#Fannie mae foreclosures in virginia code#

Borrowers thereafter filed this appeal to the Supreme Court of Virginia.ДЄt the outset, the Supreme Court agreed that the General District Court (or in this case the Circuit Court which was hearing an appeal from the General District Court), lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate title. The Circuit Court agreed, granted Fannie MaeвЂ™s motions, and awarded it possession.

Fannie Mae also moved to exclude evidence of any defense contesting the validity of the trusteeвЂ™s deed, arguing that the General District Court (and the circuit court sitting as an appellate court) lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate title in an unlawful detainer proceeding. In the Circuit Court (which was sitting as an appellate court), Fannie Mae filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that its trusteeвЂ™s deed was prima facia evidence of its right of possession. The General District Court awarded Fannie Mae possession, and the Borrowers filed a de novo appeal to the Circuit Court. Because Fannie Mae (who, according to the BorrowersвЂ™ allegations, was also their lender) instigated the foreclosure despite their allegedly timely filed loss mitigation application, Borrowers alleged that Fannie Mae breached their deed of trust. Borrowers claimed to have submitted a complete application within such timeframe. В§ 1024.41(g), which prohibits foreclosure if a borrower submitted a completed loss mitigation application more than 37 days before the foreclosure sale. Fannie Mae sent the Borrowers a notice to vacate, and later filed a summons for unlawful detainer in the General District Court.Д«orrowers filed a response to the Unlawful Detainer Action, which argued that the foreclosure was invalid because the deed of trust incorporated 12 C.F.R. Following a foreclosure sale of the property, the trustee conveyed the property to Fannie Mae.

#Fannie mae foreclosures in virginia code#

The Court noted that the jurisdictional limitations at issue did not apply to unlawful detainer actions originally brought in the Circuit Court pursuant to Virginia Code В§ 8.01-124, nor does such holding impact prior cases where the homeowner failed to raise such issues.Д«orrowers owned certain property secured by a deed of trust. The Court explained that in order to raise a bona fide dispute to title, a borrower is required to raise sufficient facts that would otherwise survive a Demurrer (Motion to Dismiss). Specifically, the Supreme Court held that, where a borrower raises a bona fide question as to the validity of title in a case originally filed in the General District Court (or subsequently appealed to the Circuit Court from the General District Court), the case must be dismissed without prejudice because the General District Court lacks original subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the validity of title. Federal National Mortgage Association, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court (in an appeal from the General District Court), which granted possession in favor of Fannie Mae in an unlawful detainer case (i.e.