Verification of Foreclosure Complaint: Is a Foreclosure Plaintiff “likely” to prevail merely by filing suit?


Is a Foreclosure Plaintiff “likely” to prevail merely by filing suit?

The foreclosure world is abuzz this week on the heels of Friday’s decision from Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal in Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Prevratil, where the Second District ruled that Deutsche Bank could satisfy its obligation to verify the foreclosure complaint under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.110(b) by having its servicer and attorney-in-fact, Select Portfolio Services, sign the verification.  While some (plaintiffs’ attorneys) would argue this decision clarifies the question of who can verify a foreclosure complaint, I think the decision poses more questions than it answers.

For instance, the Second District explains at length that SPS was authorized to verify for Deutsche Bank because a written Power of Attorney from Deutsche Bank, which POA was filed in the case, authorized such.  For me, that just begs the question – can an attorney-in-fact verify for the Plaintiff under Rule 1.110(b) only when the power of attorney is filed?  The Prevratil decision does not answer that question.  Likewise, the Second District does not explain whether a servicer could verify outside the confines of an attorney-in-fact relationship.  Suffice it to say that until these questions are answered on the appellate court level, the arguments will continue in lower courts throughout Florida.

These issues aside, what really struck me about the Prevratil decision was one sentence:

If Deutsche Bank filed the Amended Complaint as directed by the trial court, it likely would obtain a foreclosure judgment. 

Think about that sentence for a minute.  And look at the opinion.  Do you notice how that statement is unsupported by any legal citations or facts?  Yes, incredibly, the Second District has concluded a foreclosure plaintiff is “likely” to prevail merely by filing a lawsuit.  No factual explanation.  No legal citations.  Just “likely” to win.

Be sure to check out the rest here…


12 Responses to “Verification of Foreclosure Complaint: Is a Foreclosure Plaintiff “likely” to prevail merely by filing suit?”
  1. Hillary says:

    I really didn’ t know that a corporation could give POA. I though they had to file an amendment. A person can give POA, but not a corporation.

  2. Mike Drouin says:

    I’m in Federal Court ,District of NH and I ‘m being ” Railroaded !! ” I have complaints into the Justice Department and have paid nearly thirty grand in Lawyer’s fees . I asked my Lawyer to withdraw because he wanted us to concede when I’m being told by a forensic Foreclosure expert that they are using documents ( PSA ) that are fraudulent in nature , and thats beside the assignment of mortgage by Sand Canyon that was recorded in the land record that violates the PSA !?!? I even had a buyer for my house two years ago and because of the assignment of mortgage being slanderous to the Title of our home , I couldn’t sell the house !?!? I even have a signed and notorized statement from the buyer . I hope all the facts come out on this one , it will definetly make you shake your head and disgust you…….

  3. robert wade says:

    it seems that the proper paper must be prior to a foreclousure. The filiing of a suit must be before the foreclosure begins if a 3rd party is involved (usually does) to hold up the standing in court to foreclosing on home PSA to have validity.

  4. Emilia Fariday says:

    The true issue is a lack of knowledge. You can claim your own property bu acknolwledging your deed sitting in a file somewhere collecting dust. You will bypass FRAUDULENT mortgages and land taxes and become the true owner of the property. Stop pointing the finger about who is supposed to do what for you, when you do it yourself, you will find that y ou yeild the power to stop the entire system. ACKNOWLEDGE is one letter away from LACKNOWLEDGE. And you currently lack. Get in on the ” ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR DEED” game and stop the siezures. If you have a mortgage you are a TENANT. Wake up folks, the shit is in plain sight!

  5. bobbi swann says:

    My name is not Hey Honey. It’s Bobbi Swann and I am not afraid of disclosing my name on any site! As far as ‘intact’ so I added a space! Editing my posting does not change the facts, NO NAME. And if you read the comments from the entire post you would be able to define and relate on what I was posting in reference. It sometimes pays to read.

  6. Bobbi Swann says:

    Noting will be done and nothing will change until we face the fact that we have to stand up and fight, protest and take back our constitutional rights (those that are still left in tact before Obama wipes them ALL out). Too many of you people blinded by the pretty face and speeches of Obama and oh yeah, his wonderful promises of greatness! Blah, blah, blah…Let me ask you all a question? How many of you know that both Barack & Michelle BOTH lost their licenses to practice law? Do you know HOW hard it is to lose your license? And Michelle just gave hers up instead of being forced. What kind of person did you all elect to run this country? A country of laws and rules and regulations that even he can’t practice….Unfortunately, we are now reaping the woes of those who sat with blinders like the 3 monkeys…hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. These monsters have been able to get away with all their deeds against the American homeowner’s because of the ignorance of voters. Now it’s coming back to haunt those who voted this man in power, while the rest of us trying to sweep up the mess.

    • no names, please says:

      Hey, honey, you don’t even know how to spell intact or know that the plural of homeowners doesn’t have an apostrophe, so why should we believe anything YOU say.
      This is a bi-partisan situation; this is bi-partisan fraud.
      All I know is that if this is bad, REPUBLICAN rule would have been WORSE. And, it’s pretty damn bad.

    • vince faulkner says:

      Your statement about both the President and First Lady losing their license to practice law is incorrect and irresponsible. Please check the facts before making claims.

      • BOBBI SWANN says:

        The Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission ( lists President Obama’s registration status as “voluntarily retired.” It lists Michelle Obama’s status as “voluntarily inactive.” @ Vince Faulkner can spin the word “voluntarily” as much as you want. For an annual fee of less than $300 to keep the license(s) active ???…..some electric bills are more than that. As far as snopes, fastcheck, etc. I personally don’t trust any of them. And if you think that conspiracies or ponzi schemes don’t exist, why do you post on this site? Enough of this discussion & waste of my time on Obama. He’s on his last term and that’s my only consolation.

    • robert wade says:

      you keep sweeping and I’ll hold the dust pan and maybe, maybe just maybe the clean up job will be accomplished. Robert Wade Pro Se Litigant…………………

  7. Caren says:

    Sorry – its at the County level !For Instance – We actually have Sheriffs strongarming homeowners out with illegal writs and foreclosure vultures coming in for the scraps as bidders on our home and properties
    Obama has no clue!
    This country is being overrun by the criminals in the court and bank systems (broad sweep) hopefully its over soon with the arrival of OPPT and they seem to have made a difference So if the Government -Corporationis are truly foreclosed on -They should be all shut down
    Why are they still there?

Leave a Reply