Guaranteed Modification

A lot of people tell me about companies that offer a guarantee for modification services and my reply  is: “who do you know that has called them on it?” There is usually dead silence because how good is a guarantee? It is only as good as a company is prepared to honor it so examine all the small print. There are not many companies that can afford to expend resources on a modification win or lose and not get compensated.

From the law office standpoint I liken it to the same set of circumstances as if I was to represent a person in court, I cannot guarantee the outcome and to do so is unethical because you, the client might not give me all the facts or can withhold information about trying to do it on your own previously and then we try and encounter huge obstacles. I’ve had clients that did their own submissions and failed (because they gave too much or wrong information) and they don’t tell us and then we meet with resistance. Now we’ve been able to get them through but because this happens there is no way to guarantee the outcome and we expend thousands of dollars of time and effort in each case so we just cannot offer a refund. Our guarantee is best efforts and if your situation is modifiable you’ll get modified and we don’t even need to go there about rejection and if that happens, maybe it is exactly what needs to happen because not only does the person not qualify for the home now, they won’t be able to afford it with any program so they should think short sale and move on. Many properties will not make sense and most banks do not offer a principal reduction because they cannot get permission from their investors to eat that much of their expected profits. The old adage of when does a negative -30 + 43 = 0 and that is any time the market goes down 30% it has to get back to 43% just to put you back where you were before it dropped.  I see many instances where the properties are down 50% and the borrower might now recover the home value in their life time and getting out with a short sale really makes financial sense.

On the fees, if you’re using a law firm and they are going to give it to you for a fixed fee, grab that and run if it is around $3,000 to $4,000. When I was at a law firm we had software that started to calculate our hourly from the time the phone was picked up until we hung it up and we were taught to keep the client on the phone and run it up. Every fax that went out was $1.00 per page and every photo-copy was .30 cents per page.  The hourly of an experienced real estate or finance attorney is going to be $375.00 per hour or more and they may have processors or paralegals that are going to be $100 to $150 per hour. When you average 40 to 100 hours per file you are going to get your money’s worth because it takes hour upon hour and constant follow-up with the banks…more than most people who work will every have. I can’t see a modification starting out less than $5,500 under typical law firm billing and the client could expect to get a back-end invoice for about the same because of the time and expenses for faxing, photo-copying and FedEx that takes place. Therefore, a completed modification would normally be upwards of $10,000 by the time it is done. Grab a modification for a fixed $3,000 to $4,000 because it is a super deal.

You can always go to a non-lawyer but you are really putting yourself in a position to have your documents used against you since a broker or any other helper cannot afford you the attorney/client privilege. You need to make sure your submission is not used as a smoking gun against you especially if you were a stated income loan and you and your broker or loan officer expanded your income for the purpose of qualifying on the loan.

If you want solid assistance at a fixed legal fee price, please contact my office.

Sincerely,

James Burns, Esq.

“Does Your Foreclosing Lender Own Your Loan?”

These days just about every mortgage is flipped by a lender to another one or sliced up into pools of securitized packages that are sold on Wall Street. The financial engineering helped oil the housing boom by making credit more available. But stalled housing prices and rising defaults have revealed a mess: In the rush to flip paper, lots of the new lenders or pools don’t have the proper paperwork to show they even hold the mortgage.

A Florida attorney noticed two years ago that nearly all lenders seeking to foreclose against clients were filing “affidavits of lost notes”–essentially requests that a judge assume they own the loan since no proof is at hand.

What was found by some average snooping was that the company that filed to foreclose didn’t own the loans. The owner was actually a securitized pool of loans overseen by Deutsche Bank (nyse: DB – news - people ). In one particular case documents showing the pool bought a loan after the homeowner defaulted which is an illegal purchase for most pools, including this one.

In Kansas there was a foreclosure filing with no documents to show the bank owned the loan. In another case, ownership of a loan was recorded on a single date in the name of two different lenders. In March last year Deutsche Bank filed to foreclose on a seven-bedroom home in Worcester, Mass. but it came out that Deutsche was assigned the loan in May or June–that is, after the foreclosure filing. A U.S. bankruptcy court judge in April slammed Deutsche for its “jumble of documents” and ruled the bank could not evict the homeowner.

