tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.comments2024-03-05T18:22:27.697-05:00Douglas Whaleydglswhaley@aol.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comBlogger620125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-51629144725836002772020-02-28T15:04:13.045-05:002020-02-28T15:04:13.045-05:00I never did see the copy of the script. If anyone...I never did see the copy of the script. If anyone has it please forward it to me.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-11191559766311754662018-05-18T14:16:40.129-04:002018-05-18T14:16:40.129-04:00Great post, Doug! Now, I want to find more about ...Great post, Doug! Now, I want to find more about the Turkey Men!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08386348388779899921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-25172520157379170852018-05-06T00:08:41.207-04:002018-05-06T00:08:41.207-04:00Dear Prof. Whaley: You are the best law school te...Dear Prof. Whaley: You are the best law school teacher I never actually had. In 1987, I was a poor first year law student in California and was struggling with contracts class. Because flunking out was not an option, in desperation, and with only a week before final exams, I spent my last $20 or so on a set of 4 cassette tapes where you lectured about contracts. I literally went into seclusion for a couple of days and wrote down everything you said on those tapes. I listened to the tapes over and over while driving my car, doing the dishes, etc. until you subliminally infused my brain with the basics of contracts law. <br /><br />I ended up not only passing that contracts class with a respectable grade, but also continued to review the tapes after graduation when it came time for the bar exams (I am licensed in 3 different jurisdictions). Your straightforward style of teaching cleared the heavy fog in my brain, and I learned more about contracts from that $20 investment than I ever learned in the overpriced law school classroom. <br /><br />Thank you for helping me and all of your other students, both in your classroom and far away.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-17344897768559371962018-05-02T15:46:49.996-04:002018-05-02T15:46:49.996-04:00New York has never adopted the UCC section describ...New York has never adopted the UCC section described in this blog post, and it does allow the payee to cash a check with all rights reserved and avoid the settlement of the dispute.<br />dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-44891219680512427382018-05-02T11:16:38.932-04:002018-05-02T11:16:38.932-04:00Hi Professor,
Great article--very helpful for bo...Hi Professor, <br /><br />Great article--very helpful for both consumers (and law students like me). <br /><br />You kind of mentioned this in the article, but just wanted to make sure it was clear. The rules vary significantly by the state. Specifically in NY, my understanding of the law, is that based on the decision of a trial-court in 2015, that if a creditor disputes a partial settlement before or "contemporaneously" to cashing the check, then it is not an accord and satisfaction.<br /><br />Here is the case. Do you share this interpretation? <br /> <br />https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2017/2017-ny-slip-op-50390-u.html<br /><br />Thanks, <br />Dash Dashnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-17114152232998715732018-03-21T22:31:40.606-04:002018-03-21T22:31:40.606-04:00Thank you for clarifying that Mr. Whaley. It is tr...Thank you for clarifying that Mr. Whaley. It is truly appreciated.IZRAULhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02312593261493304150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-58882715702268103292018-02-12T16:58:34.425-05:002018-02-12T16:58:34.425-05:00As for the question above about certain clauses in...As for the question above about certain clauses in the note destroying negotiability, the first two (waiver and protecting the collateral) do not have any effect since UCC section 3-104(3) clearly allows them. The last one about appearing in court to defend might very well destroy negotiability but some research would be necessary to be sure.<br />dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-86908918201193290872018-02-12T16:52:15.332-05:002018-02-12T16:52:15.332-05:00Article 8 has to do with stocks and bonds, and not...Article 8 has to do with stocks and bonds, and not promissory notes or mortgage assignments.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-52404926392938007422018-02-12T16:48:41.141-05:002018-02-12T16:48:41.141-05:00Yes it does, but it has nothing to do with missing...Yes it does, but it has nothing to do with missing promissory notes or the wrong person trying to enforce the debt obligation without possession of the note.<br />dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-67824135359429916282018-02-12T16:46:08.631-05:002018-02-12T16:46:08.631-05:00Payments made reduce the debt owed and a later buy...Payments made reduce the debt owed and a later buyer of the debt has no right to the original amount. If the interest rate has changed and the debt increased because of that, that is an evil with having an adjustable rate mortgage, a risk the borrower was, in theory, willing to take.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-31481050624350318772018-02-12T16:39:09.985-05:002018-02-12T16:39:09.985-05:00Also it is true that Article 3 governs issues invo...Also it is true that Article 3 governs issues involving the promissory note, and Article 9 says this distinctly. But the note can be sold into the hands of a later party and that party, if qualifying under Article 3 rules, can indeed be a holder in due course, and thus free of defenses such as fraud or even payment to another party made by mistake. But such a holder must actually have the original note and be unaware of problems with it at the time of its acquisition. The policy here is to protect later innocent purchasers of the note who act in good faith.