Does proposed Michigan foreclosure law kick owners out too quickly? | MLive.com

My neighbor abandoned his condo...
Does proposed Michigan foreclosure law kick owners out too quickly? | MLive.com
Creative Commons License photo credit: MattC..

My answer on this one should be kind of obvious, but let’s look at some of the details.  For starters, this measure is being tacked onto the provision to extend Michigan’s nearly worthless pre-foreclosure negotiation law by one year.  So there is a trade off, right?  Homeowners get this pre-foreclosure negotiation and banks get shorter redemptions.

Wrong.

Homeowners only get the benefit of pre-foreclosure negotiation if they respond exactly as they must within a ridiculously short time period -14 days from the date of the letter.  Technically, that is the date the letter was written not the date it was sent.  But, even counting from the date it was sent, the postal service might get it to the homeowner the next day or 10 days later. 

Next, the letter is sent registered.  If you are not there to sign for it, you don’t get it until you can go pick it up.  If you are like most people and work Monday through Friday during the day, you cannot pick it up until the next Saturday at the earliest – unless you take time off work to pick up a letter that may or may not be important.  So this could add another 5 days. 

The letter almost always instructs you to contact the bank’s law firm.  They are not open on weekends.  2 more days. 

Now what happens if you are already talking to someone in the bank’s loss mitigation department before the letter is even sent?  Does that count as contacting them?  No, it doesn’t.  So many homeowners let the deadline pass without contacting the right person to secure the 90 days to negotiate. 

The bottom line is that this provision is woefully under used.  To suggest that everyone should lose half of the time they have to figure out what, if anything, can be done to save their home and then find a new place to live if necessary, because a very small number of home owners will get the letter quickly enough to respond to the right person and enter into loan modification talks suggests that these legislators have no idea how this process actually works.

To make matters worse, the reduction in redemption period is permanent.  The extension of the negotiation period is for one year.

Kind of makes you wonder if this bill’s sponsors are your representatives or the banks’, doesn’t it.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Posted in Foreclosure | View Comments

A New Option For Mobile Home Owners Who Are Under Water

1967 Elcona Mobile Home

Image via Wikipedia

In the recent case of Johnson v QFD, the Michigan Court of Appeals considered for the first time a section of the Mobile Home Commission Act (MCL 125.2301 et seq) that allows buyers to back up of their purchase agreement for up to three years after the sale if the dealer violated the act when making the sale.

In this case, the dealer sold the home from an unlicensed branch location.  The buyers became unhappy with the home for a variety of reasons, even though the lack of license at the branch office where the home was bought had nothing to do with this.  In spite of there being no connection between the reason the buyers wanted out of the contract and the violation that was discovered, the Court held that the statute (MCL 125.2331) did allow them to back out of the contract.

As if this ruling were not friendly enough to mobile home buyers, the court also made it clear that the seller’s attempt to use the purchase agreement to limit the buyers to one year to take action against them and their attempt to waive violations of the Act were both invalid. 

This is an important case for consumers of all kinds, not just mobile home owners, because many companies try to illegally limit consumers’ rights through contract.  Consumers need to know that in spite of what their contract says, and sometime because of the abusive terms in the contract, help may be available.

When you are being harassed by lenders, debt buyers, debt collectors, mortgage companies, or businesses such as rent to own stores, car dealers, and mobile home dealers (all of whom primarily target low-income consumers that they believe they can take advantage of) it is very important to talk to a lawyer right away.  There may be options you have that the business trying to intimidate you is never going to tell you about, and may actually tell you that you do not have because of something in the contract.  But, much like the Johnson’s in this recent case, if you do not check with a lawyer who works in this area, you will not know.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Posted in Uncategorized | View Comments

What’s this certified letter from my bank?

Roy
Photo by justmakeit
Did you recently get a certified letter from your mortgage lender?  You’re at work all day and those little cards the mail carrier leaves to tell you about the letter can be easy to forget about.  But, make picking up that letter a very high priority.  If you are behind on your mortgage, it may “just” be your bank offering to help you figure out a way to save your house. 

The letters tend to be pretty softly written.  But, buried in them somewhere is usually a reference to HAMP.  The HAMP program is actually not very effective.  But, it is one of the few options we have to save homes at this point. 

If you ignore the letter offering HAMP consideration, your bank can foreclose and will have complied with HAMP because they offered to consider you and you did not accept. 

But, in Michigan there is another very specific certified letter your lender must send before foreclosing.  This letter will tell you that you have 14 days from the date of the letter – and this means the date they wrote it, not the day you receive it, which is why you must pick up certified letters from your bank immediately – to request a meeting to discuss loan modification under Michigan law. 

