Closing Short Sale Deals With the A-B-C Transaction

A little skepticism about Short Sales is a healthy thing. I understand that a lot of people out there are unfamiliar with how they work. That’s why it’s so important for real estate investors to get the right training and be able to answer questions like the ones I’ve been blogging about for the past week.

Just last week I received a letter from a lawyer who advised her client (the homeowner) against proceeding with a Short Sale with a real estate investor. I’ve been posting my point-by-point responses to the attorney.

Here’s another excerpt from the attorney’s letter, followed by my response:

The only way such a transaction could possibly be insurable is if the following requirements have been met:

1. There are no violations of any restrictions listed in the short sale payoff letter or closing instructions.

2. There have been no misrepresentations as to the value or ownership of the property to the existing lender, the new lender, or the purchaser.

3. All disbursements must be made exactly as stated on the HUD-1 settlement statement, and only to parties involved in this specific transaction.

4. Each half of the simultaneous closing must be kept separate and stand on its own. The sale from A to B must be fully funded and disburse with money coming from and going to all appropriate parties. The sale from B to C must also stand on its own. The money from C’s lender must not be used to fund any portion of the A to B transaction.

Yes, Ms. Attorney, you’re right on. Clearly you’ve read the advisory letter from your title underwriter (from where you appropriately copied these items). YES – this is how back-to-back Short Sale transactions should be structured and if the investor is appropriately trained (the way I teach it) then this is exactly how the investor will want to do it.

Like I said, a little skepticism is a healthy thing. We’re in absolutely unprecedented, historic times for the real estate market and especially for Short Sales. And yes, there are a lot of scams and bad-faith opportunists out there trying to rip people off out there.

However, when done the right way, Short Sales are win-win opportunities that only work if the deal works for all parties. If your seller is not on your side cheering for you, then I suggest you go find another house!

How do you set things up so your Seller is “cheering for you”? That’s one of the major real estate investor skills I teach!

How to Buy Real Estate Below Market Value

It patently requires time, work and ability to get an incredible deal for land. Obviously getting profitable deal is one of the tasks of entire business. But here we will let you know how to make a profit on purchasing a property. Doing this obviously requires research, skilled transaction and complete dedication – still if one follows the given underneath techniques you can yield stunning achievement.

To be effective in Real Estate you need to know how to purchase land below the market value, and purchase properties that bode well. For this we will first let you know why individuals offer property below market value, what its real market worth is and afterward how you can purchase land below market value.

Why do individuals offer property below market value?

Nobody wishes to offer their property less than its value. If one is doing so then undoubtedly there must be some reason for that. In majority of the cases reason is time pressure. Choices can frequently be irrational and emotional in these circumstances. For Example:

– Facing budgetary issues.

– To share funds with legatee.

– Facing Foreclosure Problems

– Personal issues.

– Interested in another property.

– Migrating because of work issues.

Whenever you discover a dealer who is keen on Short Sale, it’s nothing less than a golden opportunity for you to confer the deal with the cost and contract terms in your favor.

In such cases, never be reluctant to make inquiries like: “What is the reason of sale?”; “For how long has the property been available in market?”; Knowing these details will give you a clear idea of how much room is there for negotiation due to which your deal will turn out to be simple.

What is its real market worth?

Market worth is the original cost at which a specific property will be sold in its present condition. The cost is determined by the business sector or at times it also relies on the interaction of a purchaser and dealer. Remember that it is not settled like the cost of an item at a retail shop. This makes land bargains at an exceptionally productive open door. There is only one way of finding the definite business sector estimation of a property if you are not an agent and that is by observing practically identical deals. You have to discover recent offers of comparative properties in surrounding areas for this. It is the most accurate way to do this on your own. Likewise the least demanding way to know the market value for this is to go for such service suppliers. They will take complete liability to provide you a beneficial deal.

Remember that if you are looking at a property that necessitates repairs then you need to get it in even lower cost else you aren’t purchasing underneath real market worth.

Approaches to purchase real estate below market value:

To purchase real estate most importantly get this clear that there are short sales below market value, there are Fair market deals, auctioned property and the off market properties that can be sold below market value. With a specific end goal to use benefits of purchasing real estate less than its market value, go for these properties.

Short Sales are a phenomenal hotspot for financial specialists. Short sales are possessed by private vender; however the vender has a commitment to pay the bank more than for the amount they are attempting to offer the home. With a specific end goal to sell the home, the bank needs to take consent to take less cash than they are owed. Truly, short sales take up to 6 months or even a year to close since sellers here don’t effectively hop onto a conclusion. They take their requisite time to settle on choice.

