searching

Contract with a minor

Recommended Posts

I believe I have an idea why this all seems rather convoluted and giving of money and pretend mortgages. This person is and has been involved in money laundering. All these scheme are very complex to avoid anyone from being able to figure them out. The fake mortgage note that is never paid back is a tactic the drug cartels have been using since the 70s and others long before then. The reason behind the foreclosure is likely some of her schemes have collapsed.

http://www.cch.com/Press/news/cchwhitepaper_fraud.pdf

A contract in furthance of a criminal enterprise or endevour is void. However you would need to be able to prove at least a small element of that case to hold off foreclosure and give you time to really dig in. However you are going to need some good legal help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe I have an idea why this all seems rather convoluted and giving of money and pretend mortgages. This person is and has been involved in money laundering. All these scheme are very complex to avoid anyone from being able to figure them out. The fake mortgage note that is never paid back is a tactic the drug cartels have been using since the 70s and others long before then. The reason behind the foreclosure is likely some of her schemes have collapsed.

http://www.cch.com/Press/news/cchwhitepaper_fraud.pdf

A contract in furthance of a criminal enterprise or endevour is void. However you would need to be able to prove at least a small element of that case to hold off foreclosure and give you time to really dig in. However you are going to need some good legal help.

Thank you KentWa. This is not the situation here though. It really is exactly what I said. As for why our "friend" is doing this now her and my mother had a falling out. It was personal and had nothing to do with the mortgage or any other financial reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However you do not know that she was not involved in Money Laundring and this sounds very much like that (hence the large amount of the fake mortgage). If you can make out a prima facie case for money laundering, you have a real chance of the court throwing the intire thing out.

In court you attack with anything and everything you think you can make a plausable arguement for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I know for a fact she has never been involved in anything such as that. When she gave the money she had just come into a large and I mean VERY LARGE settlement from her fathers estate. My family had helped her through the years while she had absolutely no money except SS. She had 5 kids under the age of 9 when her husband died and left her with nothing. This is why she gave the money. I know it's a lot of money and seems quite odd however it wasn't a drop in the bucket if you added up what my family had done for her through the years. This is personal and very emotional for my mom and for me also. I am trying to look at only the legality of it and make it work out for the right of it if possible.

As much as I want to win this case I don't want to say one thing that is not exactly true.!! The monetary loss can be re gained my word can not be!

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you KentWa. This is not the situation here though. It really is exactly what I said. As for why our "friend" is doing this now her and my mother had a falling out. It was personal and had nothing to do with the mortgage or any other financial reason.

I don't think you are a drug dealer, people are just getting frustrated with your story.

you don't really want advice but, here's some. stop referring to the mortgage as "pretend". Whatever the other parties were doing, that is you committing fraud. Signing a contract that you do not intend to fulfill is fraud. I am not saying that this broker or your mother that matter are innocent but telling anyone that you thought it was pretend is not a defense.

As far as being a minor goes, it doesn't mean much in this case. Saying that you were not competent to buy the home originally doesn't protect you from the mortgage you signed as an adult.

The value of real estate has changed dramatically since 02. It is clear that this is about the money whether or not you understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think you are a drug dealer, people are just getting frustrated with your story.

You seem to be the only one frustrated...

you don't really want advice but, here's some. stop referring to the mortgage as "pretend". Whatever the other parties were doing, that is you committing fraud. Signing a contract that you do not intend to fulfill is fraud. I am not saying that this broker or your mother that matter are innocent but telling anyone that you thought it was pretend is not a defense.

As far as being a minor goes, it doesn't mean much in this case. Saying that you were not competent to buy the home originally doesn't protect you from the mortgage you signed as an adult.

It does have something to do with it if since she claiming I agreed to pay her the money she gave me. (past consideration is no consideration btw)

The value of real estate has changed dramatically since 02. It is clear that this is about the money whether or not you understand it.

It doesn't matter how much the market has changed!

I understand it completely!!! Now you obviously don't understand my question and that's ok...

Is a mortgage where the consideration (175K) was never executed enforceable?

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't matter how much the market has changed!

I understand it completely!!! Now you obviously don't understand my question and that's ok...

