************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Thanks Paul,
Very excellent and useful points made. Thanks again, David > From: [email protected] > Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:10:12 -0700 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [TROM1] Help wanted > > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi David, > > Let me say that in the end you will have to go judicial. Only by > that means can this situation be put to bed permanently. > > First off. Make sure that the land use neighbor will continue to > want to retain his contractual right to use the land and do that > until the agreement runs out. Look into the agreement and see if > there is any means to extend that agreement. That will give you the > possibility of extending the contract further out in time. > > There is always the possibility that the neighbor could sell his > contract. He has the right to do that all on his own. You might let > him know that his best option is to use the land through the > contractual period and then sell. That will give him many years of > use which is worth something and then sell later or extend. The use > contract can be looked at as both use and money in the bank when he > wishes to sell. He then can see that he has two actions which are of > value to him and he should take advantage of both. Meaning don't > sell until much later. > > This is basically a means to keep the farm out of the banks hands. > Right now it is your only option. You must be upfront and open with > him for he is your only hope at the moment. If you will, pray that > he doesn't wind up in a situation where he personally needs and could > use the money by selling the use contract. However should the lender > really want to close this situation out, he can continue to make > higher and higher offers to sell to entice the neighbor to sell. > Theoretically the bank can make bids all the way up to $50,000 and > close out their loan and take the collateral, the farm in exchange > for their loan. Take it by foreclosure once all liens and > contractual restrictions and whatever claims have been eliminated > save theirs. > > Now to address the situation with the bank. I am not familiar with > the laws but in the US, one can sue lenders for being predatory and > opportunistic. Your description definitely fits this area. Fraud is > not involved and use of the term will only weaken and reduce your > argument. The best and only way to use the term is 'alleged fraud' > for only a court can determine and pronounce something a fraud and > you will be operating within an area where this is a truth. > Unsubstantiated claims come across as emotional sour grapes in this > arena and a sign that the person making those statements has no idea > what he is doing. When you go judicial you can allege fraud in your > suit along with everything else. > > You will have to get legal counsel to home you in on what laws to > attack with and you will have to sue to clear this away. Without > doing that you can threaten at this time until such point that you > have the wherewithall to go legal. You should be able to use the > internet to discover what 'codes' both civil, criminal and > governmental that you can use. The best way to start is to talk to a > realtor or real estate broker to find out how Canada names its codes > concerning real estate so that you know where and how to search. > You can also contact law enforcement to get a clue where to search > for criminal predatory and opportunistic illegal acts along with > attempts to defraud as well as defraud. > > Paul > > On Aug 3, 2012, at 10:27 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > Dear Trommers, > > > > I have a legal problem as explained below: > > > > Is there anyone with any law back ground or just good old common > > sense that can help me solve this problem: > > > > (Note: I posted this question on: "JustAnswer" on line and a week > > has went by and no one has yet answered. > > > > Do not worry that this is a Canadian situation. > > > > Common Law is based on common sense and good judgement and good > > understanding of right and wrong. This is universal. > > > > Thanks in advance for any advice. > > > > David > > > > Problem: > > > > I have a brother who lives on a farm in Manitoba, which he inherited > > from our parents, who died in 2006 and 2007. I am Arnold's oldest > > brother and I live in Cambridge, Ontario. I am on perment disability > > pension. I cannot travel there to handle the affairs. We cannot > > afford legal battles or costs of any kind. > > > > Arnold is not capable of farming the land. Arnold is poorly > > educated and considered mentally > > handicapped, not capable of making sound decisions (having imparied > > judgement) on any significant or even basic matters. Arnold works > > part > > time or seasonal at best. Arnold has a very bad credit history. > > Arnold is considered in the community as being a few