Tad,

Thank your friend for me if you would. What a view of the process in action. Additionally, the honesty regarding what’s good for the lender is on target. The NPV; the “what’s best for us” I’m guessing it wouldn’t be to difficult to sketch that map out. As we say, “follow the money.”

The problem here consist of Loan made to VA clients by none other then COUNTYWIDE.

Countrywide as you know sold to B of A for a great deal of money. However, not before Countrywide had a large number of loans in default. While B of A was never a player in the VA system, its on the job training now. The lack of knowledge is unprecedented. The “add on’s” are nearly criminal.

D

The following is a response from my friend in the Foreclosure Prevention Capacity:

“Okay, I’ll try to do this in an organized fashion, starting with backing up to Caylin’s situation. I don’t doubt for a minute that the bank told her that she needed to be delinquent to qualify for a loan mod. With a GSE loan, there are only four hardships that qualify for modification: death, divorce, disability, or delinquency. If she didn’t meet any of those four “Ds” they would’ve given her the most obvious reason – you’re still current. The problem, is that they don’t dig deeper to see whether a homeowner would realistically qualify if the loan WAS delinquent. The bottom line is that lenders were (and sometimes still are) implying, if not outright saying that people need to fall behind to get help, when they were never going to qualify for a mod whether they were delinquent or not. I think that had less to do with dishonesty and more to do with poor training and stupid red tape."

(Tads Response: I believe it is either bad training or pay structure or incentives to get applications. Ive been in this field, and i KNOW how they work)

“If a homeowner applies for a loan mod, one of the first things most lenders ask is what the intention is for the home. If it is listed for sale, the intention is clearly (although perhaps unintentionally) to sell the home. Therefore, in most cases, that would disqualify the borrower from a modification. Additionally, they can only review for one workout option at a time, so homeowners have to choose if they want to pursue retention or liquidation options.

Putting the home on the market for a short sale does NOT stop or slow down the foreclosure process unless there is an offer on the table for them to review (and not always even then).

As for the dual track thing, my observation has been that the different departments at mortgage companies might as well be on different planets because they often can’t even see each others notes in the system. The normal process is for collection activity to continue until there is a written agreement with the lender. The reason for that is that the loan is still technically delinquent (even if the homeowner is current on a trial mod) until the loan is officially modified. The result is that I often see clients who are told by the Loss Mitigation department not to worry because they are going to get help, and then they get a foreclosure notice the next day. Again, stupid, but not uncommon at all.

That being said, if the loan is actively under review for assistance, lenders will USUALLY either delay starting the foreclosure process (assuming it hasn’t started already), or will PAUSE the foreclosure process wherever it is. If the loan is modified, then the foreclosure action goes away. If it isn’t modified, foreclosure picks back up where it left off.

The case that Doug Fair mentions where someone walked away from a condo can probably be explained by the fact that the lender almost certainly doesn’t want the home back. I have had clients that haven’t paid their mortgage in YEARS, and foreclosure still hasn’t started. It’s all about how badly the lender doesn’t want the property on their books. In most cases, contrary to popular belief, foreclosure isn’t a great deal for lenders either.

Lastly, not to defend the mortgage companies, but they ARE businesses, not charities. Whether the origination of the loan was fair or not, there is a contract in place, and the borrower is asking for a favor from the lender when they request a modification. Lenders make their final decision based on what is in THEIR best interests. The good news for homeowners is that, again, foreclosure is usually bad for lenders too, so they often come out better by modifying the loan rather than foreclosing. One of the criteria they use is an NPV (net present value) test, which in English is a determination of whether or not modification is good for them. If a loan fails the NPV test, even if it qualifies in every other way, the lender doesn’t have to do anything for that borrower."

I thought so… Well the context suggested troll… I’m glad I know who you are now!

Btw, I have a response from my foreclosure prevention friend…. I’ll get her permission, then repost today.

Glad I mentioned this… I was afraid u were the same guy… Just goes to show NEVER assume!

Tad,
Thank you for the heads up. I’ve requested IT staff to pull all post as they relate to that issue. I see only the past three post available for my review; I’m unable for some reason to look back; oddly enough. . However, we have had such a problem in the past few weeks as we support or request support from others. We have not seen my name as typed below; have you?

Douglas R. Fair

P.S. Let me thank you for the brief conversation. It has been helpful.

Doug,
Did you by any chance get hacked? There was a DB Fair below, and the comments and syntax seem different, but you both have oddly similar names…?

Tad,

Right. As a home buyer you find the need to contact your bank requesting a mod. Should you start a short sale action with the bank does that “action” prevent a home buyer from requesting a Mod at the same time?

The behavior of some home lenders appears arbitrary at best. However, a short sale agreement may prevent the dual track scheme? The “normal” contract makes provisions for such action I think.

Trying to think out of the box here.

Oddly the “difference” each case appears to flow. The only recurring fact: the home goes back to the bank and is sold.

We have a staff member here who walked from a Wells Fargo owned condo nearly a year ago. He has not some much as received a phone call or a letter in the mail.

One last question for the lunch discussion: Is there any evidence the dual track players; Mod department and f/close department are communicating in any manner? Any E-mails connections found as a result of subpoenas?

Take care,

Doug

I think its gonna depend on where the foreclosure process is at…I would THINK that one could shift and go for a short sale. MY specialty was Mortgage Origination, and That’s a question best answered by a friend of mine. Let me message her. I assume you are referring to someone upside down on a mortgage that is attempting a loan mod?

Tad,
Based on the facts of the dual track game, isn’t it possible to get Short sale paper on the table and in place while working on the mod? We don’t see that in VA stuff. But it would trump that dual track (buying time) game?

I work for a law office and see the Courts tied up daily attempting to sort out these case. Thanks for your review and acknowledgements. The system has been broken for some time. It just knocks a bit louder when the numbers go up.

Wounded Warriors

D

Doug

Thank you… 🙂

People get emotional over this issue because the system is very broken, and will always favor the banks… knowing Caylin personally, her case particulars, and knowing the mortgage field makes its.. asier to know we are on the on the moral high ground. BUT even the most intelligent people have been taken advantage of in the mortgage business…. ive seen MBA’s make extremely sophomoric mistakes that baffled the mind, and which also shows it can happen to the best of us This summary here didn’t do her case justice.

But as DB Fair stated earlier, there ARE those out there who are looking for a free ride. Caylin Crawford was never one of them. After hearing her story, I was impressed how much she did RIGHT during the process. Usually, and even those who have done a good job self educating themselves can find themselves confused when entering the world of mortgages.

Tad good comments

By the way, here is a VERY interesting article that also can explain what happened to Borrowers like Caylin: http://activerain.com/blogsview/2589190/what-is-dual-track-foreclosure-and-how-can-it-hurt-you-

https://soundcloud.com/tad-wagner/sets/caylins-home
https://soundcloud.com/tad-wagner/how-caylin-crawfords-home

This is an actual interview with Caylin Crawford about the particulars of her experience I did…Its a 2 part-er, but i think it has enough of he particulars to paint a fairly clear picture. Any other questions should be directed to Caylin.

As a Mortgage Banker with over 15 years in the field, I can truthfully say I have seen my fair share of ignorance from all sides of the transaction, but the LIONS SHARE of the honus MUST be on the bank and Mortgage Professional to do its DUE DILIGENCE to PROPERLY INFORM the borrower or client, or at the VERY least to not LIE to them.

Unfortunately, the only way to really win cases based on holding banks responsible MUST be combined with negative press as banks almost ALWAYS win…and why not?

They have ALL the MONEY!

Like I said, people who really are interested will ask questions before making snap judgements …. People with an agenda will just come online and throw their weight around. More psychological case studies for narcissistic tendencies…. It’s fun being a psychology student for sure then people come online spewing fallacious arguments based on very little information.

If legislation is passed to provide relief to struggling homeowners, and you’re a struggling homeowner, when you reach out to the bank for help and they offer it, you accept their offer. Of course, I (and millions of other people who were dual-tracked) didn’t expect to be conned by the bank. If we had all expected to be conned, there wouldn’t be a foreclosure crisis in the US right now.

Just for good measure, use spell check before you publish a rant. It helps make your statements look educated. (Fourscore = Foreclosure? Sole=Soul? Hom=Home? I’ll stop there)

I have written documentation of what the bank told me to do, which you would know if you researched my case. In fact, my entire lawsuit against US Bank and Freddie Mac is available online.

I have better things to do with my time (like organizing my community to stand up against foreclosures) than argue with you (Dbfair). For responses to your accusations regarding my claims against US Bank, you can refer to one of the 10+ news stories and interviews that have been written about my case in the past few months.

If you have any legitimate questions about my case, about the proceedings, or about the settlement that is pending, I am happy to answer them. Until then, I hope you’ve learned something from this conversation.

This is a case of someone who spent 5 minutes on the Internet, and made a snap judgment… But again, it’s a good idea to link the full story and NOT just this “readers digest” version… SOME people aren’t willing to do their homework on these cases, but are arrogant and narcissistic enough to judge and condemn, so having a link to the full story is just good business practice.

The most dangerous people in America: Those armed with a LITTLE BIT of information. Case in point!

One more chance DB:
a) Registry of the Court? Where do you live?
b) Fourscore actions? I have no idea what that is.
c) Watch Judge Judy for legal advice? Seriously?
d)‘Spent her money on more crap’? Not only have you no information on Caylin’s spending habits; you are a troll with no idea of what happens in the real world. ( Methinks thou protest too much)

I’m glad YOU have never made a mistake, nor trusted people who have a legal responsibility to tell the truth but then lied to you; and then lied more to cover it up.

Ultimately, this isn’t about the bad borrowing or payment decisions of one or even thousands of people. It is about the systematic abuse of millions of homeowners, by the banks who received billions of dollars of TARP funds, and were supposed to re-write loans for homeowners who qualified for modifications. (Caylin qualified for no less than 2 modifications, and yet the bank still tried to take her home.) Hundreds of people who never missed a single mortgage payment lost their homes to fraudulent foreclosure practices. You can spend all the time you want excoriating Caylin, and it won’t change a thing.

Caylin had the courage to stand up to the abusive practices of the lenders and servicers; and tell other people similarly situated that they are not alone. What have you ever done for the world?

I think you are correct, Shari…the little “Readers Digest” summation isn’t a good way to transmit what really happened…there needs to be more.

What happened to Caylin is is the same "Nod Nod, Wink Wink thing that certain (NOT all) bank employees have been doing for YEARS. Its all based on whats best for THEM either as individuals to best serve their pay structures, or production flow numbers.

Disclaimer: NOT all Banks are “evil”, nor their employees…After EXPERIENCING this kind for thing for YEARS, I can say that there are numerous sources of this bad direction given by certain bank employees…Improper training and oversight being at the top of the list.

Since DB is obviously here to DEMONIZE Caylin WITHOUT having full knowledge of Caylins case, (As evidenced by the lack of questions, and ABUNDANCE of condemnation) I will stop responding to his/her comments, but i think a link to the FULL interview for others who read this may be appropriate…What say you. Caylin?