There is a specific formula that must be considered if you properly request  this meeting.  If you request the meeting and provide the necessary information, your bank cannot foreclose by advertisement unless they can prove that they applied the formula to you and you do not qualify for modification.

And even if you do not end up qualifying, making the request forces a negotiation period of at least 90 days.  Only when that period expires can the bank proceed with publishing the sherif’s sale. 

So do not ignore certified letters from your bank, even if you are not behind on your mortgage – they have been known to make mistakes.  Pick up  the letter.  Read it.  If you don’t understand it, call an attorney or one of the non-profit housing counselor’s on the list that must be included with the letter if it is one of the mandatory 14-day Michigan “mediation” letters. 

Actually, even if you understand the letter, you are better off getting professional help anyway because there may be options you are not familiar with that could save your home or at least help you move on with minimal damage.

Posted in Foreclosure | View Comments

Cash-Paying Vultures Pick Bones of U.S. Housing Market as Mortgages Dry Up – Bloomberg

 

 

 

 

 

Cash-Paying Vultures Pick Bones of U.S. Housing Market as Mortgages Dry Up – Bloomberg

.

I will give them credit, at least they know they are vultures.  In fact, one of the companies I have dealt with on behalf of a client has a name that is pronounced as “condor”, vultures from California. 

In this article, one of the vultures tries to justify his existence by saying, “If there weren’t vultures out there, you would have a city of dead carcasses.”

If they were buying houses on the open market, I would agree and would not have a problem with them.  But, in Michigan, that is not how they are doing it.  Time and again I get clients who find their mortgages sold to these investment companies before the foreclosure.  When that happens, the company will stop all loss mitigation efforts (loan modification) and move to foreclose as fast as possible. 

The truth is that modifying the loan would defeat their business model, which relies on flipping houses, not servicing mortgages. 

An important self-defense tip if you are behind on your mortgage is to carefully watch for notices that your mortgage has been sold.  The Truth in Lending Act requires notice to borrowers when mortgages are sold.  When you get one of these notices, google the new owner of the mortgage. 

If you find a company that identifies itself as a “buyer of scratch and dent mortgages” (an actual quote from the business profile of one such company I have dealt with) or something similar, immediately contact an attorney if you hope to stay in the house.  If they can foreclose, they will. 

There are a few defenses available, but some are only available if you act very early in the foreclosure process.  It is a good idea to contact an attorney as early as possible when you are facing foreclosure anyway.  But, if you are dealing with one of these vultures, you have no other choice.  They will not work with you in any way.  Their business model is to circle your home until they can land and pick clean the bones of your family’s finances.

And they are proud of this . . .

Posted in Foreclosure | View Comments

Big Banks Save Billions As Homeowners Suffer, Internal Federal Report By CFPB Finds

Big Banks Save Billions As Homeowners Suffer, Internal Federal Report By CFPB Finds.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is not officially launched yet and already they are exposing continuing abuses of borrowers by banks that promised to pursue loan modifications after the tax payers gave them billions of dollars to bail them out.  The most disturbing thing to me about this business model is that they will just keep going, without hesitation, until they are forced to stop.  But, on a daily basis I have to explain to a client that they are not a bad person because they are facing a foreclosure or trying to eliminate a debt owed to one of these banks.  So, the people getting taken advantage of feel guilty about not paying more and the banks that sold loans that could never really be repaid, then took tax dollars to stay in business, then promised to modify loans – but really haven’t, keep going with business as usually. 

Now let’s see what Elizabeth Warren can do once she is really on the job.

Posted in Foreclosure | View Comments

Beware the “Missing Loan Documents” Letter

I found this great little tip on another bankruptcy blog and wanted to make sure to pass it on.  The only thing I would add is that even though you can probably ignore the letter, you should absolutely save it.  It the bank does try to foreclose and the note becomes an issue, you have evidence that they lost the note and anything they produce was probably fabricated.

________________

Recently, a colleague of mine was given a letter from a client. She had received it from a law firm, and it said:

Dear Borrower:

We are your mortgage company’s lawyers. We are attempting to reproduce certain loan documents that are now missing from your loan file. Enclosed you will find a Loan Security Agreement. Please sign it in the presence of a Notary Public and return it to us in the enclosed prepaid envelope.

Sincerely,

The client said that she was afraid that this meant she was in some sort of trouble with her mortgage, and asked my colleague for advise.

The advise was to ignore the letter. Why? Because it really means that the lender can’t find the Mortgage Note, and is trying to “fix” things by having her sign a brand new one.

Signing a new mortgage note generally isn’t a good idea. It may create liability and make it easier for the lender to foreclose against your property. If there were violations of the federal statutes in connection with the loan, it may prevent you from suing for relief. It will restart the running of any statutes of limitations related to payments under the mortgage. And it results in there being no consequences for the le

via Beware the “Missing Loan Documents” Letter.

