Six-Year Saga Of Long Island Couple Fighting Foreclosure Takes New Twist As Trial Judge Agrees To Reopen Foreclosure Judgment

In Riverhead, New York, Newsday reports:

• A state judge Monday agreed to reopen the foreclosure judgment against an East Patchogue couple -- a year after his order to wipe out their mortgage was overturned -- in the latest twist in a six-year battle.



• Judge Jeffrey Arlen Spinner in Riverhead signed an order to temporarily bar IndyMac Mortgage Services from auctioning off the home of Gregory Horoski and his wife, Diana Yano-Horoski.



• A few weeks ago the couple and their attorney, Ivan Young of Bohemia, accused IndyMac and its former law firm, Steven J. Baum in Amherst, of deception on several key details. They're also suing for $10 million in fraud damages. IndyMac hasn't responded in court yet. "The anxiety that has been caused over the years is much more than the value of the mortgage," Greg Horoski said in an interview.



• The central allegation is that IndyMac has no right to foreclose because it does not own the mortgage note. The couple alleges in court documents that IndyMac representatives "did actually slip up" in court by admitting the investor owner was Deutsche Bank.



• Both IndyMac's parent company, One West Bank, and a spokesman for Baum declined to comment. A Deutsche Bank spokesman said the new filing will be reviewed.



• IndyMac started foreclosure against the couple in 2005 and won the case in 2009. The couple fought the judgment, and in recent years the case has been closely watched by attorneys and lenders.



• Two years ago Spinner voided the couple's $300,000 mortgage debt.(1) Last year an appellate division of the state Supreme Court reinstated the foreclosure judgment, saying there was no legal basis to erase the debt.(2)

Source: Judge to reopen Patchogue foreclosure judgment.

(1) IndyMac Bank F.S.B. v Yano-Horoski, 26 Misc 3d 717, 890 N.Y.S.2d 313 (NY Sup. Ct. Suffolk Cty. 2009).

(2) IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. v. Yano-Horoski, 78 A.D.3d 895, 912 N.Y.S.2d 239 (App. Div. 2nd Dept., 2010).

See also NY Appellate Court Tells Trial Judge: Cancelling Mortgage, Note Because Of Lender's "Repugnant, Shocking & Repulsive" Conduct Goes A Bit Too Far.