For the lenders, a possibly bigger threat on the horizon is that homeowners’ lawyers will bust up the “holder in due course” doctrine that makes it easier for subsequent owners of an IOU to collect. This doctrine says that certain defenses the evictee can use against the original lender (such as predatory lending) cannot be used against an innocent purchaser of the mortgage. The rule is provided for in many federal and state statutes, but a judge could nonetheless find a way to side with the homeowner, particularly if a loan is purchased after it goes into default.

There may be cases where it makes sense to challenge the lender to show they own your loan. A law firm can assist with this and keep the transaction under the attorney/client privilege so that what you submit cannot be used against you absent a direct court order which is also arguable.

We always collect the original loan documents and do a forensic audit or request that the bank show they still have them and if they don’t…guess what? We ask them who is the responsible party for a modification and that the client cannot pay someone who is not eligible to receive the payment. Many times the mortgages are even being sold during a default.

James Burns, Esq.

“Were You Dumb When Stating Your Income”

There is a lot of confusion out there about loan modification and who is going to do the best job…it isn’t a shop but a law firm where you enter into a specific attorney client relationship not a shop that claims to have attorneys they work with. Some prosecutors are now pursuing borrowers as you can read in this article.

For one, a broker shop can do no distressed borrower any good with the current situation. As you’ll read in the attached article, some prosecutors will be going after borrowers for participating in fraud by overstating their true income. What this does is make your submission to the lender vulnerable unless you have the attorney/client privilege over your submission…hence the modification process should be a legal maneuver not Joe the Modifier who may be a Pirate that has no right to take an advance fee.

If you must send your clients to a friend who is a broker – make sure they are one of the 18 firms listed on the Department of Real Estate’s website as approved to take an advance fee as many are doing it illegally and offer no real value since they can’t prevent the documents from being used against the borrower because there is no such thing as broker/client privilege.

http://www.dre.ca.gov/mlb_adv_fees_list.html

Not everyone will be a loan modification as we are seeing the abuse of the stated income loan in a gross proportion which makes there no way to modify certain loans unless principal was to be drastically reduced which is not happening although it was announced yesterday there is a plan for some principal reduction by the government to find the market bottom; only time will tell.

LIBOR, COSI, CODI, MTA – these were the indexes of the option arm and then there is the bank’s margin spread which was immense along with the prepayment penalty so the person had to stay locked in for 3 years otherwise they suffer a severe penalty that wipes out most of the equity they would be trying to tap in a refinance or the money they would be trying to save.

If you have a friend, family member or client you care about who is having trouble making their home payments due to a temporary hardship, please have them go to this site and download the questionnaire and fax it in for a FREE evaluation www.foreclosurelegalsolutions.com.

In your service,

James Burns, Esq.

Mortgage Meltdown – who’s to blame?

Many people have now looked to point a finger and fixed it on the Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, which requires banks to extend loans where they accept deposits. It was created to combat redlining — the practice of denying loans to residents of minority neighborhoods. Conservatives have periodically criticized the fair-lending law, saying, for example, that it discourages banks from opening branches in poor districts. The latest controversy on these points began via a Sept. 15 editorial in Investors Business Daily, titled “The Real Culprits in This Meltdown.”

Contrariwise, Kenneth Thomas, author of two books about the law (“Community Reinvestment Performance” and “The CRA Handbook”). Thomas says you could just as easily blame the Sept. 11 terrorists (because the Fed slashed short-term interest rates afterward), or the Chinese (for buying so many bonds during the subprime boom). In other words, he thinks it’s a huge stretch to blame the CRA on lenders’ bad decisions.

Mr. Thomas espouses three reasons to exonerate the Community Reinvestment Act in the mortgage meltdown:

Why allegedly the CRA is not to blame

? The CRA applies to banks. Most subprime mortgages came from lenders that were not banks — so the CRA did not cover them.

? The non-bank lenders made more reckless lending decisions than banks did.

? Regulations didn’t drive the subprime lending boom. The pursuit of profits did.

I still think the enacting of the CRA is like loading the gun and even though you didn’t pull the trigger, you set the circumstances for someone to be hurt. I think those involved in this legislation should step up and take responsibility and admit they didn’t go far enough to examine the other side of the coin which was the potential for abuse and that it might get out in the hands of unscrupulous brokers; as if brokers just started in the business in 2000. There is such a symbiotic relationship between the bank and those who peddle the products or the investors (banks) that you are not kidding me when you act as if it is someone else’s fault.