Fair market deals are homes claimed by a private vender who have reasonable play in the home selling decisions. They can offer it without including the bank in the basic leadership. It is harder to discover fair market deals in light of the fact that the merchant is generally not in a gigantic hurry to offer their home underneath market value. There are fewer situations where you can find a great deal on a fair market sale.

Numerous service providers go for a property that is never listed for sale since they expect that it might cost them not exactly genuine market worth and they could easily gain the benefit. These are off market properties, since they are not available to be purchased. It requires cash and investment to have the capacity to buy these sorts of speculation properties.

At the point when a property is dispossessed by a seller, so it’s obligatory for him to attempt and reclaim its misfortunes before promptly assuming responsibility of the property. That property is termed as auctioned property. This is the reason numerous homes are unloaded at the courthouse steps. So you should simply, determine when your local courthouse holds its auctions and grapple the most profitable deal from it as soon as possible.

In addition never let go the deals in which such terms are being used by the vender:

#Desperate Merchant

#Divorce

#Decreased Estate

#Distressed Property

#Induced Seller

Generally speaking, to figure out how to purchase real estate underneath market value all you need to do is a lot of work and sparing time in research, hence after adapting these techniques your deal can be extremely profitable.

Keep in mind the old expression, ‘you profit when you purchase, you get paid when you offer’. If you are having any trouble finding a great deal on a house, check out our site http://www.stopforeclosure.co.

Huge Profits From Short Sales – Fantastic Pre-Foreclosure Tool For Savvy Investors

Louisville realtors, investors and debtors facing foreclosure ask me from time to time how short sales work. Consider this a primer.

I recently brokered the sale of a house for $85,000 to an investor. The house appraised for $120,000, giving the investor substantial immediate equity. The lender took a $60,000 loss. The owner/seller was forced to sell his house, for which he received not one red cent, and had to move into rental. How is it that all parties walked away from the closing table satisfied?!

In the beginning…

When a home owner owes his lender more than he has borrowed, he’s said to be “upside down on his mortgage”. This can come about in many ways, the principal amongst them occurring when he simply stops making mortgage payments, often because he is in serious financial difficulty. If his mortgage payment is $1,000 per month, and he stops paying, or pays intermittently, the fines, interest and principle can rack up pretty quickly. And if the owner can’t pay the mortgage, chances are he hasn’t been able to make necessary repairs to his home. This situation is almost invariably accompanied by despondency, which again leads to neglect of the house.

Stir into the mix bankruptcy, and perhaps divorce, and you’ll understand it’s not surprising to find the homes of these owner/debtors are often seriously degradated. That leaky roof is probably the last of the owner’s problems.

The “F” word

Foreclosure. It’s not a happy prospect for the lender or the borrower. Lenders have different tolerances for late payments. However by the time the debtor is late for the fourth consecutive month the vast majority of lenders begin foreclosure proceedings. In Kentucky the foreclosure sale of the home by public auction takes generally anywhere from 6 months to a year from the time the foreclosure procedures began. It can take longer – I saw one artful debtor drag on the foreclosure proceedings for more that 20 months! Her mortgage payment was $1,300 a month. After 20 months that became a significant debt compounded by late fees, interest, legal costs, and the potential cost of selling the property at a public foreclosure sale. To say nothing of the continuing, moment by moment deterioration of the property. By the time she moved out the bank had written off in excess of $80,000.

The lender’s and borrower’s conflicting interests

Capitalism is a wonderfully contrived system. It hands not only the power-barons a potent array of weapons with which to fight, but also the poor and destitute. Though the battlefield is nowhere near even, double digit interest thrust too deeply down an indigent debtor’s throat may precipitate his “nuclear” retaliatory option – Chapter 7 bankruptcy. And so these two, symbiotically entwined, are locked in an elegant dance, teetering between dividends and disaster, profit and poverty. One serious mis-step, and the band stops playing.

Thus, from years of bitter experience, lenders have learned that it’s often better (cheaper) to attempt to gain the cooperation of the owner and have him agree to voluntarily sell and vacate his home, rather than evict him under foreclosure. Lenders also understand that the chance of ever recovering the money owed to them by the debtor is slim. But many debtors choose not to sell because, around the time they realize they will never catch up on their payments, they often have another “Ah Ha!” flash of insight: that if they stop paying their mortgage and just wait for the foreclosure axe to fall (or better yet, engage in a hatfull of tricks to keep that axe at bay) they can live “rent free” for at least 6 months. So now the debtor turns from borrower to squatter, perceiving it to be in his best interest to prevent the foreclosure for as long as possible. And if the house, the lender’s “security”, should fall apart in the meantime, so be it.

