Related posts:

1. Jack of All Trades and Master of None: Attorneys Wearing Multiple Hats in a Transaction
2. Short Sales & No-Flip Clauses in the Approval Letter – Removing a Roadblock
3. Buyer $5,000 Short – How to Close the Gap…from a NY Point of View

Events:

In person networking is vital – online networking often starts the relationship but in-person cements it.  I posted several events in the NY metro area that are not be missed including the NYC Business Networking Event – Luxury Series (7/27) and Queens Real Estate Group Summer Soiree (7/28) among others.  Extend your knowledge by taking a class – Dealing with Banks: REOs and Short Sales or  a webinar such as Understanding Titles & Closings for Real Estate Investors .

Short Sales

Short Sales are now the focus of the real estate loss mitigation community and the banks have finally realized that a short sale is the premier solution as the return, dollar for dollar, is far superior to foreclosure and REO.  Check out the webinar, Understanding Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac HAFA Short Sale Rules to make sure you are abreast of the new rules.  Watch some of the new videos, like Internal Bank Form Gives Insight Into Short Sales vs Foreclosure or Citimortgage Changes Short Sale Policy Again! as the banks are constantly changing how the game is played. Visit the forums as some of our own gurus post their tips and experiences.

Remember, the S&P Real Estate Networking Site is a "members-only" site so apply for membership now (it is free!) for exclusive access.

Enjoy your summer!

Related posts:

1. Landlord/Tenant Law Resources on Scanlon & Pinto, PLLC Networking Site
2. DON’T SAY I DIDN’T WARN YOU! NY Attorney General’s Crackdown on the Loan Modification Industry
3. Short Sales & No-Flip Clauses in the Approval Letter – Removing a Roadblock

The Legislation  – HR 5623, the Homebuyer Assistance and Improvement Act of 2010 — was passed by the Senate on Wednesday was just awaiting Obama's signature. Homebuyers eligible to claim the tax credit who were under contract by April 30 now have until Sept. 30 to close the deal.  The National Association of Realtors data indicates that New York  is the 4th highest state with pending closings that could miss out on the tax credit if the deadline were not extended. 

The loss of the home buyer extension has impacted mortgage applications. The Mortgage Bankers Association reported the beginning of June that demand for purchase loans was down 35 percent from a month ago as homebuyers have yet to return to the market following the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit on April 30th.

Related posts:

1. FHA Unveils New Plan to Let Home Buyers Use $8,000 Tax Credit Upfront as a Downpayment
2. Buyer $5,000 Short – How to Close the Gap…from a NY Point of View
3. Jack of All Trades and Master of None: Attorneys Wearing Multiple Hats in a Transaction

The New York Court of Appeal recently opined in NYCTL 1999-1 Trust v. 573 Jackson Avenue Realty Corp., 13.N.Y.3d 573 (December 15, 2009) that the definitive requirement for redeeming real property during foreclosure proceedings  is the “unconditional tender [to the foreclosing party] of the full amount due” before auction.  This general rule in mortgage foreclosure proceedings also applies to the foreclosure of a tax lien.

However, note that the Courts will exercise their broad equitable powers to void judgments and even set aside sales (extending the homeowner's right of redemption), where homeowners are seeking to modify or reinstate their mortgages while the lender continues with the foreclosure action. Jimmy Lathrop, Esq., the Director of Foreclosure Intervention at the Brooklyn Bar Association Volunteer Lawyers Project, recently discussed in his blog post,  three cases where the court found that the homeowner's good faith negotiations mandated an equitable solution and a possible complete bypass of RPAPL §1341 which defines the requirements and time frame of the borrower's right of redemption.

