a mortgage is a large loan from a bank used usually to buy a house then paid off over a long period, and i would imagine the still liable thing is likely because you often have to pay the lien holders first during a sale so you are responsible for anything left, of course I could be completely wrong, but if that's the case cunninghams law (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cun.....ham's_Law) should help you out, lol

There's an example where a mortgage being added to an antecedent debt, which suggests that it's a different thing than the debt itself. The term "antecedent debt" refers to a debt that existed before filing bankrupcty, which is already confusing because the word "antecedent" suggests that it takes place after something, not before.

When property is sold subject to a lien, the buyer takes on the debt, which is reflected in the purchase price. I understand that the original creditor might get mad because they don't have a chance to decide whether or not to contract with the new buyer (run credit checks and such), and would hold the original debter responsible, just like in a negotiable instrument. but apparently there's a way to not do that??? But like, what do you do if the collateral real property has been sold and the new buyer isn't liable under the consumer goods thing, so you can't repossess the collateral? Are you still considered secured up to the value of house for taking the first cut of a bankrupt estate, and is it the previous value or the current value?

So many questions. So little law internet.