The solution

The lender is in a position to offer the borrower a very important concession for his cooperation: to write off the entire debt if the borrower finds a buyer to buy the house at a price and terms acceptable to the lender, within the time stipulated by the lender. This is the essence of a short sale. Lenders set their own guidelines for what they will accept. They may say they need to get fair market price, but will in fact often be prepared to sell for much less. They do not want to chance selling this house at auction and risk receiving a very low price. Or worse yet, receive a bid so low that the property does not meet their reserve price, and they end up owning the property. In this case the property is administered by the lender’s REO (real estate owned) department, which will then list the property with a realtor. And the cycle begins again……

The Lender initially said The Willows house was worth $120,000, and wanted it sold at about that price. It got the $120,000 figure from someone it had hired to do a BPO. BPO is short for “Broker’s Price Opinion.” It is similar to a CMA (Comparative Market Analysis) and serves the same purpose: to arrive at a fair market value for a property. Most are done as a “drive-by,” meaning that the “driver” (usually a realtor, maybe an appraiser) drives by the outside of the property, takes one to three photos and leaves. He then completes the lender’s BPO form on-line and e-mails it with the picture. Sometimes an “internal” is requested, in which case the realtor goes into the property, takes about 3 internal and 3 external photos and sends these through to the lender with the completed BPO form.

When the debtor had realized he would not be able to save his house in The Willows, he contacted me to see if I could help. He did not want a foreclosure on his credit report, which would have prevented him from getting a conventional mortgage for three years. Even with a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, the wait period is only 2 years from dismissal. He also wanted to have his debt forgiven. I was able to accomplish both these goals, saving him about sixty thousand dollars.

The short sale process

As a Realtor, the first thing I did was explain to my client all his theoretical options, including deed in-lieu of foreclosure, loan renegotiation and others. He settled on short sale. I listed The Willows property, and had him sign an authorization for me to contact the lender to see if it would agree to a short sale. Remember, when I list the property, the owner/debtor is my client (not customer). This means I must always act in his best interest. The lender is not my client and I owe it no such duty. In a normal sale the seller and buyer have greatly divergent interests: the seller wants to sell at the highest possible price, and the buyer wants to buy at the lowest. In a short sale there is no such contest between the parties: the seller wants to sell at any price the lender will accept, and will generally agree to any price offered, contingent upon the lender’s acceptance. So in a short sale, the lender takes on the mantle of “seller” vis-a-vi the buyer and these are really the parties who negotiate the contract. Now get your head around this one: as listing agent in a short sale I am often in the peculiar position of actively attempting to negotiate for the sale at the lowest possible price acceptable to the buyer! (But always with the caveat that this is in the seller’s best interest, and does not jeopardize the sale). This anomaly has many ramifications for the way I conduct and negotiate these transactions.

Price, Terms and Timing

Price: So how much will the lender lop off that price? I’ve generally found that as the day of auction approaches, lenders become more malleable. Pretty inefficient, because they loose a lot of time and money that way. I supplied the lender of The Willows property with objective material indicating that the drive-by BPO was inaccurate, given the condition of the house. The lender then had an internal BPO done. That was key to getting this particular deal done. I also sent off photos and comps of my own. In some cases I’ve sent the lenders well over 100 photos. Pictures speak louder than words, and it’s critical, when the property is damaged, that the lender understand the shape it’s in. Remember – the BPO realtor may be doing up to 50 BPOs a week – he could care less about this one deal. But as listing agent I need to keep the lender informed of all issues that coincide with my client’s best interests. The second Willows BPO came back at $100,000, and the lender initially tried to obtain that figure. Ultimately, with the foreclosure sale due to occur the next day, it reduced that amount to 80% of the $100,000 plus $5,000 to pay off non-mortgage related liens. At 4.50 pm the lender agreed to stop the foreclosure sale scheduled for 11.00 am next morning.

But hey, it ain’t over ’til the fat lady sings! Because the loss on this loan was $60,000, and because the lender had authority to settle up to $30,000 only, we had to wait for final word from the mortgage insurance company, which we eventually obtained, but not without many hours additional work.

