Army Personnel Clash With Lenders Over Foreclosure

August 21st, 2008 | Tags: Foreclosure

Foreclosures respect nothing – neither name nor fame nor patriotism. This is leading to army personnel clashing with lenders over foreclosures. James Hurley is one of the many battling an enemy named foreclosure they cannot see in front. Perhaps it was easier fighting on the war front in Iraq. In Christmas 2005 Hurley came back to his house to find that it was not same place when he had left to go to war.

Hurley with his family were residing in this three bed roomed house beside the Paw Paw River in Michigan. The lender began foreclosing when he defaulted in his mortgage payments. The lender sold the house and the wife and children of Hurley were evicted. He came to know of it during a casual telephone conversation with his wife.

Not to take things lying down the Hurelys are taking legal action against many parties related to this foreclosure. Two of the defendants are Deutsche Bank and Saxon Mortgage. Hurley alleges that the federal law known as the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) had been transgressed by this act of foreclosure and eviction.

The law goes back to the time of World War II. It was made to give protection to those on active duty from financial related matters like foreclosures leading to repossessions and evictions. With more people going to war and more foreclosures, disputes over fine points of the law are becoming frequent. Hurley’s lawyer feels that the military personnel need some sort of protection when they are not at home but on the battlefront saving the honour of the nation. He added’ “One of the rights under the SCRA is that you can’t foreclose on them.”

Neither of the two big banks was willing to discuss the case. Morgan Stanley that had taken over Saxon in 2006, gave out a written statement that it took very seriously the clauses of SCRA. Unfortunately during the legal battle it stated that the law was not applicable to Hurley. Their argument was that the bank had foreclosed about ten days before Hurley had signed for active duty. Moreover Hurley had not given them enough documents to vouchsafe that he was seriously going to Iraq. On his side the lawyer for Hurley said that the law protected the latter as soon as he got the military orders – this date being many weeks prior to his reporting for duty.