A premier California Foreclosure & Predatory Servicing Litigation Law Firm.

California Foreclosure Case Law for Lawyers fighting predatory lending and wrongful foreclosure

CALIFORNIA WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE CASE LAW ON FORECLOSURE WARRIOR

For California real estate, bankruptcy and predatory lending lawyers we have sample foreclosure pleadings, TRO applications, lift stay motions and now we have added California case law to put in your homeowner defense toolbox.

You can visit our Foreclosure Defense website where you can access case law ready for you to cut an paste into your complaints, demurers, motions to dimiss and other legal pleadings.

Here is a short snippet of the case law you will get when you sign up:

OTHER GROUNDS TO SET ASIDE FORECLOSURE SALE

(5) In the case of Bank of America National Trust & Savings Association v. Reidy, 15 Cal. 2d. 243, 248 (1940), the Court held:

It is the general rule that courts have power to vacate a foreclosure sale where there has been fraud in the procurement of the foreclosure decree or where the sale has been improperly, unfairly or unlawfully conducted, or is tainted by fraud, or where there has been such a mistake that to allow it to stand would be inequitable to purchaser and parties. Sham bidding and the restriction of competition are condemned, and inadequacy of price when coupled with other circumstances of fraud may also constitute ground for setting aside the sale. (Haley v. Bloomquist, 204 Cal. 253 [268 Pac. 365]; Dealey v. East San Mateo Land Co., 21 Cal. App. 39 [130 Pac. 1066]; Bernheim v. Cerf, 123 Cal. 170 [55 Pac. 759]; Packard v. Bird, 40 Cal. 378; Goodenow v. Ewer, 16 Cal. 461 [76 Am. Dec. 540].).

(6) In re Worcester, 811 F.2d 1224, 1228, (1987) the Court held:

Under California law, “gross inadequacy of price coupled with even slight unfairness or irregularity is a sufficient basis for setting the sale aside.” Whitman v. Transtate Title Co., 165 Cal.App.3d 312, 323, 211 Cal.Rptr. 582, 589 (1985); see also Sargent v. Shumaker, 193 Cal. 122, 129-30, 223 P.2d 464, 467 (1924).

The property here sold well below the published bid, and raises a presumption of irregularity.

REMEMBER, WHENEVER THERE IS A WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE, SEE IF YOU CAN ARGUE MUNGER V. MOORE AND SECTION 3333 DAMAGES (EX. MONEY THEY HAD TO PUT OUT FOR ATTORNEY IN UNLAWFUL DETAINER CASE, AND CURRENT CASE, AND ANY OTHER DAMAGES “WHETHER FORESEEABLE OR NOT”).  California Civil Code Section 3333.

About Vondran Real Estate Litigation
Steve Vondran is a real estate lawyer who can represent you in financial elder abuse, distressed real estate issues, short sale, predatory lending, state and federal real estate litigation, arbitration, broker compliance, accusations, real estate zoning & land use, eminent domain, trademarks, and general foreclosure defense. Call (877) 276-5084

Comments

4 Responses to “California Foreclosure Case Law for Lawyers fighting predatory lending and wrongful foreclosure”
  1. Anonymous says:

    The national Bank Regulators assigned case # in my name against my lender, in process, and I think this is a
    class action.

    I am paying my lender Chase, why Well Fargo in the picture how did it happened I asked Northwest claims owns the note. The documents in my possesion is owned by BNC, which never change from my old purchase and Chase has this copy and told them this is not their NOTE, I am in communication with Chase, but no particular
    contact person just by correspondence by mail, good black and white proof.

    October 4,2011 a gentleman came to my house and said your house is in auction by Citizen bank, I reponded who is Citizen Bank, via Northwest Trustee.

    October 5, 2011 in the morning I was served 3 days to vacate, the house was sold at auction.

    Can these be done inspite of my communication of my lender. Documents served to me are all copies on top of copies.

    I need to fight for my rights and please, can I afford your services or take contigency. I am in Los Angeles,CA
    My realtor friend check the status of my profile of my property, show it is not sold as of 10-6-2011.

  2. Foreclosure Defense Attorney Steve Vondran says:

    We can be contacted to discuss foreclosure and short sale options at (877) 276-5084

Trackbacks

Check out what others are saying about this post...
  1. [...] It is the general rule that courts have power to vacate a foreclosure sale where there has been fraud in the procurement of the foreclosure decree or where the sale has been improperly, unfairly or unlawfully conducted, or is tainted by fraud, or where there has been such a mistake that to allow it to stand would be inequitable to purchaser and parties. Sham bidding and the restriction of competition are condemned, and inadequacy of price when coupled with other circumstances of fraud may also constitute ground for setting aside the sale. (Source: foreclosuredefenseresourcecenter.com [...]

  2. [...] It is the general rule that courts have power to vacate a foreclosure sale where there has been fraud in the procurement of the foreclosure decree or where the sale has been improperly, unfairly or unlawfully conducted, or is tainted by fraud, or where there has been such a mistake that to allow it to stand would be inequitable to purchaser and parties. Sham bidding and the restriction of competition are condemned, and inadequacy of price when coupled with other circumstances of fraud may also constitute ground for setting aside the sale. (Source: foreclosuredefenseresourcecenter.com [...]



Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.