Archive for August, 2009

« Older Entries

The 2009 Citizenship Law and Adopted Children

Friday, August 28th, 2009

The Canadian government has passed a new citizenship law that resolves a variety of issues about Canadian citizenship (Bill C-37). Buried in that law is a provision that has passed unnoticed, until now, which puts limitations on the Canadian citizenship rights of some internationally adopted children. Recent articles in the National Post, the Globe & Mail and the Ottawa Citizen have brought these provisions to the attention of the adoption community.

Although this new law came into effect on April 17, 2009, I hope it is not too late for adopting parents to express their views. Also read Complex Citizenship Laws Anger Adopting Parents). The provisions of the new law are complex, so I have set out a series of questions and answers at the end of this article, which I hope will clarify the finer points of the new rules.

A good way to begin understanding the issues is to read the newspaper articles “Critics Fear Two-Tier Citizenship” and “Citizenship Changes Could Create Inferior Citizens”. For the perspective of Robin Hilborn of Family Helper, see “Canadian law denies citizenship to children of foreign adoptees” http://www.familyhelper.net/news/090129citizenship.html

Essentially the legislation provides that the children of some internationally adopted children will not have a right to Canadian citizenship. In practice, this is likely to affect only a small proportion of all adopted children. What upsets adopting parents, however, is the notion that their children will have a lesser class of citizenship. In effect, the children are being discriminated against. Adopting parents do not want to feel that their children are second-class citizens.

Adopting parents in Canada are losing their tolerance for being discriminated against. Resentment at the inherent discrimination against adopting families built into the EI legislation has been simmering for the past decade (for a detailed description of the discrimination which adopting parents feel about this subject, see our earlier Spotlight, “Adoption in the Workplace”). Now a new law that discriminates against their children is going to have a galvanizing effect on the adoption community.

The Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration, 2008, begins with the following words:

“The Citizenship Act, under which CIC grants citizenship to eligible newcomers, affirms that all Canadians have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities whether they are citizens by birth or naturalization.”

That changed April 17, 2009. In an attempt to solve the problem of Canadian citizenship being handed down generationally to people who don’t actually live in Canada, the government has reduced the citizenship rights of some internationally adopted children, and effectively created a lesser class of citizenship for them. Was this really necessary? It feels like a sledgehammer was used to kill a flea. Could not a more elegant solution have been found to actually deal with the perceived problem?

The Report of the Senate Standing Committee, which reviewed Bill C-37, states:

“Such a distinction would grant citizenship to a first generation born outside Canada while denying it to their children and subsequent generations were they to be born abroad. Such a provision strikes your Committee as arbitrary and unfair.”

The Committee also added: “Rather, the Committee urges the government to ensure that all aspects of new citizenship legislation are Charter-compliant and consistent with Canadian values”.

As a result of concerns by the Immigration Department about the confusion surrounding the new law, it recently issued a clarification.

In a published response to the concerns of adopting parents, the Minister states:

“Critics have entirely missed the point of how changes to our citizenship law, which come into effect on April 17, 2009, will protect the value of citizenship.”

I don’t think that is true. Adopting parents probably do understand the concerns that the government has about protecting the integrity of Canadian citizenship. It is the specific solution, which the government has come up with that they are protesting.

It is an insult to adopting parents to say that their children now have a lesser class of Canadian citizenship. The government needs to rethink these provisions and find a solution that does not put limitations on the rights of citizenship for internationally adopted children. The government should find a solution which fits the actual problem. This article is a call to action for adopting parents. Adopting parents who wish to make their views known to the government should do so immediately. Prior to doing so, however, please read the questions and answers set out below. The law is quite technical and there is already confusion about who the law would apply to. This is not helped by the government’s own website, which is not clear. If, after reading the article and the new rules, additional questions arise that should be asked in the list below, please send them to me and I will add them to the article.

For the purposes of this article, I will use the terms Class A citizenship to refer to full-rights citizenship and Class B to refer to the new, lesser-rights citizenship.

