The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently affirmed a trial court order setting aside a foreclosure sale where the foreclosing lender failed to satisfy certain requirements to provide notice to the homeowner.
In the trial court, the homeowner contended that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the matter because the lender failed to comply with the notice requirements of the Homeowner’s Emergency Mortgage Act, 35 P.S. §§ 1680.401c et seq. (“Act 91″).
According to the appeals court:
- More specifically, Appellee [homeowner] maintained that the Act 91 notice she received from Appellant [foreclosing lender] failed to inform her that she had thirty days to have a face-to-face meeting with Appellant.After holding a hearing, the trial court agreed with Appellee that the Act 91 notice was deficient. The court issued an order setting aside the sheriff’s sale and the judgment; the order also dismissed Appellant’s complaint without prejudice.
For the reasons set forth in the three-judge Superior Court panel’s ruling, the trial court’s order was affirmed.
Read the ruling here