top law Foreclosure defense

 Sabb v. Old Republic et. al (Los Angeles Superior Court 2013).  This is a case where the home owners property was sold at the Trustee Sale. The sale was cancelled through extensive litigation. The premises was that the Sabb had entered into negotiation with the bank for a loan modification. The bank while in the process of loan modification had sold the property. The purchaser attempted to get damages for its benefit of bargain but was too prohibited. Residential Capital, LLC v. Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 807. It was further argued that an oral agreement postpone is valid under Civil Code 2924g(c)(2) .

Sunset v. Summit Leasing (Los Angeles Superior Court 2013). This is a case where the property owner waked away from the property. Third party had a claim for fixtures which both parties claim a right to. Since the fixture was trade fixture and leased, the lender believed it would remained theirs. After extensive litigation the trade fixtures were allocated to that of Sunset due to lack of notice. A bona fide purchaser obtains title without notice of a prior unrecorded interest. See Kowalsky v. Kimberlin, 173 Cal. 506, 510, 160 P. 673 (1916). Unrecorded interests are invalid against a bona fide purchaser. See id. at 510-11, 160 P. 673; Cal. Civ.Code § 1217. One with actual or constructive notice of a contract is not a bona fide purchaser. See Kowalsky, 173 Cal. at 510-11, 160 P. 673; Cal. Civ.Code § 1217.

Samagh v. Bridge (San Diego 2012). This is a case where they borrower was facing foreclosure. The lender refuse to accept payment unless other pending charges were also paid for. Borrower lacked money to pay such sum. After scrutinizing the NOD, the bank was forced to take the sum owed as stated. Miller v. Cote (1982) 127 Cal.App 3rd 888, 179 Cal.Rptr 753. It was further argued that there may be a violation of Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Civil Code §1788, the covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Carma Developers (Cal.), Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 342, 371) 

Recontrust v. Rojas (Los Angeles Suprior Court 2007) This is a case where a homeowner in default was approached by  party attempting to offer help and by giving the homeowner a loan but no loan was ever given however a deed was recorded and the party is no seeking to get paid. Such claim was determined to be in violation of Civil Code 1695 and was later stricken. Later other claimant appeared by presenting a claim after the statutory 30 days. Their claim was too stricken for failure to file an until claim Civil Code 2924(j) (c) states as follows: “That the Claims MUST be received by the trustee at the address stated in the notice no later than 30 days after the date the trustee sends notice to the potential claimant”.


BofA v. La Jolla (Appl 5th Dis 2005) This case involves a nonjudicial foreclosure sale conducted by mistake after the homeowner and lender entered into an agreement to cure the homeowner's default and reinstate the loan. The lender did not inform the trustee of the agreement before the scheduled auction at which the property was sold to a third party. The lender sued the buyer to cancel the deed the buyer received after the sale. Judgment was entered for the lender after the court granted its motion for summary adjudication on the issue of ownership of the property.