Home Loans and Support

Traditional Loan Mod. vs Non-Traditional Loan Mod

Discussion in 'Countrywide Home Loans - Tell Us Your Countrywide ' started by simon2020, Aug 28, 2009.

  1. simon2020

    simon2020 LoanSafe Member

    Will someone place explain the difference of a "traditional loan modification" and a "non-traditional loan mod."? :confused:

    What are the elements of each type of mod?

    Thank you.
  2. simon2020

    simon2020 LoanSafe Member

    Almost 200 views and no one can answer this question? Hmmmmmmmmmm. :eek:
  3. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    I'm not certain, but you do know there have ALWAYS been what are called "IN-HOUSE" modifications?

    I would venture the GUESS that the In-house mods are the 'traditional' ones. All these new versions based on government programs or the CA AG settelement with CountryWide would be what I would presume to be 'non-traditional'.

    You would need to check with each lender about their in-house mods (I would presume there would be some areas of commonality) and then compare that to the slew of government programs.
  4. simon2020

    simon2020 LoanSafe Member

    So I would assume if someone does not pass the test with the Obama plans or HAMP, etc. then the bank looks internally to see what they condo for the homeowner.
  5. ama125

    ama125 LoanSafe Member

    I think they are considering all avenues. Since they have been working on these for a few months now, the negotiators probably have a good feel for what will fly with an investor. If you request HAMP (aka the Obama plan, aka MHA mod), then they should review you for it per your request. They will in all likelihood run your numbers for whatever in-house loan mods they can do. I never answered your original question because I had never heard of traditional vs non-traditional so I wasn't sure what you meant by it. Hope this helps and good luck to you!
  6. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    You might have to ASK.

    If you were processed via NACA or some similar place, they may only consider the government programs. If you were working thru such an agency and got turned down, call them and ask if there is any in-house program.

    I have learned thru this site that there are even some in-house programs where rental property that is non-owner occupied can get modifications.

    Also, the CountryWide CA AG settlement specified guidelines for modifying 3 types of loans and that court settlement agreement does not seem a likely one for the agencies to be working. You probably need to look that settlement up online (I've already posted the link other places on this forum). If it SHOULD apply to you, you would need to contact CW. It does not REQUIRE them to give you a mod, but IF they determine they SHOULD, it specifies much simpler APPLICATION processing.

    Also, there are some situations where they have to help pay for your move it they DON'T help you and you have to give up on your house.

    If you DO qualify for this program, you will have to ask CW about it but I would do that via their 'David Leighton'.
  7. simon2020

    simon2020 LoanSafe Member

    Thanks for the response. The reason I asked that question was for the benefit of not only me but other readers. I have noticed some people have mentioned in their threads about banks offering "traditional loan mods" so
    I was just wondering what the differences were. Now I understand.

    Thanks again!
  8. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    Glad I could help.:) That is where this mess I'm in brings the good with the bad. When you get lemons, try to make some lemonade or lemon bars, right?

    I continue to learn more and even find more 'ammunition' to use in my case. I also try to forewarn people of further potential CW/BofA/Litton treachery.

    I'm having to sue to enforce a modification contract that CW originated under that CA AG stipulated settlement agreement. After that initial surprise, I started my search online. I had been SOOO unaware of what was going on. I did not even know my mod was a 'CW CA AG mod' until I posted both here and at the BK forum. I forget which place it was, but someone told me that my description of the mod contract content and the APPLICATION PROCESS with a CW loan were the 'hallmarks' of the CW CA AG modifications.

    I looked and they were right. I've now found others on other forums where CW reneged on implementing mods. I even found a couple of other companies doing it to. (Just a little bit of collusion?) CW has already been sued over this. Each time they insist that they are not obligated to implement the modification contract that they originated. As long as the person hires an attorney to draft a suit, CW settles out of court really fast but requires non-disclosure. Each person has to do it all over again. Divide and conquer at work. Some people do not have the knowledge that they are being conned, while others do not have the resources or drive to put up the necessary fight.

    With at least 2 cases, CW reneged on implementing their modification contract and then with said verified, notarized modification contract sitting in their offices, completed a transfer of the note to Litton. With the transfer, there is cause to use RESPA to force the modification contract to be honored. They just added another venue (RESPA and HUD) to the basic contract law breach. Oh, and for the CA AG settlement mods, also add breach of settlement, plus potential contempt of court/failure to comply charges.