Is a mortgage where the consideration (175K) was never executed enforceable?

when you wait 9 years to point out that you didn't receive the 175k then maybe yes, maybe no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
when you wait 9 years to point out that you didn't receive the 175k then maybe yes, maybe no.

lmao.....ok....I suppose this is based on your experience of working in a court house? May I ask what your job description is?

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
when you wait 9 years to point out that you didn't receive the 175k then maybe yes, maybe no.

I think this is what the Judge will ask you if you bring up "consideration". If there was any problem with consideration you would think it would have been brought up close to the contract date.

Might go so far as to say the consideration is implied since it wasn't brought up earlier.

I know when researching my own credit card information, I entered into a credit card contract when I was 17, therefore the contract is was not valid, but by continuing to make payments on a credit card after I was 18 the contract then became valid as it is implied by my payments/continued use of the credit card that I agreed to the card's terms.

I'm not saying this is the case here, but by going 8/9 years and not saying anything about consideration, the "consideration" could be viewed as valid. Granted you are not making payments to validate it but you are following the terms of the loan agreement for the most part (until the taxes weren't paid). Lack of action on your part might have limited your options.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not trying to be sarcastic or appear unappreciative of any one's input here....that being said......

When a minor enters into a contract it is not enforceable in a court of law,however if they act as if they are bound by the contract (implied by making payments) after reaching maturity that "ratifies" the contract.

I never had a contract when I was a minor. She is implying that I did by claiming the 50K was part of the consideration given for the mortgage.

All contracts have to have "consideration" each party has to give something.

You can't use "past consideration" in a new contract. You can modify a contract but if you create a new contract you have to have new "consideration" from both parties.

Unless there is something I'm missing here you just can't decide to say

"oh well I think this was for that and that was for this" like in the check written to an attorney for her late husbands estate.

If your bank went into court and told a judge that part of the money that shows as their consideration was a check made out to someone else wouldn't you think the judge would raise an eyebrow?

I am surprised that a few are more focused on what I may have done wrong instead of what the creditor has done wrong.

The law is the law!

I want to thank you all for your input. If anyone can show me where my thinking is wrong according to the law PLEASE do! That is what I'm looking for here. I am not the brightest crayon in the box (obviously lol) and may be seeing this all wrong. Maybes don't make it in the court room!!!!

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
a mortgage is loan. who or how was 175k supposed to be paid back?

the full price of the home does matter. why do you keep saying it doesn't? Having the balance paid with mystery $ won't work. 50k love gift is mysterious enough.

I think this situation needs to be made into a Lifetime movie! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea I know for a fact she has never been involved in anything such as that. When she gave the money she had just come into a large and I mean VERY LARGE settlement from her fathers estate. My family had helped her through the years while she had absolutely no money except SS. She had 5 kids under the age of 9 when her husband died and left her with nothing. This is why she gave the money. I know it's a lot of money and seems quite odd however it wasn't a drop in the bucket if you added up what my family had done for her through the years. This is personal and very emotional for my mom and for me also. I am trying to look at only the legality of it and make it work out for the right of it if possible.

Even more reason this needs to be a Lifetime movie!!!!

Sorry, don't mean to mock. But this is an intriguing story! I really think you should sell it to Lifetime! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you KentWa. This is not the situation here though. It really is exactly what I said. As for why our "friend" is doing this now her and my mother had a falling out. It was personal and had nothing to do with the mortgage or any other financial reason.

Not to dispute that, but, if what KentWa is saying is possibly true, do you think it's possible that the falling out may have been a cover for her to foreclose on the house? I mean, IF she was involved in money laundering, then she would need a good reason to foreclose now. And that $175,000 mortgage looks awfully suspicious, if she wasn't planning on getting the house back eventually.

I know you believe she gave you the money out of love, and it was repayment for the help you and your mom gave her. And I respect that. And it might be true. All I'm saying is that people aren't always what you think they are.

When I was your age I was a lot more trusting that I am now. As you go through life you realize that there are some people who are just very, very good liars and con artists - even people you trust, and who you think you know.

So I'm not saying that she's involved in money laundering. I'm just saying it's POSSIBLE, and that this might have been her plan from the start, and she used her friendship with you and your mom as a way to manipulate you. I'm only saying it's possible.

