Question

1. What happens when a secured party and an unsecured party claim security interests in the same collateral? Is that fair? Why or why not?

2. How might a notice of default and foreclosure actually benefit a debtor who is behind on payments?

3. Should the federal government regulate the advertising of real property and mortgages on the Internet to protect consumers from potential fraud? Why or why not? If so, what kind of regulations would be appropriate, and how might they be enforced?

Answer 1

Answeeer1:

Secured creditors usually prevail over unsecured creditors and over creditors; the World Health Organization has obtained judgments against the individual however the World Health Organization hasn't begun the legal method to gather. Associate degree hooked up interest (whether or not it's been perfected) has priority over the claims of creditors World Health Organization don't have an interest. Any formed interest has priority over a lien person World Health Organization no heritable his or her lien once perfection, however, a lien person has priority over any unperfected interest (except if a secured party files with relevance a purchase-money interest among 10 days—twenty days in some states once an individual receives possession of the collateral, the secured party has priority over a lien creditor’s rights that arise between the time the interest attaches and therefore the time of filing).

Answer2:

An individual edge most from having debt forgiven and paying a debt is that the commonest technique to accomplish this finish. If a notice of default associate degreed proceeding prompts an otherwise unpunctual individual into paying down debt, the individual edges by preventing harm to his or her credit ratings. different debtors conjointly profit as a result of creditors square measure inspired to create additional credit accessible, and may afford to try and do this at a less expensive value as a result of the number of defaults is reduced.

Answer3:

Yes, as a result of the likelihood that realty consumers and sellers would possibly rather be deceived by dishonest or false advertising is just too nice and therefore the consequences too severe. Acceptable laws would possibly fit people who exist already to manage realty and mortgages and different advertising at the federal level. No, though some applicable federal regulation of selling already exists, as a result of the states ought to additional suitably regulate the advertising of holding and mortgages and different aspects of such transactions that occur among their borders.