Complaint Review: US Loss Mitigation - Poquoson Virginia

We feel that any complaint of this magnitude should be addressed; likewise, as outlined by the complaint above, we strongly disagree with the client's complaint related to the details of the particulars. We understand the sensitivity of the situation our clients are faced with coupled with the distress they maybe experiencing. I have examined the file and have determine the information posted by this particular client to be unfair and misleading. The file was received and information provided on August 9, 2006 by the client. The application details provided by the client, upon our initial review, was grossly inaccurate. They informed us that they were 4 months delinquent with a pending sale for September 6, 2006. Moreover, the finanical assessment of the information they provided demonstrated affordability and liklihood of a favorable outcome. Analysis: The information provided by the lender was contrary to the information that the client acknowledged as being accurate on the initial application. The information provided by the servicer was that the client was in bankrutpcy and they were unable to assist them at this time. Our office was not aware of any on going bankruptcy proceedings, furthermore the lender had no such foreclosure sale date set for September 6th as indicated by the client in the initial meeting. We were held at bay until the servicer was given permission by the bankruptcy courts to proceed with foreclosure action. This was granted to the servicer in March 2007, likewise, allowing my office to have legal jurisdiction to assist them without violating law. The lender received all documents from their investor and our office to proceed to examine file and negotiate a workable plan if possible. A sale had been set for July 3, 2007 to foreclose on client's home. The case was assigned and the lender was reviewing the case for a modification, however the amount of the delinquency was much more than what was reported by the client considering the delays with bankruptcy courts. Here's the actual note posted to the file from Patryce Copeland with lender on June 15, 2007: Patryce Copeland called lender and spoke with representative who stated that the mortgagors are 20 payments past due and owing, in just payments, $42,527.58. They are looking into a loan modification for the mortgagors. They are aware of the foreclosure sale date set for July. Lender indicated that the contribution, due to the significant number of months behind, would be approximately $20k. Contacted mortgagor and updated him of the status. Explained to him the amount that is owed and the amount they will need. Advised they would need at least $20k to put towards workout assistance. Told him I would call him next week. He stated Ok. Assessment: Please understand the client has been instructed to save money while the mitigation process is on going in the event that servicer should request a contribution. Keep in mind that the client's mortgage payment is $2,016 per month. If they had started to put a mortgage payment aside from September 2006 to June 2007 they would have saved approximately $20,160 to put toward the modification. We instruct all clients to save their mortgage payments since the lender during the mitigation process is refusing to accept any payments until an acceptable workout has been agreed upon by both parties. Conclusion: If the mortgagor had followed the directions of our office they would have been able to meet the terms of the modification and would most likely have been able to adhere to the proposed solution provided. In addition, if the information provided at the initial meeting would have been accurate we would have been able to provide them an accurate assessment at the initial meeting. It is critical to be as accurate as possible so we can provide the best potential outcomes, as well as, potential contributions necessary to facilitate the lender's terms if approved for a modification. According to the lender the client was more than 4 months behind on their mortgage obligation at the time the client requested assistance. Real hard to provide accurate information, and possible outcomes to a client, if the information provided is contrary to actual facts. Sinerely, Mr. Schultz 866-625-7610 ext 304

This file got a Loan Modification and a very good one at that, if anyone believes what this lady is falsly stating please let me know i have the notes on the file from every day including times it was worked along with the Loan Mod. That we got the client which is the best workout you can get someone in forclosure.