Just one more reason to go to the Attorney General's office and lay this out before them. At the very least, she seems to be a scam artist (as you yourself, agreed with, a few days ago), even if not a money launderer. So one way or another, you should take this to the authorities and let them look into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is a mortgage where the consideration (175K) was never executed enforceable?

You say the $175K was never executed. But, actually, it was.

If she goes to court and says she LOANED you $50K (her argument, even if you disagree), and that she required no payments, but that the entire amount would be due in 2018, then that's essentially $50K loaned at 20% interest for 16 years.

Now, I realize that your mortgage says "no interest." But she can argue that there is no interest on the $175K - that the $175K was just a lump sum amount that you agreed to pay her in exchange for borrowing the $50K for 16 years.

I'm not saying that that's what you agreed to. I'm just saying that that's what she could argue in court.

And, I have to say, on the face of the document, it seems that she would have a very good argument!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am surprised that a few are more focused on what I may have done wrong instead of what the creditor has done wrong.

The reason that people are focused on what you have done wrong is because we're trying to help you. If you can see the weaknesses of your defense, then you can see what needs to be done. If people here said, "You're right, you have nothing to worry about," then that wouldn't be helping you, would it?

We're not trying to pick on you. But if there are flaws in your perception, then it's better for you to realize them now than when you're in court, right? That's why we focus on where your weakest points might be - to try and help you fix them.

As for the legal arguments, bear in mind that most people who post here are not lawyers. If you feel that you're right and that the people giving you advice are wrong, then great. But it's better to be challenged than to be left without a defense. And when you go to court, it's not always a black or white issue. Oftentimes it's whether you can convince the judge of your point of view. So any weaknesses in your argument should be pointed out.

And speaking of going to court, have you had any success in finding a lawyer yet? I know you said you had talked to two of them the other day. Any progress with that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this situation needs to be made into a Lifetime movie! :lol:

LOL!!!! If she perfoms her end of the contract I will be delighted to perform mine. The contract is for 175K she did not give me a penny for THAT contract.

Let's forget that we were long time friend of the family and it was just my local bank.

I sign a mortgage for 175K. They never give me the 175K. (nonperformance)

8 yrs latter they foreclose and say "well you have a nonsecured line of credit and we are going to just add it to this mortgage contract"

Would they be able to add the nonsecured loan to a secured mortgage??

Would you fight that?

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
You say the $175K was never executed. But, actually, it was.

No it was not!

If she goes to court and says she LOANED you $50K (her argument, even if you disagree), and that she required no payments, but that the entire amount would be due in 2018, then that's essentially $50K loaned at 20% interest for 16 years.

She can "say" anything she wants to.....but that contract says differently. Now, I realize that your mortgage says "no interest." But she can argue that there is no interest on the $175K - that the $175K was just a lump sum amount that you agreed to pay her in exchange for borrowing the $50K for 16 years.

And I can "say" no I did not agree to that. And the contract says its for the 175K. She says one thing I say another. What does the contract say?

I'm not saying that that's what you agreed to. I'm just saying that that's what she could argue in court.

And, I have to say, on the face of the document, it seems that she would have a very good argument!

Your wrong IMOP....I absolutely understand why it "appears" like that would be the fact. But the truth is the "four corners" of the contract is what the law is.

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you have to know is this:

A court will not focus on what is ethically right or wrong, nor will it focus on what is morally right or wrong, even though our law is supposed to support moral and ethical issues> A court will make determination on what is LEGALLY right or wrong.

What YOU think is right may not always be what is legally right. You need to read up on your state laws and try to find some cases that are just like yours or somewhat close. The fastest way to convince a court is show them case law from what higher courts have decided.

The problem arises that while you may have signed a contract when you were a minor, the contract you signed when you turned 18 will negate that contract.

You could use as an argument that she is doing this out of spite due to the falling out of a friend ship. It will not win the case for you but it will establish some facts to the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing you have to know is this:

A court will not focus on what is ethically right or wrong, nor will it focus on what is morally right or wrong, even though our law is supposed to support moral and ethical issues> A court will make determination on what is LEGALLY right or wrong.

