MV Realty ordered by a Massachusetts court to cease recording new mortgages

In its lawsuit against MV Realty, the Massachusetts attorney general’s has received a preliminary injunction.
The preliminary injunction was granted by Kenneth W. Salinger (a justice for Suffolk County Superior Court) and prohibits MV Realty’s marketing practices. It also prohibits the company’s obtaining or recording any additional mortgages during the litigation. The company must also release existing mortgages.
According to court documents, the Court believes the attorney general’s Office will succeed in proving that MV Realty engages with unfair and deceptive behavior by “tricking homeowners into signing HBAs” by “tricking homeowners into paying MV money for free by claiming that MV would give them money without disclosing that MV would repay that advance with substantial interests if they sell their home within the next forty years or that their repayment obligation will be secured through a 40-year mortgage interest on the property; falsely a homeowner’s; not giving to a copy of the contract and mortgage to cancel the three-day rate has expired; and MV mortgages; and borrowers haven’s; and borrowers have not received any MV mortgages; and borrowers have not a mortgages; and a mortgages without involving an attorney
The court stated that the preliminary injunction was in the public interest because it is “reasonably tailored for remedying the unfair and deceptive act by MV Realty.”
In December 2022, the office of Massachusetts’s AttorneyGeneral Andrea Joy Campbell sued MV Realty. They claim that MV Realty misleads and confounds homeowners through its so called Homeowner Benefit Program. This program promises homeowners cash in exchange for the exclusive right for their home to be listed for the next 40-years.
According to the suit, “MV Realty conceals in marketing and sales material terms, including its ability to foreclose the home, and that the company only acts ‘non agent facilitator’ and that if the heirs don’t assume the agreement following a homeowner’s passing, MV Realty may foreclose.”
The complaint states that a non-agent facilitator is a type transaction broker that has no duty to the seller and has no obligation to find the highest market price. It also owes no duty to confidentiality to the seller.
Campbell further explained in a statement posted by the Massachusetts attorney general: “MV Realty has used maligning marketing practices to prey upon, lie to, and financially exploit hundreds more Massachusetts homeowners, stripping their home equity from cash-strapped customers. This preliminary injunction will prevent MV Realty’s further harm to our residents and serves as a model to other attorneys general offices across the nation fighting these types of predatory practices.
MV Realty is currently facing additional lawsuits by attorneys general in Florida and Pennsylvania.
“While we are disappointed by the judge’s decision,” Michale J. Connolly (MV Realty’s outside counsel and Hinckley Allen’s attorney) wrote in an email. “We are confident that the Homeowner Benefit Program is fully compliant with Massachusetts law.” Consumers who receive a cash incentive to choose MV Realty as their listing agent will continue to be able to trust us.
MV Realty announced last week that it was pausing the signing of new Homeowner Benefit Agreements.
“MV Realty has voluntarily suspended entering into new customer contracts while we address the concerns raised regulators and legislators,” a spokesperson for the company wrote in an email.
Utah was the first state to adopt legislation prohibiting the use of right to list agreements on Thursday last week. The law makes right-to-list agreements unenforceable, prohibits recording them in property record, imposes penalties if they are recorded in property record, and allows for the removal of existing agreements and the recovery of damages.
This story has been updated to include commentary by MV Realty.