<br />dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-11837534171089860472018-02-12T16:34:31.427-05:002018-02-12T16:34:31.427-05:00You're right that the current state of things ...You're right that the current state of things is a mess, a point I made in the article. The lenders seem to think that it is the assignment of the mortgage that is crucial, hence MERS was created to take care of that. In the law it is possession of the promissory note that is crucial, and the banks and lawyers seem to have forgotten that, as the article above also indicates. As for the issue of the blank contract, that is simply breach of contract. Each of the parties to the loan contract should get a copy signed by both parties at the closing or shortly thereafter. If that is not forthcoming it's time to make threats of nonpayment until the signed contract is produced.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-84549658583615147822018-02-09T06:47:27.700-05:002018-02-09T06:47:27.700-05:00So the Promissory Note is negotiable if "the ...So the Promissory Note is negotiable if "the promise or order doesn't require any other “undertaking or instruction by the person promising or ordering payment to do any act in addition to the payment of money."<br /><br />Do any of the following qualify as additional orders that would affect negotiability? <br /><br />"Borrower shall waive the rights or presentment and notice of dishonor" <br /><br />"Borrower shall Occupy, Preserve, Maintain and Protect the Property" <br /><br />"Borrower shall, appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to <br />affect the Property or any portion thereof...." Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-15104428925809561702018-02-02T20:44:04.442-05:002018-02-02T20:44:04.442-05:00Sold or securitized? I think once it's securit...Sold or securitized? I think once it's securitized, Article 8 governs. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-64065265330286457422018-02-02T20:40:50.834-05:002018-02-02T20:40:50.834-05:00U.C.C. 3-420 addresses conversion of an instrument...U.C.C. 3-420 addresses conversion of an instrument.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-83779566256515029922018-02-02T20:36:02.457-05:002018-02-02T20:36:02.457-05:00So if I sell my car to someone for $5,000 @ $500 a...So if I sell my car to someone for $5,000 @ $500 a month w/ adjustable rate interest, I can collect 1/2 ($2,500) then sell the title to someone else for $5,000 & make $7,500. <br /><br />Then the next person can raise the interest and double his money by selling the title.<br /><br />And if the person defaults after paying more than $5000, he loses both money and car, because the debt needs to be repaid. <br /><br />Even though the original owner made more than $5000 and the 2nd owner made more than $5000. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-5155431463883927872018-02-01T23:53:44.119-05:002018-02-01T23:53:44.119-05:00Forgive me if you've gone over this above, but...Forgive me if you've gone over this above, but if I understand it right, the UCC is commercial code, and as such, applies to commercial transactions. <br /><br />At the time a borrower signs the note, the deal is governed by Article 3, not 9, correct? <br /><br />If so, is it because transactions under Article 9 are considered cash proceeds?<br /><br />The reason I ask is because these laws were made in assuming the transactions were done in the normal & lawful manners for which they were intended. <br /><br />But that isn't the case today, and applying normal law to cases riddled with problems creates bigger problems. <br /><br />It's no longer safe to assume honest and fair dealings. A holder in due course must be an owner by purchase, or value given in good faith 1-201 (19). <br /><br />Also, honesty and fair dealings is required. If notice is given to a holder that problems exist with the instrument, then that's a problem.<br /><br />I'm not sure why basic contract law doesn't carry any weight when it comes to these mortgage cases, but I have a pretty good idea. IZRAULhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02312593261493304150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-78389343446715981892018-02-01T19:48:46.572-05:002018-02-01T19:48:46.572-05:00Thank you. I'm just trying to understand why, ...Thank you. I'm just trying to understand why, in my mind, it seems conflicting, or rather contradictory, to the general principles of basic contract law.<br /><br />There are basic, well established requirements for valid contracts. Such as, there must be be 2 or more parties for an agreement to be valid, because 1 cannot contract with themselves. <br /><br />Also, the signatures of all parties are required. And, correct if I'm wrong, one has the right to know with whom they are dealing. Otherwise there is no disclosure, correct? <br /><br />In the traditions of basic contract law 101, these simple requirements, for the purpose of validity, make perfect sense, because they're safeguards meant to assure fairness and protection of all parties equally. <br /><br />The UCC seems to disrupt that harmony, by creating loopholes that allow certain parties to gain superior positions and skirt the basic protections against unfair dealings, while affording themselves those protections.