Inequitable. Unconscionable. Vexatious. Opprobrious.
These are just a few of the choice words a New York state judge used to describe the behaviour of Indymac in a decision in which he wiped out the $292,500 sub-prime mortgage owed by a homeowner to the bank.
Indymac began foreclosure proceedings in 2004 on the home of defendant Dana Yano-Horoski in East Patchogue, New York.
Judge Jeffrey Spinner said that it became clear to the court at a September 2009 settlement conference — one that had been postponed five times due to Indymac’s failure to “cooperate” — that Indymac “had no good faith intention whatsoever of resolving this matter in any manner other than complete and forcible devolution of title…”
The judge repeatedly stated that the homeowners were willing to work out a deal and could do so, and noted Indymac’s repeated failure to make concessions, including the fact that they denied an offer by the defendants’ daughter to purchase the home at fair market value with third-party financing.
The court found that Indymac’s conduct was “wholly unsupportable at law or in equity, greatly egregious and so completely devoid of good faith that equity cannot be permitted on its behalf.”
And thus, finding that if he just dismissed the foreclosure action he “cannot be assured that Plaintiff will not repeat this course of conduct,” he concluded the most effective course of action would be to cancel the entire mortgage.
Skinner leads a foreclsoure unit created “to accommodate settlement conferences that have reached 2,400” in his county, according to the New York Law Journal.
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.