Tiggerlgh,
The guy that told me that actually said he could get in big trouble for telling me that, but he could tell we were struggling and in need of the mod. As he put it to me he was just trying to help me. He told me that as long as I stayed current I would not be able to get any mod, that I would have to default for at least two months before I would be considered. As I said, at that point I couldn't pay the full payment anyway, so it was immentent default.
The bottom line is I was in much need for a modification, the bank lied to me, they gave me incorrect information and caused me to go into default. You can sugar coat the banks all you want to but miss Cinderella I'm afraid your logic about their practices are about as fairy tale as your avatar name is:( we are real people loosing our homes due to mostly our economy downfall. Be thankful you have a job because it can happen to you too. I suggest you give a bit more compassion and a little less judgement!
Hi JMW. I suggest you have compassion and not be so judgmental!!!
You spoke with a person that stated you had to be xx delinquent, in which you stopped paying your mortgage and then blame the person relaying federal guidelines to you. Nothing that person or servicer could do would bypass federal guidelines, and the reality is a hardship affidavit is exactly that, a certification one does have the financial ability to make the mortgage payment, yet is current.
If I don't agree with you that were tricked or mislead and are a victim because a creditor deceived you in not making payments, then I am judgmental? Really?
Cinderella, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE LATE TO GET A MOD. You DO have to show immentent default and finacial hardship.http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/programs/lower-payments/Pages/hamp.aspx The CSRs should never tell a person to go delinquent.
I don't want to get into what I do, but I will say I work for a large bank as well and if I heard of any of our CSRs telling someone they HAD to be delinquent or to suggest miss two payments and call back...heads would roll. Not saying it doesn't/hasn't happened but there a consequences if they are identified.
Yes, you would have been denied as loan is not in imminent default, along with everyone else. Anyone less than sixty days delinqunt, was denied. Period. Anyone that says otherwise, does not do modifications for banks.
From the beginning, everyone that was pre approved for a hamp trial mod would be delinquent by the time a mod was made permanent. That is because trial payments made a person late, the terms of the mortgage had not changed until it was booked, after the trial. People were placed on trial mods based on verbal income from the borrower, as required by the guidelines. Big problem. I don't think the government anticipated the amount of misrepresentations that were made. Eventually, when the docs were received and reviewed in underwriting, WOW! Colossal scre! up. We are talking material differences in documented income vs. what the borrower stated verbally. Big problem because they had already been given HAMP trial mods based on the amount the borrower told the customer service rep they made. Federal guidelines required a trial based on this, but also require the service eventually document their income in underwriting. Once reviewed in underwriting, hundred of thousand of people that initially pre qualified for HAMP were going to be denied. People stated they made 3k a month, but turns out, once we reviewed their income, they made 6k a month!!! Their mortgage was reduced based on the 3k a month, but now is not going to qualify for mod because they misrepresented their income based on the on a documented review. Thousands of homeowner now owed the difference back between their trial payment to their contractual payment. Modifications are very political. An administration that once boasted about...."we have 800,000 on trial mods!" to the people now have dismal numbers to report, but actually 400,000 received permanent modifications, many were denied.
Yes, for sometime in the beginning, you could have been current entering into a mod, because the trial would make you delinquent. Because of all the misrepresentations in income, the guidelines obviously changed to documented income prior to offering a mod, and in 2010, almost everyone would have been denied if they were current.