Related posts:

1. DON’T SAY I DIDN’T WARN YOU! NY Attorney General’s Crackdown on the Loan Modification Industry
2. NY Governor Looking to Expand Protections for Defaulting HomeOwners, Tenants
3. Short Sales & No-Flip Clauses in the Approval Letter – Removing a Roadblock

Having recently issued a decision canceling an Indymac mortgage lien in another foreclosure action, Judge Spinner turns his attention to the outrageous actions of Wells Fargo and holds the mortgage behemoth liable for trespass, resulting in $155,092.00 judgment, in Wells Fargo v. Tyson. At the outset, the court pointed out that the Plaintiff sent a per diem attorney to the first  settlement conference who had no knowledge of the case so that any potential progress was thwarted.  It is a common problem and a recurring complaint that usually Plaintiff’s representative, at these settlement conferences, has no authority to negotiate, thus preventing any meaningful settlement and violating the spirit of the law. Having aroused the ire of numerous judges, you would think that these foreclosure mill law firms would figure out that they had better send counsel with authority to enter into some sort of settlement or at least have the ability to get someone on the phone who has it.

Certain facts were not disputed – that Wells Fargo had a representative enter the premises, without notice, not once but twice.  The representative changed the locks despite the fact that the premises were obviously not abandoned by the defendant.  Defendant had previously winterized the home, secured it, maintained the exterior of the premises and did not remove his furniture, clothing, food etc.  Defendant also visited the home at least once a week and had asked a neighbor to keep an eye on the premises.

Plaintiff relies on certain language in the mortgage itself: “Lender, and others authorized by Lender may enter on and inspect the Property. They will do so in a reasonable manner and at reasonable times. If it has a reasonable purpose, Lender may inspect the inside of the home or other improvements on the Property. Before or at the time an inspection is made, Lender will give me notice stating a reasonable purpose for such interior inspection.” as well as the express provisions in another paragraph regarding abandonment: “If…I have abandoned the Property, then Lender may do and pay for whatever is reasonable and appropriate to protect Lender’s interest in the Property…Lender’s actions may include but are not limited to: (a) protecting and/or assessing the value of the Property; (b) securing and/or repairing the Property;…Lender can also enter the Property to make repairs, change locks…and take any other action to secure the Property.”

In its analysis, the court first noted that mortgage documents and their terms are not negotiable and as such, are contracts of adhesion.  Therefore, they are to be construed strictly against the drafter – the plaintiff herein.  Belt Painting Corp. v. TIG Insurance Company 100 NY2d 377 (2000). “Under the circumstances presented to this Court, it is appropriate and fair that the terms of the instrument be construed in favor of Defendant.”  Using a fair reading of the above language, it is apparent that the Lender’s actions must be reasonable and entry can only be upon adequate notice. Further, abandonment of the property is a condition-predicate to entry and the testimony of the defendant substantiated defendant’s claims that he had not abandoned the property.

Based upon the foregoing facts, Spinner declared that the Plaintiff  engaged in a Trespass on at least two occasions:

Distilled to its very essence, trespass is characterized by one’s intentional entry, with neither permission nor legal justification, upon the real property of another, Woodhull v. Town of Riverhead 46 AD3d 802, 849 NYS2d 79 (2nd Dept. 2007). The injury arising [*4]therefrom afflicts the owner’s right of exclusive possession of the property, Steinfeld v. Morris 258 AD 228, 16 NYS2d 155 (1st Dept. 1939), Kaplan v. Incorporated Village of Lynbrook 12 AD3d 410, 784 NYS2d 586 (2nd Dept. 2004). The elements of a claim for trespass are intent coupled with the entry upon the land that is in possession of another. In order for trespass to lie, general intent is legally insufficient. Instead, there must be a specific intent, either to enter the land or to engage in some act whereby it is substantially certain that such entry onto the land will result therefrom, Phillips v. Sun Oil Co. 307 NY 328, 121 NE2d 249 (1954). The intent need not be illegal or unlawful, MacDonald v. Parama Inc. 15 AD2d 797, 224 NYS2d 854 (2nd Dept. 1962) but even one who enters the land upon the erroneous belief that he has the right to enter thereon will be held liable in trespass, Burger v. Singh 28 AD3d 695, 816 NYS2d 478 (2nd Dept. 2006). Trespass will lie against a party if entry upon the land was perpetrated by a third party, such as an independent contractor or other party, at the direction of the party to be charged, Gracey v. Van Kamp 299 AD2d 837, 750 NYS2d 400 (4th Dept. 2002). Id.

