Upcoming Foreclosures

What is Texas Foreclosure process. Trying to help friend out of a jam.?

How long does it take to stop the foreclosure process in Texas,once a deal has been reached w/the mortgage co? We received notice back in February that our landlord was going into foreclosure on the house that we rent. It was posted for auction on the county website, etc...When we were finally able to get a hold of the landlord, she said that it was being taken care of and they had the money to pay it. She said they made a deal with Citimortgage to do 2 payments and that it just had to get final approval. After weeks of waiting, we get the call that the house wasn't being foreclosed on...it was approved. GREAT!....However, the next month we started getting letters again. Checked public records and the house was listed again for auction the following month. Landlord said it was just part of the process; the Mortgage company had to refile it?? This has happened every month and she just keeps saying that Citimortgage is so swamped, that they haven't been able to talk to anyone. I searched public records today and found Citi assigned a substitute trustee and the house is on the auction list for July 7th. I'm just wondering if she is being truthfull about this process or if she's full of s%*#.. Sorry this is so long, but any help with this would be greatly appreciated!

state statutes in texas foreclosure? what is the foreclosure process in texas

what is process of foreclosure in the state of Texas, and how long before you may be evicted?

What is the length and process of a foreclosure in Texas? How long would I have before they foreclose on my home in Texas. How much time would I have before I had to move out. I am going to be a month behind because my air conditioner went out. The only way I have to fix it is to use the mortgage payment. In my past experience they have sent me letters when I have been a month behind that they would foreclose in 20 days. How long is the whole precedure and when would I have to move out? It is possible I would have the extra money in about 3 months and could catch up. How can I find out what the policy of the lender is?

How do I file a foreclosure on a property? I am a lien holder on a property and the person who is buying the property has not paid their taxes and is always late on the payments? Is there a form I can fill out to start the foreclosure process? I live in Harris County, Houston, Texas. Thank you.

On Foreclosure in texas? I got a letter in January 14,2009 saying I had till January 19th to get with the lender to pay up 6 months of mortgage pass dued or they were going to foreclose. I called the investor and told him I had $6000 to give him and I'd make arrangements on the other. He told me to keep my money and he was going to still proceed on the Foreclosure. Then I get 20 day to cure letter correction/amendent and telling me to ignore the 01/31/2009 letter (which I had not received yet) with one of the 10 acres on it, but doesn't describe which property it is in the letter. I have 3-10 acre tracks. So when I called the attorney, he said he was too busy and the letters tells me which property they are by 10.17, 10.18, 10.67 and I should know which one it is and he would call me back after 5 pm on 02/11/2009. Which he didn't. I stated I only have received one letter and said the others will come. I got the other ones, but they don't describe the property except by amount of acreage and the address. Is this the process on foreclosure. A letter from the lawyer in January and then another sent out January 31 and on Feb 3 a correction/amendant for one of the 10 acres. It doesn't make since and the investor calls before I can even receive the letters, because he doesn't want to pay anymore lawyer fees out. Please let me know how I can fix this problem. Are where I can get help.

How long does a motion to relief from a automatic stay take in Colorado? Regarding a home in foreclosure.? I need to how long this process will take. My home is in foreclosure the sale date was May 13th. I filed for bankruptcy in Texas March 25th. The home is in Colorado. My daughter lives in the home. How long will this bankruptcy delay the sale.

my bank forclosed my home without notifying me? I was default on my payment and bank of america informed me that they would try to qualify me for a makinghomeaffordable program. They informed me that while we were being considered for a loan modification, that would stop the foreclosure process. They proceeded with the foreclosure and are now ordering an eviction notice. (Texas) Can I do anything about this situation?

How come mortgage lenders don't want foreclosure? I am refering to if the loan thats due is worth significantly less than the value of the property. So in that case, why would a lender not want to sell this property and gain all of the profits from the sale? Like in Texas, if the borrower misses 3 months of payments. Property is worth $300,000. Missed payments, plus the entire loan is $250,000. So why would a lender not want to either sell this property at a tax deed auction or sell it afterwards if their were no bidders? Since they would gain all the profits from the property either way. If they would not want to go through this foreclosure process given my example given, then would it be possible for me to buy their loan from the lender and have the property go into foreclosure so I can reap the profits? Tell me what I am not understanding please.

