Bank Sanctioned For Failure to Negotiate a Mortgage Modification In Good Faith

mortgage modification attorneysA foreclosure action was referred to Justice Genine Edwards who sits in Kings County. The lawsuit had been referred to her for a bad faith and standing hearing after more than 25 foreclosure conferences had been held regarding the case during a period of more than 36 months. After numerous attempts to reach an agreement between the homeowner and the bank, a hearing was conducted by Justice Genine Edwards.

Foreclosure Court Conferences

The foreclosure court conferences had taken place before a referee. The referee had written a report which stated the defendant, Diakite had qualified for a HAMP trial mortgage modification. In addition, Diakite had made three monthly payments under the HAMP temporary mortgage modification. After the three payments were made, the bank refused to accept any further payments from Diakite.

Three Mortgage Payments Made Under The Temporary Mortgage Modification

The first three mortgage trial modification payments were accepted by Aurora Loan Services. Aurora rejected the final modification. They claimed Diakite needed to restart the process all over again since Aurora did not receive the executed mortgage modification agreement from Diakite. Diakite indicated the reason she didn’t send it to Aurora was that she had never received it in the first place. Nationstar Mortgage thereafter informed Diakite the servicing on the loan was being transferred to them from Aurora. Nationstar thereafter denied Diakite’s HAMP application. They claimed Diakite did not provide necessary documentation.

The Judge’s Decision

Justice Edwards took into consideration that while she had directed the bank to produce a copy of the mortgage and the note and any assignments which indicated proof of ownership of both instruments, the bank had failed to produce any documentation whatsoever. She concluded the record supported the referee’s report. The plaintiff had failed to negotiate in good faith pursuant to New York Civil Practice Law and Rules section 3408. Justice Edwards therefore confirmed the referee’s report and stayed all interests, costs, and attorneys fees due and owing to the bank from March 1, 2010 until October 27, 2014, the date the hearing took place before her.

Conclusion

More and more banks are being sanctioned for failure to negotiate in good faith at mortgage modification conferences. Making homeowners provide documents over and over again, not taking responsibility for misplacing the documents, or losing the documents is simply unfair. In addition, it is unfair to grant a homeowner a mortgage modification, have them pay the required amount pursuant to the modification for between three and six months and thereafter have the bank say, no we are not going to make the modification permanent.foreclosure lawyer New York

Homeowner Sues Bank For Breach of Contract Regarding Temporary Mortgage Modification

mortgage modification attorneysHomeowner Lyo brought a breach of contract proceeding against Bank of America. Lyo had attempted to obtain a mortgage loan modification from Bank of America. She had contacted Bank of America. Bank of America sent her an application for a loan modification. Thereafter Bank of America accepted and mailed Lyo an agreement for a trial modification mortgage plan.

Payments Made Under Trial Mortgage Modification

Lyo made all necessary payments under the trial program. She continued to make payments which were accepted by Bank of America even after the trial program finished. However, Bank of America never sent her a permanent mortgage loan modification. Bank of America notified Lyo she did not meet the eligibility requirements for a modified loan. They claimed this was due to the present value of her home.

23 Payments Accepted, 24th Payment Rejected

Bank of America had accepted payments from Lyo for 23 consecutive months after she had agreed to the trial period mortgage modification plan. Bank of America rejected her 24th payment. Supreme Court Justice Judith McMahon sitting in the Supreme Court Part in Richmond County ruled Lyo’s temporary mortgage modification plan could be considered an enforceable agreement. This agreement granted Lyo a loan modification as described within the terms of the agreement. She found the language in the temporary mortgage modification plan unequivocally provided, if Lyo complied with all the conditions, Bank of America was obligated to grant her a permanent loan modification. Bank of America’s application to dismiss Lyo’s breach of contract lawsuit against it was therefore denied.

