A Utah House committee Tuesday voted down a bill that would have given homeowners the name of someone with whom they could try to renegotiate a loan during the foreclosure process.
The Business and Labor Committee voted 6-5 to recommend against HB326 despite sponsor Rep. LaVar Christensen’s assurance it was tilted in favor of banks, mortgage lenders and note holders.
At the time a default notice is filed, the bill would have required the holder of the mortgage note to register the name and contact information of a “special servicer” who had authority to renegotiate the terms of a loan before a property could be sold. It also would have required the servicer to give “reasonable consideration” to a home-owner’s request for relief.
The bill pushed by the Draper Republican was created in response to thousands of foreclosures and threatened foreclosures in Utah, the result of the bursting of the real estate bubble in 2007. Home-owners say lenders have failed to negotiate loan modifications with them and, in some cases, they cannot even find anyone to speak to about their loans.
Continue reading … The Salt Lake Tribune
H.B. 326 Substitute
Trust Deed Foreclosure Changes — Christensen, L.
Drafting Attorney: Robert H. Rees
Bill List | Bills by Representative, Senator, or Subject
Similar Bills: Mortgage Business Real Estate
This bill has been substituted. The substitute is H.B. 326 Second Substitute
This bill is a substitute bill. The bill that was substituted is H.B. 326
Bill Status/Votes
Last Action: 01 March 2011, Bill Substituted by Standing Committee
Last Location: House Business and Labor Committee
Bill Status/Votes Last Updated: 1 March 2011, 11:23 AM
Audio Recordings of Debates (Software to listen to audio recordings can be found at real.com. Questions about audio/video streaming.)
House Business and Labor Committee 3/1
Bill Text (If you are having trouble viewing PDF files, Install Latest Adobe Reader)
Introduced HTML | PDF | WP Zipped 71K Last Updated: 24 February 2011, 8:13 AM
Compare H.B. 326 Substitute to H.B. 326
Fiscal Note
Fiscal Note HTML | PDF Last Updated: 24 February 2011, 7:59 AM
Printed copies of bills may be obtained from Legislative Printing.
© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
Is it any surprise with 6 out 8 Republicans on the Committee? At least 3 had a conscience. Any time a law maker doesn’t vote for a law to protect the constituency its time to see whose deep pockets they swim in… look at the campaign donations, telephone log and appointment book with a microscope.
Virginia – I agree with you 100%, voted officials who do not represent the people need to be scrutinized!! We cannot have a body of government brought by the greedy few and only have their interest at heart…this can lead to the end of America as we know it and to a state or anarchy as the poor become poorer and poorer…and the middle class begin to slide downwards to join them…
We need to nip this favortism in the bud and hold our elected officiials accountable!!
We the American people really do have the power, even over the rich! We need to collective exert it!!
The real deal is: we don’t want to hear about little details like “fraud”,”standing”, “chain of title”, “robo-signers”, “Mers”,”rocket docket”, etc.
Just pay or get out!!!
There is no mortgage, it is called an investment contract. You were the maker and the issuer of the promissory note that created the money then you did an exchange with the bank for the house. There was a modification at closing that made you liable for the pooling and servicing agreement. If you could obtain their accounting, or call report financials you’d realize the bank made a lot of money on your promissory, your monthly payment was a cash flow claim for the investors. You never earned a cent on this investment, the bank made millions. If you paid this investment contract to term you’d have paid in 3 times what the home was originally valued at, and chances are good now that the homes value has dropped dramatically. YOU HAVE NO EQUITY IN THIS SITUATION. Banks cannot make the consideration or risk parameters of a legally binding contract, the Banking Act of 1864 precludes any bank from making loans with assets or currency under their control in circulation. NO RISK, NO CONSIDERATION, NO CONTRACT. This is why you’ll receive a “Notice this is an attempt to collect a debt”from the bank. You need to make a 3-305 claim in recoupment and a 3-306 claim to the investment contract. YOU HAVE TO MAKE A CLAIM AS THE OWNER IN FACT OF OUR HOME AND THE INVESTMENT CONTRACT. Wake up and stop the bleeding. If you want help email me
at riceowlex@gmail.com