|
Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (“HAFA”)
When Mortgage Modification Isn’t Enough
By Michael Smeenk
The Home Affordability Modification Program ("HAMP") has been largely unsuccessful in creating permanent loan modification solutions that allow distressed homeowners to remain in their properties. In response, the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program ("HAFA"), which went into effect April 5, 2010, provides foreclosure avoidance options for homeowners who are not able to permanently modify their loans to manageable levels. Homeowners can now sell or convey their property at market value through a standardized set of processes, with pre-defined results, even if they owe more on their mortgages than the property may be worth.
While over one million homeowners have started trial loan modification programs under HAMP, only approximately 116,000 have received permanent loan modifications. If permanent loan modification under HAMP is unsuccessful or impossible, HAFA provides an alternative for borrowers to avoid losing their house to foreclosure.
HAFA offers homeowners two primary foreclosure alternatives:
Continue
Where Does All That Money Go? Child Support, Spending and Extracurricular Activity Expenses
By Gregg Greenstein
Colorado law is not specific concerning how a parent receiving child support is supposed to use the money. Child support is generally determined by a formula. The formula is supposed to calculate child support based upon the parents' combined adjusted gross income estimated to have been allocated to the child if the parents and children were living in an intact household; adjust the child support based upon the needs of the children for extraordinary medical expenses and work-related child care costs; and allocate the amount of child support to be paid by each parent based upon physical care arrangements.
Continue
Don’t Paint Yourself into a Corner
The “Toxic Substances Control Act”
By Oliver Frascona and Doug Barber
You may have heard that EPA has some new rules for lead based paint (LBP). The rules passed in 2008 and became effective April 22, 2010. Here is our overview of the law from the perspective of Attorney (Oliver), Realtor®, and Certified Contractor (Doug).
Target Property. What is covered? Property where a repair (painting, renovation, fix and flip) creates a hazard in affected housing and child-occupied commercial facilities. That means houses, day care centers. It will cover your personal residence also.
Residential. The rule generally applies to renovation (remodel, repair) of any housing constructed prior to 1978 (for which a building permit was issued prior to 1978).
Commercial. It also applies to a public/commercial facility of similar date where children are present on a regular basis (e.g., school or day care facility), and spells out what that means.
Exemptions to the Rule include:
Continue
This publication is intended to provide accurate and authoritative information on the subject matter covered. It is distributed with the understanding that the publisher and distributor are not rendering legal, accounting or other professional service, and assume no liability in connection with its use. Copyright © 2010. This is an advertisement.
|
IN THIS ISSUE
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
By Cinthia Manzano
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) is designed to punish people for registering a domain name with the intent of making money off of someone else’s trademark rights even if a trademark is not registered. For example, if a well-known corporation had failed to register a domain name such as www.famouscorporation.com and someone else did register the domain name and tried to ransom it off for a hefty fee, there would be a violation of the ACPA. The ACPA provides for fines between $1,000 to $100,000 for each domain name, can require an injunction, the transfer of the domain name, and/or the payment of up to three times actual damages and in some cases even attorney's fees. Damages are fixed by the court in its discretion. There needs to be a bad faith intent to profit off the domain name.
To be found liable, you need to be the person who registered the domain name through a service provider such as GoDaddy, used it (you still need to be the registrant or an authorized licensee to be considered a user) or you have to have trafficked it (i.e. tried to ransom it or transfer it for consideration). The domain name also would have to be identical, confusingly similar or dilutive of someone else's trademark. The mark needs to have been distinctive or famous at the time of the registration for the ACPA to apply.
Continue
When is a Sale Considered “Closed?”
By Jonathan Goodman and Jordan Bunch
Consider a transaction scheduled to close on Wednesday, June 30, 2010, attended by both buyer and seller. The seller signs all of the seller documents, including the deed, which is tendered to the closer for recording. The buyer signs all of her documents and tenders her down payment. Though the buyer's loan has been approved, the wire from buyer's lender doesn't arrive on Wednesday, so the parties execute an escrow agreement authorizing the closer to hold the closing documents until the hoped for arrival of the lender funds on Thursday. The wire does arrive on Thursday. Did the deal close on Wednesday?
Does it make a difference if the escrow agreement provides that if the wire doesn't arrive on Thursday, the seller gets to keep the buyer's earnest money? What if the escrow agreement provides that if the wire is late, the contract terminates and the buyer gets her earnest money back? What if the escrow agreement doesn't address what happens if the wire is late? What if there is no escrow agreement?
In a different example, the buyer has signed all the buyer documents, and all the funds on the buyer's side (e.g. the earnest money, the down payment and the borrowed funds) are in the closer's account by Wednesday. One of the two sellers has signed all the closing documents for both sellers, including the deed, which has been delivered to the closer for recording. The signing seller has authority to sign on behalf the absent seller through a power-of-attorney. The absent seller signed the power-of-attorney in Chicago and faxed a copy to the closer which she received on Wednesday morning. The closer declines, however, to disburse the seller's proceeds to the seller, or the deed for recording, until the original power-of-attorney arrives on Thursday. Did this deal close on Wednesday or Thursday?
Continue
|
|