Q1. Who does the new law apply to?
A. The new law applies to adopted children who receive their citizenship abroad, pursuant to the new direct citizenship provisions enacted in Canada on December 23, 2007. [See also Q10 below]

Q2.Who is not subject to the new rules?
A. The new rules do not apply to the following:

(a) adopted children born in Canada;

(b) Internationally adopted children who come to Canada on a permanent resident visa and subsequently obtained Canadian citizenship after their arrival in Canada. Up until now this has been the situation of most (but not all) children adopted overseas and brought to Canada. They will not be affected by the new rule, despite what it says on the Canada Immigration website.
The web posting “New Citizenship Rules” states:
“This limitation will also apply to foreign-born individuals adopted by a Canadian parent. The adopted children of Canadian citizens will be considered to be the first generation born abroad. This means that:
If a person born outside Canada and adopted by a Canadian parent has a child outside Canada, that child will not be a citizen by birth;……..”

This information is misleading. In a clarifying email from the Ministry of Citizenship & Immigration (which doesn’t seem to be posted anywhere at the moment), an official makes it clear that the restriction on obtaining Canadian citizenship only applies to situations described in the above quote and where the parent of the child born outside of Canada originally was granted Canadian citizenship overseas pursuant to the new 2007 direct to citizenship route. This misstatement on the government website has caused some parents to believe that the new law will apply to their children, when in fact it will not.

(c) The new law will not apply to children who would normally fall into the Class B citizenship definition, but whose parent is working overseas with the Canadian government (Federal or Provincial) or serving overseas in the armed forces. Instead, these children will have Class A citizenship. However, children whose parents are working for Canadian corporations, the United Nations, who are on vacation, or who are otherwise travelling outside of Canada do not get this exemption and will have Class B citizenship. This is a distinction which is hard to justify. If you work for one kind of employer your children are Class A citizens, and if you work for a different kind of employer your children are Class B citizens. Surely there is a better way to sort this out.

Q3. What is the most serious consequence of this new law?
A The most serious consequence that is evident at this time is that a child born overseas to an adopted person has a reasonable chance of being a “stateless individual” (this would be the adopting parents’ grandchild). This leads to a number of questions:

(a) Why would this happen? – Only some countries grant citizenship to a child born in their country (Canada and the USA being examples of countries that do that). Many countries rely on the citizenship of the child’s parents or some other criteria. The child would be born stateless if they did not derive a citizenship through either parent and they are also born in a country where birth on soil does not give access to citizenship. As a stateless person, the child would have no obvious way to come to Canada.

(b) Is there a remedy? – A child of a Canadian who was born stateless abroad would have the option of applying for a grant of citizenship on the basis of statelessness. The amended Citizenship Act has provisions for granting citizenship to stateless children of Canadian citizens, but the child must first live in Canada for three years. This stateless child would have neither a passport nor a right to enter Canada, so it is not even clear how the child could travel to Canada to establish residence. One can only hope that there will be a benevolent immigration officer overseas who has empathy for the predicament that the Class B Canadian citizen finds himself in, and will grant the stateless child some sort of visa to come to Canada. This event will be 20, 30 or 40 years into the future. It is hard to predict what the world will look like then in terms of population and pressures on the Canadian immigration system. What will immigration officers say to a Class B Canadian citizen in 30 years who wants to bring their stateless child back to Canada? Adopting parents today will be the grandparents of that child. We can all hope it’s a sympathetic response.

(c) Any born-abroad Canadian adopting parents could immediately face the problem outlined in (b) above. Again, this is because the provisions of the new law apply to children born outside of Canada as well as to those adopted.

Q4. What happens if my adopted child has Class B Canadian citizenship and gives birth to a child overseas?
A That child, your grandchild, will not acquire Canadian citizenship. He or she may be eligible to be sponsored as a permanent resident, and then apply for citizenship as soon as he or she becomes a permanent resident.

Q5. How does it work for subsequent generations? Do they have Class A or Class B Canadian citizenship?
A Generational Chart Showing Whether Descendants have Class A or B Canadian Citizenship Rights:

Parents Child

First
Generation (Adopting Parents)

N/A

Second
Generation
(your adopted child)

If this child receives Canadian Citizenship overseas under the 2007 law, he/she will have Class B Canadian Citizenship

Third
Generation
(your grandchild)

If the child of the adopted child above is born outside of Canada, he/she will not be entitled to automatic Canadian Citizenship. The child may apply to enter Canada on a Permanent Resident Visa. If he/she subsequently obtains Canadian Citizenship, then it will be a Class A Citizenship.

Fourth Generation
(your great-grandchild)

The child of this Class A citizen parent, if born inside Canada, (the Adoptive Parents’ great-grandchild) will have Class A Citizenship.

