Divorce & Home Foreclosure in Arizona

August 31st, 2008

With Arizona’s (and the rest of the country’s) current depressed real estate market, many people are facing foreclosures. A few things to keep in mind:

1. The foreclosure is going to continue on in most divorce circumstances unless the home’s mortgage is brought current, along with the reasonable costs associated with the foreclosure, including attorney fees.

2. Arizona has an anti-deficiency statute that is going to apply in the majority of cases involving standard mortgages. Thus, Arizona law offers protection to homeowners whose home has been foreclosed. This statute, A.R.S. §33-729, states as follows:

33-729. Purchase money mortgage; limitation on liability

A. Except as provided in subsection B, if a mortgage is given to secure the payment of the balance of the purchase price, or to secure a loan to pay all or part of the purchase price, of a parcel of real property of two and one-half acres or less which is limited to and utilized for either a single one-family or single two-family dwelling, the lien of judgment in an action to foreclose such mortgage shall not extend to any other property of the judgment debtor, nor may general execution be issued against the judgment debtor to enforce such judgment, and if the proceeds of the mortgaged real property sold under special execution are insufficient to satisfy the judgment, the judgment may not otherwise be satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.

B. The balance due on a mortgage foreclosure judgment after sale of the mortgaged property shall constitute a lien against other property of the judgment debtor, general execution may be issued thereon, and the judgment may be otherwise satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, if the court determines, after sale upon special execution and upon written application and such notice to the judgment debtor as the court may require, that the sale price was less than the amount of the judgment because of diminution in the value of such real property while such property was in the ownership, possession, or control of the judgment debtor because of voluntary waste committed or permitted by the judgment debtor, not to exceed the amount of diminution in value as determined by such court.

Interpreted, this statute means that for the average homeowner, a lender cannot seek to recover from the homeowner any shortages when the foreclosing bank sells the house for less than the outstanding mortgage amount. The second part of the statute is interesting, but reasonable, in that it references voluntary waste -if, for example, a homeowner angry at the foreclosing bank wrecks his/her home intentionally, the homeowner may be responsible for the effect the damage has on the home’s value.

So what options does a homeowner have in a divorce situation or otherwise? Here are a few:

1. Let the bank foreclose on the property. The foreclosure in most circumstances will absolve the homeowner from most or all further financial responsibilities but will not reflect well on the home owner’s credit report. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation prior to assuming that there will be minor or no financial repercussions as there are exceptions to the anti-deficiency provisions of A.R.S. § 33-729. If there are negative financial repercussions, community property principles apply and if a divorce situation exists, then the parties or court will decide the parties responsibility for the financial obligations. Of course, any divorce rulings define the rights and obligations as between the parties only and are not binding on third party creditors, such as mortgage holders, meaning that banks are free to go after both parties if community property/obligations are involved.

2. Bring the mortgage current and retain the property. The homeowner will have to pay additional fees/costs to do so but then will continue to own the property.

3. Consider a “short sale” which is an effort to sell the property at a reduced price so that the bank will not have to bother with the time and expense of foreclosure. The bank then accepts the buy-out, basically, with less negative effects on the homeowner. It’s more complex than that but that’s the gist. I recommend that a lawyer guide both the seller and buyer of anyone participating in a short sale situation; as well, a good real estate agent familiar with short sales is recommended. Of course, when the real estate market is better than it is at the time of this writing, selling a house and paying off the mortgage in full is easier than it is now. In addition, some lenders will not agree to short sales because they believe it sets a bad precedent that too many other borrowers will attempt to use. Another piece of the short sale puzzle is the possibility the IRS will consider any amounts forgiven as income (consult an attorney regarding the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 for specifics on that new law and related consequences).

Real estate issues are complex and real property is often the largest asset involved in a divorce. It’s a good idea to consult with a competent attorney prior to making decisions about real estate!