<br /><br />In contracting with banks for loans, covenants or otherwise, none of these basic requirements are being met. <br /><br />I understand how complicating simple things can make sense to lawyers, but for average reasonable persons, there's an imbalance in fairness. Not to mention the dealings with professionals who possess superior knowledge. <br /><br />The fact borrowers never receive copies of the actual executed closing documents should be of concern in the eyes of the law. <br /><br />Simply, it leaves the door wide open for fraud and creates uncertainty in regards to the original terms of agreements. <br /><br />Signatures can easily be added to documents that contain different terms without borrowers ever knowing it. And they have nothing to compare it with. <br /><br />They get copies of the alleged originals in blank, days or even weeks later. And I think we can all agree, it's a shady practice that serves no real purpose, other than to afford the ability to commit fraud.<br /><br />The same goes for withholding creditor/principle identities. Everyone has the right to know with whom they are dealing. <br /><br />And if mortgages are 2 party contracts (3 party for Deeds of Trust), then how can they be valid with only 1 signature? What other multi-party contracts are deemed valid when signed by only 1 party? <br /><br />In my mind, that question brings me to the original regarding principles. It only makes sense in the context of fraud, and to protect them from liability for the same. <br /><br />That's what I believe the lawyer was trying to convey in the letter I read concerning MERS, here. https://deadlyclear.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/110398mers1stamtitle.pdf<br /><br />When we look to the heart of contract law, without any of the extra legal word wizardry of the UCC, the only real goal is "Fair Dealings." <br /><br />But that's not where we're at with the agreements today. To afford present day Corporations more rights and protections than consumers and more flexibility and leniency in contracting, not only defies logic and common sense, but contravenes the "doctrine of absurdity" and "fair dealing." <br /><br />IZRAULhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02312593261493304150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-45569185063856039402018-02-01T11:34:51.783-05:002018-02-01T11:34:51.783-05:00This is true. Section 9-503(d) specifically allow...This is true. Section 9-503(d) specifically allows the secured party to be a representative of the real creditor without so indicating in any way.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-5470075687386589872018-01-29T08:57:47.462-05:002018-01-29T08:57:47.462-05:00Hello Mr. Whaley. I hope all is going well with yo...Hello Mr. Whaley. I hope all is going well with you. I have a question.<br /><br />I was reading a letter from 1998 concerning MERS, and in the reply to a question an attorney stated...<br /><br />"There is no requirement under the UCC that the secured party identified in the security instrument be a principal rather than an agent." <br /><br />Is this true or is it implied in some round about language within in code?<br /><br />Thank you.IZRAULhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02312593261493304150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-74449584574748341412018-01-03T04:24:19.351-05:002018-01-03T04:24:19.351-05:00All I remember about graduating is the huge party ...All I remember about graduating is the huge party and fun we had in an <a href="https://eventup.com/" rel="nofollow">event venue</a> in NY. It was a really crazy party and afterwards I decided to join in with my father's business. College was the best time of my life. I made so many friends for life, and unforgettable memories. Cheers to 2018!Drew Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14187808483145982017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-56186043187822474602017-12-16T11:43:03.932-05:002017-12-16T11:43:03.932-05:00It is not published, but was complied by my sister...It is not published, but was complied by my sister, Mary Elizabeth Colpitts.dglswhaley@aol.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06014306127062171178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-13391180709390603182017-12-14T01:52:03.894-05:002017-12-14T01:52:03.894-05:00Hi! Is this a published book, or homemade?
I am al...Hi! Is this a published book, or homemade?<br />I am also a Whaley and found a book by Rev Samuel Whaley, but this book is new to me.Wormholerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09629550751543292180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-47668945774699787362017-12-08T10:14:13.602-05:002017-12-08T10:14:13.602-05:00President Donald Trump (peace be upon him) is turn...President Donald Trump (peace be upon him) is turning out to be the single greatest leader of our modern era. It's a good thing that you coastal elite weenies didn't get your Hitlery.IGnatius T Foobarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15664986058467587907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7844434945868494835.post-55522898274059505412017-11-29T04:59:05.875-05:002017-11-29T04:59:05.875-05:00Hey, you have shared such a brilliant post on how ...Hey, you have shared such a brilliant post on how to pass the <a href="https://testmaxprep.com/bar-exam" rel="nofollow">Bar Exam</a>. I am really very thankful to you for sharing this post because at this moment I was in great need of these tips. Will be taking this test in next year so will definitely consider these tips.<br />liamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01670113230935477351noreply@blogger.com