Liu Min (Huai 'an Branch of Agricultural Bank of China, Jiangsu): A company used its real estate as collateral to handle the maximum mortgage loan for one year, and the relevant registration procedures were complete. During this period, the mortgaged assets were seized by the court. Because the court failed to inform the mortgagee (bank) of this situation in time, the bank still issued the loan after the mortgaged assets were seized. Does this loan have priority to the mortgaged assets? Yang Changhai (Internal Control and Legal Compliance Department of Jiangsu Branch of Agricultural Bank of China): The maximum mortgage refers to the secured property provided by the debtor or the third party to the creditor's rights that will occur continuously in a certain period of time in order to fulfill the guaranteed debt. If the debtor fails to perform the due debt or realize the mortgage according to the agreement of the parties, the mortgagee has the right to get priority compensation for the secured property within the maximum amount of creditor's rights. In order to balance the interests of the third party with the maximum mortgage, the law sets certain restrictions on the realization of the maximum mortgage priority. Paragraph 4 of Article 206 of the Property Law stipulates that the mortgaged property shall be sealed up and detained to determine the creditor's rights of the mortgagee. Article 27 of the Provisions of the People's Court on Seizure, Seizure and Freezing of Property in Civil Execution stipulates that "if the people's court seizes or distrains the collateral set by the person subjected to execution with the maximum amount of mortgage, it shall notify the mortgagee. The amount of creditor's rights secured by the mortgagee shall not be increased after receiving the notice from the people's court. Although the people's court did not inform the mortgagee, but there is evidence to prove that the mortgagee knows the facts of seizure and seizure, the amount of creditor's rights secured by mortgage will not increase from the time when he knows the facts. " According to the above provisions, if the maximum amount of collateral is sealed up or detained, and the people's court notifies the bank, or the people's court does not notify the bank, but the bank actually knows that the collateral is sealed up or detained, and the bank continues to issue loans, the mortgage priority of the newly issued loans will not be protected by law, and there will be legal risks that the bank loans will lose the protection of mortgage priority. However, after the people's court seals up and distrains the maximum mortgage, will the new loans issued by banks inevitably lose the protection of the maximum mortgage priority? The answer is no, according to the law, the following two conditions must be met: first, the maximum mortgage is seized and detained by the court; Second, the court informed the mortgagee of the facts of seizure or seizure, or the mortgagee actually knew the facts of seizure or seizure and continued to issue loans. If the above two conditions are not established, the new loans issued by banks should still be protected by law. After the people's court seals up and distrains the maximum mortgage, it will lift the measures of sealing up and distraining according to law. Is the new loan issued by the bank given priority protection? There are different views in theory, which is not clearly stipulated in China's property law. We believe that the seizure and detention of the maximum amount of collateral does not necessarily lead to the compulsory disposal of collateral at different prices, but limits its rights. The mortgagor or debtor may apply for cancellation and rescission of the seal-up or seizure order by paying off debts, providing new guarantees and executing legal documents. If the measures of sealing up and distraining are revoked, the legal basis for limiting the maximum amount of collateral will be lost, and the enforcement based on this should be invalid, and the guarantee effect of this part of creditor's rights should be restored. Therefore, from the general legal analysis, after the court's seizure and seizure measures are revoked, the newly issued loans are still protected by the highest mortgage priority. Faced with the legal risk that the maximum mortgage may lose the priority of compensation after being sealed up or detained, banks should take active and effective measures to prevent and control it: First, prudently control the maximum mortgage business. Once the maximum mortgage is seized and detained by the court, if the account manager misoperates, makes mistakes in his work, or is careless in his thinking, there may be legal risks that the newly issued loans will not be given priority protection. The second is to strengthen the management of maximum collateral in post-loan management. 1. Check one by one, and pay close attention to the mortgage situation before each loan is issued under the maximum mortgage. The account manager should check the mortgage registration departments such as the real estate department and the land management department one by one before each loan is issued, and the loan can only be issued if the maximum mortgage is not sealed up or detained by the court; If it is sealed up or detained by the court, it shall immediately stop issuing loans. 2. Properly sign the notice of seizure by the court, notify the account manager in time, and store it in the credit file for future reference. After receiving the notice of seizure and detention from the people's court, the bank shall properly fill out the "Receipt of Service", and shall not sign for the time in advance as required by the court, and notify the handling personnel of the fact of seizure and detention at the first time to stop issuing loans. 3. Take prudent measures, such as requiring customers to increase new guarantees and repay loans in advance. When a bank finds that the collateral has been sealed up or detained, or after receiving a notice from the people's court, it shall immediately negotiate with the customer, explain the reasons for stopping the loan, provide corresponding evidence, ask the customer to supplement new guarantee measures, or announce the early maturity of the loan and recover the loan to avoid risks. Third, actively safeguard rights and rights according to law. If the mortgage with the maximum amount is seized and detained, and the bank still issues new loans without knowing it, the bank should actively defend its rights and put forward the defenses that the people's court has not notified and the bank is unaware. Four, strengthen consultation, and strive to cancel the seizure and seizure measures. Generally speaking, the people's court shall restore the mortgage priority of new loans after the measures of sealing up and detaining are revoked.