As you see, the price of The Willows property was determined by the lender looking at the bottom line – how much net it would receive. And in order to get this number, all lenders in short sales request a “fake HUD-1” or a “net sheet” submitted simultaneously with the offer. In a normal real estate transaction the HUD-1 is drawn up at the end of the transaction, after agreement is reached. – in a short sale the title search is performed immediately upon listing, even before there’s an offer, so that the figures can be applied to the net sheet as soon as needed.

Terms: The most common terms distinguishing these deals are that the lender often requires terms such as “sold as is” and “proof of finance or funds required with offer”, and to protect the seller, the realtor should insert terminology indicating seller’s acceptance is subject to release from all liability for debt. None of this is carved in stone, and I’ve negotiated repairs and other concessions from lenders. Each case is unique. Paper will suffer any indignity – write the offer!

Timing: The REO, Foreclosure and Bankruptcy departments often appear to be understaffed and overwhelmed, so don’t expect instant responses. Some will take weeks to reply. Make sure the buyer and seller understand this. But once a deal is struck, the lender will often expect an unreasonably quick closing, and will attempt to penalize you with days interest for closing after a certain date. This all goes back to the net sheet calculations; because you have informed the lender how much it will receive by a certain date, it then attempts to hold the line at that date, even though they are generally very slow to respond. The Willows lender, after having not responded to multiple contacts, gave us just 2 days within which to close! Fortunately we well prepared, but it was very close.

Closing Note

The tax consequences of short sales fall outside the scope of this article. If you want info on how to handle competing offers, dual limited agency within this environment, or need a copy of the net sheet I use, you may contact me.

Update

Here’s a new twist. A couple of weeks ago I submitted a $235,000 offer to a lender on a short sale, (Seller owes about $275,000) which the lender ultimately accepted. However, in it’s acceptance letter, at the very bottom of the sheet, the lender stipulated that it retained its right of recourse against the seller/borrower (my client)! And this despite seemingly contrary language in the main body of the letter. I explained to the lender that the ONLY reason my client had agreed to the short sale (and not to jerk the lender around in the bankruptcy proceedings) was because he expected to obtain a complete release from all liability at closing. After a weeks or so of wrangling, attorneys etc, the lender “saw the light” and agreed to the release.

CMA

Though the information provided is considered reliable, it is not complete, nor warranted accurate. Always consult your broker or an attorney.

Pro Se Primer 101 – 3 – Constitutional Irreducible Minimum Requirements of Standing in Foreclosure

STANDING AS DEFINED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

“Why put all of the blame on the attorneys? Hell, most of them don’t know the law.”

If you were to walk into a 2nd grade elementary school class room and see that all of the boys are standing on their desks shaking their butts, laughing and shouting, and throwing things at the girls in the class, who respond by screaming and running, and then you notice that the 2nd grade teacher is setting at his desk doing nothing to stop the chaos, would you really blame, the children?

No, it is the teacher who is charge of the room. If the teacher does not enforce the rules of classroom behavior, then the children will act like wild monkeys. How would they know not to?

It is no different than the judge in the court case who is charged with controlling and enforcing correctness in information and procedure in a court case.

If the judge does not enforce the constitution, which is all that keeps this country great;

If the judge does not make the attorneys prove their claims and/ or does not keep them from claiming transfers of ownership of essential Promissory Notes with assignments of incidental security instruments (mortgage or deed of trust) which do nothing but describe the collateral, then, of course the attorneys are going to forge and fake and lie, worse than wild monkeys;

Then lack of subject matter jurisdiction is the fault of the judge of the court. He or she places the burden of proof of standing on the borrower (very nearly every time), yet it very clearly is the burden of the court.

The judge promised when he took the job that he, or she, would enforce and protect the laws that come from the constitution and that they defend the court ferociously from losing the public trust. Maybe that was too much to ask from a pompous ass.

Why did we all expect more of judges and attorneys anyway?

If I am any part of the public, then I can tell you for sure, the courts have lost some of the public trust.

It is difficult to pull Borrowers back from their searches for Promissory Notes, Assignments of Mortgage, MERS, PSA etc., etc., thinking like Dick Tracy and looking for a way to “prove” that the party trying to foreclose on them does not have the authority, or, STANDING, to do so.

But, if what I say is true and the judges are letting the attorneys run amuck like the 2nd graders in my description, who can blame the attorneys for running amuck. “Amuck” is quickly becoming synonymous with the “actions of the courts”.

