In a remarkable reversal of fortune that made headlines across the country, Florida homeowner Warren Nyerges didn't just fight back against wrongful foreclosure—he turned the tables and foreclosed on the bank itself. This David-versus-Goliath legal story demonstrates how ordinary citizens can use the legal system to hold powerful institutions accountable.
The Foreclosure That Never Should Have Happened
In 2010, Bank of America initiated foreclosure proceedings against Warren and Maureen Nyerges for their Collier County, Florida home. There was just one problem: the couple had paid for the house in cash and had never had a mortgage with Bank of America.
Despite presenting clear evidence that they owned their home outright, the Nyerges were forced to hire an attorney and fight the foreclosure in court. After five months of legal battles, the bank finally admitted its error and the case was dismissed.
Victory in Court, But the Battle Wasn't Over
When the court dismissed the wrongful foreclosure, it ordered Bank of America to pay the Nyerges' legal fees of approximately $2,500. But months passed, and despite multiple calls, certified letters, and promises from the bank, the couple never received their money.
That's when their attorney, Todd Allen, suggested an unusual but legally sound approach: why not foreclose on the bank?
Turning the Tables: Foreclosing on the Forecloser
Using Florida's execution of judgment laws, the Nyerges obtained a writ of execution against the bank. Then, in a move that delighted reporters and onlookers, they showed up at a local Bank of America branch with their attorney, two sheriff's deputies, and a moving truck.
Their intention? To seize bank assets—computers, desks, cash in the tellers' drawers, even photocopiers—to satisfy their judgment.
"We were foreclosing on the bank," Allen later told CNN. "Instead of them foreclosing on my clients, we were foreclosing on them."
Bank Managers Scramble as Tables Turn
Bank managers, suddenly finding themselves on the receiving end of a foreclosure, frantically called their attorneys. As customers conducted business and news cameras rolled, bank employees worked the phones, trying to resolve the situation.
After about an hour, the bank manager handed the Nyerges' attorney a check for the full judgment amount plus the additional costs for the deputies and the writ—a total of $5,772.88.
The Legal Precedent and Public Impact
While the case didn't set a formal legal precedent (the bank settled rather than allowing the case to proceed through appellate courts), it did demonstrate a creative application of existing law. More significantly, it captured public imagination during a time when many Americans were frustrated with banking practices following the 2008 financial crisis.
The story went viral, appearing on major news networks and in newspapers nationwide. It exemplified how ordinary citizens could use the legal system to fight back against powerful institutions that had wronged them.
Legal Lessons for Homeowners
The Nyerges case teaches several important lessons:
- Document everything and keep thorough records of all financial transactions
- Respond promptly to any legal actions, even if they appear to be in error
- Be persistent in pursuing legal remedies when wronged
- Understand that court judgments aren't self-enforcing—winning in court is sometimes just the first step
Most importantly, it shows that with knowledge of the legal system and determination, even individual homeowners can successfully stand up to large financial institutions.
Aftermath and Reform
Following this and similar cases, many states implemented stricter requirements for banks initiating foreclosures, including provisions requiring them to verify ownership of loans before filing. The publicity around cases like this also led to greater scrutiny of "robo-signing" and other questionable practices that had become common in the foreclosure process.
Warren Nyerges' story remains a powerful reminder that sometimes justice requires creativity, persistence, and a willingness to use the same legal tools against powerful entities that they routinely use against ordinary citizens.
