While as a general rule foreclosing parties seek to move through the action as quickly as possible—all for good and obvious reasons—there are worthy countervailing compulsions (or unworthy blunders) which can interfere with this goal. Among these are pressures from various sources to pursue settlement, public relations constraints or, sometimes, as parenthetically mentioned, just an error. (There is no issue—certainly with the borrower—about refraining from conducting the foreclosure sale pursuant to a forbearance agreement where the hiatus is mutually volitional pursuant to contract.)
It is, therefore, not so infrequent that a foreclosing lender or servicer finally arrives at the foreclosure judgment stage and then, perhaps for one of the reasons cited, holds in place. A few weeks or months of inaction is not meaningful. But what about a year, or two, or much more? Although it seems unlikely, it does happen and then the questions, or attacks, emerge.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
