Suit alleges America's Servicing Company
induced distressed borrowers into default
by JON PRIOR
Tuesday, November 30th, 2010, 9:38 am
New York law firm Harwood Feffer filed a class action lawsuit against a Wells Fargo (WFC: 30.99 -1.02%) servicer America's Servicing Company alleging it induced distressed borrowers to default on their mortgage in order to get a modification, meanwhile accruing late fees and penalties.
According to the suit, ASC allegedly told the borrowers now represented by Harwood Feffer that they would not be able to modify the mortgage as long as they were current. The firm said by making a loan default a pre-requisite for modification — even if the borrower qualified because of financial hardship — credit scores were harmed and fees, penalties and additional interest were charged.
The firm is suing ASC for compensation on those fees, totaling more than $5 million for the 12 plaintiff households. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
According to the Treasury Department's Home Affordable Modification Program guidelines, a participating servicer can offer a modification to a borrower facing imminent default. Wells Fargo participates in the voluntary program, but ASC does not.
Mortgage servicers have come under fire from Congress, regulators, state attorneys general and the public for mishandling foreclosure affidavits. Class action attorneys have used the issue to raise questions over the entire mortgage documentation process, from foreclosures and securitization to now modifications.
Wells Fargo and ASC did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
Friday, December 24, 2010
CLASS ACTION AGAINST AMERICA'S SERVICING COMPANY SHOULD CLAIM DAMAGES FOR STRESS INDUCED ILLNESS, ATTEMPTED AND SUCCESSFUL SUICIDE, IRREPARABLE HARM TO FAMILIES NATIONWIDE. I DON'T KNOW HOW A COMPANY PAYS FOR THAT. ASC IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE WHY THERE SHOULD BE NO LIMIT ON THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT CAN BE AWARDED IN A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
DOES THIS MAKE YOU AS HAPPY AS IT DOES ME? FINALLY!! A CLASS ACTION AGAINST WELLS FARGO AND AMERICA'S SERVICING COMPANY. IS THERE ENOUGH MONEY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD?
Harwood Feffer LLP Files Class Action
Against Wells Fargo’s Loan Servicing Unit,
America’s Servicing Company (“ASC”)
Tuesday November 23, 2010
Lawsuit Alleges That
Loan Servicer
Engaged Deceptive Loan Modification Practices (TO SAY THE VERY LEAST)
New York, New York, November 23, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) – The law firm of Harwood Feffer LLP (www.hfesq.com) today announced that it filed a class action lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (NYSE:WFC), and its loan servicing division, America’s Servicing Company (“ASC”), for fraudulent and deceptive practices related to loan modifications.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Forster, et al. v. Wells Fargo, et al., Index. No. CV-10-5321(BZ), alleges that ASC improperly and unlawfully induced borrowers to default on their mortgages by informing borrowers that loan modifications would not be considered for those individuals who were current on their payments. By making loan default a pre-requisite for modification, without regard to whether a borrower otherwise qualified for a modification due to financial hardship, ASC caused borrowers to unnecessarily suffer ruined credit and subjected them to significant fees, penalties and interest.
ASC is a loan servicer, meaning it does not have a beneficial interest in the mortgage loans it oversees but rather is contracted to administer and enforce the terms of the mortgage agreement. As a loan servicer, ASC generates a significant portion of its revenue from fees, penalties, and interest collected on the non-performing loans it services. Consequently, it is in ASC’s financial interest to avoid, delay, and deny loan modifications and to pursue foreclosures because doing so will lead to increased revenue.
A copy of the complaint is available on the firm’s website (great information you should really go there http://www.hfesq.com) (here is the link to the complaint, great reading!! http://www.hfesq.com/admin/include/uploads/fls/4911446894ced6241b27dd.pdf ) or can be obtained by contacting the firm. If you believe you were a victim of ASC’s mortgage loan modification scheme (meaning you went into default based on ASC’s representation that you would not qualify for a loan modification otherwise), you may be part of the proposed class. For more information on this case, you may contact Jeffrey M. Norton (jnorton@hfesq.com) or Roy Shimon (rshimon@hfesq.com) via email or toll free at (877) 935-7400.
For over two decades, Harwood Feffer has been a nationally recognized firm that specializes in complex, multi-party litigation with an emphasis on securities, ERISA, consumer fraud, products liability and civil rights litigation. Harwood Feffer serves as lead counsel in numerous class actions on behalf of investors, employees, and consumers and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for its clients.
CONTACT:
Harwood Feffer LLP
Attorneys:
Jeffrey M. Norton
Roy Shimon
488 Madison Ave., 8th Floor
New York, NY 10022
jnorton@hfesq.com
rshimon@hfesq.com
877-935-7400
http://www.hfesq.com
Attorney Advertising. Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcom
Against Wells Fargo’s Loan Servicing Unit,
America’s Servicing Company (“ASC”)
Tuesday November 23, 2010
Lawsuit Alleges That
Loan Servicer
Engaged Deceptive Loan Modification Practices (TO SAY THE VERY LEAST)
New York, New York, November 23, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) – The law firm of Harwood Feffer LLP (www.hfesq.com) today announced that it filed a class action lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (NYSE:WFC), and its loan servicing division, America’s Servicing Company (“ASC”), for fraudulent and deceptive practices related to loan modifications.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Forster, et al. v. Wells Fargo, et al., Index. No. CV-10-5321(BZ), alleges that ASC improperly and unlawfully induced borrowers to default on their mortgages by informing borrowers that loan modifications would not be considered for those individuals who were current on their payments. By making loan default a pre-requisite for modification, without regard to whether a borrower otherwise qualified for a modification due to financial hardship, ASC caused borrowers to unnecessarily suffer ruined credit and subjected them to significant fees, penalties and interest.
ASC is a loan servicer, meaning it does not have a beneficial interest in the mortgage loans it oversees but rather is contracted to administer and enforce the terms of the mortgage agreement. As a loan servicer, ASC generates a significant portion of its revenue from fees, penalties, and interest collected on the non-performing loans it services. Consequently, it is in ASC’s financial interest to avoid, delay, and deny loan modifications and to pursue foreclosures because doing so will lead to increased revenue.
