| Identity theft in the State of Washington is defined as
“ . . . to obtain, possess, use, transfer a means of identification or financial information of another person, living or dead, with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any crime. (RCW 9.35.020(1)
So unless the ex-wife obtained the POA by forgery or other fraudulent means, or altered the document, it wouldn’t appear to fall within the statutory definition.
_____________________
However, for several reasons I have some reservations as to the candidness of this post.
Noting that “she obtained the loan” - implying that she the agent was the direct recipient of the proceeds of the loan -
How does an attorney-in-fact consummate a personal loan using the principle’s real property as security for the loan, unless the power granted expressly authorized it?
Moreover, I don’t see a licensed legitimate mortgage lender acting solely on the signature of the agent even if the power expressly granted such authority. Nor grant the loan without first securing a lender’s policy of title insurance.
And I’m also convinced that a title insurance company would not insure the lender’s security in the property against adverse claims on the mere strength of a POA from the record owner.
It also occurs to me that a property owner that has not only lost out a sale of their home, but now finds the home further encumbered might have other more pressing questions. But then I’m seldom right.
_____________________
Anyhow, if all is so and if everything neatly fell through the cracks, it would take but a heartbeat or two for a court to declare the “loan transaction” null and avoid ab initio!
That is, unless the circumstances were such as to entitle the lender to assert the defense of equitable estoppel. All in my opinion, of course. | 
08-26-2009, 10:25 AM
Linear Mode