How can I save my house from foreclosure once the bank starts the process? We bought a house a couple years ago in Texas. We live in this house. We are self employed and the economy had hit us pretty hard. We have not made a house payment in five months. Money is starting to come in again and we can now afford the $1200 a month, but we can not afford the back debt. We called our mortgage company (Suntrust) and they told us we had to talk to a loss mitigation counselor. We received a letter stating the house will be sold on January 7th. The loss mitigation people are telling us we have to wait for them to call us before they can help. They say it takes up to 30 days to receive a phone call. Well, if we wait for them to call, the house will already be sold at auction. What can we do? They will not talk to us at all. We do have a HUD backed loan. We have called Hope Now and that did not seem to help. HUD has a wealth of information online about reinstatement, forbearance, and repayment plan options. We can not contact anyone to help us try to qualify for these options. If we can not reach loss mitigation, what are our other options? We received a couple letters from lawyers regarding bankruptcy. The letters mention chapter seven and eleven. If we can save our house with bankruptcy, what is the best way? Any ideas on how to get loss mitigation to grant us some extra time so we can work for them? Thank you for all your help.

Fannie Mae foreclosure purchase? I am in the process of purchasing a foreclosure home that is owned by Fannie Mae. They have an item listed in their addendum that states the following: "Grantee herein shall be prohibited from conveying captioned property to a bonafide purchaser for value for a sales price of greater than $150,000 for a period of 3 months from the date of this deed. Grantee shall also be prohibited from encumbering subject property with a security interest in the principal amount of greater that $150,000 for a period of 3 motnhs from the date of this deed. This restriction shall terminate immediately upon conveyance at any forclosure sale related to a mortgage or deed of trust. " Can anyone explain this to me and put this in plain english terms. The home is in Texas if that makes any difference. Is there anyway around this clause?

Can I Refinance my Mobile Home Mortgage after almost 1 Year into my Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Case? I have managed to fall behind another 3 months, now the mortgage company (WAMU), I'm not going to mention them by name, are trying to take me back to court and have the Motion for Relief to Stay lifted so that they can go ahead with starting Foreclosure procedures. I hear, in Texas, the whole process is usually done in about 3 months. Most cases dont even make it to the Judiscial level!

We rent and...The bank is kicking us out!!! Do we have 90 Day's? We have been renting from a property management company for 3 years now. We just found out today that our landlord had the home we live in up for auction. Nobody bought it, so it went into foreclosure, and now the bank owns it. Well. The bank told us today we need to leave. They said we had 3 choices. 1. We can sign a lease for a month and a half, after that we need to be gone, or 2.We can do a cash for keys program where if we movve out in the next week they'll give us $800. 3. An eviction process, that will take 6 weeks. I heard that we actually have 90 days until an officer comes to evict us? Can anyone help us with this. Do we REALLY have 90 days? I live in Ft. Worth Texas. How long do we really have if need be? Thank you in advance!

Mortgage default in Idaho-tax consequences,please? I just don't understand this whole process. So, we have defaulted (after trying in vain to get a payment arrangement,etc), the company would not send us deed in lieu of foreclosure papers.This all started with husband losing his job, and wife's hours getting cut. Now, I am told the mortgage company can write off the difference between what we owe, and the fair market value, but that we ALSO have to pay the difference as income on our taxes...would it not seem that one OR the other should be done, but not both? We now live in Texas, and currently owe the IRS and state of Idaho for taxes (income and state). Can this mortgage company also try to sue us or garnish our wages over this?? We lost everything we had, and now live week to week. Please no insulting answers.

