HAMP: Treasury Department Penalizes Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo on Sham Modifications

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE

EDITOR’S NOTE: It is this simple: Nobody wants modifications except homeowners. Everyone else profits from pretending to have a mortgage modification process and then foreclosing. It is the biggest land grab in history.

Big Banks Penalized for Performance in Mortgage Modification Program

By

As the nation’s housing market continues to teeter, the Treasury Department on Thursday penalized three of the nation’s largest banks for subpar performance in administrating a government-sponsored program to modify mortgage loans for distressed homeowners.

As part of a new assessment of mortgage servicers, Treasury officials said they would withhold incentive payments for the three banks — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — until the problems are resolved. At that point, those payments would be made, a Treasury spokeswoman said.

In May, the three banks received $24 million in incentives as part of the modification program.

The Treasury Department has previously withheld payments from mortgage servicers, but Thursday’s action focused on some of the biggest players in the program. Called the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, it is voluntary for mortgage servicers. Nearly all of the nation’s largest banks have signed contracts to participate.

The Obama administration has long been criticized as being too easy on the mortgage servicers, and Thursday’s announcement did little to quiet that criticism.

Neil M. Barofsky, who resigned in March as special inspector general for the bank bailout, described the assessments and penalties as a “lost opportunity” to hold lenders more accountable.

“It further reaffirms Treasury’s long-running toothless response to the servicers’ disregard of their contract with Treasury, and by extension, the American taxpayer,” Mr. Barofsky said in an e-mail.

Timothy G. Massad, assistant Treasury secretary, defended the approach. He said the assessments of banks and other mortgage servicers “will serve to keep the pressure on servicers to more effectively assist struggling families.”

“We need servicers to step up their performance to meet the needs of those still struggling,” he said in a statement.

The mortgage servicers were evaluated on a scale of one to three stars during the first quarter on whether they had identified and searched for eligible homeowners; assessed homeowners’ eligibility correctly; and maintained effective program management, governance and reporting. Bank of America received the lowest grade, one star, on four of seven areas that were evaluated; Wells received one star in three areas; and Chase, in one.

A fourth mortgage servicer, Ocwen Loan Service, was also assessed as needing substantial improvement, but Treasury said it would not withhold payments to Ocwen because it was negatively affected by a large acquisition of mortgages to service.

Six other mortgage servicers were graded as needing moderate improvement. There were no servicers deemed as needing only minor improvement.

Wells Fargo issued a statement saying it was “formally disputing” the Treasury’s findings.

“It paints an unfairly negative picture of our modification efforts and contradicts previous written assessments shared with us by the Treasury,” said spokeswoman Vickee J. Adams, who said the criticisms were dated and did not reflect recent improvements.

Chase said it too had made significant improvements. “The bank respectfully disagrees with the assessment,” the company said in a statement.

Dan B. Frahm, a spokesman for Bank of America, said that the bank was “committed to continually improving our processes to assist distressed homeowners” through the federal modification program and its own internal program. But he added, “We acknowledge improvements must be made in key areas, particularly those affecting the customer experience.”

The modification program was created using $50 billion that was set aside from the bank bailout to help distressed homeowners. The idea was that the Treasury Department would provide incentives to mortgage servicers and investors to modify mortgages for struggling homeowners, rather than foreclose on them.

The administration predicted that three million to four million Americans would benefit, but so far, only 699,053 permanent modifications have been started.

To date, Treasury has spent about $1.34 billion on HAMP. One problem was that the mortgage servicers, at least initially, were not prepared to handle the onslaught of modifications, and homeowners complained that paperwork had been routinely lost and trial modifications had dragged on for months.

35 Responses

  1. Hi everyone i must be “ignorant” but why is our elected officials allowing wells fargo to scam us like this. i was told last sept to “stop paying” or i could not get help. i had to be in eminent default to be enrolled in obamas plan. if they are lieing to us why do foreclosures continue. i have been dealing with wells fargo since 2009. way before i new anything about these websites. all i wanted was to save my home. but now that i have found out the truth. that the real lender was not included on my closing documents is a breach of contract and makes the note and mortgage null and void. now the trust can present themselves if they have the note and re-mortgage at (not a mod or refinance new note and new mortgage) below property value to give us all some of ther equity e we lost giving some people the ability to sell their homes if they need to for military or for jobs else where in this country. right now every thing is at a standstill noone can sell and move. not that i want to just saying. i want to save my home. but to be alloud to continue to lose paper work and move files has to break some fudiciary or rico law. no paper work was lost when we applied for these loans, no files were moved when we were applying for these loans? and these banks did not loan us this money why did they take it upon themselves to not include the real lender in our notes and mortgages. hoe could we sign a fake contract then they sell our mortgages to the stock market with out our knowledge. i am in awe all this criminal acts. i need to sue wells fargo now but how do we none of us have money. we are all struggling. seems only the people who have money are able to sue. yet what wells fargo has been aloud to do to all of us should end,