    Now, Litton failed to even reply to my attempt to get their compliance with section 6 of RESPA and they likewise failed to reply let alone to comply with my attorney's letter on the same topic. That is a minimum of 2 statutory counts for $1000 each plus ATTORNEYs fees and actual damages. My suit is drafted.

    I do not think the other cases that were settled by CW had a clear-cut cause to have the attorney's fees paid, since they were mods that CW held onto, informing the borrowers 73-90 days after their first reduced payment was made that they had not paid the 'full' amount due and it was needed for all those months plus any arrearage (payments that were supposedly added to the 'back-end' of the loan). Just a sudden 'pay-up or else', never a 'we are not honoring the mod contract' letter or phone call. One guy in AZ was told at that late date that CW found that CW had made a math error and were not implementing his mod due to that. He has his suit being drafted also. [If you think any of these situations are legal, you do not understand basic contract law.]

    They try to convince each such borrower that CW has done nothing wrong. But the only venue to deal with this has been a private law suit. [Execpt in MI where the AG and the MI Housing Authoity has sent high level bank examiners after CW/BofA and the mod contracts got honored in that state, miraculously without a law suit.]

    Litton claims they don't have to honor the CW mod contract because they transferred the note and although the mod contract was verified, CW/BofA never signed it. (Hint: signature is nice, just not required per basic contract law. Workerbees at BofA were willing to TELL Litton to honor the contract. They are not allowed to call Litton and Litton refuses to contact those lowly-level workers. This is a very PLANNED strategy ploy cooked up between the two companies. A supervisor even told a CW worker to 'stay out of this case'. I smelled a dead rat.) So Litton is willing to risk both basic contract law AND RESPA being thrown in their faces? CW too of course.

    Do the other people that CW gives a mod to actually EVER see a copy of the mod with the CW/BofA signature? Many companies never sign these. Are they going to eventually do this same transfer to others, claiming the contract was not signed? [Of course those that got the notice at the 73-90 day stage will not be in this boat: typically, either they sued or they lost the house.]

    Is this to become the 'next wave' of scams? Will we see all the lenders possibly transfering just the original notes where they never gave the borrower a lender-signed copy of the modfication contract, regardless of proof that the initial lender took the negotiated modified payments?

    I hope to have a significant update for this situation this week.
  9. ama125

    ama125 LoanSafe Member

    So-cal-gal, eyes WIDE open! I keep seeing posts that people at the end of the MHA trial have not yet received a signed copy let alone being offered a permanent mod. And now there is a waiver posted online for the servicer to extend the trial by another month. Something stinks!!!!
  10. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    Is it that same dead rat or is this one a dead skunk? Maybe with a yellow instead of while line down it's back?
  11. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    Of course, I did refer to my never-honored, never-implemented modification contract as being 'beached' like a whale. Maybe it is a stench of all the mods CW has failed to honor.

    There are thousands of them already in that state at CW. I suspect more are being added. So it is a big pod of beached whales we smell.

    We do not even know the 'criteria' of how CW/BofA 'picks' the ones they refuse to honor. Now that could bring in additional grounds for suits.

    First, no justification is reported to the borrower immediatedly (only for narrow grounds, there would be a possible reason to reject a contract, but when time elapses or other manipulations such as the note transfer occur, they lost the right to argue that).

    So, would a class action allege that CW had not only illegally failed to honor the contracts, but could such a suit cause CW to provide proof that it was done on a totally random basis? (I'll just bet it is NOT totally random.) There may be some rather reprehesible targetings that were done.
  12. ama125

    ama125 LoanSafe Member

    Oh, but you are talking about JUST the modifications going ignored...what of all the HAMP requests that are being wrongfully rejected or denied? From all that I've read, you pass the NPV test, you win, here's your trial plan. But oh NO, from what I have been told, the investor has the final say. It is THEIR money so they are the ones who are really calling the shots here and THEY did not sign any kind of agreement to participate in the MHA program, even if the mortgage servicer did! It's time to mandate investors to cooperate! I never asked he/she/that company to buy my mortgage. They took that chance, they took that risk! I don't care what kind of investment guarantee they have on my loan! NOTHING in life is guaranteed except that one day life will come to an end! The investors should be doing their part in stopping foreclosures PERIOD! This should not be about saving their precious money! We are in a huge housing crisis and those investors who are unwilling to even consider modifications should be thrown in jail for perpetuating the crisis!!!!
  13. Garry

    Garry LoanSafe Member

    Something is smelling a little Ama, and it started when they never mailed a signed copy back to anyone for the trial agreement. I'm going to give the bank the benefit of the doubt on the people that are still waiting for their final mod, I think the bank is just going through a learning process and they haven't mastered it yet. It should get better as time goes on.
  14. Melanie702

    Melanie702 LoanSafe Member

    Hi Ama, in your response above, about requesting the HAMP.....when I call BofA, do I actually have to ask to be considered for it? I called about a week ago, and probably a mistake, but gave them all my financial information. Pay stubs, expenses etc.....the rep on the phone said, Sorry, you do not qualify for anything. My question is, can I actually ask for the HAMP even though they said I wasn't qualified for any programs? So they say. Liars. Just to mention, when I spoke with a man (forgot his name, but I posted it here) last week, he said if I wanted to try the HAMP I would have drop NACA. Don't know if that's true or not. Very confused with all these programs. NACA submitted us for a forbearance, but when I spoke with "the man" he said he was working on an in-mod for us. :confused:
  15. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    Don't get me wrong, I'm with all of you guys fighting to even get a mod contract to 'pop' out of the blasted system. I'm trying to be of help wherever I can. I believe what is happening with the mods that are never implemented only underscores how dirty the lenders really are. Bear with me on this.

    Too many 'outsiders' ignore what is happening with mortgage mods or figure that it is only the people who should not have been in the housing market that are getting into trouble.

    We need Jonny Q Public to realize HOW FAR these lenders are willing to go to deny any mods, right? We need JQP to remember the lenders are the villians, not the borrowers.

    If there is a way to possibly pull HUD into the frey in a way they can not deny that things have gone just too blasted far, we need to use it to the best advantage of ALL of us, right?

    To have lenders willing to break basic contract law plus violate RESPA rules may get HUD involved. This is also a positive action.

    JQP will not have sympathy for a lender breaking the law in an attempt to foreclose where a viable mod contract was signed, delivered and verified. Get JQP to think in terms of laws being broken to take homes from LAW-ABIDING citizens by dirty lenders.

    Acknowledgment of this blatant fraud will lay groudwork for stepping up the clamor about improper processing occuring within the application process.

    We have to continue to show that the banks (esp CW/BofA and Litton) are STILL dishonest. Then we can tie in the fact that HUD-funded NACA is hiring people FROM CW and providing the offices for that staff in space rented from CW.

    Public opinion and pressure that is positive to our efforts is what I'm hoping to bring to this frey. I'm hoping to have a further update this week.

    In the meanwhile, we all fight on to get to the goal of a signed-by-the-servicer-and-recorded copy of the final mod contract.

    I think we all need to demand that they produce a signed copy of the mod contract within 30 days. The other action is HUD regulations or banking regulations to stop all transfer of notes while a mod application or final contract is being processed. And toss in no credit reporting or foreclosure action while either a trial or final mod is being worked.

    Do you realize how many forums have people posting about having to start over with an application process when the note is transferred? Some of those cases even occured while a trial mod was in effect, let alone cases where the final mod exists like mine.
  16. Garry

    Garry LoanSafe Member

    I agree with everything you are saying So-Cal-Gal, I also feel bad for the situation you are in, it should have never happened and I hope you are compensated well for the hell you are going through. I understand that compensation is not what you are looking for, all you want is a contract enforced like it should have been, but I hope you get compensated for your trouble just the same.
  17. ama125

    ama125 LoanSafe Member

    I've been to my local HUD office. The counselor there has been trying to assist but she told me to go the route I suggested from this forum, email the OOP (after her attempts all failed to even get someone to look at my file). I'm keeping my HUD counselor aware of the entire situation as it unfolds. She does have conference calls and meetings with other agencies to air complaints, questions, and concerns about the program. I know she is speaking out on my behalf.
  18. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    I would really like to see my case be the one that ENDS all modification contract implementation OR enforcement debacles permanently. Rule changes or clarification of enforcement in RESPA would do the trick on that score.

    I also want HUD or the banking regulators to institute rules requiring the mods that are offered by lenders and accepted by the borrowers, be acknowledged and signed/recorded within 7 days.

    I may even push some buttons on what CW put in my mod vs what the AG's settlement listed. Let's see, there is that question of how to interpret the section on the final fixed rate for my loan. It looks like it should read in my resulting mod that the final interest rate is the original one LESS 200 BASIS POINTS. (200bp = 2%) Gee that would even change the starting point for the step-rate loan mod. Now, they weren't trying to cheat me on that aspect too, were they?

