What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? VA
I was a mortgagee on a Deed of Trust in Virginia and got 2 months behind on payments. Rather than send a default notice the mortgagor filed a Warrant of Unlawful Detainer based on a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure I signed at closing (did not remember or fully understand this) and the General District court dismissed. Mortgagor re-filed the Warrant of Unlawful Detainer and testified this was upon the advice of the closing attorney who prepared the Note, Deed of Trust, and the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure and was also the Trustee.
Again General District Court dismissed due to res judicata and mortgagor appealed to the Circuit Court. Mortgagor appeared both times in General District Court pro-sae. For the appeal mortgagor hired another attorney because the closing attorney claimed conflict. The closing attorney testified at the appeal that he prepared the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure, that mortgagor contacted him about behind on payments, advised there was a conflict, and advised there was a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure.
The Circuit Court ruled the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure was invalid because it removed the right of equitable redemption. The same day the order was to be presented to the court a Substitute of Trustee was filed naming the same attorney who represented the mortgagor in the appeal.
My question is, was the closing attorney in violation of being impartial between the mortgagor and mortgagee by advising the mortgagor and same question for the second attorney by representing the mortgagor and then becoming the trustee.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
I was a mortgagee on a Deed of Trust in Virginia and got 2 months behind on payments. Rather than send a default notice the mortgagor filed a Warrant of Unlawful Detainer based on a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure I signed at closing (did not remember or fully understand this) and the General District court dismissed. Mortgagor re-filed the Warrant of Unlawful Detainer and testified this was upon the advice of the closing attorney who prepared the Note, Deed of Trust, and the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure and was also the Trustee.
Again General District Court dismissed due to res judicata and mortgagor appealed to the Circuit Court. Mortgagor appeared both times in General District Court pro-sae. For the appeal mortgagor hired another attorney because the closing attorney claimed conflict. The closing attorney testified at the appeal that he prepared the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure, that mortgagor contacted him about behind on payments, advised there was a conflict, and advised there was a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure.
The Circuit Court ruled the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure was invalid because it removed the right of equitable redemption. The same day the order was to be presented to the court a Substitute of Trustee was filed naming the same attorney who represented the mortgagor in the appeal.
My question is, was the closing attorney in violation of being impartial between the mortgagor and mortgagee by advising the mortgagor and same question for the second attorney by representing the mortgagor and then becoming the trustee.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?