If you had seen judges simply ignore proof when it is presented as much as I have, then what I am really trying to say is that this whole thing is only about Standing and in constitutional law only the court (the court is the judge and the judge is the court.) has the initial burden of determining if the foreclosing party is a Plaintiff with Standing.

It is only the Supreme Court that has original jurisdiction over all issues of Constitutional rights. No state judge or local judge should claim that they have superior jurisdiction to the Supreme Court and it’s decisions.

The way it has been practiced for the last 15 to 20 years has been exactly the opposite.

The judges have been sitting up there on their hands on the bench and waiting for the Borrowers to describe what the foreclosing party was up to and forcing the Borrower prove it. These cases nearly always begin with the judge placing the burden on the Borrower to prove what the Foreclosing Party has tried very hard to hide. That is a ridiculous premise. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and the rest thought so too.

If an act of fraud is working here, then by definition the act was meant to be kept hidden.

How would the Borrower prove or disprove something he was not privy to. It is the foreclosing party who must claim that he has been wronged by the borrower and it is this same foreclosing party that must prove it (not claim it) with evidence which is “concrete and particularized”.

So, the way it works in reality law is that the judge cannot even preside over a case until he reads what the Plaintiff (in judicial states and defendant in non-judicial states) has written in their lawsuit to make the claim that the court should hand them the deed to your home and that they should get to sell it and keep the money. How this has been allowed to happen illegally ten million times is a shameful disgrace for the majority of our judiciary. It is truly unbelievable. Not untrue, just unbelievable. (There have been many beautiful and sane rulings also, but it is nowhere near “fair” yet.)

It would be very difficult for me to show you how Challenging Standing s is supposed to be working, because no one is doing what I am doing, so it is still, in essence, only in my head. There are hundreds of citations concerning case rulings on the subject, but they are mostly contract law cases from other industries. Home Loans funded with a Promissory Note are all contract law, but no one is doing it enforcing them is the correct way as required by United States Constitution, the basis of all American law.

That doesn’t change how it works with your home loan, because contract law is what governs home loans.

So, since it is the judges burden to know that he or she has subject matter jurisdiction, which he needs to even begin the case, he must see the proof of standing the Foreclosing Party wrote in his lawsuit.

Borrowers, before anything else, you must first understand the proof that is required to establish Standing. If prooff has not been presented and the judge rules without Standing and therefore without subject matter jurisdiction, then he has broken the law and this is the only situation where a judge does not have “absolute immunity”.

If he rules against you, right or wrong, without having “subject matter” jurisdiction he has done so as a “civilian” and if has barred you from any of your constitutional civil rights, he is liable to you for any money or property harm that you have suffered. You don’t really sue the judge as a judge, you sue the man or woman who acted as a judge without the requirements needed to create a legitimate court with subject matter jurisdiction.

There was no legitimate court for any foreclosure case that I have ever seen. I have seen as many as anybody.

So, first things first. Review, slowly and carefully what the US Supreme Court has determined is the constitutional minimum requirements for Standing. The words they use is the strategic offense you will use to keep your house safe from anyone that you do not owe the money to.

Let me know if you can see how those words fit your situation. If not, we will go over them again before moving on, as to how and when we would apply them.

Below is an actual paragraph from my own motion to vacate a void judgment of foreclosure.

Plaintiffs have filed to Invoke their Rights to Challenge the Standing of the Defendants at any Time Under Article III of the United States Constitution earlier into this court case, yet this court failed to even mention or give any recognition that the court had even read the Borrower/Plaintiffs’ invocation of this fundamental constitutional civil right, which was foremost the responsibility of this court.

Plaintiffs state as follows and the court ignores at its own peril:

1.) That Article III of the Constitution of the United States and the Supreme Court have established a constitutional irreducible minimum set of requirements for a party in a genuine dispute to establish Standing. Without Standing of the Foreclosing Party, all courts in the land must acknowledge that the court has no jurisdiction to hear any merits of a case and must dismiss the subject action, in this case the void and fraudulent foreclosure of Plaintiffs’ property.

1a.) That only the United States Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over constitutional question issues.

(The decisions of the United States Supreme Court, whether right or wrong, are supreme: they are binding on all courts of this land, Hoover v. Holston Valley Community Hospital, 545 F. Supp. 8, 13 (E. D. Tenn. 1981) (quoting Jordan V. Gilligan, 500 2 F.3d 701, 707(6th Cir. 1974).