Q6. Can I do anything to avoid this new law if I am going to adopt a child in the future?
A Yes you can. Do not use the new direct citizenship route for children adopted overseas. Only use the old route of applying for a permanent resident visa for the child, and after the child is landed in Canada apply for Canadian citizenship. This child will have a Class A Canadian citizenship.

Adopting parents report that they are consistently advised by Canada Immigration officials to use the new direct citizenship route. Anyone considering which route to follow should read our previous Spotlight – Citizenship for Adopted Children: Canada’s New Law for 2008. In addition, adopting parents should obviously think about whether they wish their children to have Class B Canadian citizenship, and what effect that might have on their grandchildren.

Q7. Does the new law contravene the Charter of Rights?
A I don’t know. The government has not invoked the “Notwithstanding Clause” under the Constitution of Canada, so the Charter does apply to this legislation. In the 1998 McKenna case, the Canadian Human Rights Code was used to say that it was discriminatory to adopted children not to be able to obtain citizenship overseas. It was this case that 10 years later finally led to the new citizenship law of 2007 permitting just that. On the other hand, adopting parents were not successful in invoking the Charter of Rights to overturn the inherent discrimination in the EI legislation in the 1997 Schafer case. It does seem likely that eventually someone will challenge this notion of Class B citizenship for adopted children under the Charter of Rights. A Charter challenge could also come based on discrimination against persons born abroad to Canadian citizen parents.

Q8. Are the new rules retroactive?
A Section 3 (4) of the Citizenship Act states:

“Subsection (3) does not apply to a person who, on the coming into force of that subsection, is a citizen.”

What does this clause mean? It means that if you are a citizen on the day the new law comes into force, then you will not lose your citizenship. Unfortunately, the Immigration Department is interpreting this to mean that a person will not lose their Canadian citizenship, but the new provisions will change the quality of your citizenship.

So, for the adoption world, the law will be retroactive and will have the following three results:

(a) Children who have been adopted and obtained their Canadian citizenship overseas since December 23, 2007 will have their Canadian citizenship downgraded from Class A to Class B on April 17, 2009. This will come as an unhappy surprise to Canadian adopting parents, who have pursued the direct citizenship route as a result of non-stop directions from Canada Immigration officials to adopting parents to take the new route; and

(b) Adopting Parents who were born to Canadian parents overseas and acquired Canadian citizenship as a result. Any adopting parents in this category will have their citizenship changed from Class A to Class B on April 17, 2009. As a result, when they adopt overseas, their children are not entitled to direct Canadian citizenship. Their only route will be to sponsor the child as a landed immigrant, obtain a permanent resident visa, and subsequently apply for Canadian citizenship.

(c) Adopting Parents who were adopted overseas themselves as a child, and then became Canadian citizens through the Permanent Resident Visa process. The new law will NOT affect these adopting parents as they have Class A citizenship. Their adopted children will be eligible for direct citizenship (albeit Class B). If these adopting parents use the Permanent Resident Visa process, however, their adopted child will have Class A Canadian citizenship.

A CIC official has verbally confirmed that these provisions are retroactive. We have requested that the government confirm to us, in writing, that the law is retroactive. We will update this section when we receive the government’s written answer.

Q9. Does this new law only apply to adopted children?
A No, in addition to adopted children, the new rules apply to children born outside of Canada, unless their parent(s) fit within a specific definition. In addition, Bill C-37 (the new law) also deals with many other citizenship issues unrelated to adoption.

Q10. If I am adopting parent who was born abroad to Canadian parents, can I adopt overseas?
A You can adopt, but if you are single you will not be able to use the direct citizenship route. Your child will have to be admitted to Canada with a PR Visa. The reason for this is that the new law applies to children of Canadians born to Canadians overseas, as well as to those adopted overseas. However, if you are married to a Class A Canadian citizen, then you will be able to use the direct citizenship route.

Q11. Is there any “patch” that the government could use to repair this law?
A The application of the new law should be suspended until the adoption community has a real chance to have input, and perhaps a better solution is found. One suggestion being proposed would provide an exception to the new law if the adopted child lived in Canada for a certain unspecified period of time. In other words, the child would start with Class B Canadian citizenship, and if the child eventually qualified by living in Canada for a certain period of time, they would graduate to Class A Canadian citizenship. Whether this would be a satisfactory solution for Canadian adopting parents remains to be seen.
Note: These concerns are not limited to children adopted abroad, but also apply to children born abroad. The implications of this law are likely to be seen more immediately for born-abroad Class B citizens than adopted-abroad Class B citizens.

