The Home Affordable Modification Program’s Paltry Lifeline

A Slack Lifeline for Drowning Homeowners

JULY 31, 2015 By GRETCHEN MORGENSON

“After Lucy Circe became disabled and could no longer work, she applied to Bank of America for a mortgage loan modification on her Vermont home. Over more than two years, starting in 2012, the bank repeatedly requested copies of documents that had already been provided, asked for proof that she was no longer married to a man she did not even know, and made other errors, like asking why Ms. Circe had indicated that she didn’t want to keep her property when she had actually told the bank she did….” READ MORE HERE.

Contact an Aggressive Foreclosure Defense Lawyer at Shaffer & Gaier Today

We provide a free initial consultation to anyone with concerns about foreclosure or who is involved in foreclosure proceedings. To schedule an appointment, call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660 or contact us online. Evening and weekend meetings can be arranged upon request. We will travel to your home if necessary to meet with you.

Foreclosure Defense in PA and NJ

If you have encountered financial problems and fallen behind on your mortgage, you may believe that your only option is to move out and allow your lender to foreclose on the property. To the contrary, there are many good reasons to fight foreclosure. Fighting foreclosure could give you an affordable place to live until you get your financial situation turned around. You may even be able to renegotiate your loan to make it affordable. The attorneys at Shaffer & Gaier, can help protect your rights.

Contact Us

To schedule a private meeting with an experienced foreclosure defense attorney, call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660 or contact us online. Evening and weekend meetings can be arranged upon request. We will travel to your home if necessary to meet with you.

COMPLICATED LITIGATION RESULTS IN FAVORABLE SETTLEMENT

On June 30, 2005, my client took out a $104,000 loan and mortgage on his family’s home in Southwest Philadelphia. The original lender was Indy Mac Bank, a sub-prime lender, whose operations were essentially taken over by the FDIC for what many believed were shoddy lending practices. The loan carried a low interest rate for the first two months, and then increased to an exorbitant interest rate for the next 29 years and 10 months. The mortgage broker, however, told my client at closing that he would be able to refinance the loan within a matter of months. This false promise never materialized, leaving my client with a deceptive, unfair and unreasonably high interest rate for the life of the loan.

One West Bank acquired the mortgage loan, which was later serviced by Ocwen Loan Servicing. One West filed a foreclosure lawsuit, and we filed a counterclaim and cross-claim against other lenders. The bank’s attorneys and I engaged in written discovery and multiple depositions, and in the fall of 2013, the Court scheduled a series of settlement conferences. The case was scheduled for trial in March, 2014.

By the time the case would be presented for trial, however, the balance on the loan was going to be approximately $187,000, almost twice as much as the original mortgage loan. The parties, however, reached a settlement, which lowered the principal balance by nearly $100,000, to $93,000. The settlement also called for an interest rate of 2% for the first 5 years, and for the remaining 5 years at 4.35%. While the case took almost 3 years to wind its way through the court, we were able to reach a favorable result.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Foreclosure Fraud Against Deutsche Bank Yields $30,000

Shaffer & Gaier’s client agreed to a $30,000 cash settlement with Deutsche Bank in an action filed by the banking giant to foreclose on his New Jersey investment property. When purchased in 2006, the property was worth approximately $110,000, but at the time of the trial the value had fallen to $65,000. Shaffer & Gaier’s review of the loan documents uncovered fraud committed by the Lender in the underwriting process.

After Deutsche Bank filed its foreclosure action, Shaffer & Gaier filed a counterclaim based on fraud and misrepresentation (the lender grossly inflated our client’s federal tax return income when qualifying him for the loan and failed to disclose that to the client). During pretrial discovery and trial preparation, Shaffer & Gaier proved that the bank’s assignment documents (which give the Lender the right to bring the foreclosure lawsuit) were defective and therefore it did not have the right to foreclose.

Along with the counterclaim, this allowed the client to successfully settle the claim on the third day of trial. As part of the terms of the settlement, our client was entitled to retain the property and collect the rental income for an expected period of 18 months, free of mortgage payment obligations.

Interest – Only Loan Settlement

Shaffer & Gaier’s clients owned a vacation home on the Jersey Shore since 1989, and in 2007 a mortgage broker qualified them to refinance into an “interest-only, negative amortization loan”. While our clients’ loan allowed them to make “interest-only” payments that were lower than a traditional monthly mortgage payment, the loan was misleading because the balance of the loan increased each month, even though a payment was being made. This is often because the Truth in Lending document does not appear consistent with the true terms of the loan.

These loans are so deceptive for the homeowner that they have been outlawed in many states while many of the big banks have even stopped offering the loans to prospective homeowners. Shaffer & Gaier filed a lawsuit in Cape May County, NJ against the lender and secured a confidential settlement in July, 2012 for money damages which allowed our clients to recoup the amount of interest they had paid since the loan’s inception.

Options After Act 91 Notice

There are generally three options for a homeowner after the bank sends its pre-foreclosure notices:

1. Cure The Default – Within 30 days from the date of the ACT 91 Notice, the borrower may cure the default by bringing the mortgage current. The borrower must pay the total amount past due plus late fees. There also may be associated attorney or legal fees.

A. If the default is cured before the lender refers the account to their attorney, the borrower will not incur any legal fees.

B. If the default is cured after the lender has referred the account to his attorney but prior to commencement of legal proceedings, the homeowner will be responsible for legal fees up to and not in excess of $50.00.

C. If the default is cured after the lender’s attorney has begun legal proceedings, the homeowner will be responsible for ALL legal fees (even those in excess of $50.00).

2. Meet With A Consumer Credit Counselor – Within 30 days from the date of the ACT 91 notice, the borrower may meet with a consumer credit counselor located in the county where the mortgaged property is located.

