Some fraudsters attempted to disguise themselves as government agencies by displaying government seals or adopting names similar to a government agency. They promise to help borrowers modify their loans through the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).
SIGTARP warns homeowners to seek modifications through their servicers or contact a HUD-approved housing counselor at 1-888-995-HOPE (4673).
Friday, November 25, 2011
Consumer Warning
Some fraudsters attempted to disguise themselves as government agencies by displaying government seals or adopting names similar to a government agency. They promise to help borrowers modify their loans through the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).
SIGTARP warns homeowners to seek modifications through their servicers or contact a HUD-approved housing counselor at 1-888-995-HOPE (4673).
SIGTARP warns homeowners to seek modifications through their servicers or contact a HUD-approved housing counselor at 1-888-995-HOPE (4673).
Reaffirmation Agreements
A reaffirmation agreement is a brand new legal contract that revives your personal liability on the mortgage note – a liability that will otherwise be wiped out when you receive your discharge in your bankruptcy case.
What this means is if sometime down the road, say, 2 or 5 or 10 years from now, you can no longer afford to make your mortgage payments, your lender would not only be able to foreclose and take your home, but the mortgage company can also file a lawsuit against you for the deficiency from the foreclosure sale (ie, the difference between what you owe on the mortgage loan and the amount the property sold for at the foreclosure sale). For example, if you owe $200,000 on your mortgage loan, and your home is worth only $150,000 at the time of the foreclosure sale, then if you sign a reaffirmation agreement now, you could legally owe your lender $50,000 even though you no longer own your home.
Your lender will give you reasos to try to get you to sign the reaffirmation agreement which will certainly sound enticing: start receiving monthly billing statements again, reestablish automatic debit payments, and have your positive payment history reported to the credit reporting agencies.
But you have to ask yourself whether those are nearly good enough reasons to put yourself back on the hook for a liability of hundreds of thousands of dollars in the future? Just keep making your mortgage payments and comply with all the other terms in your mortgage loan documents (property taxes, insurance, etc), and if you have any problems with your lender, then come talk to us.
Now, if your lender is willing to re-negotiate the loan, lower the interest or the principal owed, or somehow entice you into an offer you cannot refuse, then we may be willing to talk about it.
Note: This does not apply to car loans. You must reaffirm car loans to keep the vehicle. Ride through provisions no longer apply to vehicles.
What this means is if sometime down the road, say, 2 or 5 or 10 years from now, you can no longer afford to make your mortgage payments, your lender would not only be able to foreclose and take your home, but the mortgage company can also file a lawsuit against you for the deficiency from the foreclosure sale (ie, the difference between what you owe on the mortgage loan and the amount the property sold for at the foreclosure sale). For example, if you owe $200,000 on your mortgage loan, and your home is worth only $150,000 at the time of the foreclosure sale, then if you sign a reaffirmation agreement now, you could legally owe your lender $50,000 even though you no longer own your home.
Your lender will give you reasos to try to get you to sign the reaffirmation agreement which will certainly sound enticing: start receiving monthly billing statements again, reestablish automatic debit payments, and have your positive payment history reported to the credit reporting agencies.
But you have to ask yourself whether those are nearly good enough reasons to put yourself back on the hook for a liability of hundreds of thousands of dollars in the future? Just keep making your mortgage payments and comply with all the other terms in your mortgage loan documents (property taxes, insurance, etc), and if you have any problems with your lender, then come talk to us.
Now, if your lender is willing to re-negotiate the loan, lower the interest or the principal owed, or somehow entice you into an offer you cannot refuse, then we may be willing to talk about it.
Note: This does not apply to car loans. You must reaffirm car loans to keep the vehicle. Ride through provisions no longer apply to vehicles.
Bankruptcy Case Law
In re Dumont, 383 B.R. 481, 489 (9th Cir. BAP 2008)
“Ride through” option under pre-BAPCPA law was eliminated in 2005. However, “if a debtor is in compliance with sections 521(a)(6) or 362(h)(1) and (2), then section 521(d) has no effect, and enforcing an ipso facto default clause is still barred by the Code.”
In re Bennett, 298 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2002)
Absent a valid reaffirmation agreement, an agreement to repay a discharged debt is unenforceable under section 524(a)(2), regardless of California law to the contrary
“Ride through” option under pre-BAPCPA law was eliminated in 2005. However, “if a debtor is in compliance with sections 521(a)(6) or 362(h)(1) and (2), then section 521(d) has no effect, and enforcing an ipso facto default clause is still barred by the Code.”