    Question, back when they told me not to pay and i was in obama review i cried alot to the home preservation specialist. i live in a home that has a pool with a screen porch. around my home there are alot of little children. i told them that alittle chid in miramar, aleady died after getting access to a foreclosed neighbors pool. i told them please do not foreclose and leave this pool unatteneded. becuase we all know the cops come and kick us out. who is going to remember to drain my pool? so how legal is this to leave a pool to the elements??? so i pleaded with her to help me get this mod and my file was moved. she told me omeone hacked into her computer and moved my file. complaint to the occ and florida ag has done nothing yet. waiting for rmy court date, but would love to sue first. they should not be getting away with what they are doing to all of us. we have worked all our lives for these homes to let an entity whom doesnt even have intrest in these mortgages (appraisal fraud) but because they are wells fargo the judges give the homes to the bank. how do all get heard?

  2. @spankie

    Other comments have wisely advised you to document everything and never sign anything—such as things that are too complicated to understand——- its often not because you are ignorant but that the facts simply do not add up.

    keep a logbook —-like a diary–because that is what it will become
    make notes of calls

    but more than anything——warn them that you are recording them –they wont believe it anyway———-and capture the conversation–to cross to your diary–they depend on your inability to prove what they say or do not say

    you may be up against their self serving notes that they may be making to distort the conversation——-they may falsely characterize you as obstinate impolite nasty–things that justify refusing to take your info properly or put you on a known bad person list that justifies cut-offs etc

    we are not seeing those discussed here-id love to hear of such instances on this blog

  3. After spending over $3,000 to get a laon mod, my atty. bailed on me. 1 1/2 years later, I find myself looking for another atty. It’s now costing me $7,000 to hire a litigation atty. This time I’m suing B of A. Loan mods do not work because all the attorneys have to do is submit paperwork The SAME paperwork month after month. This will go on til the cows come home. They will tell you that they are in negotiations with your bank. B.S. Don’t believe a word of it. Get a litigation atty. and go after the bank. It’s the only way you can keep your house. The banks will settle out of court. They don’t want anyone to set a precedent. If enough people do this, we can take back what we have been working for. House and peace of mind.

  4. spakieblue- re: HAMP via Wells Fraudgo- there are several things which you must do. 1. start a file for your “HAMP” modification. 2. write down what you sent, how you sent it, who you sent it to, the date and time you sent it, and KEEP A COPY. 2. Read the HAMP guidelines published by the (i think) US Treasury. Become familiar with all the requirements BEFOREHAND. 3. Contact the Treasury to report that you are being considered for a HAMP modification and see what payments Wells is receiving at each stage, and the requirements to be met for each stage. 4. Keep accurate notes of each phone contact, including name of person with whom you speak. 5. Don’t sign anything. 6. Don’t sign anything. 7.Don’t sign anything. 8. Don’t sign anything.

  5. I am just starting my Hamp journey with Wells Fargo. Allready the legendary lose of faxes has occured. Any help would be appreciated on what course i need to take. If you can email me here spankieblue@live.com with any words of wisdom I would greatly appreciate it. Surely we can beat this jaugurnaut wells fargo down.

  6. […] HAMP: Treasury Department Penalizes Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo on Sham Modifica… MOST POPULAR ARTICLES GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE EDITOR’S NOTE: It is this simple: Nobody wants modifications except homeowners. Everyone else profits from pretending to have a mortgage modification process and then foreclosing. It is the biggest land grab in history. Big Banks Penalized for Performance in Mortgage Modification Program By […] […]

  7. The Bank of America is changing it’s name because of all the bad press. It is now called ” The Bank of Yakuza” This will be limited to the banks in So. Calif. only.

  8. So what happens to the People who suffered this FRAUD, and SHAM on their APPS?

    Is anyone going to JAIL?

  9. To Enough Already. If you look at Spankieblues report, me, you will see that i am starting the same decietful process you underwent. If you have any info that might help me please contact me at spankieblue@live.com My experience is the same as yours and as the same of the majority of Hamp applicants at wells fargo. It seems that somehow this jaugarnaut can be brought down my David. (us)
    Good luck to you Enough Already. I feel the pain.