Turning to the issue of damages, the court expressed that a foreclosure action is an action in equity and as such, it may impose punitive damages.  “In a suit in equity, the Court is empowered with jurisdiction to do that which ought to be done.” Id.  Spinner then turned to address the bank’s egregious conduct:

Here, the Court is constrained to find that the conduct of Plaintiff in this matter was both willful and wanton, as evidenced by not one but two unauthorized entries into Defendant’s dwelling, occurring in complete derogation of Defendant’s right of possession. This conduct becomes even more glaring when consideration is given to the fact that Defendant affirmatively notified Plaintiff that he had secured the property and that it was not abandoned and still contained his personal property. Even so, Plaintiff maintains that it has entered the property under a color of right, which turns out to be illusory under the circumstances. In spite of these declarations, Plaintiff willfully took it upon itself to enter the property on more than one occasion, doing so unreasonably and without notice, in direct contravention of the terms of its mortgage promulgated to Defendant by its assignor. This is even more distressing when it is considered that Plaintiff breaches its obligations to Defendant under the mortgage, running roughshod over Defendant’s rights with a specious claim that it is acting to protect its rights and the property. In short, the conduct of Plaintiff was nothing short of oppressive and would best be described as heavy handed and egregious, to say the very least. Certainly, the trespass was willful and calculated and was not accidental in any way and the Court finds that Plaintiff did not act in good faith. Under these circumstances, an award of both actual and exemplary damages is necessary and appropriate in order to properly compensate Defendant for the losses he has sustained by way of Plaintiff’s shockingly wrongful conduct as well as to serve as an appropriate deterrent to any future outrageous, improper and unlawful deeds.  Id.

Unfortunately, it appears that this type of behavior is not unheard of by members of the real estate bar.  One member noted that a similar situation occurred with a foreclosure defendant client of his.  Although he had secured and winterized the premises, the bank’s inspection service alleged the premises were wide open and entered the premises.  They also changed the premises, turned the valves to “turn off the water” which instead resulted with the water being turned on.  The pipes burst and flooded the home.

The court’s actions in Wells Fargo v. Tyson should send a clear and unequivocal message to Lenders and their various contractors that they do not have an absolute right to enter a mortgagor’s property and such behavior will not be tolerated.

Related posts:

1. NY Governor Looking to Expand Protections for Defaulting HomeOwners, Tenants
2. Real Estate Law Update: New York State Decisions of Interest
3. Short Sales & No-Flip Clauses in the Approval Letter – Removing a Roadblock

In the seller’s boom market in years past, any prospective purchaser who would dare ask for this contingency would never even make it to the binder stage let alone contract. Contracts often crossed my desk that were missing mortgage contingencies, even though Purchaser needed a mortgage to complete the transaction – competition was so fierce that these buyers would agree to almost anything to cinch the deal. But that market has come and gone – we are in the midst of a buyer’s market and now the purchaser has some leverage.

Still, most real estate attorneys will balk on including a Sale of a Purchaser’s Current Residence (SPCR) Contingency in their Contract. The rationale is that the Seller has to take their home off the market and risk losing the opportunity to snag a qualified Purchaser who doesn’t need such a contingency. This is a very sound rationale and definitely makes sense in the Seller’s market. Here, however, there is some bargaining room as “qualified” purchasers aren’t lining up in droves so that the Seller’s risk is lessened.

There are a few strategies that can be employed on a Purchaser’s behalf in this type of situation. If Purchaser is obtaining a mortgage and needs the funds from the sale of the current residence (or the removal of the debt obligation), this will often be a condition in the mortgage commitment. So, even if seller’s attorney won’t include an actual SPCR Contingency, the mortgage contingency clause will therefore indirectly include the SPCR contingency. I am not overly fond of this strategy because of its ambiguity. Ambiguity creates issues of fact which can lead to uncertainty and litigation. Also, please note, attorneys have caught onto this trick and include language that specifically states the contract is not contingent upon the sale of the purchaser’s home and that a mortgage commitment will be considered firm and unconditional (and therefore satisfy the requirements of mortgage contingency clause which causes its removal) even if it has a condition requiring the sale of Purchaser’s real property or the payoff of certain debts and liens.