(The lower courts are bound by Supreme Court precedent, Adams v. Department of Juvenile Justice of New York City, 143 F.3d, 61, 65(2nd Cir. 1998)

(Walker v. Quality Loan Service Corp. of Washington et al., No. 65975-8-1)

(Washington State Supreme Court, Bain v. Metro. Mortg. Group, Inc., et al.175 Wn.2d 83, 285 P.3d 34 (2012))

2.) That the requirements in a case of Non-Judicial Foreclosure actions are:

1. The foreclosing party must claim and prove with concrete and particularized evidence that it has sustained and Injury in Fact.

2. This Injury must be fairly traceable to the foreclosed party with concrete and substantive evidence.

3. The court must be able to redress the injury with a ruling in favor of the injured party.

3.) That if it is the alleged foreclosed party that is the claimant party then it must also 1. claim and prove an injury in fact. 2. Its’ injury must be fairly traceable to the foreclosing party. 3. Its’ injury must be able to be redressed by the court.

4.) That the United States Supreme Court defines the requirements of Standing as:

3.1.B. The Constitutional and Prudential Requirements of Standing

Inherent in the constitutional limitation of judicial power on cases and controversies is the requirement of “concrete adverseness” between the parties to a lawsuit. The rise of public interest law litigation involving claims of non-economic loss has forced the Supreme Court to craft an analytical framework for determining whether the requisite adversity is present. The Court requires that plaintiffs establish that the challenged conduct caused or threatens to cause them an injury in fact to judicially cognizable interests. By establishing that they personally suffered injury, plaintiffs demonstrate that they are sufficiently associated with the controversy to be permitted to litigate it. The question of injury raises two questions –

(1) what kinds of injuries count for purposes of standing and

(2) how certain the injury must be if it has not yet occurred.

3.1.B.1. Injury in Fact

The Supreme Court has held that, to satisfy the injury in fact requirement, a party seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court must show three things:

(1) “an invasion of a legally protected interest,”

(2) that is “concrete and particularized,” and f

(3) “actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical. The following section discusses several types of injuries considered by the Supreme Court in determining whether there is a legally protected interest.

3.1.B.1.a. Economic Interests

The Supreme Court has had no difficultly determining that economic interests are legally protected interests. More difficult is determining when economic injury that has yet to occur is sufficiently imminent and likely to confer standing. The Court has been relatively forgiving in this regard. Economic injury need not have already occurred but can result from policies that, for example, are likely to deprive the plaintiff of a competitive advantage or a bargaining chip. In Clinton v. New York, for instance, the Court held that New York had standing to challenge the veto of legislation permitting the state to keep disputed Medicaid funds. The veto left the state’s ability to retain the funds uncertain, subject to the outcome of a request for a waiver. Despite this uncertainty, the Court regarded the “revival of a substantial contingent liability” sufficient to confer standing.

3.1.B.5. Injury Fairly Traceable to the Challenged Conduct

In addition to alleging injury in fact, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s unlawful conduct. In cases in which the government acts against the plaintiff, causation is simple.

3.1.B.6. Relief Sought to Redress Injury

A corollary to the Supreme Court’s requirement for standing, that the injury alleged be fairly traceable to the challenged conduct is the separate requirement that the relief sought must redress the injury. In the great majority of cases the inquiry into causation and redressability are indistinguishable.

Thus, in Warth, the Court held that there was no reason to suppose that the elimination of exclusionary zoning would enable the plaintiffs to obtain housing in Penfield. In Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, the Court held that there was no reason to think that revoking the IRS Revenue Ruling at issue would assure that the next ill or injured poor person would be admitted to a hospital.

Furthermore, in Allen, the Court held it was entirely speculative that revoking tax-exempt status for allegedly discriminatory private schools would serve to foster public school integration. What is peculiar about the Court’s concern for redressability is the elevation of the question of remedial efficacy to constitutional status.

While the scope of equitable relief to redress unlawful governmental action has long been a matter of controversy, not until City of Los Angeles v. Lyons did the Court clearly articulate the requirement of remedial efficacy as a constitutional component of standing. The plaintiff in Lyons sought damages and injunctive relief after being choked by city police officers. He alleged that the city permitted the police department to use unnecessary choke holds indiscriminately. The Court conceded that Lyons had standing to sue for damages. However, the Court held that he lacked standing to seek injunctive relief, as an injunction would not redress his injury because it was unlikely that he would be arrested and choked again.

You really aren’t trying to outsmart attorneys or that joke of an entity the foreclosing party. What you really want to do is to place the judge in as much of a pickle as you are in (jeopardy).