karen tumulty should be nominated for the best jounalism 2008? How to Pick a Veep Jun. 23, 2008 | By KAREN TUMULTY ...to picking vice-presidential nominees...of Vice President should tell...three-star running mates. The right... 1591 words | view cover So who might be pizazz choices for this year's contenders? McCain might turn to his longtime hero Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. =========================================== One of the stranger ironies the Constitution has bestowed on American politics is this: some 50 million people just finished choosing the parties' two nominees in a grueling, yearlong primary campaign that cost millions of dollars and captivated the world. But when it comes to picking vice-presidential nominees, only two people on the planet get a vote: John McCain and Barack Obama. Between an explosion of democracy in the spring and an even bigger explosion of self-determination in the fall is a brief interlude of, well, something that Vladimir Putin could probably live with. Related Articles The Keys to McCain’s VP Pick When you are running for President, you can’t exactly just have a few friends over on the weekend, e... Wooing New Hampshire’s Undeclared The guy in the purple "I’m a health care voter" shirt stands up to ask a question at a John McCain t... Romney Frees McCain for New Fight When Mitt Romney stepped forward to announce his endorsement of former rival John McCain, the former... McCain: Frail with the Far Right John McCain emerged from Super Tuesday the undisputed heavyweight in the fight for the Republican pr... Everyone knows that the main qualification for the vice presidency is being ready, at a moment's notice, to step into the most powerful job in the world. But what qualifies you to do the job and what qualifies you to get the job may involve two completely different calculations. Both McCain and Obama have their selection committees already at work scouring candidates' financial and personal backgrounds, voting records and public statements. In a sudden setback that could slow the Democratic nominee's search, Obama lost his top Veep hunter, Jim Johnson, after the former Fannie Mae executive came under scrutiny for accepting preferential mortgages from a lender linked to the foreclosure crisis. Both camps will finish their work by early August, if not sooner. When they do, the choice of Vice President should tell us something — maybe a lot — about how McCain and Obama think and how they could run the government. There are a lot of ways to choose a Vice President, and each comes with risks. Here are five of the most reliable: 1. Play to Your Strength Perhaps the fastest way to send a message about who you are is to pick someone who appears to be ... just like you. In 1992, Bill Clinton picked another Southern baby boomer with a moderate record and a full head of hair. Then Clinton, Al Gore and their wives took a bus trip that looked like a rolling scene from The Big Chill. Picking Gore reinforced Clinton's claim to be part of a new generation of Democratic pols, liberated from the tired (and losing) politics of the past. If McCain were to take a similar approach, he might pick a No. 2 who has strong national-security credentials or another maverick who defies party labels — perhaps someone like independent Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman. By this standard, Obama might opt for a partner who is young and charismatic and also breaks a historic barrier of race or gender — perhaps Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius — or one who transcends partisan politics, like Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. 2. Look at the Map An old-fashioned road atlas is a good Michelin guide for three-star running mates. The right choice can add balance to a nominee whose roots may seem a tad too effete to go over well in the heartland — or add some coastal glitz to a rural candidate's prairie-flat steadiness. As it happens, the last two candidates to make their picks with geography clearly in mind — John Kennedy in 1960 and Michael Dukakis in 1988 — were both from Massachusetts. And they both picked Texas Senators — Lyndon Johnson and Lloyd Bentsen — for the second spot on their ticket. More narrowly, the map can help a nominee make a play for a state that is crucial in November, though that is never a sure bet. Kennedy, with Johnson as his running mate, squeezed by Nixon to win Texas with a margin of merely 46,000 votes, in what turned out to be one of the closest elections in American history. But Dukakis got swamped in the Lone Star State, where Bentsen's considerable popularity was no match for the thrill of having another Texan, George H.W. Bush, in the Oval Office. This year, given the closeness of the race and the importance of winning a few battleground states, McCain and Obama will keep at least one eye on the Electoral College map right through November. That means Obama will be considering choices like Ohio governor Ted Strickland (though Strickland says he would turn down the offer) or one of three possibilities from Virginia — Governor Tim Kaine, former governor Mark Warner or Senator Jim Webb. Or perhaps a Westerner like Montana governor Brian Schweitzer. McCain might get an Electoral College boost by picking Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, Pennsylvania's ex-governor Tom Ridge or former rival Mitt Romney, who has family roots in pivotal Michigan. 