Re printers: the census of general wisdom is that printers are the scourge of modern-day technological existence. A pestilence to be included in a class with viruses, plagues, locusts and elevator music, i.e., those things that exist to bedevil the human race and test our collective patience. They've sent many to the point of meltdown. Still you have to give a reluctant hat tip to the marketing wizards that recognized the profit potential in ink jet cartridges. Take a product that costs less than a penny - few drops of ink in plastic and sell it for twenty bucks! A brilliant if evil concept. Think of the inkjet barons now locked down like the rest of us in isolation albeit in mansions paid for at the expense of our sanity and ink spattered clothing.Wanda, I no longer maintain anything less than 3 broken printers. Yes, they all still scan! One is officially a cat bed on top of my dining room buffet under the window. It was an easy conversion with a bath rug to cover. (washable too!)
I learned my lesson, I scheduled the ink jet to turn itself on and off DAILY. Without that little puff of air on startup... ink dries up inside the jets and it's BYE BYE PRINTER AND THAT LAST ROUND OF INK CARTRIDGES!
AnnieMac this could rotate out in ongoing fashion. I'm disappointed because I have my evidence and I'm ready to shut the door on these people. SO angry that this lasted this THIS long. I've just discovered my mortgage broker had pre-determined my cough, "new" address for taxes without asking me. Years later I have an address mismatch. Burns me every time I see remnants of those frauds.A Lottery of Our Own......not sure what we're betting. But wagers on how long we are going to have to wait for court time now....hearing postponed until May, no June, perhaps August, but wait, September might be more of a sure thing. What are the rest of you hearing on hearings?
Thanks for the time reading and your input. the  is on page 5 starts "It is despicable a..... measly sum" I am afraid it is too strong? Wanda did not think so. With all the stuff of what's happening with the virus, I am not too worry about the servicers and mREIT companies. Ocwen stock is at 45 cents/share NRZ is at $4.40 (from $17 a couple months ago) they'll probably go bankrupt, can not fulfill their sevicing advances and taxes, won't be able to pay legal fees to foreclose on us. Too bad!!!!!More Trouble,
I'm reading your appeal and again it's forcefully written. Also read the Respondent's brief.
The Respondents claim that you can't appeal because you lack a substantial right and there's a technical meaning there which you address with on point case law. They're asserting the malfeasance is superfluous and without relevance because when your payments ceased so did your rights and their obligations. There's the familiar subtext that as a defaulting homeowner your contractual rights end and the bank's contractual obligations are discharged due to non payment. But that's not what the terms of the loan contract provide or even contract law in general.
Until not too long ago a material breach could result in the loss of contractual rights. In the first Restatement of Contracts you breach and you're history. Then in 1979 Restatement (second) of Contracts was promulgated by the ALI and a significant change took place that's reflected in the terms of the mortgage loan contract.
It was the concept of cure in Restatement §§ 237, 238. Previously a material breach allowed a party to terminate a contract but now unless a contract states otherwise there are cure rights which preserve the breaching party's rights under the contract by precluding the injured party from cancelling the contract without the opportunity to cure. Thus it affords the breaching party a second chance at contract performance while extending contractual rights until they can no longer occur.
Your right to cure is a substantial legal right. In your DOT there's probably some language also providing the right to "assert the non existence of default or any other defense to foreclosure", a very substantial legal right indeed.
Your argument essentially is that cure is not possible because the respondents are not the PETE or;
Cure is not necessary because the misconduct by the Plaintiffs caused you prejudice sufficient to offset the cure amount or;
Cure is inaccurate because third party payments have been applied reducing your loan balance thus their cure amount is in excess of the amount owed, a breach of the DOT and a violation of the FDCPA as overcharging is an attempt to collect money and consequently actionable under section 1692f(1).
Anyway, all of that was intended to demonstrate that you have a substantial legal right and a just claim to appeal the order or at least as I see it.
I haven't found the  but will look again.