I have a unique solution to this very problem and it is usually well received by other real estate attorneys. Modify the SPCR Contingency to include an escape clause for the seller. Allow the Seller to continue to market the property for the time the contingency is in effect. If a prospective buyer makes a bona fide offer, Seller gives notice to the Contract Purchaser of the offer and allows Contract Purchaser to either remove the SPCR contingency and continue with the Contract or cancel the Contract and receive a refund of the down payment monies. With this modification, Purchaser does not have to worry about jeopardizing their down payment and Seller does not have to take their house off the market and lose out on potential qualified buyers.

The modification of the Sale of a Purchaser’s Current Residence Contingency is a way to balance and satisfy the needs of both parties while removing an almost impossible roadblock to a potentially successful real estate transaction. Careful examination of the terms of the proposed contract and wording of the SPCR Contingency with modification language is key and should be left to the expertise of a real estate attorney.

Related posts:

1. Buyer $5,000 Short – How to Close the Gap…from a NY Point of View
2. Seasoning and FHA’s Time Restrictions on Resales – a Legal Analysis

Section 265-b enumerates which activities are forbidden to Distressed Property Consultants:

1. Providing services without a written, fully signed contract with a homeowner;

2. Charging or collecting payment from a homeowner before completion of services;

3. Taking a Power of Attorney from a homeowner;

4. Keeping any original Loan Documents or any original documents relating to the distressed home loan;and

5. Inducing a Homeowner to executing a Contract that does not comply with the provisions of the Act.

The Contract

Section 265-b lists very specific requirements when it comes to the Contract for Distressed Consultant Services.  First, it must be in writing and must contain the entire agreement of the parties.  Therefore, oral agreements pre- and post-contract are not enforceable and the agreement is enforceable only as to those provisions contained within the four corners of the written Contract.  Also, the proposed Contract must be provided to the homeowner, in advance, for his review.

Content & Form

The NY legislature laid out very specific requirements as to the form and content of the Distressed Consultant Contract.  First, as to the font, it must be in at least 12 point type and in the same language that was used between the Consultant and the Homeowner to discuss the Consultant’s services.  For example, if the parties conversed in Spanish about the proposed services, then the resulting written contract must be in Spanish.

The Contract must provide full disclosure.  It must include:

1. the exact nature of the services to be provided by the Consultant and anyone who is associated with the consultant;

2. the total amount and terms of compensation for such services;

3. the name, business address, and telephone number of the distressed property consultant and the address (if different), phone & fax number or email address of the distressed property consultant where the homeowner can send communications to the consultant;

4. it must be dated and personally signed by the homeowner and the distressed property consultant before a Notary Public;

5. It cannot limit the liability of the Distressed Property Consultant nor waive any provisions under this Statute and cannot require arbitration of any dispute arising under the Contract;

6. it must contain a specific Right to Cancel:

a. 14 point boldface type;

b. Containing the following language with the Distressed Property Consultant accurately entering the date the right to cancel ends and his name -

NOTICE REQUIRED BY LAW

YOU MAY CANCEL THIS CONTRACT, WITHOUT ANY PENALTY OR OBLIGATION AT ANYTIME BEFORE MIDNIGHT OF _________________________ (FIFTH BUSINESS DAY AFTER EXECUTION).

_______________________________________ (THE”CONSULTANT”) OR ANYONE WORKING FOR THE CONSULTANT, MAY NOT TAKE ANY MONEY FROM YOU OR ASK YOU FOR MONEY UNTIL THE CONSULTANT HAS COMPLETELY FINISHED DOING EVERYTHING THIS CONTRACT SAYS THE CONSULTANT WILL DO.

YOU SHOULD CONSIDER CONSULTING AN ATTORNEY OR A GOVERNMENT-APPROVED HOUSING COUNSELOR BEFORE SIGNING ANY LEGAL DOCUMENT CONCERNING YOUR HOME. IT IS ADVISABLE THAT YOU FIND YOUR OWN ATTORNEY, AND NOT CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY RECOMMENDED OR PROVIDED TO YOU BY THE CONSULTANT. A LIST OF HOUSING COUNSELORS MAY BE FOUND ON A THE WEBSITE OF THE NEW YORK STATE BANKING DEPARTMENT, www.banking.state.ny.us OR BY CALLING THE BANKING DEPARTMENT TOLL FREE AT 1-877-BANK-NYS (1-877-226-5697).  THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THIS CONTRACT CONTAIN THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND THE CONSULTANT. YOU SHOULD NOT RELY ON ANY ORAL AGREEMENT OR PROMISE.

c. The date for the Right to Cancel: it is midnight of the 5th business day following the day the Contract was executed by both parties.

d. Notice of Cancellation:

1. must be in writing and delivered by the homeowner or the homeowner’s representative, to the Property Consultant to the address, fax or email address specified in the notice.