  10. I am in the Hamp process right now. So far they have lost faxes, not stated fully the documents they needed. I have complied with each request from them with appropriate paper work, 3 times now and each time they said they had what they, wells forgo needed. They lied each time. I just faxed them the last NEW request for a document and am waiting for the same lie about not having enough or the right documents. Wells Fargo are without doubt liars and theifs. Where do they find all these peeps to work for something so crooked? I cant afford a lawyer. What recourse, or WHO, can I contact to stop this run around. If you have any info my e-mail is spankieblue@live.com Please feel free to contact me there or just leave any info you might have here. ty

    My job was sent to China and I can prove it.

    signed,
    A struggleing American

  11. For many years the major owners of Bank of America and their holding company, Bank America, were the Jesuits and the Vatican, and their long-time cronies, the Rothschilds. Like Continental Bank up to 1984, they owed tens of Billions of Dollars to the Japanese mafia, the Yakuza who own most of the other sizeable banks in California. In the late 1980s, Bank of America was faced with a run, so they have quietly given over most of the control to the Japanese Yakuza.
    http://www.skolnicksreport.com/popes1.html

  12. @johngault
    Re: “DB said:

    “THERE IS NO CLOSED TRANSACTION TRIGGERING INCOME TAX ON THE GAINS ? THIS MAY BE WHAT they are hiding.”
    Please expound….?”

    YES–IV BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT A LOT—LET ME WALK THROUGH THIS CHAIN OF LOGIC AND SEE IF IT LINES UP FOR ANYONE.

    SO WITHOUT JUMPING TO ANY WIDESPREAD ASSERTIONS –LET ME REFER TO ONE SITUATION THAT I KNOW INTIMATELY WELL. OLD-AHM PURPORTED TO CREATE A TRUST THAT SUPPOSEDLY WAS THE BENEFICIARY OF A CONVEYANCE OF $2.9 BILLION PRINCIPAL NOTES SECURED BY $2.9 BILLION IN MORTGAGES. –AS PER PROSPECTUS. ALL FOR AHM 2004-4 TRUST

    AHM VIA THE NOMINAL TRUST ISSUES 3.5 BILLION IN FACE AMOUNT MBS PER SAME PROSPECTUS-BNY LATER RAISED THE MBS AMOUNT TO ABOUT $7.5 INEXPLICABLY ON THE 2005 8Ks FOR SAID TRUST–JUST BY MISAADDING THE COLUMNS—IT DOESNT EVEN HAVE TO AD UP FOR BNY–

    BUT –DESPITE REPRESENTATIONS AS TO FILING A LOAN SCHEDULE WITH THE INDENTURE ETC IN THESE SEC FILINGS—AND DESPITE REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT FILING THE LOAN SCHEDULES WITH DELAWARE SEC STATE UCC DIVISION, TO BOTH PERFECT THE TRUST SECUTITY INTEREST AND THE INDENTURE TRUSTEE BNY SECURITY INTEREST AND STANDING, NO LOAN LISTS WERE FILED WITH EITHER ENTITY AND I HAVE CERTIFIED STATEMENTS THAT LITERALLY PROVE THESE NEGATIVES.

    SO THE TRUST RECEIVED NO CORPUS–AND CERTAINLY THE TRUST WAS NOT TREATED AS IT SHOULD BE TO PASS THE IRS AND FASB OFF BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME NON-RECOGNITION FEATURES —ANYTHING ABOUT THIS ISSUER, THE STUFF IT ISSUED AND THE TRUST IF IT HAS SEPARATE EXISTENCE AT ALL IS TAXABLE–THERE ARE NO EXEMPTIONS HERE FOR ANY TRANSACTION THAT ACTUALLY “CLOSES”-SEE “CLOSED TRANSACTION DOCTRINE” —THUS LETS JUST SAY THE TRUST WAS TERMINATED OR NEVER EXISTED AND THE MBS NOTEHOLDRERS SIMPLY HAVE AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE CASH RECEIVED OR IMPUTED INCOME RECEIVED FROM A CLOSED TRANSACTION AS WITH ANY OTHER ASSET—

