A previous story mentioned Neighborhood Stabilization funds from HUD coming to Tampa. These funds are used to buy properties in order to make needed repairs/maintenance to existing structures or demolish existing structures and replace them with new-builds, thus improving the neighborhood, increasing affordable housing and reducing crime. $8-million of these funds will be going to Hillsborough County and $4.7-million to Pinellas County. The city of Tampa will get $4.7-million. Saint Petersburg is slated for $3.7-million. The main aim for the funds is supposed to be foreclosed properties and the money is considered emergency assistance. The city of Clearwater has already committed to a similar type of project in the East Gateway neighborhood using its own funds.
More information has come out about the situation at GMAC. It was reported earlier that they had stopped evictions and sales of all foreclosed properties in 23 states including Florida. No real reasons were given for the action in the first statement. The company now says that technical errors initiated the action but that no underlying problems exist for the affected foreclosures. Affidavits supporting evictions and sales contained information company employees did not personally know to be true. Law firms sending GMAC the affidavits were relied upon. The affidavits were also sometimes signed without a notary being present. This is mortgage fraud and more than a few foreclosures have been dismissed because of similar actions by other firms, including right here in Florida. It will be interesting to see how GMAC attempts to extricate itself from this situation without facing legal prosecution. Seems like something the Florida Attorney General should be checking into.
Insurance companies are still, or even more so, trying to get out of paying every homeowner’s claim possible. This issue is even stickier concerning sinkhole insurance which is now separate from most homeowners insurance policies. The latest argument from insurers is sinkhole insurance only covers structural damage to the house as determined by an engineering firm. In other words, they are saying that if the house is not damaged enough to be in danger of collapsing they shouldn’t have to pay for repairs. The law actually seems to call for stabilizing both the land and the structure and does not seem to require structural damage to the house itself for claim payment. There is not yet much legal precedence in this area but at least a few cases have been decided in favor of homeowners.
Comments