Stayviolation.com provides this commentary of In Re Pratt (our coverage here). Their coverage is quite extensive, but it concludes thusly:
...in this writer's opinion, that was the position that GMAC left the Pratts. GMAC left the Pratts with the undesirable alterntives of leaving the hunk of junk that belonged to GMAC in their front yard, or paying the remaining portion of the loan to which the Pratts were no longer liable. The 1st Circuit apparently saw it that way as well.
Comments