Q12. Why was the adoption community in Canada not consulted before this law was brought into force?
A The adoption community in Canada was unaware of these new rules until articles appeared in the press in mid-January, 2009. How did this happen? – Bill C-37 received royal assent on April 17, 2008. It came into force on the first anniversary of that date, April 17, 2009. For over a year preceding the passing of the new law, the government consulted with various interest groups who could be affected by changes to the Citizenship Act. It does not appear to have been made clear, however, that a Class B citizenship would be created for children adopted overseas. On December 13, 2008, the regulations under this new Act were published in the Canada Gazette, and provided for a 30-day comment period. Unfortunately, this comment period extended over the Christmas and New Year’s vacation and expired in early January. Buried in the comment attached to the Canada Gazette was the statement , “The aforementioned limitation will also apply to foreign-born persons adopted by a Canadian parent”. It was only when these proposed regulations were published that one person noticed this and has been raising an alarm for the past few weeks.

Surely, if the Government of Canada was going to do something as dramatic as create Class B citizenship rules for adopted children in this country, it is incumbent on them to really bring this to the attention of adopting parents, the Adoptive Families Association, the Provincial Adoption Bureaus, Adoption Agencies across Canada, and the Adoption Council of Canada. It is incredibly dismissive of the adoption community to have been treated in this manner by the government.

Q13. What can I do to stop this new law?
A Perhaps nothing. The new law (Bill C-37) has been passed, given Royal assent, and the regulations under it are in force. Some parents are currently considering filing a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. And, of course, someone with deep pockets could take a Charter of Rights challenge to try to have the law declared unconstitutional. On the other hand, perhaps adopting parents in Canada can speak out with one voice and object to what has happened. Adopting parents in Canada represent a potent political force. To date, this has been largely untapped. It is time that the Canadian adoption community make its influence felt. There is no reason why we cannot have an Adoption Caucus of MPs and Senators who listen to what’s important to the adoption community in Canada. The natural focus of these efforts could be the Adoption Council of Canada, which can harness some of the tremendous energy and opinions of adopting parents in this country. Hopefully, this issue of Class B Canadian citizenship for some internationally adopted children will provide a focus for adopting parents to work together.

In the meantime, parents who wish to comment on what has happened should contact their Member of Parliament and the Adoption Council of Canada.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Feldman Law Center – Why Loan Modifications Are Better Than Short Sales

Thursday, August 20th, 2009

When facing the loss of their house, short sales are a method that some people choose to use in order to stop a foreclosure from taking place. This tactic takes place when it seems likely that the bank will lose less money than it would with a foreclosure.

By definition, a short sale means that the home is being sold for less than is owed on the mortgage. In evaluating the pros and cons of a short sale, some of the cons include: having to pay taxes, insurance, and mortgage payments on the property until the house is sold; competing with other bargain basement-priced homes in the area; getting a negative mark on your credit report; losing all of your investment in the property; and the possibility of still owing money towards the mortgage of a home that you no longer own or live in. After dealing with all of these problems associated with a short sale of your house, you still have to find a place for you and your family to live. While a short sale may be one of the options you have, we believe that there are better options out there for you.

If you are facing a similar problem, you should consider a home loan modification. Many California companies offer loan modifications, but not all companies have the benefit of experienced, licensed attorneys. The Feldman Law Center specializes in California loan modifications, which can help you avoid a foreclosure, bankruptcy, or short sale on your home. An attorney can help secure the most advantageous deal for you, your family, and your property.

Loan modifications are one of the best options to choose when facing the loss of your home. When comparing a home loan modification to a short sale, you could potentially avoid all of the cons of a short sale. You would stay in your home, keep the investment you’ve made in the home, and avoid the hassle and expense of completing a short sale and finding new accommodations.

Most California loan modifications include lowering or fixing the interest rate of your mortgage, which means that monthly payments would be stabilized to an amount that is more attainable for you. It can also include reducing the principle balance that you owe or forgiving some of your mortgage payment defaults or missed payments on fees. A modification completed by one of our loan modification attorneys can include any or all of the above features. The main advantage of having an attorney complete the negotiations with a lender is that our attorneys can achieve better results than you can achieve alone, and can achieve them more quickly.

