Tag Archives: syndication

Holidays 2009: Distressed Asset Investment Letter

Dear Friends:

With year-end traditionally being a time to slow down and reflect, this post is intended to be a review of the past year, and a prognosis of sorts for what the transactional deal marketplace may show us in 2010.

However, slowing down and reflecting on this year only gives me that post-roller coaster sickness feeling. This was one of the most challenging years in business for most of us. Although it ended up being a positive year from a business standpoint, it required a wholesale reinvention of what we do, as most of our business models were affected by many polar opposite, sometimes unintended and varied influences that converged in a dizzying array of confusion. It was humorous to read that many prognosticators declared that the end of the recession was near, or even that the recession was behind us, because, contrary to the statistical reports showing declines in unemployment figures and upticks in consumer confidence, in reality the fundamental problems that grounded the economy in 2007 are not significantly different from those prevalent now. Other than runaway bank profits and the gilded age of Wall Street bonuses, our world is now as it has been for the past 2 years. We have made forward progress, but what the economic landscape has in store for us in 2010 will prove to be a mixing pot of small explosions that together will concoct a distressed asset stew full of nutritional values that we may only be able to sample if we have the coupons. Well, friends, we are the manufacturer of those coupons.

Let me try and catch you up on all that has happened in this busy year! Continue reading

The Ibanez decision and the foreclosure business

Foreclosure Sign

Last week, in a Massachusetts Land Court decision, Judge Long issued a Memorandum and Order denying the motions to vacate the previous judgments that he had entered in the consolidated cases of U.S. Bank National Association v. Ibanez and Wells Fargo Bank v. Larace (both referred to hereinafter as the “Ibanez” decision).  Effectively, Judge Long thereby reaffirmed his earlier decision in Ibanez, which invalidated the foreclosure sales because the foreclosing entities were not the mortgage holders “at the time” of the foreclosure, nor did they have a valid assignment of the mortgage pursuant to Massachusetts law.  Judge Long rejected the banking industry’s arguments in favor of a strict construction of the requirements that need to be followed by a foreclosing party under M.G.L. c. 244 Section 14 (hereinafter referred to as the “Massachusetts Foreclosure Procedure Act”).  The banking industry had argued that (1) “post-sale mortgage assignments to the successful bidder, even if backdated should suffice”, (2) that the foreclosing entities should be “statutorily deemed to be the “present holder” of the mortgage” because they possessed the note, a blank mortgage assignment, and a series of off-record assignments by which they were entitled to a mortgage assignment in recordable form”, and (3) that the foreclosures initiated by the foreclosing entities were “valid because they were done at the direction of the actual mortgage holder.”

To understand the industry ramifications the Ibanez decision may have, a detailed look at the facts and issues of the case is necessary.  

Although there were several issues under consideration in Ibanez, the primary and most important issue  was whether the foreclosing entities had “the right . . . to foreclose the subject mortgage in light of the fact that the assignment of the foreclosed mortgage . . . was not executed or recorded until after the exercise of the power of sale.”

It had become common in the mortgage industry, that in order to create the volume in the money supply that the market was demanding, mortgage loans were sold into a trust, packaged into pools based upon their credit quality, and then syndicated to qualified investors in a private or public offering underwritten by Wall Street banks. 

This is precisely the situation that occurred in Ibanez.  Continue reading

Brownfields Tax Credit Transaction Closing Announcement

Needham, Massachusetts, March 16, 2009

I am pleased to announce the successful sale by my clients, Station Place, LLC and Myrtle Square, LLC, of 2008 Massachusetts Brownfields Tax Credits to a Fortune 100 international insurance conglomerate.

Brownfields Tax Credits are issued by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to developers who have successfully remediated environmentally contaminated sites. The tax credits are issued as a percentage of the developer’s costs incurred in the environmental cleanup of the site. We congratulate our clients, Station Place, LLC, and Myrtle Square, LLC, for their successful remediation and development of these environmentally damaged sites.

If you have any questions about commercial real estate, development financing, or tax credit transactions, please feel free to contact me directly at 781-239-8900 or wkirshenbaum@oarlawyers.com.

Orsi Arone Rothenberg Iannuzzi & Turner, LLP •160 Gould Street, Suite 320, Needham, MA 02494-2300 • http://www.oarlawyers.com.