[WSBARP] Federally backed mortgages and evictions

[Kaitlyn Jackson]

Jimmy -

I think I saw that hearing. But I think we both took different things from
it. The *Pinzon *case only found that the 14 day notice and 30 day notice
is "invalid" *if *the property is subject to the CARES Act protections. I
think a clear distinction can be made and *Pinzon *does not apply IF the
property is found NOT to be subject to the CARES Act protections. Mainly,
because an owner has no control if the loan is sold to a federal program at
some point after service of the notice but before the writ is executed. If
the CARES Act doesn't apply to the property, then it's not applicable to
the case full stop and the notice can be ignored as irrelevant. Many CARES
Act notices specifically state that the landlord is not conceding that the
property is subject to the CARES Act and that the landlord is only serving
this notice in case it is later found that the property is subject to the
protections. So, the landlord informs the tenant of a condition precedent.
If the tenant is confused, then they are advised to reach out to an
attorney. Admittedly, if the property is subject to the CARES Act,
then the *Pinzon
*case steps in and says "sending notices is confusing to the tenant" and so
the landlord will have to re-serve a 30 day pay or vacate notice (still not
sure if they have to retrace their steps all the way back through ERPP and
Offer of Reasonable Repayment Plan requirements) before starting the case
again. If the property is not subject to CARES Act, then the fact that the
tenant received *extra notice *and *extra time *is of no harm to the tenant
and should be ignored.

Now, I don't know if that will "work" in this climate. But I think a case
on those facts should succeed and even if the Commissioner disagrees (which
they likely will), I think it would succeed on revision in front of many
judges.
But, we will have to find out.

Kaitlyn

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


On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:05 AM Jimmy Garg <jimmy at jimmygarg.com> wrote:

> There was a show cause hearing prior to mine (I don’t recall the case
> number) where the Defendant was a no-show and Commissioner had asked if a
> 30 day notice had been given pursuant to Pinzon, and had it been given, it
> would’ve been invalid.  Plaintiff’s attorney said no 30 day notice was
> given, and unlawful detainer was granted.
>
>
>
> Jimmy Garg, Esq.
>
> Jimmy Garg, PLLC
>
> 300 Lenora Street # 1063
> Seattle, WA 98121
>
> 206-580-3790 (p) 206-736-3218 (f)
>
> *Notice:* Unless you have previously signed an engagement agreement with
> this firm, and the firm has accepted you as a client, then NO exchange of
> information by virtue of e-mails or other communications will create an
> attorney-client relationship, including a duty of confidentiality, between
> sender and/or recipient.
>
> *Confidentiality Note:*  This e-mail, and any attachment to it, contains
> privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
> individual(s) or entity named on the e-mail.  If the reader of this e-mail
> is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
> delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> reading it is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your
> system.  Thank you.
>
> Please note that due to COVID-19, this office is not currently accepting
> in person appointments.
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Kaitlyn Jackson
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 17, 2023 10:38 AM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] Federally backed mortgages and evictions
>
>
>
> You might as well just all move to 30 day notices no matter what. *Pinzon
> *applies to more than just federally backed mortgages. If a tenant
> receives federal subsidies, then it also applies. There's no clear way to
> totally determine whether or not a property/tenant is subject to the CARES
> Act. In court the other day, I watched an unlawful detainer hearing where
> the plaintiff was sure the property was not subject to CARES/*Pinzon, *but
> the defense attorney used some website that claimed it was (though the
> website specifically stated it was not guaranteeing accuracy) and the
> Commissioner said the only person "with knowledge" to provide a declaration
> was a qualified title officer as part of a title review. So, if a landlord
> wishes to move forward, then the landlord likely has to line up a title
> officer to do a search and provide a declaration one way or the other. AND
> don't forget that evictions take 4-6 months (at least they do in King
> County), SO there's no guarantee that the loan, even if not federally
> backed, is not sold during that time period to Fannie or Freddie. So, in
> that circumstance the landlord would have to start all over at the
> beginning if that were to happen at any point before the Sheriff executed
> the writ.
>
>
>
> Might as well bypass the whole thing and just move to all 30 day notices
> while this mess gets worked out by the Supreme Court. *Pinzon *is a mess.
>
>
>
> Food for thought - the unlawful detainer statute was created for a quick
> and efficient way to resolve the issue of possession. It's no longer quick,
> it's no longer efficient, and it's no longer affordable for many landlords.
> Some are starting to consider walking away from unlawful detainers and just
> file full on ejectment cases because now they are likely faster and can
> resolve all issues more effectively than unlawful detainers can.
>
>
>
> KJ
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:49 AM Kary Krismer <Krismer at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> If you look at the definition for 1-4 family homes it includes Fannie Mae
> and Freddie Mac loans, so it would be virtually all home loans except maybe
> those portfolio lenders like Washington Federal.
>
> 15 USC 9058.
>
> The same is true of 5 units and above, but I have no idea how common
> Fannie and Freddie are in those type of loans.
>
> There are also Internet tools I remember from the financial crisis, but I
> have not idea used or even thought about those for years.
>
> https://fhmtg.com/freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae-loan-lookup-tools/
>
> Kary L. Krismer
>
> 206 723-2148
>
> On 1/17/2023 6:23 AM, Annie Fitzsimmons wrote:
>
> Good Morning.  If you've not yet read *Sherwood Auburn LLC v. Pinzon*,
> 521 P.3d 212 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022), then reading it will get your
> Tuesday-masquerading-as-a-Monday off to a startling start.  Spoiler alert:
> based on the CARES Act, all  landlords with a federally backed mortgage
> must give 30 days notice before initiating an eviction based on unpaid
> rent.
>
>
>
> Question:   How do you know if a mortgage is a "federally backed
> mortgage"?  I know that FHA and VA loans are federally backed.  Aren't
> there some conventional loans that are federally backed?  If so, how do you
> determine if it is or isn't?
>
>
>
> Thanks!  Annie
>
> Annette T. Fitzsimmons P.S.
> P.O. Box 430
> Belfair, WA 98528
>
>
>
> ***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.***
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> WSBARP mailing list
>
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> ***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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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
>
> *www.dimensionlaw.com <http://www.dimensionlaw.com/>*
>
> 631 Strander Blvd, 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.
>
>
> 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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>


-- 

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

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

631 Strander Blvd, 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.

-- 
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/wsbarp/attachments/20230117/d9cd3f7e/attachment.html>