    I know of other settlements where there was just a simple situation of CW never implementing. No transfer scheming, no RESPA violations, no improper filing of a NOD per CA laws. Mine has all the scheming, all the violations, all the collusion, all the fraud and is precisely the fixed rate subprime loan addressed by the CW CA AG settlement that required streamlined application and then just implementation of the mods that borrowers accepted. So add in contempt of court/breach of existing settlement also. One case had asked for more than I my loan is to compensate for the guy's time. My schedule has been far more impacted than his was. Too bad, they decided to take a cheap settlement and get on with life, but then their case was far simpler.

    The other simple CW settlement cases dropped all arrearages. OK. They did not pay all the attorney fees. NOT ok. Whisper 'RESPA'. Look at the penalty for RESPA failure to acknowledge or comply with section 6.0. Ok? Attorney fees are recoverable. $1000 in statutory compensation per count, well 2 requests were ignored, so $2K. Then ACTUAL damages. Since RESPA is going to help me recover attorney fees, do I have any motiivation to not try for the TRUE damages from the frickin' idiots who TRIED TO ROB ME OF MY HOME?

    And now the little snack on the side: Litton had Quality Loan Service Corp in San Diego file a NOD that is totally lacking in content or quality. It does not conform to CA law. What are the damages for a defective derogatory public record that is not retracted when the company is informed of same? When said recording remains on public record for more than a month?

    I believe that BOTH Litton AND Quality will have to pay damages for that.

    The current law states they are to make certain efforts to work with the current owner to keep them in the home. Litton did not follow the requirments of the new law. Then the law requires that those efforts be fully documented within the NOD. They never did them and they did not address any attempt in the NOD.

    Litton contacted me AFTER the NOD was filed, apparently trying to come up with the proper content. I sic'd them on the attorney but they never called. Of course they already had several letters from the attorney so they should not have even called me.

    The last gal wanted to know if I had filed a bk (if you have filed one, they do not have to follow the new law). I did have the PLEASURE of informing her the ONLY reason they needed to talk to my representative was because of THEIR failure to HONOR the EXISTING MODIFICATION CONTRACT.

    Oh, that is a bit of a problem. See you should not be trying to document that you could NOT work out a plan for the current owner if there is ALREADY an EXISTING MODIFICATION CONTRACT that you, the SERVICER, ARE REFUSING TO HONOR. Crossing between the CA law and RESPA rules on that one. Gotcha both ways. I used to HATE chess but I really feel like that is the game we have been playing.

    Can they hide this one like the did all the others?

    The other lender that I have noticed following the CW/BofA and Litton practice of note trading is SAXON. I just googled Quality Loan Service and noted that A ripoff report shows for Saxon using Quality Loan Service also. Nice tight little 'good ole boys club' or WHAT?

    Oh, and in the posting on line against QLS on Ripoff report? It shows they proceeded with the sale of a house DESPITE a restraining order! Looks like I need to send this info to my attorney too. It helps explain the complete lack of compliance QLS has shown for CA law to date in my case. They broke so many laws in the other case, it looks like they do not even try to comply.
  19. Garry

    Garry LoanSafe Member

    The homework you are doing is amazing. I know you hate the game of chess but sometimes it's worth playing, I don't see how you can loose on this one. Keep the good fight going!
  20. so-cal-gal

    so-cal-gal LoanSafe Member

    You miss-understood the PART of HUD I was referring to. I AM NOT talking about the counseling part of HUD, at ALL. That would be a JOKE for the situation I have.

    RESPA has some ENFORCEMENT aspects spelled out in terms of injunctive action.

    Go check out the threads on RESPA. HUD has responsibilities that are NOT related to COUNSELING whatsoever.

    If they don't act then there are a couple of state-level officials who can also act. And then there would be my own effort if I have to go it without any of them. RESPA still would be grounds for demanding my attorney's fees and certain other fees, regardless of who files.

    I hope everyone better understands my original posting now. I did not realize that others would presume HUD == HUD counselor!

Share This Page



"Hello Moe, I just wanted to tell you, your website has saved my life (literally), I stumbled on your site in the middle of losing my home, I was able to network with people going through the same thing as I am. I didn't feel alone anymore, I have tried to give back and counsel those that haven't walked in my shoes yet. We hear so much about what is wrong with America, I just wanted you to know, you are whats "right" with America."

Nina Mitchell
Loansafe & MoeSeo Inc. © 2014 | LoanSafe.org is not a bank, lender, mortgage broker, law firm or affiliated with the US Government. Privacy Policy