    S0 LETS SAY THAT A PURCHASER OF AN MBS PAID 15CENTS/DOLLAR FOR AN MBS THAT ENTITLES HIM TO A CUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF EITHER AN INCOME STREAM FROM A PAYER–OR A SHARE OF THE COLLECTION PROCEEDS OF A FORECLOSURE–IF THERE IS ANYTHING LEFT AFTER FEES

    BUT NOW LETS POSE THE WORST OF ALL WORLDS FOR THIS VULTURE BOTTOM FEEDER–LETS SAY THE NOTE IS REPLACED WITH ANOTHER NOTE OF JUST 65% OF FACE—BUT OUR BOY PAID ONLY 15CENTS–SO HES GOT PHANTOM INCOME OF 65-15——-IE 50 CENTS INCOME BUT NO CASH DISTRIBUTION IN HIS TAXABLE PARTNERSHIP

    I POSIT TO ALL THAT THIS IS WHY THEY DO NOT WANT TO MODIFY—AND CONGRESS DOES NOT WANT TO BE SEEN AS GIVING THEM A TAX BREAK BECAUSE ITS HARD TO EXPLAIN AND WHO FEELS SORRY FOR THE VULTURES STUCK WITH PHANTOM INCOME–THEY ARE STILL UP PLENTY –THEY JUST HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE MONEY–WHICH IS BAD IF YOU NEED TO GET THE MONEY AND RUN.–LOTS OF POSSIBILITIES AND DIFFERENT FACT PATTERNS BUT THIS IS HOW IT LOOKS TO ME

  13. Oh,dang. We know the loan/note per se is not being modified. The servicer or other third party is subsidizing the payment on the existing note. Let’s see. I have a 30 year note with 24 years to go. My payment, p &i, is 1240. Now I pay 930, and ABC third party pays the difference. ABC says I have to pay now for 40 years. (won’t reduce principal, but will ‘extend’ term)

    Is that another 10 years or is it another 16 years? I don’t know without an agreement in front of me to determine the number of years to pay. With ABC’s subsidy and my 930, the note will be paid off in 24 years as scheduled. ABC will be the beneficiary of the other 16 years…..! If not sixteen, then ten! Did I get this right? Me thinks I did.
    Dang! They use the HAMP funds for the subsidy and then get either 10 or 16 years worth of p & I ( reduced amt of 930) out of homeowners!

    If it’s “only” 10 years, it looks like this: they subsidize to the tune of $89,280.
    (24 yrs x 12 mos. x 310.00 monthly subsidy) BUT, they get back $111,600. (10 yrs x 12 mos @ 930. per month)

    That will probably not happen much, since most of us don’t keep a home for that amt of time, but it could happen.
    I haven’t looked closely at this if the home is only kept for, say, 5 more years,but from the hip, I think they actually have to part with some HAMP funds they won’t see again. In that case, with the same figures, it costs them 5 x 12 x $310, or
    $18,600. But, like I said, I might be missing part of this formula.

  14. DB said:

    “THERE IS NO CLOSED TRANSACTION TRIGGERING INCOME TAX ON THE GAINS ? THIS MAY BE WHAT they are hiding.”

    Please expound….?
    And are these mooches of TARP bailout funds paying taxes on the gimme HAMP funds? How was that handled? Ignored? Even when subsidiizing payments, they are tax-wise volunteers, are they not?.
    If the HAMP gimme funds were given tax free, and the banksters get a write-off for the subsidies, that’s a nice gig, right?

  15. @db, I’ve only see a friend of mine’s interim. He scratched out some language. The bankster, B of A fka CW, then assigned his svcing to someone else – again. They will likely give him a surprise f/c.
    If there were new notes, we’d have heard about it, but there aren’t.
    Did you read about that class A suit where the homeowners got 96.00 each and the attorneys got 25 million?

  16. Actually, tila and respa are prob not be implicated because there is no new note/loan or real modification to the original one. At best, it’s the subsidy I described being called modification.

  17. @johngault

    MY RECOLLECTION WAS THAT THIS MODIFICATION MATERIAL MUCH OF WHICH WAS COMPLEX WAIVERS AND HOMEOWNER REPRESENTATIONS TO LOCKDOWN THE HOMEOWNER TO THE DATA PROVIDED TO GET THE MOD WAS IN THE NATURE OF A SIDE AGREEMENT WITH THE SERVICER —NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE OWNER—AND IT SEEMS THEY ALL TEND TO HAVE ONE WAY REVOCATION CLAUSES AT THE ENDS OF ANY AGREEMENT YOU CUT WITH THEM. THEY WILL THROW 30 PAGES OF WAIVERS —I THINK THIS IS WINDOW DRESSING TO PREVENT ALTERATION OF THE OBLIGATION AND DECLARATION OF DEFAULT. THE DEFAULT AS WITH GREEK DEBT WOULD TRIGGER CDS–SO IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT IF THERE IS NO MODIFICATION TO THE ACTUAL TERMS OF THE NOTE –THERE IS NO CLOSED TRANSACTION TRIGGERING INCOME TAX ON THE GAINS ? THIS MAY BE WHAT THEY ARE HIDING —WHY NOT REWRITE THE NOTE—CDS ARE OUT THERE. BETTING FOR /AGAINST DEFAULT.