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Divorce & Home Foreclosure in Arizona

August 30th, 2008

With Arizona’s (and the rest of the country’s) current depressed real estate market, many people are facing foreclosures. A few things to keep in mind:

1. The foreclosure is going to continue on in most divorce circumstances unless the home’s mortgage is brought current, along with the reasonable costs associated with the foreclosure, including attorney fees.

2. Arizona has an anti-deficiency statute that is going to apply in the majority of cases involving standard mortgages. Thus, Arizona law offers protection to homeowners whose home has been foreclosed. This statute, A.R.S. §33-729, states as follows:

33-729. Purchase money mortgage; limitation on liability

A. Except as provided in subsection B, if a mortgage is given to secure the payment of the balance of the purchase price, or to secure a loan to pay all or part of the purchase price, of a parcel of real property of two and one-half acres or less which is limited to and utilized for either a single one-family or single two-family dwelling, the lien of judgment in an action to foreclose such mortgage shall not extend to any other property of the judgment debtor, nor may general execution be issued against the judgment debtor to enforce such judgment, and if the proceeds of the mortgaged real property sold under special execution are insufficient to satisfy the judgment, the judgment may not otherwise be satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.

B. The balance due on a mortgage foreclosure judgment after sale of the mortgaged property shall constitute a lien against other property of the judgment debtor, general execution may be issued thereon, and the judgment may be otherwise satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, if the court determines, after sale upon special execution and upon written application and such notice to the judgment debtor as the court may require, that the sale price was less than the amount of the judgment because of diminution in the value of such real property while such property was in the ownership, possession, or control of the judgment debtor because of voluntary waste committed or permitted by the judgment debtor, not to exceed the amount of diminution in value as determined by such court.

Interpreted, this statute means that for the average homeowner, a lender cannot seek to recover from the homeowner any shortages when the foreclosing bank sells the house for less than the outstanding mortgage amount. The second part of the statute is interesting, but reasonable, in that it references voluntary waste -if, for example, a homeowner angry at the foreclosing bank wrecks his/her home intentionally, the homeowner may be responsible for the effect the damage has on the home’s value.

So what options does a homeowner have in a divorce situation or otherwise? Here are a few:

1. Let the bank foreclose on the property. The foreclosure in most circumstances will absolve the homeowner from most or all further financial responsibilities but will not reflect well on the home owner’s credit report. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation prior to assuming that there will be minor or no financial repercussions as there are exceptions to the anti-deficiency provisions of A.R.S. § 33-729. If there are negative financial repercussions, community property principles apply and if a divorce situation exists, then the parties or court will decide the parties responsibility for the financial obligations. Of course, any divorce rulings define the rights and obligations as between the parties only and are not binding on third party creditors, such as mortgage holders, meaning that banks are free to go after both parties if community property/obligations are involved.

2. Bring the mortgage current and retain the property. The homeowner will have to pay additional fees/costs to do so but then will continue to own the property.

3. Consider a “short sale” which is an effort to sell the property at a reduced price so that the bank will not have to bother with the time and expense of foreclosure. The bank then accepts the buy-out, basically, with less negative effects on the homeowner. It’s more complex than that but that’s the gist. I recommend that a lawyer guide both the seller and buyer of anyone participating in a short sale situation; as well, a good real estate agent familiar with short sales is recommended. Of course, when the real estate market is better than it is at the time of this writing, selling a house and paying off the mortgage in full is easier than it is now. In addition, some lenders will not agree to short sales because they believe it sets a bad precedent that too many other borrowers will attempt to use. Another piece of the short sale puzzle is the possibility the IRS will consider any amounts forgiven as income (consult an attorney regarding the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 for specifics on that new law and related consequences).

Real estate issues are complex and real property is often the largest asset involved in a divorce. It’s a good idea to consult with a competent attorney prior to making decisions about real estate!