What YOU think is right may not always be what is legally right. You need to read up on your state laws and try to find some cases that are just like yours or somewhat close. The fastest way to convince a court is show them case law from what higher courts have decided.

The problem arises that while you may have signed a contract when you were a minor, the contract you signed when you turned 18 will negate that contract.

You could use as an argument that she is doing this out of spite due to the falling out of a friend ship. It will not win the case for you but it will establish some facts to the court.

BINGO!!! Thank you , you are absolutely right!

Clarification here though. I NEVER signed or ORALY agreeded to pay for the money given to me as a mnior. It is in no written form any where that I did.

But just like the court will not do what they think is right for me they (should) not do what they think is right for her. They have to look at the law. This is a legal contract for sure. No doubt about it. But is it enforceable? I say no according to my research. And trust me I have researched the contract law this year. Although it is hard to see the forest for the tress here because she gave me what seems as such a large amout of money (and to me it is!!) The contract I signed has no mention of the origina gift (loan).

So I ask again, if this was not a family friend and was a bank that I had a unsecured loan (gift) and a mortgage can they put the unsecured loan (gift) on my secured loan just because they want to? I say no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing you need to understand about courts. Court will not do what is best for either side, the only way you will get a court to do any thing is by MOTIONING the court. Do not ever expect the judge to do what is right even if he knows it is right. If you do not object or motion the court, the court will proceed as if nothing happened..

I object to everything the other side does or says, if I do not object the court will act is if I either do not know or do not care, or I agree.

What do attorneys do in court? the Argue their side. A court is a tribunal with a referee for two parties to argue it out legally. If you do not argue your side then the other side will be victorious.

Edited by BTO429
Link to post
Share on other sites
What was this pretend mortgage thing?

It is the contract I signed knowing I would not get the 175K that was on the contract. Being told it was not enforceable. (pretend) in order to protect the property from lawsuits. And unless I'm missing someting BIG it's not because she did not perform her side of the contract (175K) There is no reference to the money given one and a half years earlier any where.

However in her Interrogatories she shows that money along with various checks to various people. One being to a business that I am in no way associated with (my mother did work with the business) one to my uncle, one to an attorney, and where it says "for" at the bottom of the check on that one it clearly says its for her late husbands estate!! lol....if that's legal I give up!

If there is some law that I have yet to see that says that then can you imagine what the banks would do? We would have no protection under the law.

I am certain its not enforceable but you are correct it has to be argued and I don't intend to be the one argueing it! Unless I can't get an attorney to. I have spoken with several this week and one is doing researching the law now. I offered to send my research to cut my cost but he passed lol.

Although it may be morally right or ethical for me to pay her the money she gave me I can see no way legally she can claim it on the secured instrument.

Edited by searching
Link to post
Share on other sites
It is the contract I signed knowing I would not get the 175K that was on the contract. Being told it was not enforceable. (pretend) in order to protect the property from lawsuits. And unless I'm missing someting BIG it's not because she did not perform her side of the contract (175K) There is no reference to the money given one and a half years earlier any where.

However in her Interrogatories she shows that money along with various checks to various people. One being to a business that I am in no way associated with (my mother did work with the business) one to my uncle, one to an attorney, and where it says "for" at the bottom of the check on that one it clearly says its for her late husbands estate!! lol....if that's legal I give up!

If there is some law that I have yet to see that says that then can you imagine what the banks would do? We would have no protection under the law.

I am certain its not enforceable but you are correct it has to be argued and I don't intend to be the one argueing it! Unless I can't get an attorney to. I have spoken with several this week and one is doing researching the law now. I offered to send my research to cut my cost but he passed lol.

Although it may be morally right or ethical for me to pay her the money she gave me I can see no way legally she can claim it on the secured instrument.

I believe that she can only collect money that was documented to be paid out. and it can not be some random interest rate. It would be on the loan documents And each so called payment would be a separate argument. The impression you gave before was that it was a private mortgage. if this was done at a local bank, then there should be clear record of the disbursement and the loan papers that you can request. So has anyone used the term reverse mortgage?

Edited by cinnamngrl
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.