buckeyegoingtotx,
Thanks for the additional information and your patience in allowing me
adequate time to respond to the clarifying questions.
If I have it correctly you ask for the following:
(from clarifying questioned 9 November 2004, 3:31 PST)
1. How does section 1321 (specifically 1321.57 (G)(1)) relate to your
First Mortgage, when it is headed alternately (you say ?Small Loans:
Second Mortgage?)?
2. Do the same laws apply to Second Mortgages as first Mortgages?
3. Can a source be cited?
4. If 2. is valid doesn?t that means (G)(2) applies and (as the loan
is to be cleared from the sale of the security) no prepayment fee can
be charged?
(from clarifying question 10 November 2004. 3:39 PST)
5. My prepayment clause is similar but not the same, as the one on the
reference site. Is something amiss?
Any legislative tool has its own history. It is written once, then
revisited periodically, with parts amended, repealed or reemphasised,
to cover the different situations that arise over time, reflecting an
ever changing society. The Ohio Revised Code was written in 1918 to
implement the ?Ohio Small Loan Act? (and others) with the ?Ohio
Mortgage Loan Act? added in 1965. The intention here was to allow
?non-depository? financial institutions to enter the mortgage market,
making more funds available for Ohioan housing. Until then
institutions regulated federally (depository financial institutions),
had been the main source of funds.
So in viewing the legislation, the term ?Second Mortgage? needs to be
read as ?Second Mortgage Lenders? or those regulated by the State of
Ohio.
See here:
http://www.com.state.oh.us/dfi/cfhist.htm#hist
Next the ?Mortgage Loan Act? is located in the revised code, in
Section 1321.51 to 1321.60.
See here:
http://www.com.state.oh.us/dfi/revcodes.htm
So my comments to the first four questions are:
1. Section 1321 is not relevant, Section 1321.57 is.
2. Use of ?Second Mortgages? should be understood to mean ?Second
Mortgage Lenders?.
(Note- To a lender a Second Mortgages value relies on sufficient
equity being left in a property after taking into account the First
Mortgage. The execution of document is complicated by the involvement
of another party, with the borrower facing added fees for the higher
complexity of the matter, in addition to higher interest rates
reflecting the risk and purpose of the loan. To my knowledge the law
relating to First/Second Mortgages is basically the same, in that
property supports a loan and can ultimately be claimed if the borrower
fails to meet their commitments. The laws originated from
statue/courts. For a general article see here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/mortgages.html
For state statue see here (again):
http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/oh/lpExt.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=PORC
search field:1311.14)
3. Not applicable (due to answer 1&2).
4. As I said before ?isn?t legislation just wonderful to read (not)?.
I maintain that 1321.57 (G)(1) applies because reading it in
combination with (G)(2) the lender has an option of applying either.
As you point out (G)(2) can?t be applied (because your property will
clear the loan) so they fall back on (G)(1) and can charge 1% of the
original principle.
The site referred to in the post of the 10 November 2004, 4:02 PST has
been looked at (and in combination with reading the wording of the
prepayment clause) is of concern, obviously because of the 6% fee
mentioned.
As a high degree of care should be taken in the preparation of loan
documents (in my locale, such a error would void the section entirely,
with a very outside possibility of interest being repayable by the
institution for the term over which it has been in existence) I must
raise with you a possibility that your loan is governed by regulations
not so far commented on. To set both our minds at rest, please further
look at your loan documentation, as a clause should be on it,clearly
identifying how the loan is regulated.
Some comfort can be taken from the fact that ?Decision One? (thanks
again for the further details) has been checked and at the time of
your loan, were licensed as out-of-state ?Second Mortgage (yes that
term again) lenders. This means to me the lenders ?Inverdale Mortgage
Corporation? (still haven?t found anything on them) and latter
assigned owners, Household Financial Services (HSBC etc) are bound by
the fees as commented on.
See here: https://www.d1online.com/d1/LicensingDisclosure.jst
Licence numbers SM 5662,5726,8618 checked against the State of Ohio
Commerce Department records and exists (drew a blank on SM 5726) see
here:
https://www.com.state.oh.us/dfi/fiin_apps/license/default.aspx?vType=SM
So for question 5. things look OK, but please settle the governance
issue via documentation then institution and if the loan document is
found to be incorrect this should be added to the list of things, that
may reduce the prepayment fee.
Finally a handy reference point (to have ready) may be the complaints
section of the Department. They point out that you need to try and
talk to the holder of your loan first, but they are willing to act as
a go between when needed (from researching these comments, it is
apparent the Department has taken a strong stand against institutions
not complying with their duties). See here:
http://www.com.state.oh.us/dfi/ccnondep.htm
Kind regards
gfmaster |