Posted in Foreclosure | View Comments

Another Reason to Complete Your Tax Return Before Filing Bankruptcy

 In the recent case of In Re Senczyszyn, the federal court for the Eastern District of Michigan upheld the Eastern District Bankruptcy Court ruling that taxes for the prior year are debts to include in a Chapter 13 plan, even if the bankruptcy case is filed before April 15. 

 In this case the debtors filed their 2008 tax return on February 14, 2009.  They calculated that they owed $1,900 to the state of Michigan and listed this as a priority tax debt on the bankruptcy petition that they filed on March 31, 2009. 

 The state objected to this plan, arguing that the tax debt was post-petition and needed to be immediately paid out side of the plan because the tax return was not due until April 15, two weeks after the petition was filed.

 The definition of the phrase “becomes payable” controlled the decision.  If the phrase meant the day that the payment was due, the state would win.  The court listed many reasons that such a holding would present practical problems applying it in real life.  But ultimately they resorted to the dictionary.  The definition was simply an amount to be paid, and it was specifically noted that debts are often payable long before they are due. 

 Applying this means to the case, the court held that tax debts are pre-petition debts if the tax could possibly be paid before the petition is filed.  For individual tax payers, this means that on January 1 your taxes for the previous year are prepetition debts.  As a prepetition debt, they must be listed on your bankruptcy petition.  And, in a Chapter 13 case they can be paid through the plan.

Posted in Uncategorized | View Comments

Be Careful When Valuing Assets on Your Bankruptcy Forms

 Whether you are filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy where non-exempt assets could be lost to the trustee or you are filing a Chapter 13, where unsecured creditors must receive at least the amount of money they would have received if you filed a Chapter 7, you have to list all of your assets and give values for them.  These values are then compared to the dollar limits on your exemptions to see if the trustee will take any property in the Chapter 7 or to run the “liquidation analysis” in a Chapter 13 to determine the minimum amount that unsecured creditors must receive.

 For most consumers, this valuation can get kind of sloppy.  People tend to lump all of their clothes together, put a value on it, and move on.  The same thing happens with furniture, cookware, etc.  But, there is a specific value you are supposed to place on these items – replacement cost for an item in similar condition.  As stated in the notice that must be signed to start the process –

 (1) How to Value Assets at Replacement Value:

 You must determine how much your personal property is worth as it is today. Do not value your property based upon what you can sell it for. Instead, value it at what you would have to pay to replace it. If your property is new or close to new, consider retail value adjusted to whatever amount appropriate for the extent the property has been used. If there is a market for your property as used, you may use that market to determine value. For example, you may consider using thrift store prices or prices at house or garage sales or at a secondary marketplace such as eBay to determine what it would cost you to replace your personal property.

 So, you tell your attorney that it would take a certain amount of money, lets say $2,200 to replace everything in your house.  This is a believable amount, your exemptions cover it all, you sign the forms swearing under penalty of perjury that it is true, the trustee does not object, and your case moves on as a no-asset case so that you lose no property and there is no payment to the unsecured creditors. 

 But what if we add one more fact?  After you submit the bankruptcy paperwork to the court your house burns.  You have insurance and no one is hurt, so you file the claim expecting to replace your stuff and move on.  But, you really do want to replace everything, so you get every penny you can into that claim, lets say $45,924.88.  Is there a problem?

 These were the exact circumstances in the recent case of In Re Rossi.  The insurance company cut a check for the $2,200 amount listed in bankruptcy schedules.  The homeowner sued in state court to make the insurance company pay the rest of the claim.  The insurance company tried to remove the case to the bankruptcy court.  The bankruptcy court decided in this case that because the “no-asset” report had been filed and the bankruptcy case had been closed, this was no longer a matter for them to decide and sent it back to state court.

 This is where the reported decision ends.  But, the rest is not had to imagine.  In state court the homeowners are gong to have to stand in front of a judge and say “Yes your honor, we lied on our sworn bankruptcy forms when we said our stuff was worth $42,000 less than we are saying now.  Please make the insurance company pay us the full amount.”

 That argument will of course not work.  Technically it is called collateral estoppel.  The more common application of it in bankruptcy is when someone fails to list a possible lawsuit that they have or they value the possible recovery very low and then the defendant in that suit uses the value provided in the bankruptcy forms to limit the possible recovery in the lawsuit.  But, however it is being applied it means that what you said in the previous case limits what you can say now. 

 So, not only are these homeowners not going to get the extra value for their lost property, they are likely to face criminal charges.  They either lied on their bankruptcy forms, which is a federal felony, or they lied on their insurance claim, which is know as “insurance fraud” and is also a felony. 