3. Shore Up Your Weak Side On the other hand, the nominee might need a partner who compensates for his vulnerabilities or perceived weaknesses. That was plainly what George W. Bush had in mind in 2000 when he picked Dick Cheney, a seasoned Washington insider with a long foreign policy résumé (who also happened to be heading up Bush's vice-presidential-selection process). And Gore knew that in picking Lieberman, who had been one of Bill Clinton's harshest Democratic critics during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he was buying some distance from the incumbent Commander in Chief. In McCain's case, any doubts that voters have about electing a 72-year-old President might be allayed if he tapped someone far younger. And it wouldn't hurt, in a year when gasoline prices and financial jitters have moved past the Iraq war to the top of voter concerns, to look for a sidekick who is more comfortable than McCain is with economic policy. It may well turn out to be someone about whom the conservative base, which is a little leery of McCain, is more enthusiastic. Some possibilities the two might want to consider as hedges against their shortcomings: McCain could pick Romney or Pawlenty, both of whom have executive experience and relative youth, or perhaps an economic-policy expert like former Ohio Congressman Rob Portman, who served as both budget chief and trade representative for Bush. Obama, however, might want to address concerns about his youth and inexperience by picking a running mate who is older and has strong national-security credentials. He could turn to seasoned, silver-haired foreign policy experts like Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Joe Biden or former Senate Armed Services chairman Sam Nunn. Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell or former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle would add some experience as well. 4. Hug Your Rival Even after a long, hard primary fight (and sometimes because of it), the ultimate winner almost always has to consider bringing the loser aboard the ticket. That's what Ronald Reagan did when he picked George H.W. Bush in 1980 and how John Kerry came to choose John Edwards in 2004. Sometimes party unity simply demands it. "We ended up with the obvious choice," says adviser Bob Shrum of Kerry's decision to tap Edwards. "People in the party overwhelmingly wanted him." Then again, a former adversary can have extra baggage. For one thing, there will be lingering tensions and suspicions that former rivals still harbor ambitions of their own. The other party is certain to dredge up every damaging sound bite — "Voodoo economics!" — that your former rival hurled in your direction back in February. These worries are usually overcome. Already it's hard to miss the steady thaw in McCain's once frosty relationship with Romney as the former Massachusetts governor throws himself — and his formidable fund-raising operation — into campaigning for the man who beat him. And Hillary Clinton's supporters — starting with her husband — are letting it be known that they expect Obama to give her serious consideration. 5. Hire Some Pizazz Some nominees find themselves in need of excitement. That explains why Walter Mondale tapped Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman on a national ticket, in 1984. "This is an exciting choice," he said at the time. Within weeks, Mondale did not see it that way. Given their difficult history of tangling over just about everything, hardly anyone would have expected Bob Dole to pick Jack Kemp as his running mate in 1996 — least of all Kemp. As little as three weeks before he was selected, recalls Dole's campaign manager, Scott Reed, Kemp was grumbling in GOP circles that he hadn't been given a speaking spot at the party's convention. So why did Dole pick him? "We were going for oxygen, heat and energy," Reed says. "We went through the traditional list, and we just weren't happy with what we were coming up with." Kemp later turned out to be far more complicated a partner than Dole or Reed had imagined. So who might be pizazz choices for this year's contenders? McCain might turn to his longtime hero Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Excitement is hardly what Obama needs, but he could pick a woman, such as Sebelius or Arizona governor Janet Napolitano, who might force McCain to spend more time in his otherwise safe home state. But if you venture too far out of the box, voters will scratch their heads sooner or later — and eventually you might too. George H.W. Bush seems to have entered his Veep wish list into one of those dating computers back in 1988. That year he stunned nearly all his advisers when he tapped someone whose Midwestern roots were an antidote to his privileged Kennebunkport background, who was young to his old, who could balance his moderation with a dose of conservatism, and came up with Dan Quayle. The ticket beat the Democrats that fall, but by 1992 even Bush was trying to nudge him off the ticket. The ploy failed. Which is a reminder that however you choose a running mate, another rule will always apply: hard as it is to find a good one, it is sometimes harder to get rid of a bad one.