In re Bennett, 298 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2002)
Absent a valid reaffirmation agreement, an agreement to repay a discharged debt is unenforceable under section 524(a)(2), regardless of California law to the contrary
Southern District Flordia Effective 12/1/11
http://www.flsb.uscourts.gov/web_folder/NEWS/11-11-22_Notice_of_Entry_of_Administrative_Order_11-03.pdf
http://www.flsb.uscourts.gov/AdmOrders/AO_2011-03_Order_Adopting_Interim_Local_Rules_and_Clarifying_Status_of_Local_Forms_Related_to_Chapter_13_Case_Matters_Addressed_in_Local_Rule_3070-1_and_Related_to_Local_Rules_2002-1_and_4004-3.pdf
http://www.flsb.uscourts.gov/AdmOrders/AO_2011-03_Order_Adopting_Interim_Local_Rules_and_Clarifying_Status_of_Local_Forms_Related_to_Chapter_13_Case_Matters_Addressed_in_Local_Rule_3070-1_and_Related_to_Local_Rules_2002-1_and_4004-3.pdf
Single Point of Contact and Reviews
The Federal Reserve says all servicers have instituted policies to end dual-tracking and provide borrowers with a single point of contact. Mortgage servicers under the OCC’s jurisdiction include: Aurora Bank, Bank of America, Citibank, EverBank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, MetLife Bank, OneWest Bank, PNC, Sovereign Bank, U.S. Bank, and Wells Fargo.
The Federal Reserve has supervisory responsibility over the two other servicers subject to the April regulatory consent orders – Ally Financial and SunTrust.
http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-139a.pdf
The independent consultants for each servicer are:
• AllonHill for Aurora Bank
• Clayton Services for EverBank
• Deloitte & Touche for JPMorgan Chase
• Ernst & Young for HSBC and MetLife
• Navigant Consulting for OneWest PricewaterhouseCoopers for Citibank and US Bank
• Promontory Financial Group for BofA, PNC, and Wells Fargo
• Treliant Risk Advisors for Sovereign Bank
• The engagement letters describe how the independent consultants will conduct their file reviews and claims processes to identify borrowers who suffered financial injury as a result of procedural deficiencies.
• The letters include language stipulating that consultants will take direction from the OCC and specifically prohibiting servicers from overseeing, directing, or supervising the reviews. The OCC says it is working to ensure a consistent process for all servicers.
http://www.independentforeclosurereview.com/
http://www.occ.gov/topics/consumer-protection/foreclosure-prevention/independent-review-foreclosure-letters.html
The Federal Reserve has supervisory responsibility over the two other servicers subject to the April regulatory consent orders – Ally Financial and SunTrust.
http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-139a.pdf
The independent consultants for each servicer are:
• AllonHill for Aurora Bank
• Clayton Services for EverBank
• Deloitte & Touche for JPMorgan Chase
• Ernst & Young for HSBC and MetLife
• Navigant Consulting for OneWest PricewaterhouseCoopers for Citibank and US Bank
• Promontory Financial Group for BofA, PNC, and Wells Fargo
• Treliant Risk Advisors for Sovereign Bank
• The engagement letters describe how the independent consultants will conduct their file reviews and claims processes to identify borrowers who suffered financial injury as a result of procedural deficiencies.
• The letters include language stipulating that consultants will take direction from the OCC and specifically prohibiting servicers from overseeing, directing, or supervising the reviews. The OCC says it is working to ensure a consistent process for all servicers.
http://www.independentforeclosurereview.com/
http://www.occ.gov/topics/consumer-protection/foreclosure-prevention/independent-review-foreclosure-letters.html
Principal Write Downs Coming?
Bank representatives and government officials are working on a broad settlement of most state and federal foreclosure-practices investigations that could move forward without the participation of California
Bank representatives and government officials are working on a broad settlement of most state and federal foreclosure-practices investigations that could move forward without the participation of California
Debt Card Increases Under Justice Dept Review
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-22/debit-card-fee-increases-under-u-s-justice-department-review.html
The U.S. Justice Department is conducting an antitrust review of statements and actions by banks and their trade associations about imposing fees on customers who use debit cards. The Federal Reserve, acting on a provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, imposed rules on Oct. 1 limiting fees card networks charge merchants to 21 cents per transaction, about half what retailers had been paying. In response, lenders including Bank of America and Wells Fargo considered new charges for debit customers to make up some of the $8 billion the largest banks may lose under the rules. House Democrats who last month asked Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether U.S. banks and their trade groups colluded on whether to impose fees in response to caps on what they can charge for using debit cards.
