want to get reported to the court the sale and get it approved by the court this week this is a non judicial foreclosure there was no court proceeding or the foreclosure under virginia law you don't have to report the sale you can just conduct it yourself and there's no court involvement at all well after a sale that is an ex parte procedure for report to the commission of the camps which is a an official ken ken ken a  object to a foreclosure and i think you have to have some means of access of the supreme court requires a certain amount of due process when you follow through on that if i were if they have jacked then if the foreclosure is  is in limbo until there's a resolution of the objection you ought to have submitted that is not virginia law in fact virginia law is quite to the contrary then how does a debtor object to a foreclosure what i s just a mistake and they debtor objects to a us can before or after well there there's always the first steps of foreclosure always self help because that's the authorization in the document virginia supreme court last year hill that if you have an investor which is what happened here who buys the house and a foreclosure the sale of final when the when when hamill falls and even well that gets to the essential issue in this case which is whether or not they borrow whether or not a borrower has to him that one has to be the facts have to be that the court hill that adds to a back that he didn't notice two days without eating out i don't understand that you know you keep talking about back dated the evidence is it was dated to may for there is nothing to indicate it was backdated it was mailed presumably on may for you refer to something at the top of the page and i think you just missed reading it that's correct i'm not suggesting that ok as a guy they sent it out and the document says once it's mailed on may for that is the notice now that the problem is once you're in default and that occurred in march once you're in default you can't be in default again you're in default and every mortgage company can demand that you bring the thing current you have in order to get rid of the default even you don't get new letters every month you're fighting about this eight or ten months later and the court says ok you can redeem this but notice did not say you have to pay after june one fact it says it's on page ninety one of the appendix it says if you make any payment after the date of this notice it will be may be applied to  you could not you had to over pay the mortgage if you if you bought it current doing the month of may this bozo made the form if you paid to any way up until may thirty one thirty one and brought the loan current according to this notice they could go forward to four players and that is the difference between this case and that case and these other cases that talk about the next month month note that is no statement in this notice that says a correct amount that was necessary to bring the loan current during the first twenty seven days of the thirty day q unknowns and when i was talking about what happened in the district court i didn't say that to suggest that you paid on or before june third as follows working thousand dollars and then they say which includes the didn't first installment yes and obviously if you pay before june first you don't know then june first installment but you will owe it on june first i don't know any reasonable person reading that recognizes that fourteen thousand includes the june first now if they pay it on may fifteenth they can subtract that june first it doesn't you don't on page ninety one of the join appendix it says pay much replied to go alone after the date of this notice an excuse me will not delay in the proceedings on the part of p m c mortgage on less the action required to kill this default as i would line above have been performed now i will check or i will look the notice i'm trying to look at the notice and a commonsense reading of it well and the notice says basically you're in default and you have until june third to bring it forth or it will be accelerated and then they say if you pay and they give you a number then they say which includes the six one two thousand to three thousand and ten installment and what somebody supposed to interpret that the fourteen thousand in effect they tell the bar where you have to pay ahead you behind that is not an hour i mean it that way i got that notice on march on may sixth and i sent him a check i wouldn't pay him the complaint they didn't offer to pay had a retainer bring it current in a matter of fact apparently they couldn't they didn't have the wherewithal i don't don't question that but the point i'm making is is that the notice does not say you can you can pay three fourths of it gives a specific amount it does say it includes the next month and it goes on to say on the next page that if you don't pay according to what we say above which is the fourteen thousand dollars figure then we can accept it and go forward and reasonable interpretation of that i submit is that because you are in default you have to pay a hit that is not unusual in the world for example of landlords and tenants you've got to pay ahead because you got behind but the important thing here is is that the note and the deed of trust say the use of the circumstances these are the preconditions under which you can take the bird valuable equity in my home and out a bit let's imagine that the notice said where the way you say it should have read which is to not include in that fourteen thousand seven hundred seventy dollars in eighteen june payment ok so it just takes that as a may thirty first and then your clients walk again with a check on june second certified check that doesn't include the june under another provision of the deed of trust but that would not harm your clients more than the way it's worded here well imagine imagine a homeowner a mortgage gee you know hustling for a couple of weeks the raise the money set out in the notice and they show up the day before the deadline and the short and the dentist says sorry well you're not even if i accept this check you w  that case clearly says that the elements of a breach of contract action are won legally enforceable obligation to breach and three injury or damage caused by the breach and what the appellant is trying to do here is just completely remove the causation element i believe judge floyd you asked a question relating to that and i do believe that the notice complies here but i think it's important to look at the elements of a breach of contract action because i think what the appellant is trying to do here is take i don't understand you know there is somebody who didn't pay in march didn't pay and they didn't pay and they're given thirty days from the this june third to complete payment and if they had gone in with payment just through the mark thirty one they would again still be in them so they say if you pay it includes fourteen thousand which includes the june one installment they say make that explicit to make it clear and why do you suppose that's a breach i don't mean it's turning the thing upside down the breach was the failure to pay  i agree i agree with you your honor there is no