A federal judge has yet again issued a ruling that effectively questions the validity of scores of foreclosures in Oregon, a crisis the Legislature could resolve in the mortgage industry’s favor this week if bank lobbyists and House Republican leaders have their way.

In an opinion issued Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon rejected a magistrate judge’s finding and rulings by two of his colleagues that big banks could avoid recording notices in local land records each time a loan is sold to other lenders or investors.

 Simon sided with two other federal judges in Oregon in ruling that lenders have violated state recording law. They’ve done this, they say, by logging sales within its nationwide Mortgage Electronic Systems Inc. and declaring MERS a “beneficiary” of the loan.

The mortgage industry created MERS to reduce the need for recording loan sales, or assignments. That enabled mortgages to be quickly bundled and sold to investors. MERS does not loan money, collect loan payments or invest in mortgages. It is, however, named in certain loan documents as the mortgagee or beneficiary of record.

Simon ruled that under state law, lenders must file a notice in county records each time they sell or transfer a note, or a promise from a borrower to pay.

MERS, he ruled, can file those notices on the lenders’ behalf, if a lender has authorized it to do so. MERS cannot, however, simply log those notices within its own database without also recording it publicly, he found. In millions of loans nationwide, it has.

In acting as he did, Simon overruled lower Magistrate Janice Stewart’s previous findings and recommendations in the case. His ruling also conflicts with opinions in other cases issued by his equals in Oregon — Judge Michael Mosman and Judge Marco A. Hernandez.

But it aligns with rulings in other cases by Judge Owen Panner and U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Frank Alley. Panner’s ruling, which also came last year as lawmakers debated the MERS issue, is on appeal to the U.S. Ninth District Court of Appeals.

-Excerpt taken from  Brent Hunsberger, The Oregonian @ OregonLive.com

See full story here

Foreclosure concentration by stateForeclosure activity is much slower this year than last.

According to foreclosure-tracking firm RealtyTrac, the number of national foreclosure filings plunged 35 percent in March 2011 as compared to March 2010, a statistic that reflects a more healthy housing market and more robust outlook for 2011.

A “Foreclosure filing” is defined as any of the following : a default notice, a scheduled auction, or a bank repossessions. Foreclosures filings were down in all but 8 states last month.

Activity remains concentrated, too. More than half of all bank repossessions can be tied to just a handful of states.

In March, 6 states accounted for 51% of activity.

  1. California : 15% of all repossessions
  2. Florida : 9% of all repossessions
  3. Arizona : 7% of all repossessions
  4. Michigan : 7% of all repossessions
  5. Texas : 6% of all repossessions
  6. Nevada : 5% of all repossessions

At the other end of the spectrum is Vermont. With just 5 repossessions for all of March, Vermont accounted for 0.008% of repossessions nationwide.

Distressed homes remain in high demand among today’s home buyers, accounting for almost 40% of all home resales. It’s no wonder, either. Distresses home typically sell at a steep, 15 percent discount as compared to non-distressed properties.

Buying foreclosures can be a great “deal”. However, make sure you’ve done your homework.

Buying homes from banks is different from buying a homes from “people”. Contracts and negotiations are different, and homes are often sold with defects.

If you plan to buy a Sacramento foreclosure, therefore, make you you speak with a licensed real estate professional before submitting a bid. You can research a home online and learn a lot of the process, but when it’s time to purchase, put an experienced agent on your side.