the property in the event of default by the borrower. Thus, if the junior hen holder is satisfied that there is “equity” to protect (the debt to the senior hen holder is worth less than the value of the property to the junior hen holder), the junior hen holder can cure the default of the borrower, foreclose the WRAP mortgage and take possession of the property from the borrower, while forcing the senior lienholder to “stay in place.” The senior debt holder may or may not find such a WRAP arrangement acceptable given a variety of economic considerations. If, for example, the senior debt holder is well secured (the property is clearly worth more than the debt owed the senior hen holder), the senior hen holder may view the WRAP structure as simply another avenue of payment for its debt (<HOLDING>). From the viewpoint of the senior hen holder,
holding that despite foreclosure judgment providing that the holder of a junior mortgage had no interest in or lien on or claim to said premises the lack of foreclosure sale meant that the junior mortgage was not extinguished recognizing that the junior hen holder has the right but hot the obligation to cure defaults holding that  1322b2 does not protect the holder of a junior mortgage  when the holders claim is not secured to any extent under  506a holding that  1322c1 did not allow debtors to cure home mortgage defaults after a foreclosure sale regardless of state law redemption rights holding that the holder of the note must act in a manner that effectively provides notice that the holder has exercised his option