[Dec 15 2019] Foreclosure Saga - http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=FBTCV196091825S

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

Will DSP file his bankruptcy before MidFirst Bank gets their hands on his WAkhando?

  • Yes

    Votes: 112 51.9%
  • No

    Votes: 104 48.1%

  • Total voters
    216
I would be willing to bet a small amount of money that his parents got a family friend to negotiate the short sale on Phil's behalf or had a family friend working at the bank they could talk to for him. Possibly even the CT tax guy showed up and gave them the sob story of how he fucked phil's life up by accident
If they had such a friend why wouldn't they have put him or her in play before this point. Foreclosure is the endgame.
How do we know he's not just lying? Assuming Phil posted this, of course.
It's in the real estate listing.
 
That parking lot sure is nicely plowed. Wasn't one of his huge complaints that he had to shovel snow just to get to his car?

I know real estate photos always tell the most attractive story but I've never heard of a HOA that wouldn't plow when snow fell. Just another in the endless list of things Phil lies about for no reason.
You need to know how to decipher Phil's pignosis speak to get the full story.

He hates snow. The condos parking was crappy and didn't have covered carports. Whenever it snowed, his car would be snowed in and undrivable. Nobody came around to clear off the snow.

At face value this reads like the condo association didn't plow the parking lot. Look deeper. If he parked under a covered carport he wouldn't be snowed in and he could drive. Aha! His complaint wasn't that the parking lot wasn't getting cleared of snow, his complaint was the snow plow guys didn't wipe the snow off Phil's car. This is the solution.
 
You need to know how to decipher Phil's pignosis speak to get the full story.

He hates snow. The condos parking was crappy and didn't have covered carports. Whenever it snowed, his car would be snowed in and undrivable. Nobody came around to clear off the snow.

At face value this reads like the condo association didn't plow the parking lot. Look deeper. If he parked under a covered carport he wouldn't be snowed in and he could drive. Aha! His complaint wasn't that the parking lot wasn't getting cleared of snow, his complaint was the snow plow guys didn't wipe the snow off Phil's car. This is the solution.
More food for thought:

Screenshot_20191227-145103.png


An attached garage isn't something that just happens. We've had a kiwi actually walk the site, have we not? Is this not accurate?
 
More food for thought:

View attachment 1069716

An attached garage isn't something that just happens. We've had a kiwi actually walk the site, have we not? Is this not accurate?
Those condos do not have garages. You can go check it out using Google maps. You are entitled to two parking spaces. The garage thing must just be incorrect information.
 
Seems likely this is the first step to the lender trying to recover their money. They'd do the short sale to collect whatever they can and be rid of the property itself. Then they come after Phil for the difference (I hope).

My understanding of short sale is "take the house, get whatever you can for it, and our business is done". Is there a different version of this that can play out?
 
My understanding of short sale is "take the house, get whatever you can for it, and our business is done". Is there a different version of this that can play out?
Yeah the bank can take the house away from you, get whatever they can for it, and sue you for the rest if they think it's worth their time. It's called foreclosure.
 
Yeah the bank can take the house away from you, get whatever they can for it, and sue you for the rest if they think it's worth their time. It's called foreclosure.

Ah, so while the listing says "short sale" , there's nothing in it that describes the bank's intentions on proceeding past unloading the condo. Got it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haunter
Ah, so while the listing says "short sale" , there's nothing in it that describes the bank's intentions on proceeding past unloading the condo. Got it
Like I said it only says short sale because it has said short sale since he listed it in 2017.

The bank has not listed the condo for sale. If you clicked on the text "pre-foreclosure" you'd see that it explicitly says that.

1577481956507.png
 
Ah, so while the listing says "short sale" , there's nothing in it that describes the bank's intentions on proceeding past unloading the condo. Got it

After the short sale, they can sue for what is called a deficiency judgment for the outstanding balance of the mortgage. They don't just automatically get it, though, and some states prohibit the practice. Connecticut is not one of those states, though, and they can pursue him. Once they get it, it is a judgment like any other. Unlike the original mortgage, it is not secured, although it can be used, after domesticating it in Washington state, to file a lien against his property there, which is a secured interest.

Or they can attempt to garnish other sources of income or assets he has, if they feel that's worth their trouble.
 
Unlike the original mortgage, it is not secured, although it can be used, after domesticating it in Washington state, to file a lien against his property there, which is a secured interest.
Question: Does the homestead exemption affect a lien if he doesn't declare bankruptcy? e.g. in the theoretical situation where the condo value tanks and he sells it in 2050 for like $50K after paying it off can the lien holder come in and be like "lolnope that's my money"?
 
I'm not good with legalese but it at the very least says that Phil is being taken to court over not paying for the Khando in Connecticut. File date was late November and last update was the 6th so this is a relatively new occurrence that is still going on.

I wonder though if someone who knows the law better can clarify more. I'm very curious about the motions section as I imagine it could tell us a lot more.
will something happen or will be a big nothing like with cwc court cases?
 
You need to know how to decipher Phil's pignosis speak to get the full story.

He hates snow. The condos parking was crappy and didn't have covered carports. Whenever it snowed, his car would be snowed in and undrivable. Nobody came around to clear off the snow.

At face value this reads like the condo association didn't plow the parking lot. Look deeper. If he parked under a covered carport he wouldn't be snowed in and he could drive. Aha! His complaint wasn't that the parking lot wasn't getting cleared of snow, his complaint was the snow plow guys didn't wipe the snow off Phil's car. This is the solution.
The snow Phil was always complaining about having to shovel is the few shovelfuls of snow in a thin strip in the parking space itself directly next to his car. In a heavy snowstorm this will be like 10 shovelfuls of snow, in an average snowfall this would be 3 shovelfuls of snow. This is what was too difficult for Phil's back that we heard a traumatized Phil describe as "being snowed-in for days and days". Literally 15 seconds of work where all you do is brace the shovel and let your body weight push it forwards as you slowly walk. Of course this is the same guy who unironically described a 12-pack of soda cans as "Oh wow, that was super heavy!"
 
Question: Does the homestead exemption affect a lien if he doesn't declare bankruptcy? e.g. in the theoretical situation where the condo value tanks and he sells it in 2050 for like $50K after paying it off can the lien holder come in and be like "lolnope that's my money"?

Any sale can only be accomplished by satisfying the lien. That's if DSP dies or whatever, too. It runs with the property. There are ways of avoiding it in a bankruptcy, but I don't know the exact details. The kind of person who would be able to do it is very expensive, though.
 
will something happen or will be a big nothing like with cwc court cases?
I want to note a big difference between Phil and CWC when it comes to court cases is that CWC is autistic and has declared so publicly. The court is likely to take pity on him. Even if Phil is autistic, he's not going to admit that to a court (though wouldn't that be sweet?) and I doubt they'll be taking pity on him living in his McMansion buying and streaming 5-6 new video games every month.

Just because one cow got off court doesn't mean they all will.
 
will something happen or will be a big nothing like with cwc court cases?
I want to note a big difference between Phil and CWC when it comes to court cases is that CWC is autistic and has declared so publicly.
The courts aren't giving CWC a pass on his debt because he's autistic. They're giving him a pass because there's nothing to seize at this time.
 
Back