A copy of the complaint is available on the firm’s website (great information you should really go there http://www.hfesq.com) (here is the link to the complaint, great reading!! http://www.hfesq.com/admin/include/uploads/fls/4911446894ced6241b27dd.pdf ) or can be obtained by contacting the firm. If you believe you were a victim of ASC’s mortgage loan modification scheme (meaning you went into default based on ASC’s representation that you would not qualify for a loan modification otherwise), you may be part of the proposed class. For more information on this case, you may contact Jeffrey M. Norton (jnorton@hfesq.com) or Roy Shimon (rshimon@hfesq.com) via email or toll free at (877) 935-7400.
For over two decades, Harwood Feffer has been a nationally recognized firm that specializes in complex, multi-party litigation with an emphasis on securities, ERISA, consumer fraud, products liability and civil rights litigation. Harwood Feffer serves as lead counsel in numerous class actions on behalf of investors, employees, and consumers and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for its clients.
CONTACT:
Harwood Feffer LLP
Attorneys:
Jeffrey M. Norton
Roy Shimon
488 Madison Ave., 8th Floor
New York, NY 10022
jnorton@hfesq.com
rshimon@hfesq.com
877-935-7400
http://www.hfesq.com
Attorney Advertising. Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcom
Related articles
- Why Making Trial Mortgage Modifications Permanent Is So Difficult (dailyfinance.com)
- Regulators Urged to Devise National Loan-Servicing Standards (blogs.wsj.com)
- Wells Fargo to settle lawsuit over pick-a-payment loans (reuters.com)
- Wells Fargo to modify 15,000 mortgages (money.cnn.com)
- Bank of America Sued by Arizona, Nevada Over Loan Modifications (businessweek.com)
- Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP; Harwood Feffer LLP; Izard Nobel LLP; and Stull, Stull & Brody Announce Settlement of Class Action Lawsuit Against Diebold, Incorporated (eon.businesswire.com)
- Borrowers stuck in trial loan modification limbo (nydailynews.com)
- Here's the Latest News on the HAMP Loan Modification Program (annarborundressed.com)
- Brown Reaches Settlement With Wells Fargo Worth More Than $2 Billion to Californians With Risky Adjustable-Rate Mortgages (yubanet.com)
The Ugly Truth revealed in these Law Suits Filed Against Wells Fargo: Massive violations of the Fair Housing Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and other fair housing and lending laws
Class Action Suit Accuses Wells Fargo
of Discrimination by Neighborhood
By Mary Kane | 09.09.09 | 2:00 pm
View Comments
Just a year ago, the theory that poor and minority borrowers were to blame for the housing crisis took hold with a vengeance, and so did the belief that the government forced lenders to make subprime mortgages to meet affordable housing goals. The view took on greater prominence in the heat of a presidential campaign, and an obscure anti-redlining law known as the Community Reinvestment Act became a scapegoat for subprime lending and the collapse of the mortgage market.
Illustration by: Matt Mahurin
Things have changed quite a bit since then, as the spotlight has shifted to lenders and their behavior during the boom. States and cities continue to aggressively pursue subprime lending discrimination suits, and judges across the country are signaling a willingness to move forward with some cases. As the lawsuits wind their way through the court system, more details and allegations about the inner workings of the subprime world are emerging. And as startling as some of the charges already have been — a former loan officer for Wells Fargo testified in one affidavit that employees regularly referred to minority borrowers as “mud people” and called subprime mortgages “ghetto loans,” — there’s even more ahead, said David Berenbaum, executive vice president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.
“The ‘smoking guns’ are coming out,” Berenbaum said, referring to possible evidence that lenders targeted minority communities and borrowers for higher priced loans. “And I expect more and more of these smoking guns to become apparent.”
In the latest development, a Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles recently certified a 2005 lending discrimination lawsuit against Wells Fargo as a class action case. The suit contends that area managers at the bank refused access in some minority neighborhoods to a software program that allowed for discounted prices on mortgage loans. Barry Cappello, a partner with Cappello & Noel in Santa Barbara, which represents some 10,000 to 20,000 borrowers in the suit, said he believes it is the first subprime lending discrimination suit in California to be classified as a class action.
According to Cappello, Wells Fargo introduced a program in 2002 called “Loan Economics,” which gave loan officers the authority to offer discounts to loan applicants. The savings on lower fees and interest rates could be significant, ranging from $500 to as much as $10,000 per loan. The suit claims that the Los Angeles area Wells Fargo manager refused to allow loan officers operating in certain minority neighborhoods to offer the program. Borrowers in predominantly white neighborhoods were given access to the software.
Cappello said the suit stemmed from complaints by black and Hispanic loan officers for Wells Fargo, who said they asked to use the software in their branches but upper management refused.
Wells Fargo is fighting the suit and has denied all the charges. In a statement, the bank said, “We are disappointed in this ruling and intend to vigorously defend this matter as the case proceeds. The decision does not indicate the court believes the underlying allegations have any merit. We feel the allegations represent a complete mischaracterization of our long-standing commitment to responsible lending and the pricing practices and tools we use. The policies, systems and controls we have in place ensure race is not a factor in the pricing or products we offer.”
The case could go to trial in about a year, Cappello said.
More lawsuits are expected in the near future over the treatment of Hispanic borrowers in Arizona and Texas, who were offered high-cost loans they didn’t understand at misleadingly low teaser rates, then refinanced into even more expensive loans than their initial mortgages, Cappello said.
Wells Fargo, the nation’s largest home lender, also has been a target of lawsuits elsewhere. Last month, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan sued the lender, alleging that blacks and Hispanics were sold high-cost subprime loans more frequently than white borrowers with similar incomes. The suit contended loan officers were offered incentives by the bank to steer borrowers into the more expensive loans, and that white borrowers generally received the lower-cost prime mortgages.
Some borrowers thought they were getting prime loans from Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, the suit also charged. But their loans actually came from Wells Fargo Financial, the bank’s subprime unit.
In Iowa, two watchdog groups charged this week that minority homeowners in Des Moines were three times more likely to receive high cost subprime loans from Wells Fargo than white homeowners.
In June, the New York Times reported on affidavits from a 2008 lawsuit by the city of Baltimore against Wells Fargo over subprime lending, which charged that the bank targeted blacks in Baltimore and suburban Maryland for high-interest subprime loans. Former loan officers testified in affidavits about using terms like “mud people” and “ghetto loans.” The bank also had an emerging markets unit that pinpointed black churches as fertile ground for selling subprime loans, according to the former officers. And in March, the NAACP filed suits in federal court in California against Wells Fargo and HSBC, alleging minority borrowers were more likely to be issued higher rate subprime loans than white borrowers with similar credit scores and qualifications. Both banks have strongly denied the charges. The NAACP also has pending litigation against nearly a dozen other banks and lenders over subprime lending discrimination.