The attorneys of The Feldman Law Center are experienced negotiators of home loan modifications. Our founder, Steven C. Feldman has been licensed by the State Bar of California for over 25 years. Free quotes and consultations are available for you to help you make the most of your current situation. Contact us today and let us help you with your home loan modification.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

The Law School Admissions Process

Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

Individuals from all different career and college backgrounds make their way into law schools. The best method for preparing to become a lawyer is to gain a broad range of basic skills. There really is no set major for pre-law undergraduate work. From English to philosophy and science to art, people with all sorts of backgrounds are considered for entrance into law school. So since there is no set degree requirement, what are law school admission counselors looking for?

Law school admissions counselors typically look for individuals with excellent analytical and problem solving skills. For those still getting their undergraduate degrees, it would be wise to seek out a pre-law advisor to help you select your coursework. In addition to analytical skills, law schools also look for individuals with excellent communication skills (both writing and oral communication). Critical reading and researching are also important skills to master and be able to prove.

While there is no specialized path for undergraduates seeking to become lawyers, it is important to maintain a high grade point average. Most graduate programs only accept students with a 3.0 GPA or higher and law school is not exception.

The higher your GPA, the better off you’ll be (but rest assured that you can still go to law school without a 4.0 or even a 3.5 GPA). In addition to your GPA, extracurricular activities are also a plus. Any activities that show leadership or problem solving skills will only be a beneficial.

Selecting the right law school
When you decide to seek admittance to law school (which can be during your senior year in college or after you’ve taken a break from college altogether), you will need to narrow down your options. Typically, the following factors play a large role in deciding where to attend law school; location, cost, areas of specialty, financial aid, and prestige of the institute.

You will also need to take into consideration your strengths and weaknesses. Since there are costs to apply to law school, you also need to factor in your background (i.e. your GPA, LSAT scores and letters of recommendations). Unfortunately, if you barely earned a 3.0, scored poorly on the LSAT, and lack the experiences that a law school admissions counselor would look favorably upon, then you probably don’t want to only apply to top tier Ivy League schools. If you do, then you may find that you aren’t accepted into any law school come the next school year.

LSAT
The LSAT is the law school admissions test. All law schools approved by the ABA require LSAT scores for admissions. This exam does not cover any legal topics. Instead, it tests you on reading comprehension, analytical reasoning and logical reasoning. Law schools want to make sure you possess excellent analytical and problem solving skills and the LSAT sets out to do just that.

Scores for the LSAT range from 120 to 180 (with 180 being the highest). The average LSAT score falls around 150. The higher you can score on the LSAT; the better off you will be (although if you have strengths in other areas, you can still get into law school with a lower LSAT score).

Admissions
While admissions requirements vary from law school program to law school program, it is common for the requirements to include the following; undergraduate GPA, LSAT scores, letters of recommendation and a personal statement.

You will need to provide official transcripts and LSAT scores to show your qualifications. Usually, you will submit these to the LSDAS (the law school data assembly service). The LSDAS streamlines admissions for most all law schools in the country. You will also need to submit your letters of recommendation and the personal statement to the LSDAS.

When selecting people to write a letter of recommendation for you consider asking those who know your abilities to solve problems and realize your potential to become a lawyer. College professors and employers are excellent choices.

The personal statement should essentially let the law school admissions counselor know why you want to be a lawyer and inform them of your qualifications. You would want to stress any qualifications that relate to becoming a lawyer. For example, work as an intern in a law firm would be important to showcase (as are countless other examples).

Tie in your experiences with your desire to go to law school. Be sure to write your essay concisely, keeping in mind grammatical rules. However, there is no reason to write in legalese. Just write naturally and personably.

Remember that law schools accept people from all sorts of backgrounds. If you have an interest in pursuing a law degree, then you should start pursuing it today.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Social Work and the Law

Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

NOTE: THE ARTICLE APPEARING BELOW WAS COPIED ON

Tags: ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Law School Requirements What it Takes, in a Nutshell, to Apply to Law School

Monday, August 17th, 2009

Every law school has a set of requirements, what I have referred to as the law school requirements, that are the bare minimum standards that all students – no matter how “special their situation” – must meet. For the most part, every law school shares the same objective and subjective requirements, though the quality of these requirements may vary from school to school.

The first law school requirement for essentially all law students is that they obtain an undergraduate bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university before attending law school. In connection with obtaining this degree, the graduate must submit a transcript to his or her prospective law school so that the school can evaluate the student’s grade point average (”GPA”).

