It is thus more than evident that BB&T lied to the borrowers so that BB&T could (a) correct bank errors in the loan documents which errors resulted in BB&T having no lien rights so that (b) BB&T could then set up the borrowers for foreclosure. However, shortly thereafter, BB&T refused to grant any modifications to the time for the borrowers to make payments under the loans, and thereafter declared the borrowers in default and initiated foreclosure proceedings. The proceeding to reform the documents to correct the bank errors consummated. The borrowers agreed to do so on the condition that the relationship between them and BB&T as to extending the time for performance (payment) on the loans, which BB&T had been doing with the borrowers for the prior 3 years, did not change. BB&T requested that the borrowers jointly participate in legal proceedings to reform the loan documents to correct the errors.
The requests for extensions of time to make payments were the result of numerous factors incident to construction issues.Īt some time in 2009, BB&T notified the borrowers that there was an error in the loan documents which had been prepared by the bank, and that as a result, BB&T did not have perfected lien rights against the properties. For a period of three years (from 2006 through 2009), BB&T continually amended the time for performance of payments under the loans on request of the borrowers without ever threatening default or foreclosure.
Bbt online foreclosures series#
The series of loans involved several parcels of real estate being developed as part of a planned resort community. In the Tennessee case, the borrowers had a series of construction loans which had been originated by a lender which was thereafter bought by BB&T. in the Tennessee case, and local counsel Stephen Brauerman, Esq. represents the borrowers in both actions, assisted by local counsel Andrew Farmer, Esq. Rotolante said this recent sale should help stabilize the area market and raise prices.We have two separate cases involving Branch Banking & Trust (BB&T) in two separate states (Tennessee and Delaware) where matters which have occurred demonstrate that BB&T cannot be trusted. He said a bidding war developed for the property, with 12 offers in less than 45 days, and his team’s process of marketing properties to the entire brokerage community nationwide was the reason for a quick sale “generating top dollar.”
Bbt online foreclosures upgrade#
Kislak, which has multiple office buildings in the Miami Lakes area, plans to upgrade the property and then lease the office spaces, said Matthew Rotolante, managing director of the Miami office of Sperry Van Ness. “With a new strong ownership in place, tenants will now have stable ownership with the ability to make improvements to the property, negotiate more aggressively and offer improvement allowances to prospective tenants.” “This building had such a high vacancy due to the foreclosure/distressed situation it was in for an extended period of time prior to the bank taking over all the units,” she said. Camus pointed out office vacancy in general for the Miami Lakes area is 20.6% according to Costar reports. Camus said, was under contract within 60 days and closed within 120 days at the end of June.Īt that time, the building was 36% occupied with an asking rents of $19.50 to $20.50 per square foot.
The property, which was in foreclosure and then owned by BB&T, was listed at the beginning of March, Ms. “There is no relationship between the owners of the three other small units and The Kislak Organization,” Ms. Three privately owned units consist of 6,071 square feet altogether. Kislak bought 19 of the 22 units within the Miami Lakes Corporate Center, totaling 64,511 square feet, at $96 per square foot, according to Caroline Camus, director of sales and operations for Sperry Van Ness Commercial Real Estate Advisors, which represented BB&T.
BB&T Bank sold most of an office condo building at 14750 NW 77th Court in Miami Lakes relatively quickly to the Kislak Organization for $6.2 million, giving the private real estate company ownership of more than 90% of the building and majority ownership rights of the condo association.
0 kommentar(er)
