It should be noted that there is case law that the court disrupted a sale to a good faith buyer as part of a purchasing power. It`s Camp-Wee-Gee-Ma v. Clark. At Camp-Wee-Gee-Ma, the mortgage initiated the Power of Sale procedure under the terms of the mortgage and set the repayment date to June 17, 1971. On May 3, 1971, the mortgage entered into a purchase and sale agreement that depends on mortgagor not repaying the mortgage on or before the repayment date. On June 20, 1971, mortgagor attempted to cash in the mortgage only to discover that the property had been sold on June 17, 1971. In the application filed by the Mortgagors with the Tribunal, it was decided that the equity must intervene in such a case and that the repayment capital of the Mortgagors is protected. The difficulty in this case is that it does not have the power to support the decision. It should be noted that, in the context of a purchasing power, the right to withdraw is extinguished with a sale defined as the conclusion of a purchase and sale contract and not the actual conclusion of the transaction.

According to the doctrine of fair conversion, once a sale and sale agreement is reached, the buyer becomes the right owner of the property and the seller (mortgagee) only as collateral for the payment of the balance of the purchase price. The mortgage decides on financing terms and other related terms of the mortgage agreement. Mortgagor has the right to know the preconditions for the agreement and the mortgage must disclose all the facts before signing the agreement. The title theory is “the idea that a mortgage transfers mortgaged title deeds from Mortgagor to the mortgage borrower who keeps it until the mortgage is satisfied or locked. Few U.S. states… adopted this theory. [18] According to the title theory, a mortgage has the effect of a deed that follows the legal title of the mortgage property to the borrower (the lender in a loan contract is guaranteed by the mortgage), the so-called “right title” (that is really the cash capital) is retained by the Mortgagor (the borrower in the loan). The fact that Mortgagor retains the “equity in repayment” is the fact that the surrender of the security occurred under the title theory. Mortgages within the courts of legal theory can therefore be considered as the act of what could be described as “conditional acts”. Although the title is adopted on the basis of a mortgage, the agreement is generally interpreted by the courts to recognize Mortgagor as the “owner” of the mortgaged property within the courts of legal theory.