Next, every prospective law student must take the Law School Admission Test (”LSAT”). As with the GPA, different schools may have different standards when it comes to their minimum required LSAT score, but every school requires that a score be submitted.

The above factors constitute the objective factors that every law school will use to evaluate law school candidates. Fortunately, most law schools do not make law school admission decisions based solely on objective criteria unless your GPA and LSAT scores are exceptionally high.

Many of the subjective factors are not requirements, but two generally are. These are the personal statement and recommendation letters. The law school application personal statement gives prospective law students the opportunity to demonstrate their individuality, address deficiencies or other problems in his or her application and, of course, demonstrate writing ability.

Similarly, letters of recommendation give the law school admissions committee the opportunity to gather extrinsic information regarding the law school candidate from someone besides the prospective candidate.

There are other subjective requirements that may be considered by a law school in making an admissions decision, such as diversity issues and familial relationships with the school, but such matters are not required to be considered for admission.

The above items are the law school requirements, but the greatest success goes to the law school applicants who go above and beyond the law school requirements and give the law school admissions committee something extra. The greatest rewards in life go to the outstanding, and when it comes to getting into law school its no different.

This article may be freely reprinted or distributed in its entirety in any ezine, newsletter, blog or website. The author’s name, bio and website links must remain intact and be included with every reproduction.

My long time friend and mentor H. Jefferson, Jr. is an expert on on law school admission, having applied to and been admitted by 11 of the top law schools in the United States. To learn more about the the techniques and strategies you can use to get into the law school of your choice, visit lawschoolacademics.blogspot.com

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Feldman Law Center – Five Steps to a Loan Modification

Sunday, August 16th, 2009

If you check the stock market on Monday, people will be saying the market is up and everything is looking better financially.  If you check the market on Tuesday, all economists will be in complete agreement that the world is going to end in 48 hours.  What does this mean for you?  No one, not even the “experts,” have any clue where the economy is going or how long it will take for the country to climb out of this “Great Recession.”

Real estate has been a nightmare for many people as well.  One minute the housing markets look great, and yet with unemployment at a 25 year high and climbing, no one has any idea what the future will bring.  This affects available homes, available credit, interest rates and more.  There is very little sure footing in today’s market, but with a loan modification, you could be closer to security than many other people.

Five Steps

Here are five steps you can take to get a loan modification:

1.    Do your homework – Read as much as you can about loan modifications.  While at work, while watching the ball game, while you are eating lunch – read and learn about loan modifications.  This will only enhance your understanding of the industry and give you a sense of what a loan modification can do for you.

2.    Get your ducks in a row – It is important to have your financial paperwork in order to get the loan modification that is going to work for you.  That means tax returns, pay stubs, bank slips and more, all from the last few years.  A bank is going to want to see your financial history, as well as your current financial situation in order to make a decision.

3.    Talk to your spouse – You cannot get a mortgage loan modification without having the assistance and agreement of your spouse.  While your financial situation may be dire, you must work together in order to make this happen.

4.    Find a loan modification company – You can always attempt to get a loan modification on your own, but having a highly qualified loan modification attorney working with you might be the necessary help you need.  Knowing how to fill the application out, how to file the paperwork, how to organize the communication between your side and the lender and much more can all be helped by a loan modification attorney.  You wouldn’t go to court without an attorney, so do not try getting a loan modification without an attorney.

5.    Calm yourself – It is important to be patient and understanding with yourself and your situation while trying to get a loan modification.  It can be very easy to overreact and lose your calm.  In fact, more marriages end because of financial troubles than for any other reason.  So, giving yourself, your spouse and everyone else around you some slack will keep your relationships and your life in a good place.

Contact a loan modification attorney today, and begin the process of staying in your home.

Visit us at http://www.feldmanlawcenter.com or call 800-588-0425.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Limbo and Home Loan Modifications by Feldman Law Center

Sunday, August 16th, 2009

Feldman Law Center – As the foreclosure backlog grows, a new class of American homeowners as described by a recent article in the Washington Post is growing by the month. These are homeowners that have fallen into a financial limbo where they are badly behind on payments, but their lenders have not yet foreclosed on the home. “I have even begged them for a foreclosure,” delinquent mortgage-holder Charlotte Jensen said. Behind on payments and not willing to wait for an eviction notice, she filed for bankruptcy, and left the home. Nearly a year later, still with no further payments, Bank of America has yet to take back the home.

