archivedlist.com archivedlist.com
  Main Page -> About Us -> Add Your Link -> Privacy -> ToS -> Submit Article
Search:   
Add Url
 

Law & Politics

Healthcare & Medicine

Property & Estate

Computers & Software

Travel & Accommodation

Health & Hygiene

Society & Communities

Recreation

Business & Companies

Adventure & Sports

News & Events

Finance & Investment

Vehicles & Automotive

Research & Science

Employment & Careers

Education & Reference

Home Family & Garden

Art & Creative

Eating & Drinking

Children

Online Shopping

Online & Indoor Games

Lifestyle & Fashion

Self Management


 

Main Page › Property & Estate › Property Sites
 

Equity Of Redemption

 
Author: Luigi Frascati

A mortgage is an interest in land created by a contract, not a loan. More specifically, a mortgage is a type of security for a debt. Although almost all mortgage agreements contain a promise to repay a debt, a mortgage is not a debt by and in itself. More importantly, a mortgage is a transfer of a legal or equitable interest in land, on the condition sine qua non that the interest will be returned when the terms of the mortgage contract are performed. This right of the borrower to repay the lender once the terms of the mortgage contract are fully satisfied is known, at law, as equity of redemption.

Mortgage Law originated in the English feudal system in approximately the 12th century A.D. In the early part of the English feudal period, the legal effect of a mortgage was to convey to the lender both the title of an interest in land and the actual possession of the land. This conveyance was absolute, subject only to the lenders promise to re-convey the property to the borrower, if the specified sum of the underlying debt was repaid by the date set out in the mortgage contract. If the borrower failed to comply with the terms, the interest in land became the lenders, and the borrower had no further claim or recourse to the property.

Because the law at that time did not recognize an agreement as security for a debt, the land and possession of it had to be transferred to the lender, so as to provide him with security. There were two types of mortgages: a vivum vadium (Latin for live pledge), in which the income from the land was used by the lender to repay the debt, and a mortuum vadium (Latin for dead pledge), where the lender kept the income and the debtor had to raise funds elsewhere. The live pledge was acceptable at law, but the dead pledge offended the prevailing laws against usury, as well as Canonic laws.

So much, therefore, for the more or less partisan misinformation of consumer advocates, who believe that governments created mortgages to enrich themselves at the expenses of the poor.

Mortgages were treated differently at common law than by the courts of equity. Common law took the view that mortgages, like any other contract, had to be performed exactly according to their terms. This meant, that if the borrower was even one day late in making a payment, the interest in land was forfeited to the lender and yet the borrower was still liable for the debt.

The courts of equity, on the other hand, altered both the relationship of the parties to the mortgage contract as well as the remedies available in case of default. These courts recognized that the mortgage was only security for a loan and, therefore, they limited the lenders right only to the interest on the loan, and further required him to make a full accounting of all income from the land while he was in possession.

Because of this equitable interpretation of the courts, the lender no longer received an actual advantage from possession of the land. Possession, in other words, was of value only if the borrower did not honor the contract. With this legal development, furthermore, the borrower was vested with the right, in essence, to possession of the land and to full use of its income to pay interest and to raise principal for debt repayment.

Finally, the courts of equity also changed the rights of a borrower who did not repay on time, through the development of what nowadays is referred to as The Doctrine Of The Equity Of Redemption. This doctrine allows the borrower the right to repay the debt and regain the property even after the contractual date for repayment has lapsed.

Because of this, furthermore, the Courts want to be fully satisfied that the lender, in fact, has offered all possible remedies and venues of redemption to the borrower prior to granting an Order Absolute Of Foreclosure. As this involves considerable legal expenses on the part of the lender, cost of man/hour, interest accrued that may not be recoverable in its entirety as well as cost of opportunity, lenders view foreclosure as the recourse of very last resort available to them.

Luigi Frascati

Author Bio:

Luigi Frascati

Luigi Frascati is a Real Estate Agent based in Vancouver, British Columbia. He holds a Bachelor Degree in Economics and maintains a weblog entitled the Real Estate Chronicle where you can find the full collection of his articles on Real Estate Economics and Finance. Luigi is associated with the Sutton Group, the largest real estate organization in Canada, and is based with Sutton-Centre Realty in Burnaby, BC.

You can search for this article using: Equity Of Redemption, Property & Estate, Property Sites, real estate agent web sites, free prope
 
 
 

Related Articles

 
Boston Real Estate Rental Market
 
Home Sellers: How Much Should You Spend to Get Your Home Ready to Sell?
 
We Help You Find The Cheap & Best Apartment on Rent
 
Understanding Easements for Mission Viejo Real Estate
 
How I Picked Up a Quarter Million Dollar House in New York for Free!
 
Buying a Property in Dubai
 
How to Get Great Results in Real Estate by Knocking on Sellers' Doors
 
Home Buying Strategies
 
Carpinteria From Here to There!
 
Wayne Rogers on Real Estate Investing: It's 2006 and The Bubble Has Burst!
 
 
 
Main Page -> Privacy -> ToS  
Copyright © www.archivedlist.com - All Rights Reserved Worldwide.