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Fair Housing Rights For Tenants and Buyers

August 29th, 2008

Congress implemented the Fair Housing Act initially in 1968, it was then altered in 1988 and protects home buyers and renters alike from all types of discriminatory practices. Under the precepts of the Fair Housing Act, sellers and property owners are not allowed to deny a sale or reject a rental application because of race, color, religion, nationality, gender, disabilities, or family status.

A seller stands in violation of the Fair Housing Act if he or she refuses your bid or rental application based on any of these personal circumstances. This includes inflating the price to try to make the property unappealing.

If you own a property that you’re leasing to tenants, the Fair Housing Act requires you to make reasonable alterations to your policies to give those with disabilities equal housing opportunities. For instance, while you might justly refuse to rent to tenants with animals, the Fair Housing Act dictates that you may not refuse to rent to an individual who is blind and owns an assistance animal. Also, under the Fair Housing Act, landlords must allow disabled tenants to make changes to their own living space that may make their habitation more agreeable to their disability.

There are new requirements for landlords that plan to rent a multi-family home with more than four units. The construction and design must conform to the requirements of disabled persons. For example, public-use areas, such as laundry and mailrooms must be accessible, doors must be wide enough to admit wheelchairs, and bathrooms and kitchens must be spacious enough to permit someone in a wheelchair to get around easily. The entry to the facilities must also be accessible and unobstructed, all light switches, thermostats and electrical outlets must be accessible, and bathroom walls need to be reinforced, in case disabled tenants need to install grab bars later on.

Has a landlord or seller rejected your application because of your race, religion, nationality, and so on? If so, you have a legal recourse and should start by filing a complaint with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, also known as HUD. After documenting the complaint, you will receive a letter back from HUD acknowledging that they have gotten a copy of your complaint. Next, an investigation begins and HUD determines if your case should be taken up or not. If HUD considers your complaint legitimate, they will then try to reach some type of agreement between you and the seller or owner of the home. If the owner of the home does not seem like he or she will honor their end of the bargain, then HUD can make a recommendation to the U.S. Attorney General and file a suit against the owner for you. Within three months, the case will go to a hearing and this costs you absolutely nothing. It is your option to retain a private attorney to file for punitive damages in a separate law suit if you decide to do so.

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Divorce & Home Foreclosure in Arizona

August 28th, 2008

With Arizona’s (and the rest of the country’s) current depressed real estate market, many people are facing foreclosures. A few things to keep in mind:

1. The foreclosure is going to continue on in most divorce circumstances unless the home’s mortgage is brought current, along with the reasonable costs associated with the foreclosure, including attorney fees.

2. Arizona has an anti-deficiency statute that is going to apply in the majority of cases involving standard mortgages. Thus, Arizona law offers protection to homeowners whose home has been foreclosed. This statute, A.R.S. §33-729, states as follows:

33-729. Purchase money mortgage; limitation on liability

A. Except as provided in subsection B, if a mortgage is given to secure the payment of the balance of the purchase price, or to secure a loan to pay all or part of the purchase price, of a parcel of real property of two and one-half acres or less which is limited to and utilized for either a single one-family or single two-family dwelling, the lien of judgment in an action to foreclose such mortgage shall not extend to any other property of the judgment debtor, nor may general execution be issued against the judgment debtor to enforce such judgment, and if the proceeds of the mortgaged real property sold under special execution are insufficient to satisfy the judgment, the judgment may not otherwise be satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.

B. The balance due on a mortgage foreclosure judgment after sale of the mortgaged property shall constitute a lien against other property of the judgment debtor, general execution may be issued thereon, and the judgment may be otherwise satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, if the court determines, after sale upon special execution and upon written application and such notice to the judgment debtor as the court may require, that the sale price was less than the amount of the judgment because of diminution in the value of such real property while such property was in the ownership, possession, or control of the judgment debtor because of voluntary waste committed or permitted by the judgment debtor, not to exceed the amount of diminution in value as determined by such court.

