[WSBAPT] Lender won't honor POA RE Fannie Mae

[Roger Hawkes]

Well said josh😊

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Kaitlyn Jackson
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2022 1:55 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Lender won't honor POA RE Fannie Mae

Thanks so much, Joshua!
Sent from my iPhone


On Dec 29, 2022, at 11:46 AM, Joshua McKarcher <josh at mckarcherlaw.com<mailto:josh at mckarcherlaw.com>> wrote:

I see Fannie Mae in your subject line. Possibly the only two words that matter in the entire message; we don’t know yet.

First, literal advice. Second, strategic advice, if I may be so bold as to call it that . . . 🤷🏻‍♂️

If the loan is a Fannie Mae loan; and if FM requires either (1) the borrower’s own ink signature OR (2) a POA signed/notarized by borrower that specifically references the address of the encumbered property, then you may be out of luck, because federal law or rules may supersede any Washington POA statute that requires third parties to “accept valid POAs or else.” So, if I encountered this issue, I would first focus on the FM issue. (This is all assuming Principal cannot simply sign a new, lender-compliant POA to empower Agent.)

From there, I would be like water flooding a home: take the path of least resistance. If borrower can do a RON session (with one of lender’s and title company’s approved RON providers) from wherever on earth borrower is, that “should” work either (a) to do the entire closing OR (b) to sign the proper POA that then allows POA agent to do the closing.

If it's "do or die" and you know there is a pathway, then keep pressing kindly and offering statutory support in the form of thoughts and questions -- not yelling and finger wagging. The former engenders conversation and is solution oriented. The latter just makes people hate lawyers even more.

I personally prefer, "Would RCW 1234 permit you to allow a [RON signing or POA agent signing] and prevent a third party from collecting damages for your reliance, etc.?" vs. "You have no basis to refuse my request. Pursuant to RCW you must [whatever]."

But what if their "basis" is federal law or some other rule or law that you aren't thinking of? Then you have lost a lot of ground you needn't have. Or just that they're a new underwriter and this is "company policy." Now you're their (not) favorite lawyer and maybe "not listening" from here forward.

In my experience, both lending and title underwriters will always FIRST tell their listener that something is required because underwriter knows that listener will nearly always accept it and make it happen accordingly — believing there is no other option. (I consider this akin to the at-fault party’s insurer in a car accident making an offer for damages and the injured party saying — as the system relies upon most saying — “Okay, well if that’s what it is, I guess I better take it.”)

I can sympathize to a degree: their job is to crank through files and resolve them, not to make Lawyer Joshua McKarcher And His Client happy. But little do they know that if I’m nice enough and persuasive enough and, of course, reasonable enough, that is precisely what they will do. (Hee hee. Don’t tell them.)

So, honestly, if I know there is a LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE pathway to give them cover and give me what I want — even when it’s not standard operating procedure or even if they’ve never before done it — I have NEVER had an underwriter NOT relent.

Rather, I have only had to back off when I realize I am wrong or am missing a link in the chain of “them covering their bases,” which I cannot reasonably ask them not to cover.

And remember, I have spoken to none of these underwriters. Their listener is always an intermediary like a loan officer or a title officer — who probably knows me, trusts me, or has incentive to (see above) "make Lawyer Joshua McKarcher And His Client happy," so long as it's not improper, illegal, etc.

So, I'm hoping that is both literal advice (RON is awesome when done correctly and smartly); and then just strategic advice in case my literal advice is useless. (If both are useless, well, it cost you nothing.)

But: Fannie Mae! That is where this little puzzle starts, my friend. Have fun!

Best, Josh


Joshua D. McKarcher

McKarcher Law PLLC

537 6th Street

Clarkston, WA 99403

(509) 758-3345

(509) 758-3314 (fax)

josh at mckarcherlaw.com<mailto:josh at mckarcherlaw.com>

www.mckarcherlaw.com<http://www.mckarcherlaw.com/>

________________________________
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> on behalf of Kaitlyn Jackson <kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com<mailto:kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com>>
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2022 1:50:23 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBAPT] Lender won't honor POA RE Fannie Mae

Hi all -

I rarely add to this listserv, but I've had a strange situation arise with regard to the purchase of a property. Client is purchasing property and client's son has a POA which is effective immediately and specifically allows son to purchase, sell, dispose of real property on behalf of Client. Client will be out of reach during the anticipated closing date for the purchase and wants Client son to execute closing. Underwriters for the loan say "no" because POA doesn't contain the specific address of the real property. Has anyone come across this?

My concern here is that POAs are generally written and if the principal is incapacitated, new POAs could not be executed for each transaction with each address. Can the underwriters be convinced this is not necessary?

Would love to hear your feedback.

Kaitlyn

--

**Happy Holidays! Please note our office is closed for the Holidays from December 24, 2022 through January 1, 2023.**



Thank you,



Kaitlyn R. Jackson, Senior Associate Attorney

Dimension Law Group, PLLC

Office:  206-973-3500│Fax:  206-577-5090

Email: kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com<http://dimensionlaw.com/>

www.dimensionlaw.com<http://www.dimensionlaw.com/>

631 Strander Blvd, Bldg A, Suite G, Tukwila, WA 98188



PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This email (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify us by email, facsimile, or telephone; return the email to us at the email address below; and destroy all paper and electronic copies.

Sent with Right Inbox<https://www.rightinbox.com/?utm_source=signature>


PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to intercept this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines, imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper and electronic copies. Any settlement offer contained herein is made pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on the part of this firm’s client(s) or its agents.  IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:  To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, I inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein.

***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
_______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to intercept this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines, imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper and electronic copies. Any settlement offer contained herein is made pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on the part of this firm’s client(s) or its agents.  IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:  To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, I inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20221229/3d4376c2/attachment.html>