Who advocates for me?

We have received plenty of offers to help us navigate the waters of this financial nightmare. The filing of the Notice of Default was the chum in the water that brought them all circling. Some try to appear as official looking documents, others use a handwriting font in an effort to appear to be very personal; one particularly clever one was a postcard with a bright, splashy graphic of a witch being squashed by a fallen house. There are few secrets between us and our mailman any longer (I wonder if they are allowed to received Christmas "gifts").

I used to work in mortgage financing and decided that perhaps I should reach out to someone still employed in the lending industry for a recommendation. A former boss of mine was happy to provide me with the name of a real estate attorney who offers consultations for a flat $200 fee. I have already ruled out any and all options that do not include attempting to hold onto the home so the advice I am looking for is pretty narrow- Does our situation warrant our inclusion in a loan modification program, and is there anything that appears in the documents we can use to force our lender to negotiate one with us?

I decided to call the attorney and see if there was a reason to schedule a consultation. There were two things I wanted to clear up before making the appointment-a) Should I need more than just advice would they also represent me under a retainer or hourly fee structure, and b) While I wasn't looking for the attorney's actual recommendations prior to scheduling (ie paying for) the consultation, I had hoped they might agree to look at a summary of the facts, and keeping my objective in mind, simply tell me if there was any advice they would be able to offer me when we actually did sit down. Yes, of course, they would be willing to convert a flat fee consultation into paid representation (duh), but no, they would not be willing to review my situation in advance to determine if they could actually offer me any valuable advice. I was disappointed at this, and soon found myself mulling over whether or not I should even be hesitating dropping $200 for professional, informed, legal advice when the stakes where so high. This did not seem the time to be cheap, but I have paid for legal advice in the past and found it be- what shall I say-lacking in enthusiasm. I appreciate the patience the gal on the phone demonstrated with me as I contemplated my decision, and was just about to book the appointment when I looked up at the top of their webpage. Attorneys will often post an article or something which can be useful and perhaps even somewhat telling. I click on the link for Resources- it says "Coming Soon", next to it is Library-same thing, Preferred Affiliates-also says"Coming Soon", followed by Shop and Cart-those are active links. I thanked the woman for her time and allowed her to get to the next phone call from a desperate homeowner looking to save their home. Two hundred dollars is a pretty good price point for selling hope. 

How many cracks can one loan slip through?

A link to my communications log with BofA will be inserted <here>.

Meanwhile I wanted to save this link, and this link to the blogs of other distressed homeowners.

Yesterday's efforts via my Facebook status: 

Last Friday when I sat down at my computer I was greeted by my own face looking back at me from a Yahoo News article about distressed homeowners. Since the article had already garnered several hundred comments (some quite vicious) from people who knew nothing of my circumstances, I decided that I might as well go ahead and tell my story, so I created a blog.

Today I received a letter from my lender (technically they are just the servicer), Bank of America, saying that after 18 months of my pleadings, myriad paperwork submissions, and literally hundreds of phone calls, they would not be offering me a mortgage modification. The letter of denial was written one day, and on a Saturday no less, after the Yahoo article started trending. The timing might just be a coincidence, and of course it also may not, but I'd definitely like them to know that I won't allow them to foreclose on my home without a fight. That's where you all come in- please take a moment to review my blog at http://distressedhomeownersusa.blogspot.com/    and consider following the blog. (I've also posted it in the Yahoo article comment section)  Maybe, just maybe, they will take notice, and give pause. Pride and privacy being both taken already (yes, I did agree to the photograph, but I thought it was just to promote the Homeowner Bill of Rights being voted on at the state capitol), this is all I got left.

A special note to those who are located in the state of California:

The California state legislature passed the Homeowner Bill of Rights this month.  I was present for the vote on both the Assembly and Senate floors, and could not help but participate in the banned applause which erupted from the viewing balcony after the vote was counted. This legislation does not fix many serious issues borrowers face in attempting to negotiate a modification with their lenders, but it will make the mortgage modification/foreclosure process more fair and transparent, which anyone who has ever tried to seek any cooperation from their lenders in the past can attest, has been sorely lacking.

Unfortunately, the legislature did not insert an urgency clause before taking the bills to vote, so the protections don't go into effect until January 1, 2013. There are a few groups of activists who are requesting the governor declare a foreclosure moratorium until January 1^st to allow those currently in the foreclosure process an opportunity to seek relief under the legislation. Occupy Sacramento's Foreclosure Committee is planning to hold a vigil at the Governor's residence beginning in August when the legislative session reconvenes.

I know this comes as too little/too late for thousands of homeowners who have already lost their homes, of questionable value to those in foreclosure now, and seemingly of no help to those living in other states, but it isn’t as if the lender’s internal procedures are likely to be differentiated by the location of the property, and I’d think they would begin implementing procedures now in order to be in compliance come January.  I'd like to believe there will be consequential benefits to groups not technically covered by the legislation. 

State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, is thanked by homeowner DeAun Tollefson, after he helped get homeowner protection legislation approved by the Legislature at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Monday, July 2, 2012. The legislation would require large lenders to provide a single point of contact for homeowners who want to discuss loan modifications, prohibit lenders from foreclosing while the lenders consider homeowners' request for alternatives to foreclosure and let California homeowners sue lenders to stop foreclosures or seek monetary damages if the lenders violate state law. Tollefson's is facing the loss of her Sacramento home due to foreclosure.(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)

My lender won't take my payments and intends to foreclose on me in September.
Looks like I'll be marching again soon!





http://www.independentmail.com/photos/2012/jul/12/133317/?enlarge=1

My communication with Bank of America:

I received today the 7/28/12 letter of denial for our modification request. The letter specifically states that we were reviewed for eligibility in the "new" principal forgiveness modification program. The types of relief programs available are confusing at best, but first let me be clear that my request was not just for a new "recently introduced" program as a result of the U.S. Department of Justice and State Attorneys General global settlement, nor is my request for consideration under the governments HAMP or HOPE programs. My request was for consideration under whatever guidelines would be specific to my investor, BNY Mellon.


Because the denial was based on investor disallowance, in accordance with California Civil Code 2923.6, I would like to be provided with the specific section of the underwriting guidelines used in the review of my "In-House" modification request which states that no consideration will be given to any loans wherein the first mortgage housing ratio does not exceed 38%. To reiterate, I am speaking here not of the HAMP guidelines, as those are readily available online, I am referring to the guidelines used under the investor's program. 

Additionally, because my loan was originated during the period included in California's Civil Code 2923.6 as originally signed back in 2008, which states that <It is the intent of the Legislature that the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent offer the borrower a loan modification or workout plan if such a modification or plan is consistent with its contractual or other authority>, I would ask for proof that the anticipated recovery under the foreclosure does not exceed the anticipated recovery under a loan modification. It is my belief that denying a mortgage modification which does not pass this test for recovery because the DTI is too low would be inconsistent with your obligation to maximize net present value of your pooling and servicing agreements.  

Finally, in accordance with paragraph I.A. of the settlement  reached between Bank of America and the U.S. Department of Justice, please consider this email as my formal request to have sent to me the following:

1. A copy of the Note for our debt (including all endorsements)

2. A copy of all assignments of the Deed of Trust

3. A statement of the amount necessary to cure any default as 

of the date of the petition.

Should this email not be considered adequate delivery of this request, I ask that you please notify me of such immediately. 

Thank You,

De Aun Tollefson