Interpreted, this statute means that for the average homeowner, a lender cannot seek to recover from the homeowner any shortages when the foreclosing bank sells the house for less than the outstanding mortgage amount. The second part of the statute is interesting, but reasonable, in that it references voluntary waste -if, for example, a homeowner angry at the foreclosing bank wrecks his/her home intentionally, the homeowner may be responsible for the effect the damage has on the home’s value.

So what options does a homeowner have in a divorce situation or otherwise? Here are a few:

1. Let the bank foreclose on the property. The foreclosure in most circumstances will absolve the homeowner from most or all further financial responsibilities but will not reflect well on the home owner’s credit report. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation prior to assuming that there will be minor or no financial repercussions as there are exceptions to the anti-deficiency provisions of A.R.S. § 33-729. If there are negative financial repercussions, community property principles apply and if a divorce situation exists, then the parties or court will decide the parties responsibility for the financial obligations. Of course, any divorce rulings define the rights and obligations as between the parties only and are not binding on third party creditors, such as mortgage holders, meaning that banks are free to go after both parties if community property/obligations are involved.

2. Bring the mortgage current and retain the property. The homeowner will have to pay additional fees/costs to do so but then will continue to own the property.

3. Consider a “short sale” which is an effort to sell the property at a reduced price so that the bank will not have to bother with the time and expense of foreclosure. The bank then accepts the buy-out, basically, with less negative effects on the homeowner. It’s more complex than that but that’s the gist. I recommend that a lawyer guide both the seller and buyer of anyone participating in a short sale situation; as well, a good real estate agent familiar with short sales is recommended. Of course, when the real estate market is better than it is at the time of this writing, selling a house and paying off the mortgage in full is easier than it is now. In addition, some lenders will not agree to short sales because they believe it sets a bad precedent that too many other borrowers will attempt to use. Another piece of the short sale puzzle is the possibility the IRS will consider any amounts forgiven as income (consult an attorney regarding the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 for specifics on that new law and related consequences).

Real estate issues are complex and real property is often the largest asset involved in a divorce. It’s a good idea to consult with a competent attorney prior to making decisions about real estate!

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Using a Power of Attorney For Real Estate Contracts

August 27th, 2008

The use of a Power of Attorney in connection with real estate contracts and be a powerful tool, but care should be taken to avoid potential pitfalls. Here are a few common questions that Arizona real estate lawyers commonly face with regard to the use of the Power of Attorney in the real estate context.

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Are You Or Your Neighbor a Nuisance?

August 26th, 2008

Is your neighbor a nuisance? Are you a nuisance? In Arizona, you can sue your neighbor if he or she causes a nuisance and, if the judge or jury agrees with your position, the Court can order the neighbor to stop whatever actions constitute the nuisance and/or award damages.

Unfortunately, despite decades of debate and numerous court decisions addressing what does, and does not, constitute a nuisance, it’s still not entirely clear what exactly a nuisance is. What is evident is that the question of whether something is a nuisance or not turns on the unique facts and circumstances of each case. Based on those facts and circumstances, the judge or jury will decide whether the complained-of activity unreasonably disturbs the free use, possession, or enjoyment of the property.

Over the years Arizona lawyers have successfully argued that excessively bright lights, loud noises, and bad smells constitute a nuisance. Other examples might include intrusive air pollution or otherwise normal sounds at unusual hours.

One complaint Arizona real estate lawyers frequently hear has to do with intrusive vegetation. Perhaps surprisingly, most Courts have held that encroaching branches and dropping leaves do not constitute a nuisance unless the intrusion is causing substantial damage. Instead, the Courts suggest that the remedy is to simply deal with the intrusion yourself by trimming the branches or other vegetation that find themselves across your property line. This is permitted even if the offending neighbor does not approve or if the corrective action kills the plants.

If you have a neighbor who is being a nuisance you should consult with an experienced Arizona real estate lawyer to see if legal action is needed or to confirm that your intended course of action does not expose you to liability yourself. Although a resolution frequently can be worked out after a well-reasoned demand letter from an Arizona real estate attorney, sometimes legal action will be needed.

