Posted on: 27th Jul, 2010 02:37 pm
Michigan - My inherited home was foreclosed on because the mortgage company refused to talk to me. Is a mortgage lender legally obligated to talk with me as the inheritor of my deceased parent's house and loan even though my name is not on the loan itself?
There are laws protecting me as an inheritor of the house and loan that say I can assume the loan and they can't do anything. Does that not then make them obligated by law to talk to me about the loan? The deed is my name. I had been paying on this loan for 4 1/2 year when my husband got laid off work. We were scheduled to have the loan paid off 5 years in advance because we paid more towards the principal for over a year.
When my parents passed away Washington Mutual had the loan and they were very cooperative and talked to me about the loan. When they went under, Wells Fargo took it over, but they flat out refused to talk with me at all.
There are laws protecting me as an inheritor of the house and loan that say I can assume the loan and they can't do anything. Does that not then make them obligated by law to talk to me about the loan? The deed is my name. I had been paying on this loan for 4 1/2 year when my husband got laid off work. We were scheduled to have the loan paid off 5 years in advance because we paid more towards the principal for over a year.
When my parents passed away Washington Mutual had the loan and they were very cooperative and talked to me about the loan. When they went under, Wells Fargo took it over, but they flat out refused to talk with me at all.
Welcome Kay,
If the property is in your name and if you have been paying the mortgage dues on time, then the lender cannot foreclose the property simply. They should have spoken to you about the mortgage and should have let you assume it.
If the property is in your name and if you have been paying the mortgage dues on time, then the lender cannot foreclose the property simply. They should have spoken to you about the mortgage and should have let you assume it.
In 2003 my father passed away followed by my mother in 2004. I bought my parents house from my siblings for $1, with the exception of my son who my parents adopted. My name, my husband's name and my minor son's name is all on the deed. The loan how ever was in my parent's names. I'm aware of the Garn - St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982, and I assumed payments on the loan. At that time Washington Mutual was the lender and I was able to rework the loan that was in default and bring it current. A couple years later Wells Fargo bought the loan when Washington Mutual went under. In the 4 1/2 years since we took over payments on the loan, we managed to get 5 years ahead on the loan when my husband got laid off of work. When I knew I was going to miss a payment I called the mortgage company to see if I could work something out with them. They refused to talk me about anything in regards to the loan because my name wasn't on the mortgage.
They did how ever say that they would talk to my sister who was the executor of the estate, which was closed in 2007 and was released from her duties then. The mortgage company, Wells Fargo, acted like they were going to work with us. But they only gave me the run around requesting information that they already had on file, asking me to send different verifications and proof. And after they would have something, they would tell me it was the wrong information and I need to send more. This went on for some time. After sending the latest information they had requested, I called to make sure they got it on file and to ask what I needed to do next. To my surprise I learned that they had foreclosed on my house a couple days after they requested more information. I got no notice of the foreclosure at all.
If there is a law in effect saying I can take over payments on a loan if it's an inheritance, aren't they then obligated by law to talk with me about this loan? All they had to do was talk with me and rework the loan so it was current. My payment would have even been less because we were so far ahead on it. Bank of America has since bought the house and I would have to redeem it from them for more then what was owed on the loan. They know I can't redeem the loan because banks won't lend for mortgages under 40k, in addition to not having any credit. They bought the property in hopes that they would make money on it, being valued at three times what I owed.
They did how ever say that they would talk to my sister who was the executor of the estate, which was closed in 2007 and was released from her duties then. The mortgage company, Wells Fargo, acted like they were going to work with us. But they only gave me the run around requesting information that they already had on file, asking me to send different verifications and proof. And after they would have something, they would tell me it was the wrong information and I need to send more. This went on for some time. After sending the latest information they had requested, I called to make sure they got it on file and to ask what I needed to do next. To my surprise I learned that they had foreclosed on my house a couple days after they requested more information. I got no notice of the foreclosure at all.
If there is a law in effect saying I can take over payments on a loan if it's an inheritance, aren't they then obligated by law to talk with me about this loan? All they had to do was talk with me and rework the loan so it was current. My payment would have even been less because we were so far ahead on it. Bank of America has since bought the house and I would have to redeem it from them for more then what was owed on the loan. They know I can't redeem the loan because banks won't lend for mortgages under 40k, in addition to not having any credit. They bought the property in hopes that they would make money on it, being valued at three times what I owed.
I guess my case must be a rare one. No one seems to know if the mortgage company is legally obligated to talk with me about the loan.
Ok, how about this one. Would I have been able to get a loan in my name, even if I have no credit, but used the house as collateral? I'm just trying to think of different options they could have offered me instead of foreclosing on my house.
I guess I don't understand, if there are laws protecting me, how are they able to do this to me and get away with it?
It seems kind of funny to me that lenders operate in the way they do. They will give some one a loan so they can live outside their means and not be able to pay off the loan. Then the lenders just write off the claim. But some one who doesn't use credit cards because they know they will get in trouble financially, but has the means to pay back the loan, they won't even consider. It's a messed up world.
Ok, how about this one. Would I have been able to get a loan in my name, even if I have no credit, but used the house as collateral? I'm just trying to think of different options they could have offered me instead of foreclosing on my house.
I guess I don't understand, if there are laws protecting me, how are they able to do this to me and get away with it?
It seems kind of funny to me that lenders operate in the way they do. They will give some one a loan so they can live outside their means and not be able to pay off the loan. Then the lenders just write off the claim. But some one who doesn't use credit cards because they know they will get in trouble financially, but has the means to pay back the loan, they won't even consider. It's a messed up world.