Canadian Funding Corporation, in conjunction with its CEO, Moishe Alexander, recently funded a 34 unit condominium development in Southern Ontario. The project, which has now been completed, is 100% sold out.

Moishe Alexander and his co-lenders funded the deal with no presales when the bank said no. The project is now complete with 100% sell out and the developer says “Thanks to Canadian Funding Corporation we were able to develop this 34 unit premiere condominium project which is 100% sold out and will be another anchor project, Thanks Moishe”.

Moishe Alexander noted that the economics of the deal made sense, even though it did not meet the criteria that banks use for funding. As a result, the Canadian Funding Corporation was able to provide funding.

About Moishe Alexander and the Canadian Funding Corporation

As Founder and President of Canadian Funding Corporation, Mr. Moishe Alexander has led the way in funding commercial mortgages and small to large construction projects, including large multi-residential building sites.

When no other lender would assist families in need of a third mortgage to save their homes, Mr. Moishe Alexander provided the necessary relief. Moishe Alexander led his team of real estate and mortgage lending experts at Canadian Funding Corporation in creating a specific funding plan to keep families in their homes.

Canadian Funding Corporation was developed in 2005 by Moishe Alexander and is based out of the greater Toronto, Ontario area. By competently assessing the risks involved, Moishe Alexander is able to analyze all options available and provide the best solution for his respective clients, even if banks or private lenders have turned them away before. Through Canadian Funding Corporation and the large network he has acquired in the mortgage and finance business over the past three years, Moishe Alexander has access to over $75 million in private funds and, therefore, is able to fund just about any transaction.

Mr. Moishe Alexander is also a philanthropist and donates a great deal of his personal time to the community. Moishe Alexander enjoys helping the poor and families in need, regularly donating to charities such as the United Chesed Charity, the Jada Foundation, the Humane Society, and the Canadian Cancer Society. When not working at Canadian Funding Corporation, Moishe Alexander is busy coordinating committees for events held by the many aforementioned charities.

Barack Obama laid out his foreclosure-prevention plan in February. Part of the program provides incentives for mortgage-servicing businesses to reduce loan payments to reasonable levels. This is for people who are already in trouble and also for those who are at risk of falling behind. Over 200,000 borrowers that are delinquent or at risk of default have received trial adjustments — that is the first step. Obama administration officials said the adjustment program could help three to four million people.

Lisa Sitkin, staff attorney at Housing and Economic Rights Advocates in Oakland, Calif., said she was very pleased when help for at-risk borrowers was declared. “It’s disturbing to see that it is several months later and it’s still not up and running at any scale that is meaningful,” said Lisa Sitkin. Mortgage-servicing companies said they were totally committed to the plan. Bank of America Corp. is starting to implement the Obama plan for all at-risk borrowers, a company spokeswoman said. Bank of America has been putting these borrowers on a plan that allows them to make a partial mortgage payment for several months and then be considered for a loan modification.

Borrowers are saying they are being told to stop making loan payments and seek a modification later. Alisha Gorder of Bridgeport, Conn., was referred to Auriton Solutions, an approved housing counselor, after she called a mortgage industry hotline because she wasn’t getting anywhere with her mortgage company. Ms. Gorder has been struggling to make ends meet because sales have slid at her children’s boutique and her husband, Christoph, who runs disaster-relief programs for the nonprofit AmeriCares, had to take a 21% cut in compensation.

Wells Fargo & Co. didn’t begin offering some at-risk borrowers loan modifications under the Obama plan until early June. One issue was that mortgage companies were waiting for final federal guidelines on key issues such as how to determine whether a loan modification is preferable to a foreclosure, said Mary Coffin, head of loan servicing for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage.

“Stop paying on the mortgage since you don’t have the resources to cover all your expenses,” an Auriton employee said in a letter to Ms. Gorder in mid-July. The letter advised Ms. Gorder to focus on basic living expenses and to follow up with the lender after she had increased her income. Ms. Gorder said she was stunned. “To be told I should do something to put my family in this risky position doesn’t make sense,” she said. “I had a lot of faith in the system. For me, it’s really shocking and jarring to see that the system doesn’t work.”

President Tiff Worley called the missive “poorly worded.” But he added that it “correctly recognizes that this person has an upside-down budget situation and is still shorting things to her family every month.” Employees at mortgage-servicing companies often tell borrowers they can’t be helped if they are current on their loans, said Michael van Zalingen, director of homeownership services for the nonprofit Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago.

Other borrowers complained of long waits for help. Suzanne DeNick of New Jersey said J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. told her it would take four to six weeks for her modification request to be assigned to an analyst and another 90 to 120 days before she received a decision. The company also asked her to resend her application, further delaying the process.

A J.P. Morgan spokesman acknowledged “that the process took more than our typical time frame,” but added that “it took some time for us to receive a completed and signed paperwork package from the borrower.” Once paperwork is complete, it typically takes 30 to 60 days to determine whether a modification is possible, she said.