Kevin R. Harper is an Arizona real estate and business litigation attorney, representing individuals and small businesses throughout the state of Arizona from his Central Phoenix office located at 1 N. Central Ave., Suite 1130, in downtown Phoenix. His firm also has an office in Chandler, Arizona and represents individuals and businesses all over the state of Arizona.

For more information about Arizona real estate law, feel free to contact Harper Law PLC at 602-889-2616, or visit the firm online at http://www.HarperLawArizona.com

Copyright 2008 Harper Law PLC, all rights reserved.

The above article is designed for informational purposes only and, because every situation is different, is not intended as definitive legal advice. You should not act upon this information without seeking independent legal advice about your individual situation.

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Divorce & Home Foreclosure in Arizona

August 25th, 2008

With Arizona’s (and the rest of the country’s) current depressed real estate market, many people are facing foreclosures. A few things to keep in mind:

1. The foreclosure is going to continue on in most divorce circumstances unless the home’s mortgage is brought current, along with the reasonable costs associated with the foreclosure, including attorney fees.

2. Arizona has an anti-deficiency statute that is going to apply in the majority of cases involving standard mortgages. Thus, Arizona law offers protection to homeowners whose home has been foreclosed. This statute, A.R.S. §33-729, states as follows:

33-729. Purchase money mortgage; limitation on liability

A. Except as provided in subsection B, if a mortgage is given to secure the payment of the balance of the purchase price, or to secure a loan to pay all or part of the purchase price, of a parcel of real property of two and one-half acres or less which is limited to and utilized for either a single one-family or single two-family dwelling, the lien of judgment in an action to foreclose such mortgage shall not extend to any other property of the judgment debtor, nor may general execution be issued against the judgment debtor to enforce such judgment, and if the proceeds of the mortgaged real property sold under special execution are insufficient to satisfy the judgment, the judgment may not otherwise be satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.

B. The balance due on a mortgage foreclosure judgment after sale of the mortgaged property shall constitute a lien against other property of the judgment debtor, general execution may be issued thereon, and the judgment may be otherwise satisfied out of other property of the judgment debtor, if the court determines, after sale upon special execution and upon written application and such notice to the judgment debtor as the court may require, that the sale price was less than the amount of the judgment because of diminution in the value of such real property while such property was in the ownership, possession, or control of the judgment debtor because of voluntary waste committed or permitted by the judgment debtor, not to exceed the amount of diminution in value as determined by such court.

Interpreted, this statute means that for the average homeowner, a lender cannot seek to recover from the homeowner any shortages when the foreclosing bank sells the house for less than the outstanding mortgage amount. The second part of the statute is interesting, but reasonable, in that it references voluntary waste -if, for example, a homeowner angry at the foreclosing bank wrecks his/her home intentionally, the homeowner may be responsible for the effect the damage has on the home’s value.

So what options does a homeowner have in a divorce situation or otherwise? Here are a few:

1. Let the bank foreclose on the property. The foreclosure in most circumstances will absolve the homeowner from most or all further financial responsibilities but will not reflect well on the home owner’s credit report. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation prior to assuming that there will be minor or no financial repercussions as there are exceptions to the anti-deficiency provisions of A.R.S. § 33-729. If there are negative financial repercussions, community property principles apply and if a divorce situation exists, then the parties or court will decide the parties responsibility for the financial obligations. Of course, any divorce rulings define the rights and obligations as between the parties only and are not binding on third party creditors, such as mortgage holders, meaning that banks are free to go after both parties if community property/obligations are involved.

2. Bring the mortgage current and retain the property. The homeowner will have to pay additional fees/costs to do so but then will continue to own the property.