No dah, the pursuit of profit drove the subprime lending boom…why wasn’t someone watching to prevent this and get additional regulation in early enough. When you see something booming you know it is going to get abusive so get proactive rather than were we are now which is reactive with a new deficit around $11.3 Trillion.

Sound off if you have any good ideas or analysis in finding a balance between helping struggling families of color or just struggling families and how to keep it from going haywire with abuse and greed.

James Burns, Esq.

Credit Card Wars

I’ve been predicting that credit cards would be the next financial branch to go on the offensive for risk management and start closing cards or cutting credit lines.

Indeed, credit card issuers are tightening lending terms with consumers to lower their risk profile, from cutting borrowing limits to closing dormant accounts and I’ve had a few clients already that have fallen victim to this pre-risk practice.

A survey of credit card industry executives in July found that 62 percent of their companies planned to reduce lines of credits because of economic conditions and risk mitigation, according to Javelin Strategy & Research.

While changing a customers credit limit is nothing new, representatives of the largest card issuers in the U.S., Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and American Express, say they are increasingly cutting credit card limits for their customers because of the downturn and to avoid risk.

American Express routinely changes the credit limit of 20 percent of its customers every year, more cards are being limited or lowered than raised this time around, according to Kim Ford, a spokesperson at the company. This year, only one out of two customers saw an increase, versus four out of five in the recent past and they had excellent credit and payment history.

Ford says it reflects a change in the criteria used to assess riskier customers, factoring in such things as whether the card holder has a subprime mortgage, the geographic location of the home and whether home prices are falling in that area. We can only imagine how they view California right now as the earth drops all the way to China in terms of housing prices.

American Express is not alone. “We’re working more aggressively to control risk,” said Betty Riess a spokesperson at Bank of America , adding the company is also closing accounts of customers that have had a zero balance for over a year and have a riskier profile.

A spokesperson at JPMorgan Chase stated the bank is positioning itself by taking a second look at riskier customers as a result of economic conditions.

Like much of the credit crunch, the changes may mean little to those with the best credit or those who spend and borrow judiciously and pay off their monthly balances. But if you get caught in that financial quicksand, you could go down without a rope and have it adversely affect your credit score.

Accordingly, cutting credit limits or closing accounts can have a negative effect on a consumer’s credit score, or FICO, says Liz Pulliam Weston, a personal finance columnist and author of “Deal with Your Debt.” That’s because one way credit scores are calculated is by looking at the debt-to-available credit ratio. The closer the debt to the credit limit, the lower your credit score.

A credit limit reduction, for instance, can lower your credit score by 30 to 50 points, says Weston.

With lower credit limits, cash-strapped consumers, will have less of a back up— and in some cases none at all—when things get tough.

“It’s going to, in turn, effect discretionary spending,” says Bruce Cundiff, director of payments research and consulting at Javelin Strategy & Research.

What should you do?

Pay Attention

A change in credit lines or account closures will be communicated in writing. Woosley says consumers should check online statements as well as regular mail, as some of the notices can look like junk mail.

“You should know your credit score by checking it at least once a year, says Weston. I like and personally use myfico.com, as it comes from the folks who created FICO and is the most reliable in my opinion.

Appeal The Decision

If you get a notice saying your credit limit is being reduced, you can call up or write the company and try to reverse the decision, especially if you feel your credit score is in good standing. Sometimes, mentioning the possibility of changing card issuers can help. “Consumers still have some power,” says Weston.

Use Your Card

If you have a dormant, or inactive, card—one with a zero balance on a regular basis—use it for small purchases, recommends Kaplan. “It might be a good idea to go out and use it, so it doesn’t look like it’s sitting there unused,” she said.

Don’t Miss Payments

An obvious piece of advice, but worth repeating, try to pay your balance in full every month, avoiding interest and finance charges.

Companies are less likely to take action “if you have good credit,” says Kaplan.

Seek Credit Restoration

We assist consumers with credit restoration so you can contact my office as we’ve been successful in removing derogatory reporting and using the law to ensure that the reports are accurate as it is suprising how many times it is not.

Loan Modification and Foreclosure Avoidance

Usually if there is one financial situation there is another and we can help you get a loan modification that will free you from the bondage of a high interest rate that can totally sink you and your credit and once you’re credit is ruined it takes close to a decade to get it back without help.

James Burns, Esq.