There is much confusion regarding who is eligible. A spokeswoman from Bank of America said, “Given widespread public mis-expectations, a significant percentage of borrowers seeking Home Affordable modifications under the imminent-default provisions will not qualify.”

Mortgages may be equitable or legal. A mortgage may take one of a number of forms, the existence of such which will depend on the jurisdiction under which the mortgage is made. Common law jurisdictions have over time created two main forms of mortgage: by legal charge and mortgage by demise.

Legal charge

To protect the lender, a mortgage by legal charge is usually recorded in a public register. Since mortgage debt is often the largest debt owed by the debtor, banks and other mortgage lenders run title searches of the real property to make certain that there are no mortgages already registered on the debtor’s property which might have higher priority. Tax liens, in some cases, will come ahead of mortgages. For this reason, if a borrower has delinquent property taxes, the bank will often pay them to prevent the lienholder from foreclosing and wiping out the mortgage.

In a mortgage by legal charge or technically “a charge by deed expressed to be by way of legal mortgage”, the debtor remains the legal owner of the property, but the creditor gains sufficient rights over it to enable them to enforce their security, such as a right to take possession of the property or sell it.

This type of mortgage is most common in the United States and, since the Law of Property Act 1925, it has been the usual form of mortgage in England and Wales.

Legal Charge Video provided by Canadian Funding Corp Innovations

Demise

Mortgages by demise were the original form of mortgage, and continue to be used in many jurisdictions, and in a small minority of states in the United States. Many other common law jurisdictions have either abolished or minimised the use of the mortgage by demise. For example, in England and Wales this type of mortgage is no longer available, by virtue of the Land Registration Act 2002.

In a mortgage by demise, the mortgagee (the lender) becomes the owner of the mortgaged property until the loan is repaid or other mortgage obligation fulfilled in full, a process known as “redemption”. This kind of mortgage takes the form of a conveyance of the property to the creditor, with a condition that the property will be returned on redemption.

Equitable

In an equitable mortgage the lender is secured by taking possession of all the original title documents of the property and by borrower’s signing a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed (MODTD). This document is an undertaking by the borrower that he/she has deposited the title documents with the bank with his own wish and will, in order to secure the financing.

Lender
Mortgagee is a party to whom property is mortgaged, usually a lender. Mortgage provides security to the lender. Given the large sum of money involved in financing a property, a mortgage lender will usually want security for the loan that will provide a claim upon that security and will take precedence over other creditors. A mortgage accomplishes this security.

The lender loans the money and registers the mortgage with the title to the property. The borrower gives the lender the mortgage as security for the loan, receives the funds, makes the required payments and maintains possession of the property. The borrower has the right to have the mortgage discharged from the title once the debt is paid. If the mortgager fails to repay the loan according to the conditions set forth by the lender, then the mortgagee reserves the right to foreclose on the property.

Borrower
A mortgagor is the borrower in a mortgage–they owe the obligation secured by the mortgage. Generally, the debtor must meet the conditions of the underlying loan or other obligation and the conditions of the mortgage. Otherwise, the debtor usually runs the risk of foreclosure of the mortgage by the creditor to recover the debt. Typically the debtors will be the individual home-owners, landlords or businesses who are purchasing their property by way of a loan.

Most buyers of real property would have difficulty saving enough money to make an outright purchase of real estate. The use of debt increases a buyer’s ability to buy through a combination of down payment and debt. As a result a real estate transaction seldom occurs without buyers relying on borrowed funds.

Borrowing for investment purposes
Aside from the absence of large amount of available money, there are several reasons why an investor (including a buyer of real estate) might borrow funds. Some of these include:

To diversify investments and reduce overall risk by using only part of the available funds for any one investment. However the mortgage loan enables him to purchase more assets than he would otherwise been able to, and therefore in general increases investment risk rather than reducing it.

To invest the borrowed funds at a higher rate of interest (yield) than the borrowing rate; for example, a sum is borrowed at an annual interest rate of 7% per year and used to invest in a project that returns 10% per year. This is likely to be speculative and there is usually a possibility that the project may turn out to return less than 7% per year or to lose money.

To free up equity for other purposes; for example, a commercial enterprise may prefer to use funds to purchase inventory or equipment instead of investing only in land and buildings.

To obtain a tax benefit. In some countries (such as Canada), mortgage interest is not tax deductible, but loans made for investment purposes are.

Other participants
Because of the complicated legal exchange, or conveyance, of the property, one or both of the main participants are likely to require legal representation. The terminology varies with legal jurisdiction; see lawyer, solicitor and conveyancer.

Because of the complex nature of many markets the debtor may approach a mortgage broker or financial adviser to help them source an appropriate creditor, typically by finding the most competitive loan.