    I AM NOT SURE OF THE NATURE OF THE INTERIM AND FINAL MODIFICATIONS–WHAT DOES THE DOCUMENTATION DESCRIBE ITSELF AS BEING.

  18. @joan;
    yeah that is a good description –iv seen similar —-would you pls tell us if you can the name of this helpful servicer please?

    Also – If current “servicer” is not “lender” and is not paying a “lender” how can they modify anything, refinance anything, collect payments for anything, foreclose on anything, or sell anything. When is this bluff going to get called?

    They cannot make you modify———-can go through regular process—-like running the gauntlet—–

    The question I have to show my ignorance here—is whether the servicer is supposed to opffer to all its customersan opportunity-if so then you can sue them for arbitrary denials

    As far as the collection-the servicer is just collecting on an account-when you go 60 days over your loan number becomes an account number.

  19. @enough – the old note does certainly ‘supercede’ the modification, especially if the noteowner’s autograph is not on the modification. The original note is the only note. There is no new note to supercede the original note. Modifications of the NOTE aren’t going on – they can’t be unless a document says that and is entered into by the noteowner.. Otherwise, only payments are being ‘modified’, and the only thing I can make of it is that the servicer or whomever is entering into a contract with you for the servicer to make the difference in the payments as stated on the note and your ‘new’, lower payment (to subsidize your payments)

    Unfortunately, such an agreement is not enforceable against the real noteowner if the servicer quits or say files bk. It’s not enforceable against the noteowner at all. These modifications should come with an indemnity against the real noteowners, fwiw. Good luck on that one. So, in this regard HAMP funds are used to subsidize your payment. But your note is not modified and to make matters worse, you may have agreed to things you hadn’t previously agreed to.
    I’m not sure on that one because since the noteowner is not a party to these payment-reduction contracts, it is not a party to any alleged other changes.

    (It’s my understanding that anyone at any time has a right to pay the right party for a debt owed, fwiw. )

    Otherwise, the servicer would be buying the note and creating a new one with it as the payee and you as the maker/borrower. Which is what should be going on, despite the fact that they kept this req to buy the note a secret. And, you would have to be given the original note marked paid re something as protection against its enforcement by the proper party and because it’s no longer of any force and effect. The new note would have to have language statiing that it supercedes the original note made on blah blah by blah blah. This isn’t happening, is it? So your NOTE has not been modified or re-negotiated. It’s only that a third party has agreed to subsidize your payment.

  20. Oh for Pet’s sake. When I am done with my current issues, I am going to D.C. and smack some people – I swear. First of all, TILA and maybe Respa are implicated in modifications. Those yeahhoos aren’t licensed lenders. Special dispensation from Cardinal Geitner, Bernacke, like that? As I’ve said, when they handed over gimme funds to servicers, they just decided the
    fox was in the best position to mind the henhouse. Well, maybe, as ridiculous as that sounds. But, they coudl have made those bums apply for the money AS modifications are actually done, for one thing. Not just forked over billions with no real strings. The bums could’ve confessed they have to buy the notes to modify them. Of course that means they have to find the dang things.
    And:
    “A fourth mortgage servicer, Ocwen Loan Service, was also assessed as needing substantial improvement, but Treasury said it would not withhold payments to Ocwen”, wait,
    “because it was negatively affected by a large acquisition of mortgages to service.”

    Well, hot damn, Jim. We have been negatively impacted by a stinking demoralizing economy, no jobs, loss of savings, stocks and investments that turned -suddenly- to the pile of dogshyt what’shisface called the loans they were securitizing, and the shame brought to this country by the Ponzi schemers. You know what kills you in a fall?
    It’s not the fall – it’s the sudden stop. Every train wreck involves a sudden stop.
    Even death is caused by a sudden stop of oxygen to the brain. Economically, sudden stops are predictable, if not plain known ,by people who are in the positions of knowing these things.