Should the charges in the lawsuits be proven, it would amount to massive violations of the Fair Housing Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and other fair housing and lending laws, Berenbaum noted. Enforcing fair lending laws has been “an issue the government has failed to address over the past decade,” he said. Lenders could face criminal penalties from the government for violating fair housing laws, and they could be subject to punitive damages and fines from government lawsuits.
Big lenders like Wells Fargo and HSBC are obvious targets for suits because of their size and the amount of lending they did. In addition, many other lenders and originators of subprime loans have gone out of business, complicating efforts to address allegations of lending discrimination through lawsuits.
That leaves a major question regarding all the lending still unanswered, Berenbaum said: Where has the U.S. government been? The Federal Reserve reported in 2005 that an analysis of federal mortgage data found that blacks and Hispanics were more likely to receive higher interest rates on mortgage loans – and that it intended to examine the practices of 200 lenders as a result.
But nothing’s happened since that announcement, Berenbaum noted. Instead, as the years go on, and the government takes no action, allegations about price differences in mortgage loans based on the race of borrowers and their neighborhoods continue to grow.
View Comments
Comments
Like
Dislike
Community Disqus
Add New Comment
Post as …
Showing 17 comments
Sort by Subscribe by email Subscribe by RSS
COLORRED39 1 month ago
IF SOMEONE CAN TELL HOW TO FILE AGAINST WELLS FARGO I WOULD DO JUST THAT THE NEXT DAY MY WIFE AND I LOST OUR CAREER'S DUE TO A BAD HEART AND MY WIFE WAS IN A BAD CAR ACCIDENT AND ALL WELLS FARGO WANTED TO DO WAS REPO OUR HOME AND THEY DID JUST THAT. PLEASE CONTACT ME AT COLORRED39@AOL.COM
Like
Reply
Aliceame 2 months ago
Count me in to the Class Action Lawsuit against Wells Fargo, ASC, and Bear and Sterns. They foreclosed on me and my son and made us move out within 2 days of each other so there was no place for us to go. Alice - aliceame@hotmail.com
Like
Reply
louis vuitton 4 months ago
Wells Fargo is not acting in Good Faith. They are not put the money out there to help borrowers who the conned into bad loan products.
Like
Reply
Blu Cig 1 month ago in reply to louis vuitton
You should start and write article Miss Louis
Like
Reply
KatherineRBrownton 5 months ago
For an overview of both Wells Fargo home mortgages and Chase mortgages to learn more about the services each offer, keep reading.
WELLS FARGO
Wells Fargo is one of the United States' most versatile mortgage lenders. They offer a range of refinancing wells fargo bank locations
products, mortgage programs, types of mortgages and arrangements for borrowers of all stripes and colors.
Like
Reply
Cutlem 8 months ago
Great Post! Thank You Very Much.
Like
Reply
notouch 9 months ago
This is news from Wells Fargo for me.Thank for sharing.
Like
Reply
mrnan 1 year ago
Thanks for sharing. This information is useful for me.
Like
Reply
hurtinghomeowner 1 year ago
Wells Fargo's troubles are far from over !
Visit -- HurtingHomeOwners com
Like
Reply
AustrianSchool 1 year ago
The only color banks see is green. They have no personell bias except to maximized profit like any other company for its shareholders like me in my 401K.
Like
Reply
Rick200 1 year ago
And it isn't just Wells Fargo, but UBOC.
What I can't understand is that we have laws on the books that are supposed to protect us from "predator" lenders as well as prosecute those in the banking industry who fail to follow those laws as well as police themselves.
Is it no wonder that we, the citizen tax payers, the citizen workers, the citizens of this nation can't trust government or business any longer. These two women deserve prison time, minimum 5 years for banking violations as well as giving false testimony to Congress. But are they going to get it? Hell, no, they won't even get fired, because no body has the balls to do the right thing!!! No body!!!
Like
Reply
mgreg 1 year ago
Where has the government been? It's been where the monied interests wanted the gov't - quiet.
After all the people loved Ronald Reagan and his policy statements saying "Get government off our backs," "Government is the problem," not the solution. So we've had business foxes going after the "ca ching" wringing money wherever they could.
Like
Reply
AustrianSchool 1 year ago in reply to mgreg
We should learn by now that these kinds of regulations do not work. Heck, fannie and freddie had their own designated regulator and it didn't keep them on track. Nope, the thing that controls them is competition.
Like
Reply
gannieca 1 year ago
the abuse doesn't stop.
Even now.. the WF loan officers make *much less commission* (which is their only pay) on the HARP loans that would help borrowers who's market class has declined to refiance. These loans take much more time, but Wells Fargo pays their loan offers less to do these loans. So many loan officers don't do them because it takes too much of their time.
One loan officer told me she used to try to help the borrowers who had "hardship" to see if the qualified for the HAMP loans, basically trying to get their loans modfied to a lower rate.. but that was taken away from them. Now the borrowers have to frustratingly call a 1-800 # where they are put on hold for hours... never get calls back.. and are usually dealing with temps or inexperienced loan offiers.
* Wells Fargo is not acting in Good Faith. They are not put the money out there to help borrowers who the conned into bad loan products.
Our legislatures need to start helping the people adn put a moritorum on these foreclosures and force the banks to renegotiate these unethical loans.
Like
Reply
Kermit Lind 1 year ago
Yep. And guess which neighborhoods get ruthless servicing by servicers who won't maintain property under their control and abandon their mortgage liens before, during and after foreclosures leaving toxic assets with toxic titles.
Like
Reply
monkey99 1 year ago
Just when you think racism is fading in America, out comes this. Racism is alive and well with those who will not or cannot make the necessary intellectual step in accepting that we all came from the same cradle of humanity.
All you racists out there.......I'm not going to tell you not to be racist, I'm not so stupid to think that what I say will register. No, just come out and say you are racist. C'mon, the rest of us know the truth. Why can't you just be truthful with us, as well as yourselves. Quit hiding behind Rush or Beck or Hannity or O'Reilly. Or are you all cowards, like we have thought of you, all this time?
