Quote:
Originally Posted by faith  Beware of “QWR”s The increasing burdens of “Qualified Written Requests” under RESPA put mortgage servicers in a troublesome place. But there’s more law on their side than meets the eye. It must be considered as servicers distinguish legitimate issues from harassment and abuse of the law  Source: ABA Banking Journal, this item is found in the link provided:
Scare Mail: Beware of ?QWR?s |
[I abbreviated your post but wanted to show that your work is what I'm helped by.]
Thank you Faith!
I knew that my attorney had liked the very factual request that I had already made to Litton even before seeking his help. I had not known of the magic of saying QWR but the content did exactly provide the details that SHOULD have triggered a response as specified.
I gave them this in writing:
1) the name and account of the borrower, 2) a statement of my reasons for claiming my account is in error. I cited that there was an existing notarized mod contract and that there was every indication that they KNEW of said document yet refused to honor it. I basically told them they needed to 'FIX THE PROBLEM" I identified.
I NEVER got a response, not even a form letter telling me that they did not consider my request valid. It has been 2 months since I requested they respond. Now the attorney has again requested the same information. There has been one form letter from them but it does not cite that it is in response to the QWR. It says they will respond in about 60 unless legally required to do so sooner.
I like knowing that there are additional venues for getting an injunction, if we have to go that route. Litton/
CW/BofA are stonewalling. RESPA indicates transfers are not to affect the mortgage instrument.
CW/BofA transferred my note effective the very day the modified payments were to start. Litton, where the note was transferred, refused to honor the notarized mod. The CA AG's settlement indicates
CW is not to do things like that little ol' transfer to keep from implementing the mods under the settlement. Because of the provisions of that mod agreement not being implemented, Litton immediately started action to declare the loan in default. Perhaps they are thinking that because the loan was in arrears when they transferred it, that they can ignore RESPA, and justify not responding to the request based on RESPA all the while breaking it's provisions?
I also found out that my attorney can file suit asking that
CW be found in contempt of court because they have breached the stipulated settlement agreement in my case (and at least a few thousand others). The AG does not have to be the one who initiates such a claim. That would also then give grounds for an injunction. That will be a simpler case than citing ALL the laws and regulations that have been flaunted in my case. No action was to be taken to try a foreclosure while a mod under the settlement agreement was being worked out. Well, this one is a completed mod. No excuse is provided in the settlement agreement, allowing any of the notarized and verified modification contracts to be ignored and never implemented.
I wonder how easy it is to get
either HUD, a state attorney general, or state insurance commissioner to bring an injunctive action to enforce violations of Section 6 of RESPA?
Of course I know we can sue for the pidly $1000. I want that injunction since these corporate idiots won't respond and I believe it is quite intentional, not just over-worked 'grunts' who are calling the shots on these modification contracts that are being singled out for 'non-implementation'. I'm having to coin a term to describe it. They never denied the ap, they generated the mod, they never found a flaw with the mod. CW/BofA/Litton just failed to follow the instructions.