    Sanctioned excuses for non-performance by the banksters, but the homeowner has no ‘excuse”, is a dead-beat?
    Those of you have made your payments, see if you can sign up somewhere for your very own performance bonuses.

  21. Gone are the days of the “Statesman” All we have now are sex crazed politicians in it for the game- not taking blame, it’s all the same. Banks are not for the Yanks. I fear my Government. My forefathers did not. They were the “Anarchists” The government feared them. My forefathers were the “Statesmen” They were the “Minute Men” The very symbol the the Treasury uses. Ironic it is. How chronic can it get?

  22. @enough already

    it has been overcomlicated by involvement of trusts—screens to separate the predator on the front end[originator promisee on the note you signed , it gets all confused by electronic accounting–your note converted into an account credit for sale to a great black hole—and that is wherethe UCC comes into play: they must produce the original physical note to PROVE standing; you must demand production of the note [and no evidence exists that it was stolen] in order to initiate the action, past the filing of complaint which simply ALLEGES the plaintiff is holder, You deny that they are holder–whatever secondary evidence or copies that they claim to have, like the falsified assignments. They must then prove that they have THE note by handing it to the court and swearing it is real. Do not admit or assume it is real when they present it–it could be a good reproduction–so only a QDE report to show it is the note at their cost with a reasonable chain on back —people argue about authorization to sign by bankrupts—but real question is whether it is the real note so another noteholder doesnt show up with a more compelling original note -like say the from a county title office long in cahoots—they need to show a verifiable chain of custody of that note to assure it is not stolen——–are they credible?

    anyway they must provide a convincing affidavit of lost note —as an alternative

    but in the end once the stuff went into the black hole its possession of the document that is key———-if they do lost note they have one foot on a peal—if the judge can force homeowners to accept seizures then they have a certain equitable duty to force a reduced note amount for that lost note or devalue it completely–its all in the hands of the judge —he can basically enforce a writedown or finf insufficient evidence of ownership.

    Justice is served by a writedown to market as well as presrrvation of the tax base that pays for continuance of govt. If the eveidence on the other side re note is murky–take a writedown. You place evidence of murk at evidentiary hearing on presentation of the purported note. I would suggest that if the claimants cannot get a bond then why should he believe them. Or assert that the note lays on the table but the owner is unknown and the note seized by the state——-then you cut your deal with the state. You pay the RE taxes and insurance.

    In most places this is a dream world perspective–because the judiciary by and large believes that banks are presumptively credible. Older Judges my age believe it —because that is the way it was pretty much back pre-2004. And they believe the guy that pays to have all the attorneys. Hopefully they will take judicial notice of the information of the day. But I would not rely on any of this were I a layman—in order to do what iv referred to you need brave courts with a lot of skepticism about the system and so maybe they need new judges.

  23. but i heard on these web sites i am not a laywer that the original note/mortgage supercedes the modification.

  24. This is an old story. They are so drunk with power–and arrogance—-that they wont simply settle with this poor woman and close the file. How can it be economic to pay these attorneys to go on like this? in ANY other context, a plaintiff would weigh the PR and legal costs vs the value of the seized home and abandon the claim———settle for a small amount. This action is simply punitive at this point—This one clearly underscores the hypothesis that they push until you die if they can effect that outcome—Does she have a life insurance policy that they can grab from her estate?

    I cannot conceive what sort of man or woman attorney would pursue this like this and not park the case-let it lapse—-it is verging on voluntary manslaaughter. If I were a prosecutor there when she died I would charge that attorney with manslaughter and let him spend all his life and money defending himself from the power of the state—that would square it up.

  25. Pro Publica recently reported fine print is still sneaking into modification agreements. Homeowner has to sign away rights.

    “Has no defenses”
    “Cannot sue”
    “Agrees that bank is owner of note”
    “Bank can foreclose even if you make modifiaction payments on time”

    The app for modification gives your financials to the “enemy”. Doesn’t matter where your apply – it is the bank where it ends up.
    They want to figure the NPV (Net Present Value) – what is in their interest not yours. Figure out how much underwater, figure out profit in a sale. Figure out sham mod sqeeze or fast track foreclosure or… If you paid on time for many years and home is not very far underwater or not underwater or in an area still selling well or TILA period up (no defenses for predatory ect) might speed it up. Not paid for awhile and far underwater might like to sqeeze out some more before foreclosing. TILA not up, string it along. If you have income and assets they can figure out whether or not they can pursue you for deficiences well into the future – can start that five years from now. If you are poor – not afraid of lawsuit and on and on.

