Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Any borrower who has been relieved of liability for the repayment of the indebtedness may submit his affidavit of such fact to the clerk of the superior court in the county where the security instrument is recorded, which clerk shall enter a notation on the recorded security instrument to the effect that the borrower has been relieved of liability under the terms of the security instrument and the note secured thereby. Any such transfer fee shall not be considered interest and shall not be taken into account in the calculation of interest and shall not be considered a "rate of charge" as that term is defined in Code Section 7-4-30;
Such acceleration shall be permitted only within a 60 day period after the lender acquires actual knowledge of the sale or transfer to such person; and
(Ga. L. 1979, p. 345, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1980, p. 585, § 1; Ga. L. 1981, p. 480, §§ 1-9; Ga. L. 1991, p. 1653, §§ 2-3.)
- Ga. L. 1981, p. 480, § 10, not codified by the General Assembly, provided as follows: "This Act shall become effective upon its approval by the Governor or upon its becoming law without his approval; and the provisions of the Act shall apply to any transfer or sale of real estate and the assumption of indebtedness in connection therewith which is accomplished on or after the effective date of this Act; but the Act and this amendatory Act shall not affect or impair the rights, duties, or interests arising out of or flowing from instruments executed prior to the effective date of this amended Act."
- For article surveying 1979 legislative developments in commercial law, see 31 Mercer L. Rev. 13 (1979). For article surveying recent legislative and judicial developments in Georgia's real property laws, see 31 Mercer L. Rev. 187 (1979). For article surveying developments in Georgia real property law from mid-1980 through mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 219 (1981).
- Georgia laws restricting the enforcement of "due-on-sale" provisions have been preempted by the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-320, 96 Stat. 1469) which expressly permits a lender to "enforce a contract containing a due-on-sale clause with respect to a real property loan." Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Valdosta Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 175 Ga. App. 614, 333 S.E.2d 849 (1985).
O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5 does not conflict with Georgia's long-standing policy of adjusting usury laws and other regulatory policies to promote a stable and active residential mortgage lending industry. The scheme under O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5 that attempts to restrict loan modifications made in connection with due-on-sale clauses and thereby blocks a traditional method of adjusting mortgage pool rates; however, it does not necessarily limit a lender's ability to adjust market-pool spreads because it was: totally prospective in operation; coupled with a floating usury rate; and accompanied by changes in the traditional long term, fixed rate lending practices. Lindenberg v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 528 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 691 F.2d 974 (11th Cir. 1982).
In the plan of the General Assembly, O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5(b)(1) through (3), (5), and (6) provide the substantive provisions of the Act and O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5(b)(4) provides for its operation. Lindenberg v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 90 F.R.D. 255 (N.D. Ga. 1981).
O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5(b)(4) is the provision that makes that section's prohibitions operative; by itself, it has no meaning. Rather, it takes on meaning in the context of O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5(b)(1) through (3), (5), and (6) ; these are the paragraphs that determine what provisions and practices are contrary to that section and cannot be enforced pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5(b)(4). Lindenberg v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 90 F.R.D. 255 (N.D. Ga. 1981).
Where three parties are involved, release of the original borrower and acceptance of a purchaser-grantee is valid consideration for a new contract at new interest rates, even before expiration of the original loan term. Lindenberg v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 528 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 691 F.2d 974 (11th Cir. 1982).
Contracts entered into under one usury statute remain enforceable on their original terms even if the statute changes, whereas any contract entered into after changing the law is to be governed by the new law even if the new contract concerns a preexisting debt, such that even if an original loan contract was void for usury, a new promise to pay the loan after an increase in the usury limits was binding under the new limits. Therefore, the plaintiffs' promise to pay the remaining portion of their grantors' debt must be judged at the time of their promise. Lindenberg v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 528 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 691 F.2d 974 (11th Cir. 1982).
O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5 is binding on federally chartered savings and loan associations. 1979 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U79-17.
- While O.C.G.A. § 44-14-5 applies to transactions involving instruments executed prior to its effective date, the exact effect of that section on these transactions must be resolved after the instruments and the transactions are studied on a case by case basis. 1979 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U79-17.
- Validity and enforceability of due-on-sale real-estate mortgage provisions, 61 A.L.R.4th 1070.
Validity and construction of provision of mortgage or other real-estate financing contract prohibiting prepayment for a fixed period of time, 81 A.L.R.4th 423.
No results found for Georgia Code 44-14-5.