Why Would Attorney Advise Foreclosure?
Seems I am running into BK properties where the attorney is advising the homeowner to let their house go to auction after the BK is complete. I do not understand the reasoning beind such an action. Could anybody enlighten me as to why an attorney would advise such a seemingly devestating action for their client? Thank you. :-?
Bankruptcy Lawyers probably aren't that familiar with the short sale process (they are lawyers, not speculative investors) ... or they recognise the process to be complex, time consuming, and not worth the time/effort.
Their advice follows their expertice. If a Homeowner can afford a Chapter 13 plan, there is a chance to save the home from foreclosure. If the Homeowner can't afford the 13, then a Chapter 7 liquidation is considered.
(sometimes, despite a Chapter 7, the Homeowner can reaffirm the mortgage debt and keep the house)
Perhaps you could introduce yourself to several bankruptcy lawyers... offering an alternative to straight liquidation.... a mortgagee approved, preforeclosue short sale.
I completely I agree.
I have never advised a client to let their home go to foreclosure. I ALWAYS suggest short selling the property as a way to spare their credit from a full foreclosure. (if possible)
The only rationale I can think of would be that the attorney thinks there would be some benefit to letting the 1st foreclosure out the 20 non-consensual judgment liens that are on the property, (these would need to be negotiated with in order to short sell it, unless the debtor has a filed a motioj to avoid all judgment liens which had imparied the homestead during the BK)
But I just can't think of an intelligent reason why the debtor's attorney would advise just letting it foreclose, unless her client was so fed up, emotionally unstable as to no be competent to grasp the short sale process or if they had no desire to cooperate with an investor.