Micro-Lending and Missions

I have been studying microbanking recently to see what role it might play in foreign and domestic missions. I went to the opening of the movie To Catch A Dollar (http://www.tocatchadollar.com/), a documentary about bringing the Grameen Bank micro-lending structure to the US. One of the panelists on the movie was the head of www.kiva.org, which is a non-profit designed to link concerned people to worthy poor people to fund loans in increments of $25. The head of Kiva is a very young tech-savy person, and Kiva has really grown fast. “Since Kiva was founded in 2005: 571,457 Kiva lenders; $205 million in loans; 98.65% Repayment rate - We work with: 131 Field Partners; 450 volunteers around the world; 59 different countries” (http://www.kiva.org/about). From a missional viewpoint, it seems that this has application in meeting a very immediate tangible needs of the people ministered to, immediate and natural connections to locals (with weekly meeting requirements between the lending organization and the borrowers according to the Grameen model), and entry into otherwise closed countries. A missionary could look into either becoming a field partner so that people they interact with could become loan recipients (http://www.kiva.org/partners/info), or assist their people to get whatever they need together to work with another field partner (http://www.kiva.org/partners). Either of these could be a low-cost entry into a field which could really benefit people and open doors for the Gospel. Please contact me if you're interested in this.
Required Disclaimer: This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.  An attorney licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the matter occurs must interpret the facts of any specific case and advise as to whether and how any of these concepts may apply to a particular case.

Virtual Notary - NOT IN CA

See the following release from the California Secretary of State before paying for an online notary.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/notary/customer-alert.htm

Notaries are pretty accessible. Until there is a clear safe harbor for this kind of notarization, don't risk it.
Required Disclaimer: This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.  An attorney licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the matter occurs must interpret the facts of any specific case and advise as to whether and how any of these concepts may apply to a particular case.

Negotiation and the Bible

I once wrote to a client when he was negotiating with someone on a commission:

"…Don’t write anything back saying “agreed” or anything of the sort. Just ask questions, like, so, is __________ also ok with the staggered payment of the lease commission if we agree to the 4% commission to her? The distillation of my 19 years as an attorney is avoid making definitive statements. Just restate the other person’s position and ask if you understand them correctly. It generally goes better for you, and a question can rarely be used as a legal “admission.” Actually, it goes way back, to the Bible:

“19 My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, 20 for man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires.” James 1:19-20.

“8 Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.” Prov. 17:28.

“A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” Prov 15:1.

“It is a trap to dedicate something rashly and only later to consider one’s vows.” Prov. 20:25.

“Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”  Prov. 11:14.

“‘It’s no good, it's no good!’ says the buyer-- then goes off and boasts about the purchase.” Prov. 20:14.  A principle of economics is that a person’s actions are better indicators of belief/values than his or her words.

Ben Franklin also thought this method was the best for argumentation: “But he soon learned how to be modest in argument: to say, “It seems to me,” or “I apprehend a thing to be so.” Also, he found one could often argue even more effectively by not making firm declarations, but by asking subtle and gentle questions. His opponents would soon make concessions from which they could fine no logical way out. Frequently, in this way, he could win an argument and yet not lose a friend.” Benjamin Franklin: Inventing America by Edwin S. Gaustad."

Perhaps one of the greatest examples of negotiation is between Abraham and God on the destruction of Sodom related in Genesis 18:22-23.  Abraham starts out with: “Will you indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?  Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it?  Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?”  God concedes that he would not destroy the city if 50 righteous could be found in it.  Abraham then goes back lowering the threshold, to 45, 40, 30, 20 and finally 10, each time gaining a concession that the city would not be destroyed if the lowered number of righteous could be found.  Much has been written on this interaction, and I wouldn’t attempt to add any more insight to those discussions.  I do observe, however, some interesting dynamics at play in this story.  The bargaining power between God and Abraham was obviously unequal.  Abraham knew who he was negotiating against, and his values.  He reminded God of those values and worked respectfully and tactfully toward the desired goal.  He also avoided the head on conflict and used more questions than statements.

Can we extract any principles from these?  Here are some, but I would love to here your thoughts:

• Learn as much as you possibly can about what you’re negotiating about, what your goals are, what your best alternatives to making a deal are, your negotiating partner and his or her goals, values and best alternatives.
• Listen more than talk.
• Avoid head to head conflicts.
• Ask a lot of questions.
• Take time for reflection and obtaining advice before making a commitment.
• Get good advice before making a commitment.
• Keep in mind the long term relationship more than just the immediate transaction.
• Commit to a win-win or no deal strategy.
• Remember to question everything that the other person says keeping in mind that their actions are a better indicator of belief than are words.

New California anti-deficiency provisions effective January 1, 2011

Effective January 1, 2011, the holder of a first trust deed secured by 1-4 family residential dwelling units may not obtain a deficiency judgment for the unpaid balance of the note after the lender accepts a "short payoff" or "short sale," i.e. less than the full payoff in the sale of the property to a third party. While this does not specifically state that a lender may not demand a separate unsecured note as a condition for approving the short sale and does not state that the provision is not waive-able by the debtor after a default has occurred, I would fully expect that a court would not allow a lender to successfully impose such a condition. This adds to the California maze of anti-deficiency/one action rules when it comes to the rights and remedies of real property secured lenders in California. If you have any questions as to how these laws affect a particular loan, please feel free to contact me. As with all the tinkering done by the legislature in the area of foreclosures, it is an open question as to whether this will help or hurt the situation. The lender may be left with the choice of accept or reject a short payoff as payment in full even when the borrower would like to offer an unsecured note.


Cal Code Civ Proc § 580e (2010)

§ 580e. Deficiency under note secured by first deed of trust or first motgage; Sale for less that remaining amount of indebtedness due; Written consent of holder of first deed of trust or first mortgage as obligation; Fraud



(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.


History:

Added Stats 2010 ch 701 § 1 (SB 931), effective January 1, 2011.

DEERING'S CALIFORNIA CODE ANNOTATED
Copyright © 2011 by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
a member of the LexisNexis Group.
All rights reserved.

Required Disclaimer: This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.