The debt is, in civil law jurisdictions, referred to as hypothecation, which may make use of the services of a hypothecary to assist in the hypothecation.

Yes, MIchael Jackson’s death is sad, particularly with the fact that he left behind three oddly named children. But why does Jesse Jackson’s presence have to be so – so – well – present. Certainly Jesse and Michael were not separated at birth although they do share the same last name. He has been consoling the Jackson family (not his own family considering his own righteous philandering). He has been advocating for them to have additional autopsies performed. He is all over the story.

“Now Rev. Jesse Jackson wants everybody to not commit suicide,” said a Canadian Funding Corp representative. “It’s a nice idea although we think that the Michael Jackson fans that are so distraught are not going be particularly listening to his message of mental hygiene. On the other hand, since he carries the same last name, the suicidal fans who are not thinking clearly may think that he belongs to Michael Jackson family.”

At this point Canadian Funding Corp asks at which church the Reverend performs his clergyman duties. Okay, that was probably unfair but we wonder a lot of things about the Jesster.

Here is a quote from Jesse Jackson. “This is a time when hearts are heavy. There is great pain but great cause to celebrate Michael’s life. It made Michael happy saying ‘We Are the World.’ Don’t self destruct. We fall down sometimes, we get back up. That’s the right thing to do. In Michael’s name let’s live together as brothers and sisters and not die apart as fools.”

Oh brother.

Pavel Talalayev, a Russian Jackson impersonator who spent years and thousands of dollars on cosmetic surgery to look like his idol, was among the first to attempt to take his own life. “I started receiving calls from other fans, I tried to calm them down…And then I let myself go,” he told Russian news site Life.ru, as translated by MosNews, after his rescue by doctors. “I don’t know why the doctors saved me. I want to be with Michael.” No comment. Really. No comment.

At Canadian Funding Corp Innovations we regret any loss of life. We think it is a tragedy when anyone takes their life. We are only commenting on the personalities that are involved. Especially our favourite Jesster.

Oh by the way the company’s name is, wait for it – Microsoft. Microsoft is the company we all love to hate. Maybe they thought that vomit would make us draw nearer.

“Vomit is not a widely used advertising hook,” said a Canadian Funding Corp representative on Thursday. “On the other hand, perhaps in this day and age, anything goes. I don’t want to let my mind go any further on the subject. It is rather unpleasant to say the least.”

The ad has now been removed from several source channels and sites. Canadian Funding Corp could have advised them ahead of time not to do it – but we weren’t asked. Perhaps the stuff that they were smoking in their pipe wouldn’t have made them amenable to reason in any case.

Guess what? As of this time you can see the ad on YouTube. We will spare you the pleasure of viewing it on our site.

A Microsoft source said, “While much of the feedback to this particular piece of creative was positive, some of our customers found it offensive, so we have removed it.” Big surprise!!!

Bradley and Montgomery, the agency responsible for the upchuck campaign still proudly displayed the ad on its own site as of today. No surprise! They are certainly proud of their work. Whatever.

They say that even this kind of advertising is positive for the company because it creates chatter. The truth is that, at Canadian Funding Corp, we purchase Microsoft products because we need them and now, more than ever, we wish we didn’t have to.

We also hope that the lady’s gastrointestinal sensitivities calm down. We did the research, we saw the video – on to something else.

Canadian Funding Corp says this video has no representation of regurgitation. Phew!

Again, what is the origin of the word “mortgage”? The word “mortgage” comes from the French legal term meaning “dead pledge”. Sounds scary? Well there is something called a “live pledge”. What is the difference? A “dead pledge” was absolute in form. A “live pledge” was not conditionally dependent on its repayment solely from raising and selling crops or livestock or simply giving the crops and livestock raised on the mortgaged land. The mortgage debt remained in effect whether or not the land could successfully produce enough income to repay the debt. In theory, a mortgage required no further steps to be taken by the creditor, such as acceptance of crops and livestock in repayment.

The difficulty with this arrangement was that the lender was absolute owner of the property and could sell it or refuse to reconvey it to the borrower, who was in a weak position. Increasingly the courts of equity began to protect the borrower’s interests, so that a borrower came to have an absolute right to insist on reconveyance on redemption. This right of the borrower is known as the “equity of redemption”.

This arrangement, whereby the lender was in theory the absolute owner, but in practice had few of the practical rights of ownership, was seen in many jurisdictions as being awkwardly artificial. By statute the common law’s position was altered so that the mortgagor would retain ownership, but the mortgagee’s rights, such as foreclosure, the power of sale, and the right to take possession, would be protected.

In the United States, those states that have reformed the nature of mortgages in this way are known as lien states. A similar effect was achieved in England and Wales by the Law of Property Act 1925, which abolished mortgages by the conveyance of a fee simple.

If you are not getting it yet, Canadian Funding Corp urges you to read on to successive posts.

Meanwhile, courtesy of Canadian Funding Corp Innovations, a video!