Thought about that as well and wondered if I can take previous petition and convert to 13 off those numbers versus today. As stands now it would not pan out i don't think but if I could be allowed to go back in time and reopen to convert then yes...that would be of interest. I understand less and less of the law the more I read. It is built from the top down and what should be logical is not. At the time I was insolvent and they were undersecured...them coming back 14 years later no way justifies a "clean start" approach as chapter 7 is intended.Agreed. Under secured creditors should not deserve appreciation over delayed actions and subsequent improvements not attributable to the debt in question. These are basically grunge debt collectors hoping to convert bad notes on these old seconds. I wander if you can convert chpt 7 to chpt 13 and then do a cram down. Or just do a chpt 13. It might force them to settle based on value. I'm thinking they will lose all interest minimum. Much better than prior "advice" to pay in full.
Hmmm...I don't see where you are referencing. Essentially you are suggesting they should have done their own *lien stripping"? SLS has so many loop holes to support "oh that's not my job". Different departments for everything, they have not even acknowledged that I have an attorney. Found the attached that can maybe support them using home value on Petition dateI found this doing historical research. See how lender is to treat party in bankruptcy? They effectively should have revised the debt according to bankruptcy *at that time" and then proceeded with negotiations based on the "bk adjustment." I really don't see another interpretation. So you DO have claim and I would use MY calculations on it if those calcs were done at the time of bankruptcy. I don't think it requires re-opening a bk and converting as to file a 13 you would have a verfiable amount already predetermined based on past caculation. At least that's my thought because I have re-analyzed this one being in similar situation (but its not relevant to me any more).
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Expands Foreclosure Protections | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (consumerfinance.gov)
I cannot get them to negotiate what so ever. Its flipping bizarre. I purchase for a living...and never have i said to someone...we only accept offers over phone, your settlement letters that you mailed us we have not submitted. "Send me the payoff of your first and we can get started" GRRR...They are annoying and my attorney is starting to get annoyed with them as well. They sent me today 3 letters. Two letters letting me know they are reviewing my request and fedex with a home restoration plan since my loss mitigation application (that I've haven't even submitted yet) was declined.I believe you have equitable factors in your favor. That CFPB thing is also in your favor. Also SOL.
I was always shocked as to why nothing was mentioned about my 2nd when I was pulling this house out of foreclosure and getting a loan mod approved on my first mortgage (hamp) back in 2010. The mortgage(s) which were both with the same company. It might be a moot point but based on the below, they should have offered it.Something I'd like to include in my lawsuit is to establish a pattern and practice of using the modification process a a mechanism to foreclose. One clearly exists, I'm far from the only borrower to be the beneficiary of their opportunist abuse and examples of similar treatment are scattered throughout the past dozen years of foreclosure litigation. It's also good to bring up as it's associated with SCOTUS' goalposts of reprehensibility in determining punitive damages. But it does require a higher standard of proof, clear and convincing evidence.
I'm wondering if anyone knows or knows where to find info about the legal definition of pattern. It may be something determined on a individual basis but would the conduct need to has been proven or would numerous allegations suffice?
What I can easily show is multiple lawsuits where the servicer actively hindered performance and induced a default in payments then frustrated performance further with various shenanigans. It might also be shown the homeowners suffered injury though that would involve some speculation in quantifying the damage. Well, a lot of speculation.
Beyond that as we all know the vast majority of homeowners don't litigate. What would be handy is if I had some statistic, like only one out of 10,000 borrowers takes their lender to court but I have no idea how to find that. Ideas anyone?
Here are SCOTUS goal posts.
"We have instructed courts to determine the reprehensibility of a defendant by considering whether: the harm caused was physical as opposed to economic; the tortious conduct evinced an indifference to or a reckless disregard of the health or safety of others; the target of the conduct had financial vulnerability; the conduct involved repeated actions or was an isolated incident; and the harm was the result of intentional malice, trickery, or deceit, or mere accident."
Here's the SCOTUS case.
It appears this phrase generally reflects class action, but I think it also could apply to civil actions independently.Something I'd like to include in my lawsuit is to establish a pattern and practice of using the modification process a a mechanism to foreclose. One clearly exists, I'm far from the only borrower to be the beneficiary of their opportunist abuse and examples of similar treatment are scattered throughout the past dozen years of foreclosure litigation. It's also good to bring up as it's associated with SCOTUS' goalposts of reprehensibility in determining punitive damages. But it does require a higher standard of proof, clear and convincing evidence.
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure, the $1,000 was a incentive payment from the Fed to actually hire on, and get together a staff to actually process and workout these loan modifications.That phrase "must offer [...] or accept a lump sum payment from the Treasury". I was told the payment was $1,000 from the treasury. Is there a way to see if such payment was accepted by the loan's owner or servicer at that time?
Thanks. It really pisses me off now that I was not offer the program...I doubt I'll uncover anything that can really help me now. This was 11 years ago...hmmm..almost as insane as a zombie loan with $60k in interest! Smh