Like
Reply
algorealgore 1 year ago in reply to monkey99
Not wanting to lend money in a neighborhood with burned out cars and abandoned homes doesn't make someone racist. The real cowards are those that pretend not to see what is all around them. They pretend that because someone's skin is light or dark they should receive special treatment. Guess what? We are all the same, regardless of skin color. If you don' t pay your bills, you get high rates. Black or white. You don't get a free pass just because your skin is darker.
of Discrimination by Neighborhood
By Mary Kane | 09.09.09 | 2:00 pm
View Comments
Just a year ago, the theory that poor and minority borrowers were to blame for the housing crisis took hold with a vengeance, and so did the belief that the government forced lenders to make subprime mortgages to meet affordable housing goals. The view took on greater prominence in the heat of a presidential campaign, and an obscure anti-redlining law known as the Community Reinvestment Act became a scapegoat for subprime lending and the collapse of the mortgage market.
Illustration by: Matt Mahurin
Things have changed quite a bit since then, as the spotlight has shifted to lenders and their behavior during the boom. States and cities continue to aggressively pursue subprime lending discrimination suits, and judges across the country are signaling a willingness to move forward with some cases. As the lawsuits wind their way through the court system, more details and allegations about the inner workings of the subprime world are emerging. And as startling as some of the charges already have been — a former loan officer for Wells Fargo testified in one affidavit that employees regularly referred to minority borrowers as “mud people” and called subprime mortgages “ghetto loans,” — there’s even more ahead, said David Berenbaum, executive vice president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.
“The ‘smoking guns’ are coming out,” Berenbaum said, referring to possible evidence that lenders targeted minority communities and borrowers for higher priced loans. “And I expect more and more of these smoking guns to become apparent.”
In the latest development, a Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles recently certified a 2005 lending discrimination lawsuit against Wells Fargo as a class action case. The suit contends that area managers at the bank refused access in some minority neighborhoods to a software program that allowed for discounted prices on mortgage loans. Barry Cappello, a partner with Cappello & Noel in Santa Barbara, which represents some 10,000 to 20,000 borrowers in the suit, said he believes it is the first subprime lending discrimination suit in California to be classified as a class action.
According to Cappello, Wells Fargo introduced a program in 2002 called “Loan Economics,” which gave loan officers the authority to offer discounts to loan applicants. The savings on lower fees and interest rates could be significant, ranging from $500 to as much as $10,000 per loan. The suit claims that the Los Angeles area Wells Fargo manager refused to allow loan officers operating in certain minority neighborhoods to offer the program. Borrowers in predominantly white neighborhoods were given access to the software.
Cappello said the suit stemmed from complaints by black and Hispanic loan officers for Wells Fargo, who said they asked to use the software in their branches but upper management refused.
Wells Fargo is fighting the suit and has denied all the charges. In a statement, the bank said, “We are disappointed in this ruling and intend to vigorously defend this matter as the case proceeds. The decision does not indicate the court believes the underlying allegations have any merit. We feel the allegations represent a complete mischaracterization of our long-standing commitment to responsible lending and the pricing practices and tools we use. The policies, systems and controls we have in place ensure race is not a factor in the pricing or products we offer.”
The case could go to trial in about a year, Cappello said.
More lawsuits are expected in the near future over the treatment of Hispanic borrowers in Arizona and Texas, who were offered high-cost loans they didn’t understand at misleadingly low teaser rates, then refinanced into even more expensive loans than their initial mortgages, Cappello said.
Wells Fargo, the nation’s largest home lender, also has been a target of lawsuits elsewhere. Last month, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan sued the lender, alleging that blacks and Hispanics were sold high-cost subprime loans more frequently than white borrowers with similar incomes. The suit contended loan officers were offered incentives by the bank to steer borrowers into the more expensive loans, and that white borrowers generally received the lower-cost prime mortgages.
Some borrowers thought they were getting prime loans from Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, the suit also charged. But their loans actually came from Wells Fargo Financial, the bank’s subprime unit.
In Iowa, two watchdog groups charged this week that minority homeowners in Des Moines were three times more likely to receive high cost subprime loans from Wells Fargo than white homeowners.
In June, the New York Times reported on affidavits from a 2008 lawsuit by the city of Baltimore against Wells Fargo over subprime lending, which charged that the bank targeted blacks in Baltimore and suburban Maryland for high-interest subprime loans. Former loan officers testified in affidavits about using terms like “mud people” and “ghetto loans.” The bank also had an emerging markets unit that pinpointed black churches as fertile ground for selling subprime loans, according to the former officers. And in March, the NAACP filed suits in federal court in California against Wells Fargo and HSBC, alleging minority borrowers were more likely to be issued higher rate subprime loans than white borrowers with similar credit scores and qualifications. Both banks have strongly denied the charges. The NAACP also has pending litigation against nearly a dozen other banks and lenders over subprime lending discrimination.
Should the charges in the lawsuits be proven, it would amount to massive violations of the Fair Housing Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and other fair housing and lending laws, Berenbaum noted. Enforcing fair lending laws has been “an issue the government has failed to address over the past decade,” he said. Lenders could face criminal penalties from the government for violating fair housing laws, and they could be subject to punitive damages and fines from government lawsuits.
Big lenders like Wells Fargo and HSBC are obvious targets for suits because of their size and the amount of lending they did. In addition, many other lenders and originators of subprime loans have gone out of business, complicating efforts to address allegations of lending discrimination through lawsuits.
That leaves a major question regarding all the lending still unanswered, Berenbaum said: Where has the U.S. government been? The Federal Reserve reported in 2005 that an analysis of federal mortgage data found that blacks and Hispanics were more likely to receive higher interest rates on mortgage loans – and that it intended to examine the practices of 200 lenders as a result.
But nothing’s happened since that announcement, Berenbaum noted. Instead, as the years go on, and the government takes no action, allegations about price differences in mortgage loans based on the race of borrowers and their neighborhoods continue to grow.
