<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Traktman Law Office</title>
	<atom:link href="http://traklawoffice.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://traklawoffice.com</link>
	<description>Professional, Personalized, Cost Effective Legal Services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:02:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Key Provisions of California Residential Landlord-Tenant Law by Real Estate Newsletter, Vol. 1 &#124; Traktman Law Office</title>
		<link>http://traklawoffice.com/2010/09/key-provisions-of-calfornia-residential-landlord-tenant-law/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Real Estate Newsletter, Vol. 1 &#124; Traktman Law Office</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://traklawoffice.com/?p=270#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Attached is an article which provides a basic outline of the elements landlord-tenant law. It may answer some of your questions or provide food for thought. Key Provisions of California Residential Landlord-Tenant Law [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Attached is an article which provides a basic outline of the elements landlord-tenant law. It may answer some of your questions or provide food for thought. Key Provisions of California Residential Landlord-Tenant Law [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on California Short Sales And Deficiency Judgments by Terry Traktman</title>
		<link>http://traklawoffice.com/2010/09/california-short-sales-and-deficiency-judgements/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry Traktman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:31:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://traklawoffice.com/?p=223#comment-7</guid>
		<description>There is a bill which is on the governor&#039;s desk which would expressly include short sale transactions in non-deficiency category. See, SB 931, proposed CCP 580e. Unclear if it will be retroactive, and unclear if it can be waived by &#039;reservation of right to deficiency&quot; found in most short sale letters. 

580e.
(a) No judgment shall be rendered for any deficiency under a note secured by a first deed of trust or first mortgage for a dwelling of not more than four units, in any case in which the trustor or mortgagor sells the dwelling for less than the remaining amount of the indebtedness due at the time of sale with the written consent of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage. Written consent of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage to that sale shall obligate that holder to accept the sale proceeds as full payment and to fully discharge the remaining amount of the indebtedness on the first deed of trust or first mortgage.
(b) If the trustor or mortgagor commits either fraud with respect to the sale of, or waste with respect to, the real property that secures the first deed of trust or first mortgage, this section shall not limit the ability of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage to seek damages and use existing rights and remedies against the trustor or mortgagor or any third party for fraud or waste.
(c) This section shall not apply if the trustor or mortgagor is a corporation or political subdivision of the state.

Terry Traktman</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a bill which is on the governor&#8217;s desk which would expressly include short sale transactions in non-deficiency category. See, SB 931, proposed CCP 580e. Unclear if it will be retroactive, and unclear if it can be waived by &#8216;reservation of right to deficiency&#8221; found in most short sale letters. </p>
<p>580e.<br />
(a) No judgment shall be rendered for any deficiency under a note secured by a first deed of trust or first mortgage for a dwelling of not more than four units, in any case in which the trustor or mortgagor sells the dwelling for less than the remaining amount of the indebtedness due at the time of sale with the written consent of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage. Written consent of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage to that sale shall obligate that holder to accept the sale proceeds as full payment and to fully discharge the remaining amount of the indebtedness on the first deed of trust or first mortgage.<br />
(b) If the trustor or mortgagor commits either fraud with respect to the sale of, or waste with respect to, the real property that secures the first deed of trust or first mortgage, this section shall not limit the ability of the holder of the first deed of trust or first mortgage to seek damages and use existing rights and remedies against the trustor or mortgagor or any third party for fraud or waste.<br />
(c) This section shall not apply if the trustor or mortgagor is a corporation or political subdivision of the state.</p>
<p>Terry Traktman</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on California Short Sales And Deficiency Judgments by ray ross</title>
		<link>http://traklawoffice.com/2010/09/california-short-sales-and-deficiency-judgements/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>ray ross</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Sep 2010 04:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://traklawoffice.com/?p=223#comment-6</guid>
		<description>This is the first interpretation of the code that I have seen that makes any sense. Extremely well thought and explained. I wish I had never seen it, as it creates enough &quot;reasonable doubt &quot; to stop many of my potential &quot;non-recourse short sale&quot;  transactions in their proverbial tracks. Oh well, back to the negotiation table.

I</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the first interpretation of the code that I have seen that makes any sense. Extremely well thought and explained. I wish I had never seen it, as it creates enough &#8220;reasonable doubt &#8221; to stop many of my potential &#8220;non-recourse short sale&#8221;  transactions in their proverbial tracks. Oh well, back to the negotiation table.</p>
<p>I</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