The total of the backlog is estimated at one million borrowers, sits on top of the one million foreclosure actions that had been taken this year through May. It presents a major obstacle for any kind of rebound or stability in the country?s hard hit real estate markets. It?s also an obstacle than can drive the market lower and then keep it there indefinitely. Banks are currently doing the best they can not to flood the market with foreclosures but each sale, when one occurs, is counted as a ?comp? for appraisal purposes. Everything similar gets indexed to the comp until the next sells at a lower price. For evidence of properties being kept off of the market one need only look at one of highest foreclosure states in the country. California had 111,000 foreclosed properties which could have gone to auction in May. Of that number, only 17,000 went to auction and only 2,000 sold. If those kinds of numbers repeat for just a few months, the state will have a backlog that will take years to unwind. Properties that aren?t sold on the way down would most likely be sold as prices stabilize or start to bounce back, which would mute any recovery.

“Lenders are having an immensely difficult time handling the capacity. They are torn between loan modification, short sales, foreclosures, and they are finding they can’t do all these things at once, and do them well, so we’re seeing a lot of things falling through the cracks,” said Howard Glaser, a housing industry consultant and a housing official during the Clinton administration.
Mortgage lenders and investors in that scenario would be looking at more losses as a result of the mortgage crisis. “It just means foreclosure rates are going to keep rising,” said Patrick Newport, an economist for IHS Global Insight. Without an end to the downward spiral in prices any kind of meaningful recovery in the economy will be impossible.

Another issue is the growing conflict of interest between mortgage investors and the companies that service the loans for them. In many cases, what is good for the servicers is bad for the investors and vice versa. For instance, in a home loan modification versus foreclosure situation, the servicer will favor the modification because it keeps payments and fees they can charge on them alive. The mortgage investors, seeing the potential for a decrease in cash flow as a result of the modification, will favor foreclosure as a means of getting their money out of the deal. The resulting stalemate can cause a house to sit in limbo while the servicers and lenders decide a course of action. For the homeowners in the situation, the stalemate can be beneficial as it allows them to stay in the house but the stress of knowing that an eviction can come at any time is tough to deal with.

While some of the backlog reflects the inability of lenders to keep up with the sheer volume of delinquent properties, another reason is an intentional slowdown in the pace of foreclosures as government and industry try to work with borrowers who want to stay in their homes. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-run mortgage financing companies, put a temporary moratorium on foreclosures late last year, some states imposed moratoriums, and many of the country’s largest lenders voluntarily participated as well. The extra time gave lenders time to see how the guidelines of the Obama Administration?s ?Making Home Affordable? would work and which borrowers could be helped by modifying their current mortgages under the plan. Many of those moratoriums started expiring at the end of the first quarter of this year, and foreclosures have been setting records on a monthly basis since then.
With potentially millions of foreclosed homes on the market and more coming every day, Prices have been hit across the country. The prices for existing homes fell another 16% in May versus the prices one year prior.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Are you a Novice or Master user of the Law of Attraction?

Saturday, August 15th, 2009

If some of you have already read various books about Law of Attraction usage, then you have no doubt already had a dabble at trying to receive something with the Law of Attraction.

Now you may have been chuffed at the result that happened afterwards, but more than likely nothing happened and you are trying to work out why the Law of Attraction is not working for you. Many give up due to the disappointment of not receiving immediately but one needs to perserver and believe.

As you may imagine it is all about knowledge and practice. Everyone can tap into the what the universe has to offer.

Well you may not be aware, but there is actually a mastery to its usage and many users are at a level of knowledge where they can class themselves as Master, and are of course reaping the rewards big time. How do they do it? Do you see others that always get what they want? Well you may have guessed it, they are more than likely mastering the Law of Attraction. Some master it without even being aware that they are doing so.

Now that you have found about the Law of Attraction, you can now proceed to learn about the advanced techniques and discover how to succeed where others, even yourself, failed in the practice before.

About the Author:

The Law of Attraction Advancement Shop was created to offer users the products they need in order to advance to mastership of the Law of Attraction.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Law School Rankings the Biggest Bunch of Bunk Since Un-sliced Bread

Friday, August 14th, 2009

Although I understand that this can be very difficult to do, you must view the popular published law school rankings, skeptically. These rankings are not only untrustworthy, but mislead students into thinking they need to attend a highly ranked school or they will be second rate lawyers do to their “substandard” law school education. This is simply not true.

