Mark:
It seems to me that it's probably more of a credit / underwriting issue regarding the wife than a title issue, if in fact there is no lien recorded. Perhaps the lender is relying on the wife's credit to qualify the loan since the husband's is so bad (with the prior bankruptcy), and hers has to be fixed (by satisfying the judgment against her) for them to qualify. And you are right, no creditor I know will sign a "Satisfcation of Judgment" on a discharged debt.
Jim
James R. Selth
Weintraub & Selth, APC
12424 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1120
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Telephone: (310) 207-1494
Facsimile: (310) 442-0660
E-Mail:
jim@wsrlaw.net
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
To:
Sent: 3/28/2008 10:37AM
Subject: [cdcbaa] community discharge question/title company
>> Facts: H files bankruptcy and gets a discharge. H&W now want to refinance their
>> home loan and the lender is demanding a satisfaction of judgment from one of the
>> creditors before funding the loan. There is (according to the client) NO lien recorded.
>>
>> I understand that the debt as to H was discharged and, by virtue of 11 USC 524, the
>> community discharge extends to the wife--as long as they remain married.
>>
>> My question is: As far as the lender and title company are concerned, are they right in
>> insisting on a satisfaction of judgment (which in my opinion isn't an appropriate thing
>> for the creditor to sign anyway, because the judgment wasn't satisfied) if the basis for
>> that insistence is that the discharge as to the wife could disappear if they get divorced
>> in the future?
>>
>>
>> ______________________
>> Mark J. Markus
>> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>> web:
http://www.bklaw.com/
>> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
>> ___________
>> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J.
>> Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the
>> addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy,
>> distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
>> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
>> the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in
>> any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the
>> purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting,
>> marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in
>> this communication (or in any attachment).
>>
Mark:
It seems to me that it's probably more of a credit / underwriting issue regarding the wife than a title issue, if in fact there is no lien recorded. Perhaps the lender is relying on the wife's credit to qualify the loan since the husband's is so bad (with the prior bankruptcy), and hers has to be fixed (by satisfying the judgment against her) for them to qualify. And you are right, no creditor I know will sign a "Satisfcation of Judgment" on a discharged debt.
Jim
James R. Selth
Weintraub & Selth, APC
12424 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1120
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Telephone: (310) 207-1494
Facsimile: (310) 442-0660
E-Mail:
jim@wsrlaw.net
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
--- Original Message---
To:
Sent: 3/28/2008 10:37AM
Subject: [cdcbaa] community discharge question/title company
>> Facts: H files bankruptcy and gets a discharge. H&W now want to refinance their
>> home loan and the lender is demanding a satisfaction of judgment from one of the
>> creditors before funding the loan. There is (according to the client) NO lien recorded.
>>
>> I understand that the debt as to H was discharged and, by virtue of 11 USC 524, the
>> community discharge extends to the wife--as long as they remain married.
>>
>> My question is: As far as the lender and title company are concerned, are they right in
>> insisting on a satisfaction of judgment (which in my opinion isn't an appropriate thing
>> for the creditor to sign anyway, because the judgment wasn't satisfied) if the basis for
>> that insistence is that the discharge as to the wife could disappear if they get divorced
>> in the future?
>>
>>
>> ______________________
>> Mark J. Markus
>> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>> web:
http://www.bklaw.com/
>> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
>> ___________
>> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J.
>> Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the
>> addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy,
>> distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
>> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
>> the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in
>> any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the
>> purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting,
>> marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in
>> this communication (or in any attachment).
>>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.