    Anyone recommending modification includng the govt is sending lambs to the wolves.

    Question – I really don’t know this answer – if you can’t make a payment or stop making payments – are you required by law to apply for a modification?

    Also – If current “servicer” is not “lender” and is not paying a “lender” how can they modify anything, refinance anything, collect payments for anything, foreclose on anything, or sell anything. When is this bluff going to get called?

  26. @ carie i am with you. the twilight zone and rod sterling is holding me hostage. we have alot of info but unless we know law we do not know how to use it. i go on hamlet and ask and know one even knows the truth they always tell me to read and reaserch yet thats all i do everyday. the tell me to stop asking repettive questions but rules change daily and monthly. so now the goal needs to be how to bring this info to the courts and get it out there we know what they are doin to us a but we all need to fight back. everyone please get out of the banks either find a local bank or credit union for banking. then we need find out how use this info neil gafield has given. us feel so bad wheni i go on a site that is names foreclosure hamlet and i ask how to use the info fraud in the inducement. instead of telling me the info they sade read and reasearch procedures. hello if i new what to read and what procedures to follow i would nt be losing myhouse i would have new that i was being cheated at origination. so please folks
    help us all out now we need the info on how to use this info in court. none of us want to lose our houses. we want justice i just do not understand why this is being done in the first place

  27. EVERYBODY should do what Patsy Campbell is doing:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703865004575648900250047766.html

    She didn’t get a “free ride”…the Wall Street/Banksters did…with US as the TARGET.

    What part of “PONZI SCHEME” do these people not understand???

    Patsy Campbell has gone from “deadbeat” to HERO in my book.

  28. It’s always all about the money…and “things”. Always. The “culture” of sociopathic materialism on Wall Street is ubiquitous also in the Banks and the government. So we have fraud on every level. Deceit on every level. We HAVE entered the twilight zone…the twilight of end of a highly disfunctional era in the history of America and the world.

    Meanwhile, CEASE AND DESIST, DISPUTE OF DEBT, LIS PENDENS, TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, etc.
    I hate being in a constant state of “fight mode”, but this is where we are…
    I am so thankful to have found this website, because it gave me the power to fight…thanks again, Neil…so much.

  29. Excerpt;
    “As part of a new assessment of mortgage servicers, Treasury officials said they would withhold incentive payments for the three banks — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — until the problems are resolved. At that point, those payments would be made, a Treasury spokeswoman said.

    In May, the three banks received $24 million in incentives as part of the modification program.”

    I am sorry to say that this appears to be a blatant public relations effort to create the impression that these are meaningful.

    The harsh reality is that the servicers make far more by foreclosing, maintaining empty homes ——benefitting by resale speculation/cherry-picking and refinancing into govt guaranteed debt rather than keep questionable value loans on their books. They want a good size chunk of the properties to be destroyed so their spec REO property will appreciate. The post-foreclosure and DIL activity including casualty insurance fraud is far more profitable than $1000-2000

    That carrot is not enough to motivate them —and there is no “stick”——–people have not even begun to focus on the post-forclosure frauds. the incentivization. The settlement abuses.

    These servicers never wanted to do more modifications than they absolutely had to in order to qualify for access to the Fed zero-interest borrowing window and bailout $$$ which is again in the wind [see Greece]

    I have seen the offers of modification: opportunities to use govt lable to induce waivers —merely delay the date of reckoning until after the 2012 election. These are not real modifications unless the principal balance is seriosly reduced –again see the ongoing struggle whereby Germany etc will not accept that a Greek bailout will be useful unless the bondholders take a reduction in principal there.

    US homeowners are in the same boat as Greece—-but the problem in Greece is the default triggers the credit default swaps —and for those who have already defaulted in the US that risk does not exist because the swaps [untaxed insurance or untaxed betting–both of which are subject to excise taxes ] have already been triggered and paid. See AIG–unless they have re-established trusts with junk mortgage notes and restarted the whole practice over again?? And they do not want anybody to realize this until the banks have had time to strip out their equity by share repurchases and dividends.

