How many times have we all pondered why the banks never signed or acknowledged the documents? Most homeowners signed 2 sets of loan documents – and when questioning why 2 sets, most were told that the bank would send them back a confirmation set… But that never happened, did it? Would we have “voluntarily” signed 2 sets if we knew then what we know now? Doubtful we would have even signed one.
DeGiacomo v. First Call Mortgage Company (In re Reznikov), 548 B.R. 606 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2016) –
A chapter 7 trustee sought to avoid a recorded mortgage based on a defective acknowledgment and then to preserve the lien of the mortgage for the benefit of the bankruptcy estate. The mortgagee objected – arguing that the acknowledgment was sufficient, and the debtor objected – claiming a homestead exemption in the property.
View original post 859 more words
Deadly Clear 
DeGiacomo v. First Call Mortgage Company (In re Reznikov), 548 B.R. 606 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2016) –
A chapter 7 trustee sought to avoid a recorded mortgage based on a defective acknowledgment and then to preserve the lien of the mortgage for the benefit of the bankruptcy estate. Controversy arises over the fact the security instrument is given free of all liens and encumbrances as stipulated in the subject matter contract instrument “Security” . Therein is cites the “…subject to the existing lines of record which are shown in the settlement statement to have been satisfied .Said foreclosure is therefore upon the amount paid by debtor at closing upon the concurrent transfer of title made free and clear subject to a UCC filing by Creditor against Obligor or for antecedent debt. [bias] This prevails under a uniform instrument AKA “Security Deed” “see state of Georgia registerclaims@live.com