View Comments
Comments
Like
Dislike
Community Disqus
Add New Comment
Post as …
Showing 17 comments
Sort by Subscribe by email Subscribe by RSS
COLORRED39 1 month ago
IF SOMEONE CAN TELL HOW TO FILE AGAINST WELLS FARGO I WOULD DO JUST THAT THE NEXT DAY MY WIFE AND I LOST OUR CAREER'S DUE TO A BAD HEART AND MY WIFE WAS IN A BAD CAR ACCIDENT AND ALL WELLS FARGO WANTED TO DO WAS REPO OUR HOME AND THEY DID JUST THAT. PLEASE CONTACT ME AT COLORRED39@AOL.COM
Like
Reply
Aliceame 2 months ago
Count me in to the Class Action Lawsuit against Wells Fargo, ASC, and Bear and Sterns. They foreclosed on me and my son and made us move out within 2 days of each other so there was no place for us to go. Alice - aliceame@hotmail.com
Like
Reply
louis vuitton 4 months ago
Wells Fargo is not acting in Good Faith. They are not put the money out there to help borrowers who the conned into bad loan products.
Like
Reply
Blu Cig 1 month ago in reply to louis vuitton
You should start and write article Miss Louis
Like
Reply
KatherineRBrownton 5 months ago
For an overview of both Wells Fargo home mortgages and Chase mortgages to learn more about the services each offer, keep reading.
WELLS FARGO
Wells Fargo is one of the United States' most versatile mortgage lenders. They offer a range of refinancing wells fargo bank locations
products, mortgage programs, types of mortgages and arrangements for borrowers of all stripes and colors.
Like
Reply
Cutlem 8 months ago
Great Post! Thank You Very Much.
Like
Reply
notouch 9 months ago
This is news from Wells Fargo for me.Thank for sharing.
Like
Reply
mrnan 1 year ago
Thanks for sharing. This information is useful for me.
Like
Reply
hurtinghomeowner 1 year ago
Wells Fargo's troubles are far from over !
Visit -- HurtingHomeOwners com
Like
Reply
AustrianSchool 1 year ago
The only color banks see is green. They have no personell bias except to maximized profit like any other company for its shareholders like me in my 401K.
Like
Reply
Rick200 1 year ago
And it isn't just Wells Fargo, but UBOC.
What I can't understand is that we have laws on the books that are supposed to protect us from "predator" lenders as well as prosecute those in the banking industry who fail to follow those laws as well as police themselves.
Is it no wonder that we, the citizen tax payers, the citizen workers, the citizens of this nation can't trust government or business any longer. These two women deserve prison time, minimum 5 years for banking violations as well as giving false testimony to Congress. But are they going to get it? Hell, no, they won't even get fired, because no body has the balls to do the right thing!!! No body!!!
Like
Reply
mgreg 1 year ago
Where has the government been? It's been where the monied interests wanted the gov't - quiet.
After all the people loved Ronald Reagan and his policy statements saying "Get government off our backs," "Government is the problem," not the solution. So we've had business foxes going after the "ca ching" wringing money wherever they could.
Like
Reply
AustrianSchool 1 year ago in reply to mgreg
We should learn by now that these kinds of regulations do not work. Heck, fannie and freddie had their own designated regulator and it didn't keep them on track. Nope, the thing that controls them is competition.
Like
Reply
gannieca 1 year ago
the abuse doesn't stop.
Even now.. the WF loan officers make *much less commission* (which is their only pay) on the HARP loans that would help borrowers who's market class has declined to refiance. These loans take much more time, but Wells Fargo pays their loan offers less to do these loans. So many loan officers don't do them because it takes too much of their time.
One loan officer told me she used to try to help the borrowers who had "hardship" to see if the qualified for the HAMP loans, basically trying to get their loans modfied to a lower rate.. but that was taken away from them. Now the borrowers have to frustratingly call a 1-800 # where they are put on hold for hours... never get calls back.. and are usually dealing with temps or inexperienced loan offiers.
* Wells Fargo is not acting in Good Faith. They are not put the money out there to help borrowers who the conned into bad loan products.
Our legislatures need to start helping the people adn put a moritorum on these foreclosures and force the banks to renegotiate these unethical loans.
Like
Reply
Kermit Lind 1 year ago
Yep. And guess which neighborhoods get ruthless servicing by servicers who won't maintain property under their control and abandon their mortgage liens before, during and after foreclosures leaving toxic assets with toxic titles.
Like
Reply
monkey99 1 year ago
Just when you think racism is fading in America, out comes this. Racism is alive and well with those who will not or cannot make the necessary intellectual step in accepting that we all came from the same cradle of humanity.
All you racists out there.......I'm not going to tell you not to be racist, I'm not so stupid to think that what I say will register. No, just come out and say you are racist. C'mon, the rest of us know the truth. Why can't you just be truthful with us, as well as yourselves. Quit hiding behind Rush or Beck or Hannity or O'Reilly. Or are you all cowards, like we have thought of you, all this time?
Like
Reply
algorealgore 1 year ago in reply to monkey99
Not wanting to lend money in a neighborhood with burned out cars and abandoned homes doesn't make someone racist. The real cowards are those that pretend not to see what is all around them. They pretend that because someone's skin is light or dark they should receive special treatment. Guess what? We are all the same, regardless of skin color. If you don' t pay your bills, you get high rates. Black or white. You don't get a free pass just because your skin is darker.
Related articles
- Homeowner's Lawsuit Against Major Banks Progresses Slowly, Alleges Predatory Lending and Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices by Wells Fargo and Others (prweb.com)
- Lending Discrimination Class Action Trial Against Wells Fargo Bank (your-story.org)
- Wells Fargo agrees to modify California ARM loans (sfgate.com)
- Brown Reaches Settlement With Wells Fargo Worth More Than $2 Billion to Californians With Risky Adjustable-Rate Mortgages (yubanet.com)
- Wells Fargo To Modify 15K Option-ARM Loans In CA (huffingtonpost.com)
GENDER DISCRIMINATION CASE AGAINST WELLS FARGO ADVISORS
Moody & Warner files class action
gender discrimination case
against Wells Fargo Advisors
September 15, 2009. Moody & Warner joined class action law firms Sprenger + Lang and Mehri & Skalet and filed a class action gender discrimination case against Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC, formerly known as Wachovia Securities, LLC, and Wells Fargo & Co. claiming that a class of female financial advisors suffered systemic discrimination since at least early 2003. The case was filed on behalf of a class consisting of all female financial advisors employed anywhere in the United States at any time from March 17, 2003 to the present.
