Can a lender assign a deed of trust to someone just to facilitate a forclosure?
Our lender was Quick Loan Funding with mers as nominee for lender. Quick Loan was shut down by the board of corporation and then went out of business. Regions Mortgage signed up as lender through Mers, filed a notice of default as representative to Mers. Consequently set house for sale through a trustee and delayed by court proceedings. After the notice of set sale was published they sold it to HSBC (two months before the sale) and then sold the house again to HSBC the forclosing beneficiary. Are they allowed to do that? Wouldn’t they have had to start forclosure proceedings again when title was changed?
What I don’t understand is how can the forclosure still take place if the new lender did not re-file the notice of default? Shouldn’t the forclosure have to start over since the original forclosure was by another lender?
California isn’t a forclosure state that requires a court action. The loan was from Quickloan. Quickloan was shut down. Mers was on the note as nominee for lender and claimed that they assigned Regions Bank the note. They claimed regions was the new lender, but their was no assignment of deed of trust for Regions. A notice to set sale was recorded,then before the sale regions trustee then assigned a deed of trust to HSBC for 78,000.00 and then did a forclosure sale and said HSBC was our new lending. Something is fishy here, does any get this and is it legal?.
Oh yeah and bankruptcy was filed and the original debt discharged.
My home loan is at 6.5%, but paying an extra thousand a month will cut about 15 years off of my loan. However, I also realize I stand to gain a lot of compound interest investing that $ 1000 every month by just putting it into an index fund. The thing that has me wondering is if I pay down my home loan that much quicker, than I have that much more to invest from that point on.
Which is perceived to be the smarter plan and why?