One of the significant challenges facing New Jersey courts, in the aftermath of the subprime mortgage crisis, is identifying legitimate claims of fraud and negligence filed by borrowers undergoing foreclosure. Such claims have become the customary litany in response to a foreclosure action.
The circumstance arises, for example, when after a foreclosure complaint is filed by a lender, a borrower maintains in that action, or perhaps in a subsequent action, that an attorney or title agent acting for the lending institution allowed a transaction to proceed in the face of questionable circumstances or documents. In defending against the foreclosure complaint, or in support of a subsequent action for money damages, the borrower places focus on the existence of the transaction itself, rather than the default in making mortgage payments. The borrower seeks to be relieved from the mortgage and loan obligations, and in some instances also seeks money damages against the bank’s agents.
This content has been archived.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]