 The bottom line is that when you are filing a bankruptcy case, whether a Chapter 7 or a Chapter 13, you must list all of your assets – from your clothes to your potential lawsuits – and you must value them correctly or you risk consequences well beyond the loss of a little property to a Chapter 7 trustee.

Posted in Bankruptcy | View Comments

We’re from the government and we’re here to help?

I could be a cynic and say, “Coming from the people that brought you HAMP, I would not expect much.”  But, according to this recent Wall Street Journal article, the enforcement arm of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau it getting ready to launch immediate enforcement actions against some major players in the foreclosure mess.  Hopefully knowing this is on the way will get them to clean up their practices, seriously consider loan modifications, and follow the rules when they do foreclose.  But, they might just decide to foreclose everything they can, as fast as they can before July.  We should know within 5 months if the CFPB is going to reign in some of the abusive practices seen in the foreclosure industry.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703507804576130370862263258.html

BUSINESS
FEBRUARY 9, 2011
Warning Shot On Financial Protection
By JEAN EAGLESHAM
The enforcement chief of the new U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said the agency plans to “immediately” use its powers to take on any misbehavior by Wall Street firms and other financial institutions once the agency officially opens in July.
In his first interview since arriving at the agency last month to set up its enforcement operations, Richard Cordray suggested he will use the same aggressive approach that he was known for in his previous job as Ohio’s attorney general. Last year, the 51-year-old Mr. Cordray described the foreclosure practices used by companies now under a nationwide investigation, including Wells Fargo & Co and the GMAC Mortgage unit of Ally Financial Inc., as “a business model built on fraud.”
Associated Press
Richard Cordray speaks last fall.
He said his new responsibilities are “in many ways doing on a 50-state basis the things I cared most about as a state attorney general, with a more robust and a more comprehensive authority.”
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a centerpiece of the Dodd-Frank financial-overhaul bill that passed last summer. Several federal regulators are slated to transfer some of their powers to the new agency on July 21.
Many financial firms opposed the establishment of the agency and are worried about a potential onslaught of sanctions ranging from reprimands to cease-and-desist orders to fines to bans on certain business practices. Republican lawmakers are trying to blunt the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s powers and crimp its budget.
The launch of some of the agency’s enforcement powers could be delayed if the new agency doesn’t have a permanent director by July, as required by the Dodd-Frank law. Some Republicans still are angry that President Barack Obama appointed White House adviser Elizabeth Warren as a special adviser to get the agency off the ground, bypassing the Senate approval needed to name a permanent director.
Asked in the interview how soon the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would start bringing enforcement actions, Mr. Cordray said: “I will be seeing to it that we will be ready with some of our priorities immediately.”
Mr. Cordray said mortgages, credit cards and student loans are high on his enforcement agenda. No decisions will be made until the agency digs into problem areas and sets its “priorities accordingly,” he said. “I don’t prejudge what we’re going to find.”
In addition to banks, credit unions and securities firms, the new agency has oversight powers for thousands of payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, debt collectors and other financial companies.
Firms operating on “much more of a wild and woolly basis” than big banks are the most likely source of “aberrant and abusive practices,” he said. “Consumer protection in the financial area has … taken a second place in most of the regulatory bodies, but we’re going to have a different focus.”
Consumer groups are pushing Mr. Cordray to wield his powers against traditional banks, citing the subprime-mortgage crisis as a failure by regulators. He said companies that opposed setting up the new agency should want even-handed regulation that “weeds out the bad actors” that compete unfairly against other firms.
“Good, solid financial businesses have nothing to fear and maybe much to gain,” he said. The agency also wants to forge a “strong, cooperative relationship” with state attorneys general, and the Dodd-Frank law should make it easier for various state and U.S. agencies to combine forces, Mr. Cordray added.
The size of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s enforcement staff hasn’t been decided yet. Mr. Cordray said discussions about dividing the agency’s budget of about $400 million a year are “ongoing.”

Posted in Uncategorized | View Comments

HAMP Didn’t Work – This Will.

There is a comprehensive plan in Congress to give a real alternative to the huge numbers of Americans facing foreclosure. Briefly, the idea is to allow people who file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy to “cram down” the first mortgage to fair market value. This is something we regularly do on investment property and cars. And if there is a second mortgage in place, even on a primary residence, we can eliminate it as long as the house is worth less than the payoff on the first mortgage. But, we cannot modify the mortgage that is secured by any equity in a primary residence. This minor change in the bankruptcy code would save huge numbers of homes directly, as well as making modifications more easily obtainable because banks will know that if they refuse a voluntary modification, a Chapter 13 will be filed to force them into accepting modification.

More details about the proposal and why it is necessary can be found here.

Posted in Bankruptcy, Foreclosure, Uncategorized | View Comments