Ok, so which one Clinton or Obama would fine parents who don't have healh care for their children? Read the transcript from tonite's debate and answer: CLINTON: It is not enough to say, "Let's come together." We know we're going to have to work hard to overcome the opposition of those who do not want the changes to get to universal health care. You know, when I proposed a universal health care plan, as did Senator Edwards, we took a big risk, because we know it's politically controversial to say we're going to cover everyone. And you chose not to do that. You chose to put forth a health care plan that will leave out at least 15 million people. That's a big difference. When I said we should put a moratorium on home foreclosures, basically your response was, well, that wouldn't work. And, you know, in the last week, even President Bush has said we have to do something like that. I just believe that we've got to look hard at the difficult challenges we face, especially after George Bush leaves the White House. CLINTON: The world will breathe a sigh of relief once he is gone. We all know that. (APPLAUSE) But then we've got to do the hard work of not just bringing the country together, but overcoming a lot of the entrenched opposition to the very ideas that both of us believe in, and for some of us have been fighting for, for a very long time. You know, when I took on... (APPLAUSE) When I took on universal health care back in '93 and '94, it was against a firestorm of special interest opposition. I was more than happy to do that, because I believe passionately in getting quality affordable health care to every American. I don't want to leave anybody out. I see the results of leaving people out. I am tired of health insurance companies deciding who will live or die in America. (APPLAUSE) BROWN: All right, Senator Clinton, thank you. Senator Obama, please respond. (APPLAUSE) OBAMA: Well, I think that Senator Clinton mentioned two specific issue areas where we've got some differences. I'm happy to debate those, which is what I think should be the focus of this campaign. We both want universal health care. When I released my plan a few months later, we were in a debate and Senator Clinton said we all want universal health care. Of course, I was down 20 points in the polls at the time, and so my plan was pretty good. It's not as good now, but my plan hasn't changed. The politics have changed a little bit. We both -- 95 percent of our plans are similar. We both want to set up a system in which any person is going to be able to get coverage that is as good as we have as members of Congress. And we are going to subsidize those who can't afford it. OBAMA: We're going to make sure that we reduce costs by emphasizing prevention. And I want to make sure that we're applying technology to improve quality, cut bureaucracy. Now, I also want to make sure that we're reducing costs for those who already have health insurance. So we put in place a catastrophic reinsurance plan that would reduce costs by $2,500 per family per year. So we've got a lot of similarities in our plan. We've got a philosophical difference, which we've debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it. And my belief is, the reason that people don't have it is not because they don't want it but because they can't afford it. And so I emphasize reducing costs. (APPLAUSE) And as has been noted by many observers, including Bill Clinton's former secretary of labor, my plan does more than anybody to reduce costs, and there is nobody out there who wants health insurance who can't have it. OBAMA: Now, there are legitimate arguments for why Senator Clinton and others have called for a mandate, and I'm happy to have that debate. But the notion that I am leaving 15 million people out somehow implies that we are different in our goals of providing coverage to all Americans, and that is simply not true. We think that there's going to be a different way of getting there. One last point I want to make on the health care front. I admire the fact that Senator Clinton tried to bring about health care reform back in 1993. She deserves credit for that. (APPLAUSE) But I said before, I think she did it in the wrong way, because it wasn't just the fact that the insurance companies, the drug companies were battling here, and no doubt they were. It was also that Senator Clinton and the administration went behind closed doors, excluded the participation even of Democratic members of Congress who had slightly different ideas than the ones that Senator Clinton had put forward. And, as a consequence, it was much more difficult to get Congress to cooperate. OBAMA: And I've said that I'm going to do things differently. I think we have to open up the process. Everybody has to have a seat at the table. And most importantly, the American people have to be involved and educated about how this change is going to be brought about. The point is this, you know, we can have great plans, but if we don't change how the politics is working in Washington, then neither of our plans are going to happen, and we're going to be four years from now debating once again how we're going to bring universal health care to this country. (APPLAUSE) BROWN: All right, we've got some time constraints here, so