Perhaps some of the people on here who are knowledgeable about real estate transactions can explain to me what is the meaning or reasoning behind a bank foreclosing a property and then selling it back to themselves for the amount of money they were asking.
I was perusing the Cuyahoga County website that lists foreclosed properties and shows what properties are up for foreclosure sales and who bought the sold properties and the price.
Seems weird to me. Of course a lot of things sound weird to me.
Explain please.
Transactions on Foreclosed Properties
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
-
sharon kinsella
- Posts: 1490
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 7:54 am
- Contact:
Transactions on Foreclosed Properties
"When I dare to be powerful -- to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid." - Audre Lorde
-
Mark Timieski
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:47 pm
- Location: Lakewood
Foreclosure is the means by which the bank gains control of a property. The banks buy the property usually at the minimum bid price, and them the bank is paid the proceedings from the foreclosure sale. In these cases I don’t think actual money changes hands.
The bigger problem is that this is creating a lawless situation for the homes that go through foreclosure:
I’ve been to a federal foreclosure hearing. The buyers only identified themselves as “plaintiff†and no real person or even real company names were mentioned by the buyer. This is a real problem when the city attempts to enforce building code violations as there is no person that the city can cite. The banks that own these properties make no effort to conform to regulations with the city can’t provide enforcement.
Sense would be to require an actual name to be on a title prior to transfer.
The bigger problem is that this is creating a lawless situation for the homes that go through foreclosure:
I’ve been to a federal foreclosure hearing. The buyers only identified themselves as “plaintiff†and no real person or even real company names were mentioned by the buyer. This is a real problem when the city attempts to enforce building code violations as there is no person that the city can cite. The banks that own these properties make no effort to conform to regulations with the city can’t provide enforcement.
Sense would be to require an actual name to be on a title prior to transfer.
-
sharon kinsella
- Posts: 1490
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 7:54 am
- Contact:
Thanks Mark.
My first reaction to looking at the list was that the whole thing was "shady".
Looks like these are questionable practices.
Thanks again.
My first reaction to looking at the list was that the whole thing was "shady".
Looks like these are questionable practices.
Thanks again.
"When I dare to be powerful -- to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid." - Audre Lorde
-
Jeff Endress
- Posts: 858
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:13 am
- Location: Lakewood
Sharon
Part of the issue invovled is allowing the bank to redeem their equity interest in the properties involved. We must remember that there are usually at least 2 owners of a home.....those that purchased it, who we usually identify as the owners, and the banks, who are, in fact owners to the extent of the mortgage owed.
In the foreclosure process, the rights of the "homeowner" are extinguished, together with back taxes and other items, and the purchaser is provided clear title. If you are an individual, you get the property for the amount of the winning bid, and anyone else's interests are extinguished. When the purchaser happens to be the bank, they have simply used their equity (mortgage balance) to clear the title, removing any interest that the "homeowner" has, as well as any 2nd or 3rd mortgage holders. They are in essence getting that which they already own.
Jeff
Part of the issue invovled is allowing the bank to redeem their equity interest in the properties involved. We must remember that there are usually at least 2 owners of a home.....those that purchased it, who we usually identify as the owners, and the banks, who are, in fact owners to the extent of the mortgage owed.
In the foreclosure process, the rights of the "homeowner" are extinguished, together with back taxes and other items, and the purchaser is provided clear title. If you are an individual, you get the property for the amount of the winning bid, and anyone else's interests are extinguished. When the purchaser happens to be the bank, they have simply used their equity (mortgage balance) to clear the title, removing any interest that the "homeowner" has, as well as any 2nd or 3rd mortgage holders. They are in essence getting that which they already own.
Jeff
To wander this country and this world looking for the best barbecue â€â€
-
Mark Timieski
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:47 pm
- Location: Lakewood
I should probably clarify my post. While the bank initiates the foreclosure, it’s the government that does the actual foreclosing. Jeff is correct; at the end of the foreclosure process the bank gains full ownership to what it had previously partially owned.
In my mind the shady part is not with the foreclosure process, but that the banks are being negligent once they gain full control of the property.
In my mind the shady part is not with the foreclosure process, but that the banks are being negligent once they gain full control of the property.