Borrower has 30 days from the date of this meeting to file a HEMAP application. The consumer credit counselor will supply the application and assist the borrower in completing it. They are the only agency approved for submission of the application.
HEMAP may take up to 60 days to make a decision. During this time, no foreclosure proceedings may be brought against the borrower.

3. Homeowner Takes No Action – If the homeowner takes no action within 30 days from the date of the Act 91 Notice, the lender will exercise her right to accelerate the mortgage debt. The entire outstanding balance becomes due immediately and the borrower loses the right to pay the mortgage in monthly installments. The lender refers the account to her foreclosure attorney who begins the legal process of foreclosing on the mortgaged property. A lawsuit can then be filed in the county where the property is located. An answer must be filed with the court within thirty days or else the bank may secure a default judgment against the homeowner.

Foreclosure Notes

In Pennsylvania, a lender is required to send certain notices to the homeowner before it files a foreclosure lawsuit. These notices are often sent by a bank, its servicer or the bank’s law firm. It is wise to open mail regardless of whether you recognize the sender’s name due to the time-sensitive nature of the notices.

Pennsylvania law requires that these notices meet strict legal specifications and our legal team can examine each notice to determine whether the lender is complying with Pennsylvania law. The notices are:

ACT 6 Notice (Intent to Foreclose)

This is the Official Notice of Intent to Foreclose sent to the homeowner from the lender prior to initiation of any foreclosure proceedings. It is not sent until the homeowner is at least 60 days behind on his mortgage payments. The lender must send this notice to the homeowner by first class mail to his last known address and, if different, to the property secured by the mortgage. It officially notifies the homeowner that the mortgage is in default and unless action is taken to cure the default within 30 days, the lender intends to accelerate the mortgage payments (the outstanding balance of the original mortgage becomes due immediately).

ACT 91 Notice (Take Action to Save Your Home from Foreclosure)

This notice, also sent from the lender, informs the homeowner that he/she has 30 days from the date of the ACT 91 Notice to (1) cure the default or (2) contact a HEMAP Consumer Credit Counseling Agency. (3) If the homeowner takes no action within the 30-day period, the lender will instruct her attorney to file a lawsuit and proceed with foreclosure. The ACT 91 Notice provides information about HEMAP (The Housing Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program) and a list of Consumer Credit Counseling Agencies including contact information. The ACT 91 Notice, however, IS NOT sent to homeowners with FHA Title 2 Loans, homeowners more than 24 months delinquent or with past due amounts greater than $60,000.00, or when the home is not owner occupied.

Foreclosure Defense Workshop July 23

foreclosure-defense-workshop

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Philadelphia Judge Denies Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment

My clients own a home in the Chestnut Hill neighborhood in Philadelphia. Their lender is Suntrust Mortgage Company, an Atlanta based lender with offices in the Southern and Eastern U.S. and in the Cayman Islands.

Suntrust sued my clients in a foreclosure lawsuit in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. In January, Suntrust filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing to the court that a trial was not necessary because the loan documents themselves prove that the homeowners are in default. The banks frequently file these motions in which they argue that the bank should have the absolute right to foreclose. A closer inspection of the loan documents, however, established that the bank may not have properly applied the mortgage payments to the principal and interest when the payments were made. This created a question of fact because my clients’ mortgage payments conflicted with the bank’s payment ledgers.

The trial court agreed, on February 27, 2013 the judge denied the bank’s motion for summary judgment. The clients continue to reside in the home and I am awaiting notification of a trial date.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Federal Court Foreclosure Practice

I have a case pending in Federal District Court in Philadelphia against Bank of America (the servicing bank) and HSBC (HSBC controls the trust that holds my client’s mortgage). The basis of the lawsuit is that the banks lied to my client when they told him that he should let his loan go into default if he wanted a loan modification. As crazy as this may sound, this is a technique used by the banks over that last couple of years. Of course, this sets up a homeowner for a foreclosure lawsuit. This all happened before he retained me, and as luck would have it, my client did exactly what the bank told him to do—he went into default and the bank filed a foreclosure action against him in Delaware County, Pennsylvania.

I filed a lawsuit for fraud and promissory estoppel (i.e., my client relied on the bank’s statement that he should go into default). The bank filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit, claiming that it was not reasonable for my client to rely on such a promise.

At oral argument on February 14, 2013, it was clear that this was the first time that the Federal Court judge became aware that the bank engaged in tactics like this. Since most foreclosure-based lawsuits are filed in the state courts, this is not surprising. For a good part of the hearing, which lasted about an hour, I felt as if I was educating the Court about 1) the bank practices which led to the housing crisis and 2) the ridiculousness of the loan modification process. Instead of issuing an opinion, the judge ordered Bank of America to look into settling the entire matter, which would include withdrawing the foreclosure complaint and providing a loan modification.

Contact Shaffer & Gaier

To set up a free initial consultation, contact our office online or call our foreclosure hotline at 855-289-1660. Or call our office location in Philadelphia at 215-751-0100, or in New Jersey at 856-429-0970.

Our Services

img

Our Latest News Posts

Firm Newsletter: April 2019

Click here to download a printable pdf of this newsletter. Supreme Court Victory Leads to Arbitration Award It certainly seemed like a long-time coming, but our firm was successful in taking our client’s case all the way to the Pennsylvania … [Read More...]

Diagnosing Traumatic Brain Injuries

Nearly 50,000 patients die annually from traumatic brain injuries. Now a new study led by the University of Pennsylvania reveals that tiny blood vessels in the brain can offer clues to better treatment, according to an article from UPI’s Health … [Read More...]