My question involves a mortgage in the state of: Texas
Am seeking advice on a delay strategy maximizing time spent forestalling foreclosure/eviction while balancing legal fees necessary to implement that strategy so that they average out much less than had paying the mortgage been possible. Please reserve commenting on the ethics involved, only the legalities are of interest, we wish to "game" the system to the maximum extent possible under the law, and, if possible play for a "win" if there is any technique that might make that possible. Thank you for any help you can give me in achieving my goal. Details of the situation are as follows.
My father died and there does not appear to be any advantage to incurring the expense to probate his Will as he left behind only a few thousand in cash and a mortgaged house, the current market value of which is only half of what is owed on the mortgage. His grandson resides in the house and has found it impossible to work sufficient unskilled labor hours to both attend college and make the mortgage payment, therefore, the mortgage holder is in the process of proceeding to foreclosure. It is in the grandson's best interest to delay and obstruct the foreclosure/eviction process as long as possible while he occupies the house as opposed to trying to finish college while at the homeless shelter, a place he has been lodged more than once incidentally. There are about $2000 in funds available for legal expenses plus a few hundred more per month. The question is how to apply those funds most efficiently so as to only bringing in the specialized foreclosure attorney for legal filings and court hearings.
I need to digress slightly on an issue that is of significant importance to this process. My readings over the last few years have resulting in the impression that if, and only if, one retains counsel experienced in foreclosure issues, perhaps as many as half of the "parceled out, sold and resold" mortgages from a decade or so ago have a significant probability of being legally unenforceable in court due to the inability of the current mortgage holder to establish legal ownership of the mortgage with anything other than a computer printout. At one time, an estimate of as many as half of such mortgages having that problem was asserted, however, I assume that estimate is too high. The question is, in Texas, is it a viable strategy to try to gamble that the current mortgage holder cannot legally show ownership of the mortgage with an audit trail leading to a manual signature establishing ownership?
I understand that it is helpful if there was some sort of irregularity by the lender and there might be a small one in this case. My father was in his mid-70's when he obtained a 30-year loan backed by no foreseeable additional assets beyond a modest pension. So it was highly probable that he would die before the mortgage could be repaid. He knew that, the lender knew that, all either cared about was that he would send them payments until he died.
If "proof of ownership" is a viable legal strategy currently, my nephew wants to take maximum advantage of it to, even if it should ultimately fail in court, run the clock out as far forward as possible on foreclosure/eviction. Legal funds need to be conserved so it is desired to avoid legal fees until an actual foreclosure action/notice is served. The wolf is at the door and it's cold out, the immediate question is:
Respond to requests from the mortgage holder or not? My inclination is not, limit contact to in writing only and answer no questions, only ask them for documentation that they own the mortgage.

