The Supreme Court of Massachusetts has Ruled that Those who Have Lost their Houses to Foreclosure

Julie Parker

Julie Parker was born in March 19, 1983, in Lancaster – Los Angeles County, California. Her father is an experienced economist and businessman, who motivate her taste for the real estate market. Recently, graduated in Economics and now focus her studies in a PhD. Now she’s a consultant and webwritter of ForeclosureListings.com

Supreme Court of Massachusetts and foreclosure.

Photo by Respres

The Supreme Court of Massachusetts has ruled that those who have lost their houses to foreclosure can question the seizure of the property in a housing court. The housing advocates are cheering this decision as a major victory. The ruling on 4th August was unanimous.

The case related to one K.C. Bailey, a resident of Mattapan who had lost his house to the lender through foreclosure in 2007. In 2009, sixty five year old Bailey contested his imminent eviction during a proceeding in the housing court, charging that the foreclosure process was defective and flawed.

Bailey said that he had come to know of the foreclosure only after getting the eviction notice tagged to a fence encircling his colonial type house comprising of three bedrooms. He has been living here with his family from 1979. He is a Vietnam War veteran. He declined to exit because he had not been served with proper sale notice and was still occupying the premises.

The foreclosing bank was Bank of New York. It argued that housing court lacked the authority to think about allowing challenge to any foreclosure that had run its course with the nod from the judge. Bailey appealed. This led to the Supreme Judicial Court to take up the case. It has now been returned to the housing court.

The cheering housing advocates say that now the lenders will be forced to prove that they own legally the property they are foreclosing on; prior to this they would not be able to evict occupants. This will make them agree to negotiations with the troubled houses owners trying to save the roof above their heads.

The officials of Bank of New York Mellon said they had not completed review of the decision; they reiterated as being mere trustees in these matter they had “very limited ministerial role” to play.

Massachusetts a non-judicial state. It is not necessary for the lender to pass the procedure through the courts. Thus it is only at the time of eviction that the borrower will get the first chance to contest the repossession. The ruling will also provide the tenants with a new tool in warding off eviction when their residence is foreclosed upon.