734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

Quiet title action filed after expiration of 6-month redemption period properly dismissed

Given that the plaintiff filed her complaint outside the six-month redemption period, the trial court properly granted the defendants summary disposition under the authority of Sweet Air. Plaintiff's property was sold at a sheriff's foreclosure sale on 3/2/11, after she had defaulted on her mortgage. She filed her complaint on 7/6/12, seeking to quiet title to the property. The trial court decided the case pursuant to MCL 600.3240, which governs the redemption of property after it is sold at a sheriff's sale during a foreclosure. "Under MCL 600.3240(8), plaintiff had six months to redeem her residential property." In Sweet Air, the defendants tried to argue that they did not receive proper notice of the foreclosure proceedings. However, the court concluded that they "were not timely in their challenge because 'they made no effort to redeem or take any action until well after the redemption period had run.'" Thus, the court held that they could not show prejudice, and their claim of inadequate notice lacked merit. Similarly, plaintiff asserted that defendant-BAC "breached the mortgage by purchasing homeowner's insurance for her property and requiring her to pay for the insurance" and thus, the foreclosure was invalid. "However, she did not file her lawsuit until over one year after her property was sold at the sheriff's sale and took no other action to redeem her property during this period." Further, the court noted that the mortgage "specifically provided that the lender could purchase homeowner's insurance for the property if plaintiff failed to obtain insurance and it indicated that the lender could require plaintiff to provide proof of insurance." Since plaintiff did "not timely provide BAC, after a proper request, with proof of her homeowner's insurance policy covering the period in question," it appeared that "BAC complied with the terms of the mortgage." While she also argued that BAC could not foreclose because she was not in breach of the mortgage, she "presented no evidence contradicting defendants' contention that she was in breach, and BAC properly foreclosed on the property and sold it." Affirmed.


Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000
734-237-6482
734-366-4405