2. The Contract must include (2) copies of a Notice of Cancellation in the following form:

NOTICE OF CANCELLATION

YOU MAY CANCEL THIS CONTRACT, WITHOUT ANY PENALTY OR OBLIGATION, AT ANY TIME BEFORE MIDNIGHT OF _____________________________ (ENTER DATE).

TO CANCEL THIS CONTRACT, SIGN AND DATE BOTH COPIES OF THIS CANCELLATION NOTICE AND PERSONALLY DELIVER ONE COPY OR SEND IT BY FACSIMILE, UNITED STATES MAIL OR ANY ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL LETTER DELIVERY SERVICE, INDICATING CANCELLATION TO THE DISTRESSED PROPERTY CONSULTANT AT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:

NAME OF CONTRACTOR: ________________________________
STREET ADDRESS:______________________________________
CITY, STATE, ZIP:______________________________________
FACSIMILE:___________________________________________

I HEREBY CANCEL THIS CONTRACT

Name of Homeowner: ___________________________________________

Signature of Homeowner:________________________________________

Date:_________________________________________________________

e. Compliance with Notice of Cancellation: If a Distressed Property Consultant receives the Notice of Cancellation within the proscribed time frame, the Consultant must, within (10) days, return the original Contract and any other documents signed by the Homeowner to the Homeowner.  Cancellation, of course, releases the homeowner from any obligation to pay the Distressed Property Consultant.

PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION

If a Distressed Property Consultant violates this Statute, the legislature has crafted the following penalties:

1. Court can declare Contract to be null and void;

2. If the homeowner incurs damages because of the violation, the homeowner can recover actual and consequential damages, as well as costs, from the Consultant;

3. If the Consultant intentionally or recklessly violates the provisions of this Statute, the Court can award to the homeowner treble (3x) damages, attorney’s fees and costs;

4. An application can be made by the Attorney General to issue an injunction forcing the Consultant to cease and desist from engaging in future distressed consulting activities without requiring proof that any person has been injured or damaged and also can require restitution; and

5. The court can fine the Consultant not more than $10,000 for each violation.

There you have it – if you are offering any type of services to a Homeowner who is behind on their mortgage, real estate taxes etc., first determine if you are a Distressed Property Consultant (and not a member of an exempt category) and if your Homeowner and their financial distress is covered by the Statute.  If so, make sure you are in compliance by following the tenets outlined above.  The penalties can be severe but at least now, you have an outline for a plan of compliance.

Related posts:

1. Seasoning and FHA’s Time Restrictions on Resales – a Legal Analysis

I find it utterly amazing that Patterson credits New York’s 23% decrease in foreclosures in 1st Quarter 2009 as compared to 1st Quarter 2008 (compared to a 24% increase nationally) to his New York Foreclosure Prevention & Lender Responsibility Act of 2008 where the credit should lie in New Yorkers’ steadfast resolve to be represented by attorneys for the biggest transactions of their lives.

While politicians continue to churn out legislation after legislation eliminating borrower choice, capitalism and so forth, perhaps the Department of Justice’s position that lawyers create an unfair monopoly in the area of real estate closings should be revisited as the lawyers are the only ones out there who can preserve our freedom to choose and protect the average American from being misled into a toxic mortgage. 

New York Governor Wants Stronger Mortgage Protections
Carrie Bay | 06.15.09

New York Gov. David A. Paterson has proposed legislation that would build upon the state’s subprime lending reform law enacted last year. The measure centers on providing additional protections for homeowners and tenants, establishing safeguards against foreclosure rescue scams, and preventing urban blight caused by foreclosed homes.According to Paterson, more needs to be done to prevent predatory lenders from taking advantage of New Yorkers. He also says lawmakers can no longer allow tenants who live in foreclosed properties to find their leases terminated without reasonable notice, nor can they let struggling homeowners who are looking for help lose their homes to loan modification scams.

