Washington’s highest court rules MERS cannot foreclose on homeowners
By Brent Hunsberger : The Oregonian – excerpt
The Washington Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that the mortgage industry’s controversial document-recording system lacked authority to start out-of-court foreclosures and might have violated state consumer protection laws.
The state’s highest court ruled that lenders could not foreclose on homeowners in the name of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. It found that MERS did not meet Washington’s definition of a beneficiary and could not foreclose on behalf of a lender that holds the mortgage note…Washington Supreme Court Justice Tom Chambers,… wrote the opinion holding that lenders in the state could not foreclose on homeowners in the name of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc…
“Simply put, if MERS does not hold the note, it is not a lawful beneficiary,” the court wrote in an opinion written by Justice Tom Chambers and released today.
Related:
MERS Tells Servicers to Stop Foreclosuring in Their Name
“MERS Members shall have a MERS Certifying Officer (also known as MERS Signing Officer) execute assignments out of MERS’ name before initiating foreclosure proceedings. Assignments out of MERS’ name shall be recorded in the county land records, even if the state law does not require such a recording.”
Subprimes into Land Banks: A State Bill
Hmm, if the New York Supreme Court can rule that you can’t discriminate against ads, (It’s covered by free speech), can the Washington State Supreme Court ruling against MERS foreclosures have far-reaching implications? It appears MERS is not in the mood to appeal the ruling yet.