breach here but even giving them the benefit of the doubt there is no claim here but you're absolutely correct that the notice is clear that says ok here's what you do to cure and that includes the june one payment and it also says at the end if you have any questions please call our collection center at and gives the telephone number the eight hundred number to call so if there's any confusion as to what would have a if i paid on may thirty one what do i need to pay or is it true that i need to pay x the borrower could have done that it's right there there's nothing ambiguous there's nothing here that an ordinary person couldn't understand it's very clear notice we don't believe there's a big rush at all we believe that this notice take some specific language and some tweaks and argue something that's that's not there's trying to create an argument that's not there so your honor we agree there is no breach here but even if there were a breach the one thing that the plaintiff has not alleged the appellant has not alleged is th what we could have paid that lesser amount they don't even say that and all these other cases that they tried to rely on so indicate that while the plaintiff in that case could have paid the amount in harris the notice amount overstated because in that case in october the plaintiff alleged that an october payment had been made so there's a dispute as to what was owed number one number two they allege that they had the money to bring it current in squire i believe it's on page fifty nine of the case the plaintiff alleges that they had eight thousand dollars put aside and could have brought the mortgage current there's no such allegation here and i believe the appellant's counsel just admitted that there's no question that they couldn't bring it current so trying to take a breach of contract action and turn it into a lottery action because they think this didn't this notice didn't really comply somehow and it is clear here's what you pay it includes june one if you have any questions call us so if they want to pay on may ten am i believe you're right that they knew that they didn't have to make the june payment if they pay early and if they had any questions about that they could have call there's simply nothing here to support a breach any point except that you know mr klein and i have been involved in several cases together is that as soon as the notice goes out if if a bar believes that notice is inappropriate they go to court and they follow the climate if there is any substantial question done it would have determined whether or not the foreclosure notice was was appropriate and then foreclosure would proceed afterwards yes but typically you know mr mclachlan is correct that in the typical foreclosure it is in virginia it is completely non judicial we send a notice we have a sale and then at the end we file with it with the court and accounting so to speak the debt was three hundred thousand we collected two hundred thousand trustees fees were five thousand we plied one ninety five to note on the mortgage as of a particular date so it is a non judicial proceeding in virginia that point is turned into judicial proceedings all the time you look at all these cases that are cited and they did have an opportunity they got the notice they could the claim here says eighty nine loss of equity in the house that the house was supposedly worth more but it really didn't sell for that no it did not and there's and we never got to that point below but in virginia there is a very good case law that the price of foreclosure is question about the seventy five thousand dollars minimum amount of controversy here well i'm not i'm going to figure this far afield yeah i'm not sure about that because you look at the value of the house and the entire value of the loan in the amount the sin dispute that's clearly you know because the long was accelerated at that point in time i believe there's you know there's clearly a you know we're clearly above that jurisdictional limit at least as what's in dispute as to what they're claiming but i believe the court was was dead on relied on cases that were dead on and did nothing that was inconsistent with with virginia law everything complied with through virginia law and you know again even if the court decides to accept that the notice was somehow deficient there is there is a provision in virginia foreclosure law that indicates the celli have to substantially comply so even if there is some theoretical division like you give up on it i'm not giving up on that given your article sounds like you're very very defensive it seems to me the acceleration is not affected the acceleration is not affected for thirty days and on so that when they say acceleration becomes a fact of he would have owed fourteen thousand i agree and and the notice made clear that that includes the last payment that falls within the thirty days now if he came in on may thirty one and paid the fourteen thousand he be all right but if he came in and paid the shorter amount the question is why would they wait until look third what happens i guess he's cured by that and he's brought it to date as long as he pays the next day june first raise that installment right but there's no allegation that he paid that installment now so for the thirty days under the facts of this case he remained in the fall that is correct and at the end of the thirty days he owed women well you are when you look at when you look at these cases and when you look at the virginia supreme court case i don't i think that it's clear here that in this particular case it goes with the weight of authority and i believe if i remember correctly in the simon case that there was an allegation that they could have cured it and so you know here there's no such allegation that they that they could have cured at all i mean you know this celebration requirement in order to accelerate you have to give them notice certain for you have to pay the overdue amount within thirty days there was no fourteen thousand dollars overdue amount that's the only figure they gave and it goes all in the notice date of notice is given to the ball by which the default must be cured so they gave the date of june third which is not less than thirty days by which it has to be here and that date is it would have  didn't meet was what is necessary to cure the fault it is not necessary to pay june's payment in may i'm my suggestion to you in the question was there notice was intended to accelerate they could not foreclose until they times that if they paid but sent twenty seven days they had to overpay and it says that on the next page they say if you pay any amount after the stokers not after june one you must pay that me upset for a buck and that's the fourteen thousand yet well it is that right the borrower was in default but default the question of breach in this case is whether or not linda breached the contract because you cannot foreclose unless you met the preconditions before you take someone's whole answer my question was the failure to pay the marked instalment the default in this case yes or no question i played hard but but the breach in this case that is relevant here is whether or not the lender breached the terms of