This is an answer and defenses to a Connecticut action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage for failure to pay property taxes and insurance where the lender breached the payment plan that had been agreed upon. The Connecticut Fair Housing Center drafted the pleadings.
This is a brief in opposition to a lender’s attempt to strike the homeowner’s defenses and dismiss the homeowner’s UDAP and ECOA counterclaims in a Florida action involving the foreclosure of a reverse mortgage for alleged failure to pay property taxes or insurance. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is motion to set aside a default judgment on a Florida foreclosure action and sale concerning unpaid property taxes and insurance on a reverse mortgage. The excusable neglect is based on the homeowner’s age and cognitive difficulties. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is a 2018 New Jersey state court summary judgment motion seeking to dismiss a judicial foreclosure action concerning a reverse mortgage because HUD had granted an at risk foreclosure extension. The motion was filed by Legal Services of New Jersey.
This is an action in Pennsylvania state court seeking the court clerk to put a residential foreclosure case into deferred status due to the homeowner’s status as an “At Risk” mortgagor under HECM regulations.
This is a proposed order of dismissal of a lender foreclosure action on a HECM reverse mortgage relating to non-payment of property charges, where the applied for, and was granted, an “AT RISK” extension of the foreclosure deadlines. The order sets out that the effect of the AT RISK extension is that the lender will not proceed on the foreclosure for one year and the extension continues thereafter so long as, prior to the expiration of the one-year extension, the homeowner certifies that she continues to meet the criteria for the extension.
This is an answer and affirmative defenses in an foreclosure on a reverse mortgage after the death of one spouse, where the remaining spouse demands proof that the plaintiff is the holder of the reverse mortgage, and alleging that the HECM mortgage was consummated without the required HECM counseling, that the foreclosure was initiated with improper loss mitigation or servicing, and that the plaintiff had unclean hands and initiated foreclosure without complying with a condition precedent.