cards short of a > > full deck. Any sufficiently educated or and mentally or intellectually > > competent person that knows Arnold, would atest to that. > > > > In 2009 > > Arnold needed some money and went to a mortgage company to get a > > loan. > > He used the farm as collateral. The farm is or could be worth around > > $50,000. The head office of the mortgage company is in Richmond Hill, > > Ontario. > > > > Some how the mortgage company gave him a loan for $50,000. > > How? I do not know. It is beyond me how he qualified for a loan. I > > have to assume that the lender was opportunistic. > > > > The interest rate is 15.9% and the incidental charges for late > > payments etc. are > > astronomical. $250.00 to $400.00 for infraction or actions. The > > list is long and insane. > > > > I think Arnold made a couple of payments at the beginning. And non > > since. > > > > As of now the mortgage company wants to foreclose on the property > > and has listed the property for sale and I am > > told, has three offers as of last week. > > > > The saving grace for the moment, at least, has been that the > > neighbour leased the land for > > pasture a couple months prior and has registered a land use caveat. > > against the property until March 31/ 2015, with government of > > Manitoba. > > The land use caveat is dated and registered before the mortgage is > > registered. > > > > The neighbor does not want to give up the land until then. > > But the mortgage company is pressuring the neighbor to buy the land > > even at a discounted price. I told the neighbour not to negotiate with > > the mortgage company and only stick to his lease agreement. (At > > least > > to hold the mortgage company off as long as possible, to give me time > > to deal with this matter.) > > > > I remember from high school law that for > > person's signature to be binding on a contract he has to be mentally > > competent. I also know that in order for a person to qualify for a > > mortgage, he has to have good credit rating and be employed or have > > the > > financial means to make payments and pay for the mortgage. > > > From what I > > understand, these criteria are and can only be common sense and > > therefore are or have to be common law, also. My evaluation of the > > situation is that the lender was opportunistic and saw that there was > > sufficient collateral and they would be safe. So they gave him the > > $50,000. I also suspect that the lender thought that the property > > could > > potentially be worth more. To me, at least based on common sense > > and > > common law, this mortgage agreement is clearly fraudulent and > > therefore > > null and void and unenforceable. It is an instrument of fraud. No > > honest person or principled person or no one in their right mind would > > give Arnold a loan. > > > > They might be safe with a $10 or $20 loan. > > Giving Arnold a mortgage or loan with the farm as collateral is not > > unlike taking candy from a baby. I need to and have to deal with > > this > > matter only by letter. I have to give them a good scare. > > > > I want to > > tell the mortgage company that: - they did not properly qualify > > Arnold > > before giving him the loan, for the reasons I specified. > > > > 1. - their > > mortgage agreement with Arnold is clearly opportunistic and therefore > > unlawful and an instrument of fraud. > > > > 2. - to permanently cease and desist > > all foreclosure actions and leave Arnold and the property alone > > and not > > to come near him or the property for a 100 miles. > > > > 3. - no honest or > > principled person or lender would give Arnold a loan especially > > with the > > farm used as collateral. > > > > 4. I want to tell the mortgage company that > > doing what they did to Arnold is not unlike taking candy from a baby. > > > > 5. - they should be ashamed of themselves. - if they want to help > > such a > > person in need that they should give him a donation of $50,000, and > > give him guidance and therapy, not a loan. - their activities, > > motives, and principles are clearly fraudulent and I will send the > > authorities after them and have them investigated. > > > > 6. -they are loan sharks and should all be > > put in jail. > > > > I want to know what are the legal criteria under common > > law, to make a signature legally binding on a contract, > > expecially in a > > case like this? And the criteria necessary to make such a situation > > lawful? And anything else I should know? I want to know what you > > think of this matter and what you would do if you were in my (or our- > > Arnold and I) shoes to have this matter handled and save Arnold and > > the > > farm? > > > > I forgot to mention that Arnold does work part time and seasonal, > > but it can't be said that he has steady income. Right now he has a > > summer job and is working for the Manitoba department of hwys > > operating > > an asphalt packer. > > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
