Among loan sales, GERSON LAW FIRM represented an institutional lender selling first mortgage loans secured by Escondido Country Club and Stoneridge Country Club in San Diego County. GERSON LAW FIRM previously represented the same lender in a loan sale of a first mortgage loan on Lake San Marcos Country Club in San Diego County.

Further solidifying its reputation as a law firm leader in closing GSE loans, in the first quarter GERSON LAW FIRM closed more than 40 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac multifamily loans, from Maine to California, as well as providing support on more than 20 GSE loans closed internally by a GERSON LAW FIRM client. During the same period of time, GERSON LAW FIRM assisted credit union and private funds with their closings.

GERSON LAW FIRM also assisted clients with obtaining receivers for commercial property in California as well as representing three receivers in five different receivership matters, two of which required resolution of complex issues.

During the first quarter of 2013, GERSON LAW FIRM also assisted its developer and real estate portfolio owner clients in numerous transactions.

GERSON LAW FIRM APC represents clients on all matters real estate and business related, both transactional and litigation. GERSON LAW FIRM APC is nationally recognized for its representation of some of the nation’s largest lenders on loan closings, special servicing, and enforcement proceedings throughout the United States. GERSON LAW FIRM APC practice includes representing lenders closing loans under Fannie Mae’s DUS Lending Program and Freddie Mac’s Program Plus for multifamily investments. GERSON LAW FIRM APC represents major national banks, life insurance companies, and private funds in all matters lending related, including originations and loss mitigation strategies, for hotels, office buildings, shopping centers, multifamily and construction

“If an investor or owner is thinking about financing, (they should) do it sooner in the year rather than later,” said Hyman, Centerline’s senior managing director.

FHFA’s 2013 Conservatorship Scorecard for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac called for a 10 percent reduction in the government-sponsored enterprises’ multifamily lending. The GSEs set a record last year with more than $63 billion in combined multifamily lending. The scorecard calls for a maximum of $56.9 billion in combined multifamily lending this year.

Hyman said the multifamily market could see less interest for loans from the GSEs in the fourth quarter of 2013 as they work toward the new, lower goals, but he said a sizeable “runway” to do business remains. “For example, Fannie Mae’s multifamily volume of $33 billion in 2012 was their third-highest year in history. Prior to 2007, they averaged $20 billion a year, well below a target of $30 billion for 2013,” he said.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s share of the multifamily mortgage market has declined from 90 percent during the peak of the financial crisis to 45 percent today. FHFA said a reduction in the GSEs’ multifamily lending activity will allow private capital to compete more effectively.

Hyman said other goals FHFA laid out in its plan for the GSEs focus on the single-family sector and will not affect multifamily borrowing.

“The establishment of a new company to be jointly owned by the two organizations for securitizing single-family loans will reduce redundancies between the two GSEs and realize significant savings for the taxpayer (according to FHFA),” Hyman said. But he called the GSEs’ multifamily businesses “completely different in philosophy and operating model,” from their single-family businesses, so he said the creation of the new company will have no impact on multifamily owners.

Most important to the lending industry should be the court’s finding that:

“We are mindful that foreclosures are a far to frequent occurrence in today’s difficult financial times. But the hardship must not become a haven for those who, as here, do not appear to make any good faith effort to resolve the issue, but instead, seek shelter in minor ministerial omissions or speculative acts that neither misled nor prejudiced them.”

As over 30% of lawsuits in some California counties now relate to borrowers challenging foreclosures, the court’s holding in this case – especially if appealed and upheld by the California Supreme Court – may have a large effect on disposition of those cases now clogging the court system.

The implications are profound for lenders engaged in loan workouts (if not loan originations as well). The door is now open for what transpired in oral discussions as opposed to what a final written agreement provided. Morever, if a Borrower refuses to read a contract, and admits as such, they may still submit evidence of fraud. This may well lead down the road to new lender liability litigation in both commercial and residential real estate finance.

GLF Best Practice Recommendations include for commercial loan modifications and forbearance agreements to require a borrower have counsel and to provide an opinion of counsel as to the enforceability of the agreement, have a provision in the agreement that the borrower has read the agreement and understands its terms and waives all rights to contest its enforcement on the grounds that it may not be consistent with oral discussions, and require that the borrower place its initials next to that paragraph.

In December alone, GERSON LAW FIRM closed 20 commercial real estate loans which was at a clip of a loan each business day of the month, and resulted in more than $119 million in closings. Both volume and pace closely tracked its lender engagements for commercial real estate loan closings in November 2012. During the same 60 day period, GERSON LAW FIRM assisted lenders with loan assumptions and other loan servicing issues. As throughout all other months of 2012, loan closings and loan servicing matters handled spread throughout not only the western United States but throughout the country, including a loan closing for student housing in Oxford, Missisippi.

“We continue to maintain our reputation for the largest loan closing practice and loan enforcement practice in the western states,” said Gordon L. Gerson, managing principal. “We know what lenders need, what borrowers want, and how to get them to the finish line fast, along with value added insight on a myriad of issues.”

http://www.globest.com/news/12_483/orangecounty/residential/-326967.html

Among highlights for lender engagements were more 17 loan origination closing plus extensions and modifications of multifamily loans totaling more than $75,000,000.

During the first thirty days of the fourth quarter, GERSON LAW FIRM APC also had three receivership actions in which the receiver successfully sold real property, and the firm’s lawyers focused on obtaining court orders that made it possible for title insurance companies to insure sales.

November highlights also included Gordon Gerson with on a panel of the annual Trigild Lender’s Conference. The panel discussion was on issues confronting portfolio lenders. Gordon Gerson guided conference attendees on issues relating to California’s One Form of Action and Security First rules.

• A general prohibition against sending a demand letter that includes a request or demand for money or an offer or agreement to accept money, effective immediately
• A revision to the existing mandatory written advisory that must be provided with a demand letter or complaint, effective immediately
• A requirement that a lawyer send a copy of a demand letter to the State Bar and the California Commission on Disability Access, effective Jan. 1, 2013
• A requirement that a demand letter sent by a lawyer include the lawyer’s State Bar license number, effective Jan. 1, 2013
• A requirement that a lawyer send a copy of a complaint to the California Commission on Disability Access, effective Jan. 1, 2013
• A requirement that demand letters and complaints contain plain language sufficient for a recipient business or property owner to determine the basis of alleged violations, including: specific identification of each access barrier encountered; the date of the incident; and a description of how each barrier interfered with full and equal access, effective Jan. 1, 2013
• A requirement that a complaint be verified by the plaintiff, effective Jan. 1, 2013. A complaint filed without verification is subject to a motion to strike
• A reduction of statutory damages if specified conditions apply, effective immediately
• The establishment of procedures for a mandatory evaluation conference, effective as to claims filed on or after Jan. 1, 2013