3. Consider a “short sale” which is an effort to sell the property at a reduced price so that the bank will not have to bother with the time and expense of foreclosure. The bank then accepts the buy-out, basically, with less negative effects on the homeowner. It’s more complex than that but that’s the gist. I recommend that a lawyer guide both the seller and buyer of anyone participating in a short sale situation; as well, a good real estate agent familiar with short sales is recommended. Of course, when the real estate market is better than it is at the time of this writing, selling a house and paying off the mortgage in full is easier than it is now. In addition, some lenders will not agree to short sales because they believe it sets a bad precedent that too many other borrowers will attempt to use. Another piece of the short sale puzzle is the possibility the IRS will consider any amounts forgiven as income (consult an attorney regarding the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 for specifics on that new law and related consequences).

Real estate issues are complex and real property is often the largest asset involved in a divorce. It’s a good idea to consult with a competent attorney prior to making decisions about real estate!

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

An Overview of Tenant Eviction

August 24th, 2008

Sometimes, tenants cause problems. While every landlord hopes that each of her tenants will comply with the rules, pay their rent in a timely manner and not bother others, problem tenants can make their life a nightmare. When this happens, a landlord has a few different options. Most landlords usually speak to the tenant in question in the hopes of encouraging a change in the unacceptable behavior. But, when that’s no longer a viable solution, more drastic measures may be required. Evicting tenants is never pleasant, but it may be necessary. Below, you’ll learn about a few circumstances in which tenant eviction may be the only way to resolve the problem.

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Roles of Real Estate Attorneys

August 23rd, 2008

Do you know that real estate attorneys are the most wanted personals in the real estate world?

Food, dress and shelter are three essential requirements of any human being. Hence there will be real estate transactions each and every day.

Everyone has a dream of owning a home. As far as property sellers and buyers are there, real estate attorneys are in great demand. In fact these people are inevitable in selling and buying of properties. Both parties in the property transactions make use of these attorneys in variety of ways.

What are the roles of real estate attorneys?

Let me detail out here about eight important roles of real estate attorneys in the selling and buying process of properties.

• Tenant’s dispute is the first area in which they can play a major role. They will help in negotiating between the tenant and Landlord and make a settlement, which offers a win-win situation.

• Property dispute between two parties is the major area in which these attorneys often involve. They can negotiate between the parties and find an amicable solution for the dispute. Apart from this, they can help in the selling of the property so that the amount can be used for the settlement of the dispute.

• Some are available for arranging buyers for those sellers who do not feel comfortable with agents/brokers.

• Mostly there will be dispute about properties after divorce. These attorneys handle divorce property disputes excellently.

• In case of dispute regarding jointly owned properties, the real estate attorneys could settle the dispute with negotiations or any other proper actions.

• An attorney can handle disputes among the heirs of a deceased. He can help in selling the property and make settlements between the heirs.

• Real estate attorney can act as a consultant or an advisor for you. Real estate investors like to use the great service of attorney to do the business efficiently and fast. He can make the transaction very smooth and hassle free. You can make use of the tremendous experience he has to save your precious time. He will do it perfectly without any issues, which can arise later.

• In fact they are knowledge banks regarding real estate investments. Mostly the properties with disputes will be much beneficial to the investors. These legal people can provide you the best information on the disputes and settlements.

Real estate attorneys have always plenty of jobs in their hand, whether the real estate field is on a roll or not.

Prue and her 1-of-a-kind site at http://www.realestatebloom.com (where else?) helps you to make money renting in ways you’ve never known. Discover how to be a millionaire making money renting within days, even in a down market!

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

Evicting Squatters - Knowing Your Rights

August 22nd, 2008

It’s surprising when it happens. An absent property owner may be completely unaware that someone is living on his property. When a person lives on the property without having permission by the property owner, it’s known as “squatting.” In some cases, squatters have been known to live in unoccupied houses and buildings for years before being discovered by the owner. In doing so, they establish a form of ownership over the property. While the true property owner can kick the person out, evicting squatters requires him to go through a legal process. In this article, we’ll explore squatters, trespassers and the art of evicting them.

Read more

Posted in Real Estate Law Title | No Comments »

« Previous Entries