| Upcoming Classes |
|---|
|
| Search CFLA's Article Archive:
Tolling the Statute of Limitations by Initiating Administrative Processes by Neil Garfield | January 23, 2019 A recent case brought to mind a possible argument for tolling the applicable statute of limitations (SOL) on certain claims. By submission of complaints to the CFPB (TILA, RESPA, FDCPA etc) you are starting an administrative process. It might even be true that by submitting a QWR (under RESPA) or DVL (under FDCPA) you are starting an administrative process. One could argue that while you were in that process the statute of limitations on certain claims should be tolled. The argument would be that you were exhausting your administrative remedies and that therefore the statute of limitations barring your claim should be tolled (extended). The argument against that position is usually that you didn’t need to exhaust your administrative remedies and therefore there should be no tolling of the statute. General doctrine and decisions weigh the balance of the goal of finality of claims and the desire to see all meritorious claims be litigated in pursuit of justice. The courts vary so do your legal research. Your position is obviously strongest where you MUST exhaust administrative remedies BEFORE filing a claim, as provided by a statute. Your position is weakest where you didn’t need to exhaust administrative remedies. But equitable arguments often prevail. Remember that if you are successful the statute of limitations will only be tolled during the period that you were pursuing administrative remedies so the filing of complaint with the CFPB and the AG office in your state is probably a good idea if it’s done sooner rather than later. The fact that administrative remedies were available for a time does not seem to advance your position unless you started some procedure invoking administrative action. And remember that while you can’t bring a claim for remedies under a tort of statutory violation that is barred by the statute of limitations you CAN raise the same issues as an defense under the doctrine of recoupment. Procedurally recoupment only applies if you are sued. State laws and common law vary so again be careful to do your legal research. If the foreclosure is contested I believe that under the US Constitution, this requires the foreclosure to become judicial — something that every judicial state has in fact made provision for. As I have insisted for 12 years, the fact that nonjudicial foreclosure is available for uncontested foreclosures should not be an excuse for changing the burden of proof in contested foreclosures. Hence the proper (constitutional) procedure would be realignment of the parties to where the claimant for foreclosure must judicially claim foreclosure and prove it while the homeowner merely defends with an answer and affirmative defenses and/or counterclaim. As it stands, courts resist this approach and that gives the claimants in unlawful and wrongful foreclosures the ability to skip proof and go straight to foreclosure. In my opinion that reveals an unconstitutional application of an otherwise valid statutory scheme for disposing of uncontested foreclosures. Unlawful detainer or eviction is an attempt to eat fruit from a poisoned tree if in a nonjudicial foreclosure state a contested foreclosure did not require the claimant to assert and prove its claim for foreclosure.
"CFLA was founded by the Nation's Leading Foreclosure Defense Attorneys back in 2007 to serve the Foreclosure Defense Industry and fight pervasive Bank Fraud. Since opening our virtual doors, CFLA has rapidly expanded to become the premier online legal destination for small businesses and consumers. But as the company continues to grow, we're careful to hold true to our original vision. For us, putting the law within reach of millions of people is more than just a novel idea–it's the founding principle, just ask Andrew P. Lehman, J.D.. With convenient locations in Houston and Los Angeles, you can contact Our National Account Specialist and General Manager / Member Damion W. Emholtz at 888-758-CFLA (2352) for a free Mortgage Fraud Analysis or to obtain samples of work product, including cutting edge Bloomberg Securitization Audits, Litigation Support, Quiet Title Packages, and for more information about our Nationally Accredited and U.S. Department of Education Approved "Mortgage Securitization Analyst Training Certification" Classes (3 days) 24 hours for approved CLE & MCLE Credit (Now Available Online)". SEE BELOW- Call us at 888-758-CFLA (2352) |
Contact us or view our Sample Documents & Audits by completing the form below.
Certified Forensic Loan Auditors, LLC Phone: 888-758-CFLA (2352) |
| CFLA IS NOT A LAW FIRM AND DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY LEGAL ADVICE. CFLA DOES NOT OFFER FORECLOSURE CONSULTING OR FORECLOSURE RELIEF SERVICES. CFLA DOES NOT OFFER OR ASSIST WITH ANY LOAN MODIFICATION SERVICE. CFLA ALWAYS RECOMMENDS THAT CLIENTS RETAIN COMPETENT COUNSEL IN THEIR RESPECTIVE JURISDICTION. CFLA HAS A FREE PROGRAM TO REFER CFLA CLIENTS TO LAW FIRMS IN NEARLY EVERY STATE AND CFLA DOES NOT CHARGE OR OBTAIN REFERRALS FEES FOR THESE SERVICES. SERVICES NOT OFFERED TO RESIDENTS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA. |
| Home | About Us | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Disclaimer | SERVICES | Careers | Contact Us |
|---|