For "legal Eagle"
Ok the "good faith and fair dealing" theory you spoke to in my original question regarding a possible good Samaritan payment is only part and parcel of my issue.History
I have to cooperative loans
with a mortgage servicer which had changed hands on several occasion over the years (since 1988)
Both are about to mature (one of which is the one with the possible Samaritan payment)
I have been making payments in full to all holders and holders in due course over the years in a timely fashion.
Last year the cooperative started a NJF (non judicial foreclosure
) against both units for alleged arrears of maintenance, assessments, other
The cooperative did not serve proper notices to secured part (bank) but the bank was made aware of such issue (notice of default
and notice to terminate and Notice of Sale)
I also served bank with response to notice of default stating I did not owe them anything.
The way the notices were written were as if it was going to be a holdover case (they would seek possession
then sale of shares)
The bank did not say anything to me until the notice of sale came.
They called and asked if I knew what was going on and what I was doing.
I informed them that I was moving for a OSC/TRO
I asked them what were they doing.
They stated nothing because they a) have a secured interest in the units by way of UCC, b) if the cooperative prevails then whoever is the successful bidder would have to pay the outstanding loan with the bank, and c) I would still be on the hook for the mortgage(s) in any event until it is paid off.
I asked to speak with their lawyers but I was told it was the lawyers who had the bank call me.
They went on to tell me I'd better hurry up and do it because things could get ugly fast.
I filed the OSC/ TRO in May and the judge signed it after meeting in his chamber with both sides.
It was agreed that the cooperative would provide me with specific information I was seeking and that we would reappear in June.
The cooperative refused to give me any information
We appeared in Court in June and the attorney for cooperative stated they canceled the sale because they got paid by the bank,
The judge dismissed the case as I was in shock.
I called the bank and finally after about five calls they figured out that they did pay the cooperative as two hazard insurance
The bank then added each payment to each of my loans as negative escrow demanding that I pay them back.
I refused because the bank stated it would not get involved and I strongly believe I would have prevailed even before we got to the substantive issues but the bank interfered with my right to a lawful adjudication
in any event I emailed them and called and filed CSFB cases to no avail
The bank acknowledged in writing the conversation I had with them in which they said they would not get involved but it also holds that pursuant to the loan security agreement they had a right to intercede to protect their investment without notice.
This is in my opinion not fair dealing minimally because they paid an amount of money that was not sought in the OSC/TRO, the cooperative attorneys had already conceded in judge chambers that the underlying amount of money sought was a few hundred dollars per unit...which I still disagreed with, and the fact that the reason the cooperative did not respond to me was because they got paid by the bank during the pendency of the stay.
Furthermore the bank (servicing organization - not really a bank) cannot clearly prove it has a right to service the loans or that it lawfully has ownership
of same. The UCC's contradict the various documents they sent me showing different banks assigned the loans to them.