    These activities by fundamentally bankrupt entities should trigger clawbacks next time they seek bailouts. It is insane for entities that were receiving bailouts and now receive subsidized low borrowing rates at the Fed window are actually doing share buybacks –and dividend payouts rather than building capital

    The proof of this is seen by the much higher capital requirements now imposed by CHINA and Switzerland—20% not 5%

  30. i will have to say its called their “community service”part, to be eligible for the program they need to help homeowners which we know they are not. but i thnk if they act the part as dutiful banks that wnat to help homeowners the fdic and the feds will go easy on them. so its not about the money its about how they are percieved by the peole who judge them and are responsible for procecuting them. by wells fargo questioning this they are perceived as the “good guy”. we know all they want is to foreclose and get the cds insurance and derivitives. but we also know it takes 1 1/2 yr to a foreclsoure gets through the courts and by having people apply and then lose their paperwork and apply again they made millions of dollars in easy money just by moving files and losing paper work. it is a game they play until the home gets a court date or in non judicial states a sale. so this is my opinion that are just acting like they care just to have the philanthropic edge. they want the easy money waiting on the mother of payouts when the bribed judge signs the summary judgement. when will this all stop ????

  31. This may be a non issue. Why do the banks care about a 1,000 dollar “incentive” when they may be able to repossess the home instead?

  32. wells fargo is disputing? how do they have the audacity to dipute and the treasury is going to beleive them. they couldnt handle the amout of modifications so they took the insetive money and foreclosed on families anyway. and NO one see;s anything wrong with that.+ LOST PAPER WORK is saying it mildly. why is this being so downplayed. and no provisions for the homeowners they already forked over. so we suffer go to foreclosure and lose our homes while they “improve””. no one see’s anything wrong. i feel like i am in a twilightzone episode and rod sterling is keeping me hostage and wont let me wake up.

    obviously the treasury does not know what was done to us. really. oh just lost some paperwork. what does lost or unrecieved paper work have to do with forclsoure?

    in 2009 instead of modifiying in the 3 months we were promised we were strung along , denied hamp even though i was unemplyed just starting a new job, non of this considered, every week another importabt document had to be resent. they must have received money from edvery doc sent through the fax at the end of it all they added 10k to my already upside down loan. then to top it off my mortgage went up. applied for the hamp to lower my mortgage i could not afford my mortgage.

    i cried to the wells fargo lady. we paid 5 months and an illness and under employment and an illness got us again. this time it changed again now they told us we had to be in eminent default before we can get help.

    so by october after submitting my hamp application they had all my paper work. i called every 2 weeks. even called with a hope counselor every thing was in place for my review and then in dec. i get an erie phone call from the woman working on my file. she was distressed telling me someoine got her passcode got into her computer and moved my filw. i did not here from her again because she let her emotions get in the way. wells fargo by moving my file sent me to the apply again department. sent a letter stating i needed to reapply again. do you see this pattern. so i get the paper work in by feb 4th (deadline feb 14} it was sent sed ex i have retained the tracking number and signee.. premeditated i receive my hamp denial frb 16th and my foreclosure notice feb 21st.. i complained in writing to wells fargo office of the president so they put another woman in charge, i tell her i will not submit anything else to wells fargo unless they find the package i sent sent me a formalletter removing me from foreclosure, and give me a principle reduction. i was tired of the games.
    i complained to the OCC, pam bondi florida AG, and to richard nugent senator. wells fargo sent letters to all of them and me. 1st of all the recount of my dealings with them was all a lie the never included 9 mortgage payments i made waiting for modifications. gone poof. they lied and said my file was never moved or compromised and my paper work was never lost. i didnt send the right info. i resent the fact that i do not know how to send documents. when i applied for this mortgage documents were never lost. amazing how many time documents were lost over this

    so sorry folks so long but i do not get my sorry out there to the public, everyone who ddoes not have a wells fargo pretender mortgage will think all they did was lose paper work. their lax servicing started at origination. not reviewing my appraisal and throwing out fliped homes and straw bought homes.we all now know wells Fargo as all the other servicers are after int insurance on the mortgage. mine is alot i had a 789 time dated and stamp credit score from 2006. mine should not have failed. but making all the other subprime mortgages killed the economy and started my eventual tumble to forclosure hell. my 260k home is worth 111k and in somecases in my area lower. so without princible reduction which pam bondi says is immoral i just do not know. we have weasle lawyers in florida making homeowners pay 40% of a princible reduction everywhere you look home owners are being preyed upon.
    here is my story. if anyone would like to respond and help me great ! i am just at that point i do not know what we are suppose to do at this point. wht a mortitorium on foreclsoures has not occured.

  33. Bank of “America” should be required to eliminate “America” from “Its’ Trademark.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: