[Seagirl]

One of my clients is in an exact situation as I've read described here. She received two approval letters, she's fine with the verbiage on the first letter but not the verbiage on the second letter. B of A refuses to change the verbiage or give her the same approval letter for both her first and second loans. We have a P&S agreement we've been working with for three months now which gives B of A most of their money. My client has refused to sign the second approval letter so B of A says nothing they can do. We've worked with multiple loss mitigation case workers since February and have received different information from each of them. At one point my client's file was assigned then unassigned to three different case workers in one day! We just learned that her current case worker is no longer at B of A with the bounce back notification received after sending him an email. The supervisor assigned to her case is unresponsive. After that she learned they sent her file to another department without her permission, notification, etc. so I don't know where it is right now. At one point I sent emails to the person I found as the VP of loss mitigation but I've since not been able to locate that email. I assume the VP may have changed in the last three months given the whirlwind changes that seem to be going on internally at B of A.

Does anybody have a current phone number or email of the VP for the loss mitigation? If I can locate my information I'll post it. I, too, received no return calls or emails but a supervisor did get involved immediately after I began blowing up the email and vm of that VP.

In our position, B of A is saying they'll do better by foreclosing on my client. That is absolutely incorrect. Conservatively, they'll lose more than $50,000 if they choose to stick with that route and that doesn't include any holding costs, foreclosure fees, employee salaries, etc.

This is a financial issue and these are financial institutions so it's certain there are reasons (unknown to me right now, probably unknown to the general public right now) why allowing so many properties into foreclosure is financially more beneficial than working out short sales with homeowners. I have my own theories but that a topic for another forum.

So again if anyone can post contact information for the VP of loss mitigation that'd be helpful. Or any other escalated contact information that can get sticky wheels moving.

Appreciate the informative string!