The suit claims that women financial advisors at Wells Fargo Advisors, and previously at Wachovia Securities, were subjected to discrimination on the basis of their sex in various terms and conditions of their employment, including signing bonuses, assignment of accounts, participation in company-approved “partnerships,” training, mentoring, and promotional opportunities, among other things. The filing of the lawsuit capped a multi-year investigation of the company conducted by Moody & Warner and their co-counsel. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and has been assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. Read the entire complaint here. If you now work or formerly worked for Wells Fargo Advisors, please contact us and tell us your story.
(http://nmlaborlaw.com/cms/kunde/rts/nmlaborlawcom/docs/803442819-11-16-2009-09-58-31.pdf)
gender discrimination case
against Wells Fargo Advisors
September 15, 2009. Moody & Warner joined class action law firms Sprenger + Lang and Mehri & Skalet and filed a class action gender discrimination case against Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC, formerly known as Wachovia Securities, LLC, and Wells Fargo & Co. claiming that a class of female financial advisors suffered systemic discrimination since at least early 2003. The case was filed on behalf of a class consisting of all female financial advisors employed anywhere in the United States at any time from March 17, 2003 to the present.
The suit claims that women financial advisors at Wells Fargo Advisors, and previously at Wachovia Securities, were subjected to discrimination on the basis of their sex in various terms and conditions of their employment, including signing bonuses, assignment of accounts, participation in company-approved “partnerships,” training, mentoring, and promotional opportunities, among other things. The filing of the lawsuit capped a multi-year investigation of the company conducted by Moody & Warner and their co-counsel. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and has been assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. Read the entire complaint here. If you now work or formerly worked for Wells Fargo Advisors, please contact us and tell us your story.
(http://nmlaborlaw.com/cms/kunde/rts/nmlaborlawcom/docs/803442819-11-16-2009-09-58-31.pdf)
Related articles
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
WELLS FARGO, I AM SO ANGRY WITH YOU. WHY ARE YOU STILL STEALING YOUR OWN PRECIOUS CUSTOMER'S MONEY? YOUR ACTIONS OF CHARGING TRICKY OVERDRAFT FEES THAT SERVE YOUR PURPOSES ARE ILLEGAL. YOU'VE BEEN SUED IN A CLASS ACTION FOR THIS HORRIFIC BEHAVIOR AND YET YOU CONTINUE TO SUBJECT YOUR OWN CUSTOMERS TO THIS ACT OF DIPPING YOU HAND INTO THEIR ACCOUNT AND TAKING OUT THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY THAT DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU! WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE THEIR TIME WITH YOU? WHY DO PEOPLE CONTINUE TO TRUST YOU? BELIEVING ANYTHING YOU SAY IS A WASTE OF VALUABLE TIME.
CALL FOR AN ATTORNEY:
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WELLS FARGO CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT UPDATE":
The problem I have with Wells Fargo and other banks is that there is no individuality of customers. Sure, on a local level a teller might know your name but the bank views every account holder based on a risk management model that's designed to make the bank money.
Over draft fees are excuses to raid the money you've placed in their bank to enrich themselves.
I've seen a lot of stories of how the bank will say how mismanagement is the reason for the charges but what ever happened to viewing the individual and their circumstances and providing valuable service in the community?
I deposited my payroll check on a Friday. Because I was over drawn 25.00 they put a hold on my payroll check that I've deposited every week for the last 8 years. When I told the banker I had some items that would probably post during the hold period I was cheerfully informed that the bank knew I was making a deposit so I should not worry...everything would be alright.
The checks came in Monday, a day before they allowed my payroll check to post. They charged me two nsf fees and two overdraft fees...a total of 140.00. Now my account wont have enough money to cover both checks. I called the 800 number and later went into the branch. My position was that if they had not put a hold on my payroll check this would have never happened. They agreed!!!. But in both cases they were unable to reverse the charges because the system would not allow them. I asked if I could speak to the department that had the ability to remove the lock but this is evidently beyond that of the local office.
If customers were treated like people (even the IRS and the state will let you fill out a financial statement and take payments) instead of numbers, they could provide a service instead of a financial handicap.
I was told how many over drafts I had for the year (19) and that that was the reason for holding my payroll check.
I asked the banker what was the sum total I had deposited in the account since it was opened and how much had they made through my use of the bank debt card and how long I had been on my job and were they aware of other financial hardships I was dealing with. She said that they did not collect information on those areas.
I feel exploited and slighted in this experience.
This is just one of the many experiences I've had with W.F. where they came out the winner and I the looser.
Jack the Ripped Off
nomann75@gmail.com
NEED AN ATTORNEY TO HELP, PLEASE
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WELLS FARGO CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT UPDATE":
The problem I have with Wells Fargo and other banks is that there is no individuality of customers. Sure, on a local level a teller might know your name but the bank views every account holder based on a risk management model that's designed to make the bank money.
Over draft fees are excuses to raid the money you've placed in their bank to enrich themselves.
I've seen a lot of stories of how the bank will say how mismanagement is the reason for the charges but what ever happened to viewing the individual and their circumstances and providing valuable service in the community?
I deposited my payroll check on a Friday. Because I was over drawn 25.00 they put a hold on my payroll check that I've deposited every week for the last 8 years. When I told the banker I had some items that would probably post during the hold period I was cheerfully informed that the bank knew I was making a deposit so I should not worry...everything would be alright.
The checks came in Monday, a day before they allowed my payroll check to post. They charged me two nsf fees and two overdraft fees...a total of 140.00. Now my account wont have enough money to cover both checks. I called the 800 number and later went into the branch. My position was that if they had not put a hold on my payroll check this would have never happened. They agreed!!!. But in both cases they were unable to reverse the charges because the system would not allow them. I asked if I could speak to the department that had the ability to remove the lock but this is evidently beyond that of the local office.
If customers were treated like people (even the IRS and the state will let you fill out a financial statement and take payments) instead of numbers, they could provide a service instead of a financial handicap.
I was told how many over drafts I had for the year (19) and that that was the reason for holding my payroll check.
I asked the banker what was the sum total I had deposited in the account since it was opened and how much had they made through my use of the bank debt card and how long I had been on my job and were they aware of other financial hardships I was dealing with. She said that they did not collect information on those areas.
I feel exploited and slighted in this experience.
This is just one of the many experiences I've had with W.F. where they came out the winner and I the looser.