For more please read: DSNews.Com Default Servicing In Print and Online – Formerly REO Magazine

Tags: loanmodification, subprimemortgage, foreclosure, tenants, wallstreet, realestate

Related posts:

1. DON’T SAY I DIDN’T WARN YOU! NY Attorney General’s Crackdown on the Loan Modification Industry
2. DANGER ZONE – New York Post
3. Foreclosure Defense Bar: Heads Up! Forensic Exam of TBW Mortgage Corp Loan Docs Could Be Fruitful

However, ML 09-15 has disappeared from HUD's website and we are left wondering if HUD is already pulling the plug on this plan…

Related posts:

1. The New York Law Journal – Free Breaking News: Chief Judge Unveils Program to Deal With Dramatic Rise in Foreclosures
2. FHA Unveils New Plan to Let Home Buyers Use $8,000 Tax Credit Upfront as a Downpayment

HISTORY
To understand seasoning, it is essential to examine the events that caused FHA to create this underwriting requirement.

Real estate speculators would often locate distressed real estate, purchase the property at a substantial discount, make repairs and improvements and quickly resell the improved property at a substantial profit. There is nothing inherently wrong or illegal about this model of flipping real estate and often, it led to revitalization of run-down neighborhoods and increased neighboring property values. Some speculators would execute a Contract to purchase a distressed property and turn around and assign the right to purchase the Contract to another buyer for a price and at closing, would receive their profit without any investment at all. Again, nothing inherently wrong with the Assignment or Contract Vendee flip model either.

The problem was in a number of these transactions, the speculator would collaborate with the appraiser, the loan officer and sometimes the end buyer to artificially inflate the value of the home or to falsify the borrower’s documentation so that they would qualify for a mortgage.  These types of fraud transactions had a high rate of mortgage defaults because it was either never the intent of the buyer to pay the mortgage or the buyer was tricked into taking out a loan he could not afford. The Lender would foreclose and find that the value of the real property was woefully inadequate.

Therefore, to curb the fraudulent activity that often went hand in hand with flip transactions, FHA instituted a title seasoning underwriting requirement for those seeking FHA financing.

ANALYSIS
FHA’s title seasoning underwriting guidelines are codified in 24 CFR 203.37a and further clarified in its Mortgagee Letter 2006-14.

FHA begins it’s discussion of the Property Flipping Prohibition by defining property flipping as ”

practice whereby
property is resold a short period of time after it is purchased by the Seller
for a considerable profit with an artificially inflated value, often abetted by
a lender’s collusion with an appraiser”. This practice is addressed by FHA with a two-prong rule: (1) only Owners of Record may sell the property and (2) prohibits resales of property 90 days or less from the last sale. (Note, there is a rule for resales that occur between 91 and 180 days as well as up to 12 months but I am not going to discuss that here).

OWNERS OF RECORD This requirement speaks directly to the assignment/contract vendee flip transaction and therefore, the Seller on the original Contract of Sale must hold title to the property.  There can be no intervening deed or assignment of Contract etc. Further, FHA sets forth certain types of documentation that would be acceptable proof of Ownership but also specifically indicates that it is not an exhaustive list: (1) property sales history report; (2) copy of recorded deed from Seller or other such documentation like a property tax bill and (3) title commitment or binder demonstrating seller’s ownership and the date it was acquired.  Any of these items are sufficient to establish that the Seller is the Owner of Record for this test.