The U.S. Justice Department is conducting an antitrust review of statements and actions by banks and their trade associations about imposing fees on customers who use debit cards. The Federal Reserve, acting on a provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, imposed rules on Oct. 1 limiting fees card networks charge merchants to 21 cents per transaction, about half what retailers had been paying. In response, lenders including Bank of America and Wells Fargo considered new charges for debit customers to make up some of the $8 billion the largest banks may lose under the rules. House Democrats who last month asked Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether U.S. banks and their trade groups colluded on whether to impose fees in response to caps on what they can charge for using debit cards.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Postage Costs to Rise
U.S. Postal Service announced Tuesday that it will increase postage rates on Jan. 22, including a 1-cent increase in the cost of first-class mail, to 45 cents.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Bankruptcy Court Filing Fee Increase
On September 13, 2011, the Judicial Conference of the United States voted to increase certain miscellaneous filing fees, effective November 1, 2011. The "administrative fee" portion of the filing fee for each chapter will increase from $39 to $46, which will have the result of increasing the overall filing fee for each chapter by $7.00. Thus, as of November 1, the filing fees for each chapter will be as follows:
Chapter 7--$306
Chapter 11--$1,046
Chapter 12--$246
Chapter 13--$281
Chapter 15--$1,046
In addition, the fee for amending schedules will increase from $26 to $30, the adversary filing fee will increase from $250 to $293, the fee for filing a notice of appeal will increase from $250 to $293, and the fee for filing a motion for relief from stay will increase from $150 to $176.
There are other miscellaneous fee increases for certification, exemplification, audio recording, records searches, record retrieval, and returned checks.
Chapter 7--$306
Chapter 11--$1,046
Chapter 12--$246
Chapter 13--$281
Chapter 15--$1,046
In addition, the fee for amending schedules will increase from $26 to $30, the adversary filing fee will increase from $250 to $293, the fee for filing a notice of appeal will increase from $250 to $293, and the fee for filing a motion for relief from stay will increase from $150 to $176.
There are other miscellaneous fee increases for certification, exemplification, audio recording, records searches, record retrieval, and returned checks.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Matt Weidner for Office
In case you live under a rock. Matt Weidner is running for State Rep in District 52 against Jeff Brandes.
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/register-to-vote-do-it-now-dont-wait/
http://battlegroundtampabay.com/2011/08/foreclosure-attorney-matt-weidner-files-to-run-against-rep-jeff-brandes/
Brandes is a Republican. Weidner is listed as Independent.
Contributions to:
MATTHEW WEIDNER
329 4TH AVENUE SOUTH
ST. PETERSBURG FL 33701
Weidner is against making Florida a Non-Judicial State. Where does Brandes stand?
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/register-to-vote-do-it-now-dont-wait/
http://battlegroundtampabay.com/2011/08/foreclosure-attorney-matt-weidner-files-to-run-against-rep-jeff-brandes/
Brandes is a Republican. Weidner is listed as Independent.
Contributions to:
MATTHEW WEIDNER
329 4TH AVENUE SOUTH
ST. PETERSBURG FL 33701
Weidner is against making Florida a Non-Judicial State. Where does Brandes stand?
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
DHS to unveil new airport security policy for kids
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44504084?GT1=43001
Children 12 years old and younger soon will no longer be required to remove their shoes at airport security checkpoints, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress on Tuesday. The policy also includes other ways to screen young children without resorting to a pat-down that involves touching private areas on the body.
Kids should take there shoes off and go through the screening machine too. hello terrorists do not care about there kids--- Vietnam War- Middle East- ring any bells????
Children 12 years old and younger soon will no longer be required to remove their shoes at airport security checkpoints, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress on Tuesday. The policy also includes other ways to screen young children without resorting to a pat-down that involves touching private areas on the body.
Kids should take there shoes off and go through the screening machine too. hello terrorists do not care about there kids--- Vietnam War- Middle East- ring any bells????
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