Jack the Ripped Off
nomann75@gmail.com
NEED AN ATTORNEY TO HELP, PLEASE
Related articles
- Read: Documents Reveal One Bank's Plan to Squeeze Customers for More Overdrafts (propublica.org)
- Wells Fargo Ordered to Pay $203M Restitution for Overdraft Fees (dailyfinance.com)
- Legal Briefing: After Wells Fargo, Will Banks Have to Refund Overdraft Fees? (dailyfinance.com)
- Wells Fargo to settle lawsuit over pick-a-payment loans (reuters.com)
- Wells Fargo to modify 15K option-ARM loans in CA (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- Stueve Siegel Hanson LLP Announces Investigation Into Bank Overdraft Fees (eon.businesswire.com)
Saturday, December 18, 2010
SHOW ME THE NOTE
Foreclosure Blocked On
"Show Me the Note" ObjectionTim Cavanaugh | December 5, 2010
In what I believe is the biggest win yet for the "produce the note" movement, a U.S. judge in New Jersey recently blocked a foreclosure attempt by Bank of America, arguing that BoA did not have standing because of problems with its loan documentation.
In her November 16 ruling in the case John T. Kemp v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., Chief Judge Judith H. Wizmur of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Camden ruled that BoA (which acquired Countrywide in 2008) could not foreclose on an investment property Kemp owned at 1316 Kings Highway, Haddon Heights, because Countrywide never delivered the mortgage note to its trustee Bank of New York and thus could neither claim to be the noteholder of record nor claim to be acting as a servicer for BoNY.
Wizmur's ruling gets into a level of minutiae that normal people may find daunting. Issues turn, for example, on whether papers correctly name Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. rather than Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP. There are interesting conceptual questions as well, such as whether a trustee could be authorized to collect on a mortgage loan but not, because of confusion about documents, to consider that loan collateralized.
Some things that jump out at me:
* A lost note is not the issue here, and it appears that a properly motivated lender can still put together paperwork demonstrating -- even absent the original note or even (I could be wrong) a facsimile of it -- that somebody is authorized to collect. Countrywide tried to pretend it was that somebody but did not either get itself on record as owner of the original note (which it kept on its own premises, maybe), or properly get the note to BoNY and then act as BoNY's representative.
* Wizmur seems to be trying not to blaze a wide path for deadbeats to use document confusion as an escape from foreclosure. This was a good test case because Kemp acknowledges the debt he owes. ("In his complaint," Wizmur notes, "the debtor does not dispute that he signed the original mortgage documents in question.")
* For other reasons, this was not a good test case. Bank of America/Countrywide tested the court's patience by claiming that it had lost the note and had prepared a replacement note with an allonge (your word of the day, defined by Black's as "[a] slip of paper sometimes attached to a negotiable instrument for the purpose of receiving further indorsements when the original paper is filled with indorsements"), but then immediately afterward the bank claimed to have found the note and retracted the replacement. Maybe it was honest clerical trouble, but the loan documents required that Countrywide move the note to BoNY, and as a Countrywide rep accidentally testified, it was common practice not to bother. The company gave the impression of being lackadaisical about documents.
* The discussion of whether any of the lenders in this case qualified as "holder," "non-holder in possession" or "non-holder not in possession" (pages 12-19) is, I think, the section future lenders will look to as a guide for getting their ducks in a row prior to foreclosing.
At BankInvestmentConsultant.com, Kate Berry and Jeff Horwitz consider the implications from the testimony of Countrywide official Linda DeMartini, who blew the lid off the practice of keeping mortgage notes in-house rather than delivering them to the trustees:
"It's hard for B of A to back-pedal because she was their witness," [Kemp attorney Bruce] Levitt said. "This case was refreshing because the witness wasn't told how to spin things and actually told the truth. They can't dispute the fact that the note was never transferred because she was testifying proudly that Countrywide always retained the note and would never let it out of their sight. It was unscripted. That's why you won't find other testimony like this; this one slipped through."
There is little doubt that Countrywide was supposed to provide the physical note for Kemp's loan to the trust that purchased it, known as CWABS-2006-8.
In the Securities and Exchange Commission filing for that specific securitization, Countrywide and Bank of New York Mellon both attested that at the time of the trust's formation in 2006, "the Trustee has received … the original Mortgage Note … or, if the original Mortgage Note has been lost or destroyed and not replaced, an original lost note affidavit."
According to the testimony in the Kemp case, Countrywide never transferred the note and instead recreated documents weeks before the date of the hearing in an effort to prove its standing in the case.
Judge Wizmur noted in an exchange with Kaplan that the bank could salvage its position by demonstrating that the transfer of the documents was not legally necessary.
"I'm raising the possibility that the Pooling and Servicing Agreement might contain provisions that would serve to offer Countrywide an out," Wizmur said, suggesting that B of A should comb the 270-page agreement for language suggesting that it was entitled to retain the notes as the trustee's proxy or that transfer at the time of sale was immaterial.
With the caveat that I have regular correspondents who tell me I’m in denial about the apocalyptic implications of the mortgage-note fiasco, I think the “immaterial” argument will have legs. Faced with having to undo a host of foreclosures in process – and even worse, having to interfere with already closed sales of REO property that had been foreclosed with similarly flawed paperwork – some court will come up with a bright line. There’s already a lot of material in this ruling that indicates how banks can handle future challenges to their standing to foreclose.
I just wouldn’t want to be the lawyer who has to figure it all out. Or actually, I would want to be that lawyer, because then I could charge Bank of America – and by extension the American taxpayers – a lot of money.
"Show Me the Note" ObjectionTim Cavanaugh | December 5, 2010
In what I believe is the biggest win yet for the "produce the note" movement, a U.S. judge in New Jersey recently blocked a foreclosure attempt by Bank of America, arguing that BoA did not have standing because of problems with its loan documentation.
In her November 16 ruling in the case John T. Kemp v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., Chief Judge Judith H. Wizmur of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Camden ruled that BoA (which acquired Countrywide in 2008) could not foreclose on an investment property Kemp owned at 1316 Kings Highway, Haddon Heights, because Countrywide never delivered the mortgage note to its trustee Bank of New York and thus could neither claim to be the noteholder of record nor claim to be acting as a servicer for BoNY.
