.jpg)
New case on short sale and 580b
Pat - that was a trap that was addressed for newer loans by CCP 580b(c) applicable to credit transactions after 1/1/13. Case law for prior transactions is inconsistent, with no CA Supreme decisions, and app cases to support yes and no, i.e. Conley v Matthes 56 Cal App 4th 1453 and Union Bank v. Wendland 54 Cal App 3d 393.
Law Office of Eric Alan Mitnick
21515 Hawthorne Boulevard, Ste. 1080
Torrance, California 90503
(310) 792-5864; 792-5866 (fax)
MitnickLaw@aol.com
Although this email and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.
The information contained in this email message and any attached files may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by reply email, and delete the email message you received and all of the attached files.
To: cdcbaa
Sent: Fri, Aug 2, 2013 9:48 am
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] New case on short sale and 580b
No, except I have some vague memory that there is a CA case that if the purchase money lender is the lender for the refi, then it is still purchase money. Maybe someone on the list will know the cite or know the negative.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green
1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: 626-449-8433
Fax: 626-449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
See 580b(e): to the extent refi money is used to pay off prior PM loan,
antideficiency (anti-deficiency?) protection applies. To the extent refi
proceeds exceed payoff of PM loan (cash out proceeds) there is no
protection.
On Friday, August 2, 2013, Patrick T. Green wrote:
> **
>
>
> No, except I have some vague memory that there is a CA case that if the
> purchase money lender is the lender for the refi, then it is still purchase
> money. Maybe someone on the list will know the cite or know the negative.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.****
>
> ** **
>
> Pat****
>
> ** **
>
> Patrick T. Green****
>
> Attorney at Law****
>
> Fitzgerald & Green****
>
> 1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206****
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106****
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433****
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565****
>
> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com *
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com 'cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com');> [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com]
> *On Behalf Of *Kirk Brennan
> *Sent:* Friday, August 02, 2013 12:10 AM
> *To:* Cdcbaa Yahoo Listserv
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] New case on short sale and 580b****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> That's an important decision. ****
>
> Query whether it applies to refinanced mortgages. Would a refinanced
> mortgage be considered "purchase money" ...****
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Patrick T. Green
> wrote:****
>
> ****
>
> New Cal App case****
>
> ****
>
> *In this appeal we are asked to determine a question of first impression.
> Do the*****
>
> *anti-deficiency protections in Code of Civil Procedure section 580b
> apply to a borrower*****
>
> *after she, with the approval of her lender, sells her residence to a
> third party for a price*****
>
> *that is less than the outstanding balance owed the lender on the
> borrower's mortgage loan,*****
>
> *which was obtained to purchase the residence? We conclude that section
> 580b's*****
>
> *protections do apply in this situation.*****
>
> ****
>
> http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0713//D061720****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.****
>
> ****
>
> Pat****
>
> ****
>
> Patrick T. Green****
>
> Attorney at Law****
>
> Fitzgerald & Green****
>
> 1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206****
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106****
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433****
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565****
>
> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com *
> ***
>
> ****
>
>
>
>
> -- ****
>
> Kirk Brennan****
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
> exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
> reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
> message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
> attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
> message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
> constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
> be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
> purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
> Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
> letters containing the signature of a director. ****
>
> ****
>
>
>
Clifford Bordeaux
Bordeaux Law, P.C.
790 E. Colorado Boulevard, 9th Floor
Pasadena, CA 91101
T: 626-405-2345 / F: 626-628-1820 E: cliff@bordeauxlaw.com
See 580b(e): to the extent refi money is used to pay off prior PM loan, antideficiency (anti-deficiency?) protection applies. To the extent refi proceeds exceed payoff of PM loan (cash out proceeds) there is no protection.
On Friday, August 2, 2013, Patrick T. Green wrote:
No, except I have some vague memory that there is a CA case that if the purchase money lender is the lender for the refi, then it is still purchase money. Maybe someone on the list will know the cite or know the negative.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
No, except I have some vague memory that there is a CA case that if the
purchase money lender is the lender for the refi, then it is still purchase
money. Maybe someone on the list will know the cite or know the negative.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green
1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: 626-449-8433
Fax: 626-449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
The quick answers (I may be wrong) are: Refinance is not purchase money.
CCP 580b has been amended to include refinances starting in Jan 1, 2013 so
I would say it is easy to extend this case law to refinances.
Sincerely,
Michael Avanesian
Law Offices of David A. Tilem
www.tilemlaw.com
818-507-6000
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> **
>
>
> That's an important decision.
> Query whether it applies to refinanced mortgages. Would a refinanced
> mortgage be considered "purchase money" ...
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Patrick T. Green wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> New Cal App case****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *In this appeal we are asked to determine a question of first
>> impression. Do the*
>>
>> *anti-deficiency protections in Code of Civil Procedure section 580b
>> apply to a borrower*
>>
>> *after she, with the approval of her lender, sells her residence to a
>> third party for a price*
>>
>> *that is less than the outstanding balance owed the lender on the
>> borrower's mortgage loan,*
>>
>> *which was obtained to purchase the residence? We conclude that section
>> 580b's*
>>
>> *protections do apply in this situation.***
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0713//D061720****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Pat****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Patrick T. Green****
>>
>> Attorney at Law****
>>
>> Fitzgerald & Green****
>>
>> 1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206****
>>
>> Pasadena, CA 91106****
>>
>> Tel: 626-449-8433****
>>
>> Fax: 626-449-0565****
>>
>> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
> exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
> reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
> message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
> attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
> message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
> constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
> be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
> purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
> Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
> letters containing the signature of a director.
>
>
>
The quick answers (I may be wrong) are: Refinance is not purchase money. CCP 580b has been amended to include refinances starting in Jan 1, 2013 so I would say it is easy to extend this case law to refinances.
Sincerely, Michael AvanesianLaw Offices of David A. Tilem
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
That's an important decision.
Query whether it applies to refinanced mortgages. Would a refinanced
mortgage be considered "purchase money" ...
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Patrick T. Green wrote:
> **
>
>
> New Cal App case****
>
> ** **
>
> *In this appeal we are asked to determine a question of first impression.
> Do the*
>
> *anti-deficiency protections in Code of Civil Procedure section 580b
> apply to a borrower*
>
> *after she, with the approval of her lender, sells her residence to a
> third party for a price*
>
> *that is less than the outstanding balance owed the lender on the
> borrower's mortgage loan,*
>
> *which was obtained to purchase the residence? We conclude that section
> 580b's*
>
> *protections do apply in this situation.***
>
> ** **
>
> http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0713//D061720****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.****
>
> ** **
>
> Pat****
>
> ** **
>
> Patrick T. Green****
>
> Attorney at Law****
>
> Fitzgerald & Green****
>
> 1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206****
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106****
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433****
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565****
>
> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
That's an important decision. Query whether it applies to refinanced mortgages. Would a refinanced mortgage be considered "purchase money" ...
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Patrick T. Green <pat@fitzgreenlaw.com> wrote:
New Cal App case
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
New Cal App case
In this appeal we are asked to determine a question of first impression. Do
the
anti-deficiency protections in Code of Civil Procedure section 580b apply to
a borrower
after she, with the approval of her lender, sells her residence to a third
party for a price
that is less than the outstanding balance owed the lender on the borrower's
mortgage loan,
which was obtained to purchase the residence? We conclude that section
580b's
protections do apply in this situation.
http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0713//D061720
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green
1010 E. Union St. Ste. 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: 626-449-8433
Fax: 626-449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.