Protecting competent adults that signed agreements and who now claim to not know the terms of what they signed is absolutely scandalous. A contract is a contract - why should anybody enter into one if they can't count on it being enforced on its terms in court due to the political environment or the whims of judges? It's the nanny state run amok, which is nothing new in this commonwealth.

Why exactly are these deadbeats allowed to live rent free in someone else's home.

Because it is not "fair" that they ask the borrowers to pay what they agreed to pay?

Liberal Wealth Transfer and or bribery is what this boils down to.

Many mortgage loans in the past five (5) years are not in compliance with federal or state laws. TILA, HOEPA, RESPA violations are extremely common. Also common are material misrepresentation as to the terms of the loan, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract... The list could go on.

Additionally many foreclosing plaintiffs are not even in possession of the instruments, e.g., the promissory note and mortgage (or deed of trust).


To borrow from a comment above:"A contract is a contract - why should anybody enter into one if they can't count on it being enforced on its terms in court..."

I think it would be an outstanding, and very effective, practice for courts to begin enforcing the laws, and the terms of the contract fully. There is hardly a mortgage created in the past five (5) years in which the broker, the sponsor, the alleged originating lender, et. al., is not in violation of either the law or the terms of the contract.

To argue that the law should only work in favor of one party, as the previous two (2) posts seem to, is particularly biased, and that subverts the rule of law entirely.