PROPERTY RESALES OCCURRING 90 DAYS OR LESS FOLLOWING ACQUISITION The rule is: “If the owner sells a property within 90 days of the date of acquisition, that property is not eligible security for a mortgage insured by FHA unless it falls within one of the exceptions to the time restrictions on resales set forth in Section 203.37a(c) of the Regulations”. Those exceptions are as follows:

1)
Sales by HUD of Real Estate-Owned (REO) properties under 24 CFR part 291 and of
single family assets in revitalization areas pursuant to section 204 of the
National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1710);
(2)
Sales by another agency of the United States Government of REO single family
properties pursuant to programs operated by these agencies;
(3)
Sales of properties by nonprofit organizations approved to purchase HUD REO
single family properties at a discount with resale restrictions;
(4)
Sales of properties that were acquired by the sellers by inheritance;
(5)
Sales of properties purchased by an employer or relocation agency in connection
with the relocation of an employee;
(6)
Sales of properties by state- and federally-chartered financial institutions
and government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs);
(7)
Sales of properties by local and state government agencies; and
(8)
Only upon announcement by HUD through issuance of a notice, sales of properties
located in areas designated by the President as federal disaster areas. The
notice will specify how long the exception will be in effect.

One essential definition often glossed over is the Date of Acquisition.  Most realtors, loan officers and underwriters are under the mistaken impression that the seasoning clock is reset upon every title transfer.  However, FHA specifically defines the Date of Acquisition as “the date of settlement on the seller’s purchase of that property“ (emphasis added).  Therefore, not every title transfer is to be considered in determining the Date of Acquisition for the purpose of the seasoning test.

WHAT ABOUT A TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY FROM A HOME OWNER TO A TRUST?

Does a transfer of title from a Homeowner to a Trustee of an inter-vivos,
revocable trust wherein the Homeowner retains 100% of the Beneficial Ownership
of that Trust constitute a Resale of Property within the meaning of 24 CFR
203.37a and HUD Mortgagee Letter 2006-14?

The transfer of title
from a homeowner to a Trustee of an inter-vivos, revocable trust wherein the
Homeowner retains 100% of the beneficial ownership of said trust does not
constitute a Resale of Property, within the meaning of 24 CFR 203.37a and HUD
Mortgagee Letter 2006-14, and therefore, as long as homeowner’s initial
acquisition meets the test set forth in the Regulation and Mortgagee Letter,
the subsequent sale of the real property is eligible for FHA financing, even if
the transfer to the trust is 90 days or less from the sale contract date.

FHA will not provide
financing when the Seller’s Date of Acquisition is 90 days or less from the
Purchaser’s sale contract date. FHA
defines the Date of Acquisition as “the date of settlement on the seller’s
purchase of that property” (pg 2 Mortgagee Letter). The transfer of title
from the Homeowner to a Trustee is not a purchase but a mere change of
identity. The trust and the homeowner
share a commonality of ownership and control over the real property. Such
transaction is without consideration and exempt from the payment of state and
local transfer taxes based upon the “mere change of identity”
exception. Therefore, the Date of
Acquisition is the date the Seller originally purchased the real property for
consideration.

It is unnecessary and
improper to look to the codified exceptions to the 90 days or less rule,
outlined in 24 CFR 203.37a(c), if the date of the title transfer to the trustee
is 90 days or less than the purchaser’s sale contract date because such date is not
the Date of Acquisition under the Rule and Mortgagee Letter. If the contemplated transaction has a Date of
Acquisition that is 90 days or less than the sale contract date, the Rule
provides certain exceptions to the time restrictions on resales. However, as the date of title transfer to the
trust does not constitute the Date of Acquisition, it is unnecessary to look to
the exceptions provided in 24 CFR 203.37a(c), except if the date the Homeowner purchased the property, for
consideration, is 90 days or less from the sale contract date.

CONCLUSION

The real estate flip is not illegal in and of itself.  The often accompanying loan and appraisal fraud is what makes this perfectly legitimate transaction fraudulent and the basis for FHA and other lenders to institute title seasoning underwriting requirements.  If done correctly, the flip often revitalizes neighborhoods and increases home values in the surrounding areas.

I hope that this clarifies exactly what is meant by Title Seasoning and how this underwriting requirement should be correctly applied to a contemplated real property transaction.  Remember, not every title transfer triggers that seasoning clock but be mindful of those that do!

Related posts:

1. Short Sales & No-Flip Clauses in the Approval Letter – Removing a Roadblock
2. FHA Limits on Cash Out Refinances drops to 85%
3. Fannie and Freddie – What Went Wrong and Can It Be Fixed?