What is true, in my opinion unfortunately, is that going to a highly ranked law school can have an enormous financial (note: NOT educational) impact on your early legal career. That is why I wrote Covert Tactics for Getting Into the Law School of Your Choice. As I explain in that book, however, even if you do not attend a highly ranked law school, you are not absolutely doomed to suffer professionally and financially for the rest of your life. Indeed, many times you may be well-served, both educationally and financially, by attending a lower ranked law school.

But back to law school rankings. In addition to a number of studies suggesting that the data underlying the rankings is inaccurate, due to schools trying to misrepresent the true data in order to achieve a higher ranking, it is impossible for any ranking to consider all of the relevant factors, which may vary from individual to individual.

Also problematic is the fact that most of the ranking are based, at least in part, on the subjective opinions of individuals at the various schools. Of course, such subjective opinions are likely to simply reinforce the historical opinions regarding the “top tier” law schools. Indeed, if you look at these rankings historically, you will find that they really haven’t changed much over the years.

The reason that it is important that you understand the invalidity of the rankings is that you should understand that the quality of your legal education is likely to be nearly as good, and in some respects may be better, at the University of Idaho as opposed to Harvard.

Depending on who you are, you may be much better off, for a variety of reasons, attending even a very low ranked school. This may be the case even if you have the opportunity to attend a higher-ranked school.

For example, if your intent is to establish a small town practice in rural South Dakota immediately after law school, it may be unwise to attend Stanford Law School over the University of South Dakota School of Law.

Why? Let me give you three good reasons, though there are likely many more. First, you are not going to be particularly highly paid in rural South Dakota, regardless of where you attended law school. As a Stanford Law graduate you are likely to either be saddled with a high debt load or have spent a significant amount of your savings getting through school. Although few law schools are cheap, you should carefully consider whether it is worth spending and extra $100,000 to have a fancy name on your wall.

Second, as a small-town practitioner, you are going to be very reliant on relationships with other attorneys, the business community, and potential clients in general. Spending three years in Palo Alto, far away from the center of your future universe, will do very little to develop those relationships, so law school rankings are virtually meaningless.

Finally, the education isn?t going to be much better at Stanford than at USD. Believe me, in writing this I have prepared myself for the inevitable barrage of criticism that will inevitably be hurled my way. I say this with confidence, however, because I know lawyers from a wide variety of law schools and find a relatively equal distribution of idiots among alumni from top 50 and bottom 50 schools. It really depends on what you are willing to put into it ? not what they give you.

There are even some law schools not approved by the American Bar Association that may be worth considering in limited situations. Depending on what you want to do, and the particular laws of the jurisdiction where you intend to practice, a non-ABA accredited school may be a worthwhile choice.

At the end of the day, you need to make a wise choice that you will be happy with for the rest of your life. Don?t put a school on your list just because it is a highly-ranked law school or fits a formula or because you think it will look good on your resume.

Even if we find a cure for cancer in the next decade, you are not likely to live much more than 90 years on this earth. Don?t spend 3.5% of it in the wrong place.

This article may be freely reprinted or distributed in its entirety in any ezine, newsletter, blog or website. The author’s name, bio and website links must remain intact and be included with every reproduction.

My Friend H. Jefferson, Jr. is an expert on on law school admission, having applied to and been admitted by 11 of the top law schools in the United States. To learn more about the the techniques and strategies you can use to get into the law school of your choice, visit lawschoolacademics.blogspot.com,

.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Feldman Law Center – The Four Road Blocks That are Slowing Loan Modifications

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

Hope and optimism emanating from the announcement of the Obama Administration?s ?Making Home Affordable? plan have been replaced by the cold reality that the program has gotten off to start deemed by industry watchers as ?anemic?. After almost four months since President Obama first announced the $75 billion mortgage rescue effort, the administration continues to tweak the program in an attempt to reach its originally stated objective of saving up to 5 million homeowners from foreclosure. Standing between the anemic start and lofty goals of the program are four roadblocks:

1) Overloaded loan modification processors ? While the specifics of the plan were released in the first week of March, lenders couldn?t start handling applications until systems were re-programmed and processors were brought up to speed, which took an additional four to six weeks. Processors were immediately buried with stacks of applications that had been accumulating during the conversion to the new guidelines. Participants in the process report that servicers are still digging out from the initial rush as applications continue to flood their desks. Troubled borrowers, many backed up against the possibility of foreclosure, have become increasingly frustrated to the point where they have abandoned the process to retain their own legal assistance.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

« Older Entries