we've got to take another real quick break. Stay with us. We've got a lot more ahead. You can compare the candidates on the issues any time; just go to our Web site, Cnnpolitics.com. A lot more ahead here at the University of Texas. We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) (APPLAUSE) BROWN: An enthusiastic crowd here at the University of Texas. Welcome back to the Texas Democratic debate. Let's get right to it. Jorge Ramos with the next question. RAMOS: Senator Clinton, yesterday you said, and I'm quoting, "One of us is ready to be commander in chief." Are you saying that Senator Obama is not ready and not qualified to be commander in chief? CLINTON: Well, I believe that I am ready and I am prepared. And I will leave that to the voters to decide. But I want to get back to health care, because I didn't get a chance to respond after Senator Obama finished. No, let me finish, Jorge... RAMOS: But I would like to come back... CLINTON: This is a significant difference. You know, Senator Obama has said it's a philosophical difference. I think it's a substantive difference. He has a mandate for parents to be sure to ensure their children. I agree with that. I just know that if we don't go and require everyone to have health insurance, the health insurance industry will still game the system. Everyone of us with insurance will pay the hidden tax of approximately $900 a year to make up for the lack of insurance. (APPLAUSE) And you know, in one of our earlier debates, John Edwards made a great point. It would be as though Social Security were voluntary. Medicare, one of the great accomplishments of President Johnson, was voluntary. (APPLAUSE) I do not believe that is going to work. So it's not just a philosophical difference. CLINTON: You look at what will work and what will not work. If you do not have a plan that starts out attempting to achieve universal health care, you will be nibbled to death, and we will be back here with more and more people uninsured and rising costs. (APPLAUSE) BROWN: All right. We appreciate that you want to make a point, Senator Obama. We have limited time, so I would like Jorge to move on to another subject or we're going to be out of time. (CROSSTALK) OBAMA: Well, I understand. But I think that Senator Clinton made a... (LAUGHTER) You know, she's making a point, and I think I should have the opportunity to respond very briefly. And I'll try to make... BROWN: Very briefly, absolutely. OBAMA: Number one, understand that when Senator Clinton says a mandate, it's not a mandate on government to provide health insurance, it's a mandate on individuals to purchase it. And Senator Clinton is right; we have to find out what works. OBAMA: Now, Massachusetts has a mandate right now. They have exempted 20 percent of the uninsured because they have concluded that that 20 percent can't afford it. In some cases, there are people who are paying fines and still can't afford it, so now they're worse off than they were. They don't have health insurance and they're paying a fine. (APPLAUSE) In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you've got to have a very harsh penalty, and Senator Clinton has said that we won't go after their wages. Now, this is a substantive difference. But understand that both of us seek to get universal health care. I have a substantive difference with Senator Clinton on how to get there. BROWN: All right, Senator Clinton? CLINTON: Wait a minute, no, this is too important. This is the number one issue that people talk to me about. You know, when a mother grabs my arm and says, "I can't get the operation my son needs because I don't have health insurance," it is personal for me. CLINTON: And I just fundamentally disagree. You know, Senator Obama's plan has a mandate on parents and a fine if parents do not... OBAMA: That's right. CLINTON: ... insure their children. OBAMA: That's right. CLINTON: Because he recognizes that unless we have some kind of restriction, we will not get there. OBAMA: There's a reason. CLINTON: He's also said that if people show up at a hospital sick, without health insurance, well, maybe at that point you can fine them. We would not have a social compact with Social Security and Medicare if everyone did not have to participate. I want a universal health care plan. (APPLAUSE) OBAMA: Now, that's -- that mother -- that mother who is desperate to get health care for her child, will be able to get that health care under my plan. Point number one. Point number two, the reason a mandate for children can be effective is we've got an ability to make affordable health care available to that child, right now. OBAMA: There are no excuses. If a parent is not providing health care for that child, it's because the parent's not being responsible, under my plan. And those children don't have a choice. But I think that adults are going to be able to see that they can afford it, under my plan; they will get it, under my plan. And it is true that, if it turns out that some are gaming the system, then we can impose, potentially, some penalties on them for gaming the system. But the notion that, somehow, I am interested in leaving out 15 million people, without health insurance, is simply not true. BROWN: All right. Jorge... CLINTON: We disagree on that.