tgage market Matias Kranevitter Jersey

Posted by xin xiu24 on 7. Jul 2016

ers are middlemen who process the mortgage payments from homeowners and

direct the money to the banks or investors who hold the loans. With the current

problems in the mortgage market Matias

Kranevitter Jersey
, banks and the federal governments have reached

consensus to help homeowners, but often the mortgage servicers, having the

ultimate power to modify a mortgage, refuse to ?play ball?. Further, they are

increasingly turning to consumer abuses to collect mortgage payments, at a time

when working with and helping out distressed consumers would obviously be in

everyone?s best interests. Mortgage servicers are sometimes stand alone

companies, but sometimes are the branches of major banks and lenders. Brennan,

Wiener & Assoc. handled a case recently against Wells Fargo Home Mortgage,

in its capacity as a mortgage servicer servicing a mortgage first belonging to

GE Capital, and then later to Freddie Mac. A San Bernardino, California jury

returned a verdict to the plaintiffs for over $800,000.00 for a two year pattern

of false credit reporting. Fisher v. Wells Fargo, San Bernardino Superior Court

Case No. RCV 074 822, currently on appeal at the California Fourth District

Court of Appeal. What the Fisher case teaches is that major banks like to

collect the fees from mortgage servicing but do not want to put any actual money

into customer service or straightening out problems. Mortgage servicing is all

automated, and if you really want to wait on hold sometime, try calling your

mortgage servicer to straighten out a problem. Other lawsuits and attorneys

general have become aware of this growing problem. Recently, lawsuits alleging

loan modification delays and illegal collection practices have been brought on

behalf of consumers by both private attorneys and by attorneys general. Recent

studies reported that at least 38 mortgage servicers had been sued for charging

illegal fees, forcing homeowners to buy needless insurance, illegal collection

practices, confusing customers about the federal loan modification program, and

foreclosing on homeowners with pending loan modification applications.

Additionally these mortgage servicers also have been criticized for not helping

homeowners promptly, causing homeowners to pay more late fees which work out

beneficially for the companies. President Barack Obama announced the Home

Affordable Modification Program, in March 2009, to help an estimated 4 million

homeowners avoid foreclosure. Under this program, mortgage servicers will earn

fees to help homeowners facing foreclosure reduce their monthly mortgage

payments. The mortgage servicers are the only link between borrowers and banks

or investors and therefore they are in the best position to modify the loans

under this new program. The objective is to adjust mortgages so homeowners

payments remain affordable. But, in a proverbial sea of exploding adjustable

rate mortgages that homeowners cannot afford, only about 200,000 mortgage loan

modifications are under way. The mortgage servicers don?t have enough financial

incentives to modify the mortgages as they only earn on average of ? to ?

percent of the value of the loans they service. Added to this is their natural

incentive to keep costs down by understaffing their loan modification divisions

and their customer service divisions. The larger the mortgage payment, the more

the mortgage servicers earn Martin

Demichelis Jersey
, and they earn less if the loan is modified,

which frequently involves lowering the interest rate or taking other steps to

reduce monthly mortgage payments. An analysis by the Associated Press shows that

of the 38 servicers that are being paid by the government as part of the federal

loan modification program, 30 are facing lawsuits for charging illegally high

fees, prematurely foreclosing on homes and engaging in illegal collection

practices. These are violations of laws protecting homeowners in foreclosure and

laws that prevent credit reporting and debt collection abuses. Fourteen of these

companies have suits against them for misleading homeowners about their

eligibility for the loan modification program and how much the

0 Comment


Logg inn for å skrive en kommentar.

Powered by: Bloc