[Noah930]

I'm with Z-man on this. It's despicable that home-occupiers (they're not really home-owners, anymore, are they?) would try this stall tactic. Total technicality they're bringing up. After all, they're reneging on their end of the bargain to pay off the note. The bank (or whomever) didn't renege on their end of the deal to provide the money to purchase the thing from the previous owner, after all.

But hey, if sleazy home-occupiers can use this argument of "show me the contract where I owe you money," then I think it's fair game for said banks to reverse the argument and require the home-occupiers to prove that they're legally allowed to live in the home. What's the difference between what these home-occupiers doing and being a squatter? Can't prove that you belong in this house? Well then, you're trespassing and you're gonna get tossed out on your kiester, effectively immediately.