replied 1 year ago.
Hello, I am wanting to know if there is any evidence of judges in Multnomah Co. or any county in Oregon requiring that the lender follow the terms laid out during a mediation hearing to earn a Certificate of Compliance, which is required by state law to proceed with a judicial foreclosure? Which helps me to be prepared for my Ex Parte (required for civil cased in Multnomah County) hearing this Friday. My lender has provided no details as to why they will not be able to proceed with a deed in lieu of foreclosure or a pre-approved short sale, as was agreed to. They just refuse to communicate with me or my housing counselor, so without a lawyer and not knowing how to properly present a case, I will be asking the presiding judge for a 90 extension of time with my motion to try stop their plans to file a default, which will happen after 11/27, since I was served with their 10-day notice of "Intent" to proceed. However, they can only take that next step, with a valid Certificate of Compliance, and mine expires on 12/8/15 (Chapter 88.010). So I am assuming, that if I can get past that date, then this will force them to back into the state required mediation program for a new Certificate, and then maybe this next time, they will act in good faith, so I can exercise the rights offered to me with Oregon's Foreclosure Avoidance Program, and HAFA.I just don't know if I have a good chance, and I don't really know how write up the Proposed Order correctly, so the Judge will sign it on Friday? The attorney I was assigned to by the Oregon Bar for a free 30 min. consult, could offer no specific details on if the Judges will work with people not trying to save their home from foreclosure with a modification for example, but with those that want to avoid that final step with the other alternatives that are allowed by law? The desire to stay in a home takes a priority, for the three that do pro-bono work, so they have never taken on the latter, and the Oregon Atty. General's office is overwhelmed with an array of compliance issues, but they only focus on those that want to stay in their homes, so in essence the law designed to help others, has been a bust!We didn't try a pre-approved short-sale first, although I offered that route of the deed in lieu failed, since they have to negotiate a buy-out on my 2nd lien with Chase, who in the past have given verbal agreements to the terms acceptable to Fannie Mae. So I want Nationstar to be required to grant me the short-sale option, if there is a clear reason as to why the deed in lieu won't work to their benefit, but they originally picked that option.It is super stressful going through the Foreclosure process (a moving target on move-out date), and no guarantee there will be a cash-for-keys option. And under Oregon law, I cannot vacate before the sale date has passed, or I can be sued for a deficiency judgment, and I am still responsible for my condo dues, which are $400/month. Since there is a 6 month waiting period for a Right of Redemption, it may not sell to a new party, and just be taken back by the lender, and then sometimes they are canceled at the last minute, but by law I am supposed to vacate by the sale date. But I don't trust Nationstar (they have lied so many times), so I believe they will be difficult to deal with and will not keep any promises they make on a possible cash-for-keys in that case, if I stay for short-time afterwards, so they can avoid eviction. While the other two options take a smaller hit on my credit rating, and help me to have some control over how and when I leave my property, which also helps with dealing with the added stress of grad school as I plan my move, and try to find a new job to cover higher cost of rent.I hope this all makes sense? Judicial Foreclosures are somewhat new in Oregon, so it has been hard to get good direction or find any clear answers for what has been published, and my housing counselor just seems to be fighting a losing battle going on these past 2 years with Nationstar. I have read that there can be some value in selling the Right of Redemption. This might turn into a positive benefit, if I allow them to proceed, since Chase is part of the Judicial Foreclosure for that 2nd lien. So with that debt gone, along with the likelihood that Condo prices in my location might go up in the next 6 months (the value may depend on the outcome of the April trial for the lawsuit that our association has against the plumbing contractor/supplier-reason they picked the deed in lieu Dec. 2014), then I might gain a higher return, than the cash-for-keys settlement. But even with that unpredictable option, I would still need an attorney to help with that process, if there is a cash buyer ready to go?Thanks for looking this over and I look forward to gaining some valuable knowledge, to have more confidence in presenting my case on Friday afternoon. Have a nice Thanksgiving, Linda