a debtor having the obtain reaffirmation first, before the lender even considers reaffirming a mortgage loan?tgage Settlement, wants my clients to reaffirm a first and second mortgage loan on their primary residence before the Credit Union will consider modification of both loans.
>
>I think this is down right Byzantine. Concurrent reaffirmation with modification is fine with me, but if the client cannot ultimately cut a good deal on modification, but was first required to reaffirm,the client has remarried the bride only not to consummate the marriage thesecond time.
>
>Sorry for the metaphor. I just found myself with a lack for the right words at the moment.
>
>Steve Burton
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
charset="UTF-8"
I have seen numerous references on this list serve that our judges dont approve real property reaffirmations or something similar. I have told several clients this because the real property reaffirmation demands seems to be coming up more often.
My question; where do I find this policy, is this policy written down anywhere? I cant find any such reference in the Judicial Practices Survey or the local rules. The only mention I can find in the code is at 524(c)(6)(B); which seems to apply to pro se debtors.
Best regards
Larry Webb
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Check out my Blog
Larry@webbklaw. com
Law Offices of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ste 43
Camarillo Ca 93010
P 805.987.1400
F 805.987.2866
C 805.750.2150
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Check with Pat Pinto at OC Legal Aid to see if your HO qualifies for refinance. They you will know if signing the reaff is a good idea.
Law Office of Catherine Christiansen
17011 Beach Blvd. Ste 900, Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Tel: (714) 375-6651 Fax: (562) 490-8572
attorneychristiansen@gmail.com
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 12:08 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] reaffirmation and loan modification
Has anyone had any experience with a debtor having the obtain reaffirmation first, before the lender even considers reaffirming a mortgage loan? Lender in my case, a credit union not the subject of HAMP or The AG Mortgage Settlement, wants my clients to reaffirm a first and second mortgage loan on their primary residence before the Credit Union will consider modification of both loans.
I think this is down right Byzantine. Concurrent reaffirmation with modification is fine with me, but if the client cannot ultimately cut a good deal on modification, but was first required to reaffirm,the client has remarried the bride only not to consummate the marriage thesecond time.
Sorry for the metaphor. I just found myself with a lack for the right words at the moment.
Steve Burton
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Has anyone had any experience with a debtor having the obtain reaffirmation first, before the lender even considers reaffirming a mortgage loan? Lender in my case, a credit union not the subject of HAMP or The AG Mortgage Settlement, wants my clients to reaffirm a first and second mortgage loan on their primary residence before the Credit Union will consider modification of both loans.
I think this is down right Byzantine. Concurrent reaffirmation with modification is fine with me, but if the client cannot ultimately cut a good deal on modification, but was first required to reaffirm,the client has remarried the bride only not to consummate the marriage thesecond time.
Sorry for the metaphor. I just found myself with a lack for the right words at the moment.
Steve Burton
The post was migrated from Yahoo.