Defaulting of Loan and Foreclosure of Property - Case Study Example

This means that with Barney as the surviving owner, the actual owner of the piece of land was Barney and not Opie. In effect, Opie did not have the right to use the property as collateral, and the lender did not have legal possession of the property for foreclosure to take effect. Generally, foreclosure is applicable because foreclosure applies as a legal right given to a mortgage holder, who in this case was the lender to take total possession of the property or sell the property out to use the proceeds to pay an outstanding debt (Alfredo, 2012).

The lender therefore had no covering for this as he had used a property that was not the legal ownership of the borrower. Hitherto, the only form of plea that can be available for Andy’s son is for him to seek repayment negotiations with the lender with more favorable terms of payment. As Barney’s lawyer, a direct claim shall be made on the property forthwith. Abandoning of property for 20 years According to Article 1 to 40 of North Carolina Adverse Possession Law, The person in possession thereof, or defendant in the action, or those under whom he claims, has possessed the property under known and visible lines and boundaries adversely to all other person for 20 years.

What this means that as a lawyer of Barnie, the best form of legal redress that can be sought to incriminate Ernest of his actions and thus get Barney back as the legal owner of the piece of land is by investigating the time that Ernest had started any work on the land. This is especially important as construction of a cabin has already started taking place on the land. Even though Kubasek (2012) explains that adverse possession entitles a person to acquire ownership of property, with neither protest nor permission from the real owner, the North Carolina adverse possession law seems to supersede this in interpretation by giving a definite time frame when adverse possession can take effect.

As investigations go on to claim the land back, lawsuits will also be made against the approach used by Ernest, which could be said to be a threat to the life of Barney. Eviction from residence due to eminent domain The eviction that Barney faces from his Carolina Beach residence is not just an ordinary eviction from a property but one that is explained in legal terms as eminent domain. In simple terms, this is a situation whereby the government is given the right to take over private property, once payment has been made for a purpose that benefits the general welfare (Kubasek, 2012).

Since the government has shown evidence that the property that was to be taken was going to be used for a resort, which will generate jobs and income for the area, it is strongly posited that Barney would have no legal justification to litigate the claim of the property. As the lawyer however, what will be done is to ensure that the government through the town attorney is taken on its words to ensure that Barney gets the full compensation that is due him.