Suitor saves home from foreclosure redeeming lawful money

[David Merrill]

I am a bit confused here; could someone explain how redeeming lawful money was THE reason the foreclosure was stopped in this specific instance? For the record, I make demand in lawful money for ALL transactions, however, I am struggling to see how that demand staved off foreclosure for these people.

It seems that the wife had enough of the "conventional" info on her own so as to discard the husband's lack thereof. It appears the "loss mitigation application" went through only because the wife's tax info was sufficient without the husband's participation altogether. How is this considered a "win" by way of redeeming lawful money?

I imagine that the application would have been denied if the wife's tax info had fallen short of the requirements.

Am I missing something here?

You might be right. Science will tell us as we proceed. There are plenty of people who have been staving off foreclosure and eviction slowly but are just tired of how execution is only slowed down.

Of course for me, the husband's income is not use of the Fed's currency and therefore it is not taxable. So the family can keep possession of the home but at ridiculously low monthly payments under the HAMP - Tier 2 legislation. As people use the HAMP Tier 2 applications, and tell of their redemption or not, we will have more information. Theoretically if a couple where both are redeeming apply the monthly payments will just cover the administrative costs of the HAMP plan.

That is rather exciting!


P.S. Recently I was looking idealistically at BOYKO and O'MALLEY for the application of law, that a claimant would have to produce the original note in court. There are suitors on the brain trust who successfully keep homes for others to possess but they have to take each case like a chess game. There is no master key... at least not yet. The OP actually integrates redemption of lawful money and shows promise of an overall Redemption.