Wizmur's ruling gets into a level of minutiae that normal people may find daunting. Issues turn, for example, on whether papers correctly name Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. rather than Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP. There are interesting conceptual questions as well, such as whether a trustee could be authorized to collect on a mortgage loan but not, because of confusion about documents, to consider that loan collateralized.
Some things that jump out at me:
* A lost note is not the issue here, and it appears that a properly motivated lender can still put together paperwork demonstrating -- even absent the original note or even (I could be wrong) a facsimile of it -- that somebody is authorized to collect. Countrywide tried to pretend it was that somebody but did not either get itself on record as owner of the original note (which it kept on its own premises, maybe), or properly get the note to BoNY and then act as BoNY's representative.
* Wizmur seems to be trying not to blaze a wide path for deadbeats to use document confusion as an escape from foreclosure. This was a good test case because Kemp acknowledges the debt he owes. ("In his complaint," Wizmur notes, "the debtor does not dispute that he signed the original mortgage documents in question.")
* For other reasons, this was not a good test case. Bank of America/Countrywide tested the court's patience by claiming that it had lost the note and had prepared a replacement note with an allonge (your word of the day, defined by Black's as "[a] slip of paper sometimes attached to a negotiable instrument for the purpose of receiving further indorsements when the original paper is filled with indorsements"), but then immediately afterward the bank claimed to have found the note and retracted the replacement. Maybe it was honest clerical trouble, but the loan documents required that Countrywide move the note to BoNY, and as a Countrywide rep accidentally testified, it was common practice not to bother. The company gave the impression of being lackadaisical about documents.
* The discussion of whether any of the lenders in this case qualified as "holder," "non-holder in possession" or "non-holder not in possession" (pages 12-19) is, I think, the section future lenders will look to as a guide for getting their ducks in a row prior to foreclosing.
At BankInvestmentConsultant.com, Kate Berry and Jeff Horwitz consider the implications from the testimony of Countrywide official Linda DeMartini, who blew the lid off the practice of keeping mortgage notes in-house rather than delivering them to the trustees:
"It's hard for B of A to back-pedal because she was their witness," [Kemp attorney Bruce] Levitt said. "This case was refreshing because the witness wasn't told how to spin things and actually told the truth. They can't dispute the fact that the note was never transferred because she was testifying proudly that Countrywide always retained the note and would never let it out of their sight. It was unscripted. That's why you won't find other testimony like this; this one slipped through."
There is little doubt that Countrywide was supposed to provide the physical note for Kemp's loan to the trust that purchased it, known as CWABS-2006-8.
In the Securities and Exchange Commission filing for that specific securitization, Countrywide and Bank of New York Mellon both attested that at the time of the trust's formation in 2006, "the Trustee has received … the original Mortgage Note … or, if the original Mortgage Note has been lost or destroyed and not replaced, an original lost note affidavit."
According to the testimony in the Kemp case, Countrywide never transferred the note and instead recreated documents weeks before the date of the hearing in an effort to prove its standing in the case.
Judge Wizmur noted in an exchange with Kaplan that the bank could salvage its position by demonstrating that the transfer of the documents was not legally necessary.
"I'm raising the possibility that the Pooling and Servicing Agreement might contain provisions that would serve to offer Countrywide an out," Wizmur said, suggesting that B of A should comb the 270-page agreement for language suggesting that it was entitled to retain the notes as the trustee's proxy or that transfer at the time of sale was immaterial.
With the caveat that I have regular correspondents who tell me I’m in denial about the apocalyptic implications of the mortgage-note fiasco, I think the “immaterial” argument will have legs. Faced with having to undo a host of foreclosures in process – and even worse, having to interfere with already closed sales of REO property that had been foreclosed with similarly flawed paperwork – some court will come up with a bright line. There’s already a lot of material in this ruling that indicates how banks can handle future challenges to their standing to foreclose.
I just wouldn’t want to be the lawyer who has to figure it all out. Or actually, I would want to be that lawyer, because then I could charge Bank of America – and by extension the American taxpayers – a lot of money.
Related articles
- That mysterious missing mortgage note (ftalphaville.ft.com)
- Deposition: Countrywide Never Sent Mortgage Notes to Trust; Mortgage-Backed Securities in Question (news.firedoglake.com)
- Bank of America Sued by Arizona, Nevada Over Loan Modifications (businessweek.com)
- Testimony Pokes Holes in Bank of America's Defense (dailyfinance.com)
- Countrywide Documentation Disaster to Explode at Bank of America?... (projectworldawareness.com)
- SEC expands mortgage probe: sources (reuters.com)
- Judge Rejects Wells Fargo Foreclosure Documents Again (dailyfinance.com)
- The 2011 Housing Market Outlook: Unsettled, Underwater and Unsold (dailyfinance.com)
- Thousands of Pennsylvania Foreclosures Could Be Thrown Into Doubt (dailyfinance.com)
- What Foreclosuregate Means for Investors (fool.com)
Friday, December 17, 2010
WELLS FARGO, PLEASE RETURN THE LITTLE'S HOME IN GREENSBORO, NC FOR CHRISTMAS. HAVE A HEART.
Dear Wells Fargo,
I lost my job in April of 2009 and fell behind in mortgage. I began the modification process in January of 2010. I was never given an answer or correspondence pertaining to my modification. I called several times. Your organization proceeded with foreclosure after 10 months of not giving me an answer. However, once I reported my situation to the banking commissioner Mr. Christ wrote to tell me, in December 2010, I did not qualify for modification based on information he received in January. Prior to my job lost I never missed a payment and often paid extra.
This home burned down in 2006. While we rebuild I made my payment as though we were living in the home.
I was evicted. Sure there were measures I could have taken. However, Wells Fargo representatives reassured me that they would do everything to keep me in my home. I called even after the sale and was told to present a recession letter. I did instead of redeeming my home in the ten day wait period.
I trusted Wells Fargo to view me as a customer in good standing. I need my home. My income has substantially increased. I am a professional nurse practitioner, married with nine children. I would love to ask for intervention to return our home for Christmas. I work full time. Please look into this matter for me.
Sincerely,
Kim Little
4 Barrett Court
Greensboro, NC
336-339-1163
smithkwl@yahoo.com
Related articles
- Judge Rejects Wells Fargo Foreclosure Documents Again (dailyfinance.com)
- Wells Fargo closes East Bay faciliity, lays off 137 (sfgate.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)