So now we have a decrease in the amount of time banks can pursue borrowers in Florida (down to 1 year is my understanding(?) But only for deficiency judgements after July of this year. How can one get this applied retroactively to an outstanding deficiency judgement on the basis of 'unfair' to the older prosecution against the borrowers? As it appears to be a two level playing field....
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Attorney
I agree with my colleague in that it will not be possible to apply the new Statute of Limitations that presumably applies to any deficiency judgments entered on or after July, 2013 to a deficiency judgment that was entered prior to that time. The new law puts a considerable bigger burden on homeowners to prove within 20 days of service of suit that the documents the lender is using to pursue the foreclosure are faulty, so on the flip side the SOL has also been made shorter for the lenders to pursue the deficiency. This was not the case before the new law went into effect as the lenders still had the burden to prove they had the right to foreclosure (although we know that they did not prove this, often times, despite still getting a judgment in their favor). To date, lenders have not been extremely aggressive in pursuing deficiencies, although that is not to say that they will not in the future, of course.
Please note that the response above is not meant to constitute legal advice and it does not establish an attorney-client relationship. You should contact an experienced attorney to assist you.
1 found this helpful
1 lawyer agrees
it wont be possible to make the law retroactive without violating the constitution of the state and the united states. it would be ex post facto and reversible. further its my humble opinion that the new 1 year deficiency would only be applicable to those judgments obtained by banks using the new "speedy" foreclosure law. those that dont would probably be subject to the 5 year statute of repose.
without a detailed review by a lawyer can all the issues raised in your question be appropriately addressed...nothing in this response should be construed as establishing a lawyer client relationship..the answers herein are for informational purposes and not to be construed as advice
1 found this helpful
2 lawyers agree