Conclusion

Numerous homeowners come to my office each and every month with a story of woe concerning temporary mortgage modifications. The story goes as follows, the bank offered them a temporary mortgage modification and they accepted it. They thereafter made payments for a period of time, usually six months, under the temporary mortgage modification plan. Thereafter the bank comes up with some type of reason to turn them down for a permanent loan modification. Sometimes the reasons are very spurious. Homeowners who fulfill their obligations under temporary mortgage modification plans should always be given a permanent mortgage modification under the same terms!foreclosure defense lawyer on Long Island and New York City

Mortgage Modifications

Please click on the link below to watch today’s video blog:

http://youtu.be/PY8ARn7m9nw

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense lawyer in the Metropolitan New York area.  He has been helping homeowners stay in their homes for more than 45 years.  Elliot and his associates help their clients obtain mortgage modifications and defend foreclosure lawsuits.  Elliot can be reached for consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or by email to schlissel.law@att.net.

Mortgage Modifications for Second Mortgages

Please click on the link below to watch today’s video blog:

http://youtu.be/2aXQzrC2Dkk

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense attorney.  He and his associates have been representing homeowners for more than 45 years.  Elliot represents homeowners throughout all phases of foreclosure litigation, at foreclosure settlement court conferences and helps his clients obtain mortgage modifications.  He can be reached at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or by email to schlissel.law@att.net.  Contact the office for a free consultation.

The Foreclosure Legal Process On A Step By Step Basis – Part I

foreclosure defense Filing the Summons and Complaint

The first step in the actual legal process in the court system involves the financial institution hiring a law firm which drafts a Summons and Complaint and files the Summons and Complaint in the County Clerk’s office of the County in which the home to be foreclosed on is located. Simultaneously with filing a Summons and Complaint most attorneys representing financial institutions also file a “Lis Pendens“. A lis pendens is notice to the world a lawsuit is pending in court involving the home. The lis pendens specifically tells all people who do a title search on the property the home is in litigation. This has a negative effect on the title to the home.

Service Of The Summons And Complaint

After the Summons and Complaint is filed, the attorneys for the financial institution receive an index number and a filing date for the Summons and Complaint. This is attached to the top right hand corner of the Summons. Thereafter, the attorneys for the bank hire a process serving company to serve the Summons and Complaint on the homeowner.

Methods of Service of the Summons

There are a variety of ways the service of the Summons can be made in the State of New York. The Summons can be actually put in the hand of the homeowner. It could also be left with a person of suitable age and discretion at their principle place of residence or place of business. In addition, the Summons and Complaint can be tacked to the door and mailed to the homeowner. It is extremely important the homeowner not ignore the Summons and Complaint. Once they are served they have twenty days to respond by filing an Answer with the court and serving a copy on opposing counsel, if served personally, and thirty days if served by any other means other than personal service.

After the process server serves the Summons and Complaint they draft an Affidavit of Service and file that Affidavit with the court.

Request for Judicial Intervention

The next step in the process is the filing of a “Request for Judicial Intervention”, which is commonly referred to as an “RJI”. The purpose of the RJI is to advise the court the lender’s attorney wants to schedule a mandatory foreclosure settlement conference.foreclosure attorney on Long Island and New York City

Monetary Damages In a Countersuit Against the Bank

Please click on the link below to watch today’s video blog:

http://youtu.be/ja5dxpyWpxg

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure attorney.  He and his associates have been helping homeowners stay in their homes for more than 45 years.  He also helps his clients obtain mortgage modifications.  Elliot can be reached for consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or by email to schlissel.law@att.net.

Lack of Standing Defense

Please click on the link below to watch today’s video blog:

http://youtu.be/Oybec1rH3kk

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure lawyer who has been representing homeowners for more than 45 years.  His goal is to keep homeowners in their homes.  He defends homeowners in foreclosure lawsuits and helps his clients in obtaining mortgage modifications.  He and his associates can be reached for consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or by email to schlissel.law@att.net.

Couple Receives a Million Dollar Award Against Bank of America

foreclosure defense on Long IslandNelson and Joyce Coniglio had received more than 700 collection calls during a 4 year period when they fell behind on their mortgage payments. The Coniglios hired an attorney to try to make Bank of America stop calling them. Unfortunately, this didn’t work. A Federal Judge sitting in Florida recently awarded the Coniglios $1 million dollars related to the “unrelenting phone calls from Bank of America.”

Bank of America had an excuse for the phone calls. Their Senior Vice President, Dan Frahm, said the calls weren’t to collect a debt, but solely to help the couple avoid a foreclosure lawsuit.

Lawsuit Against Bank of America

The Coniglios were forced to file a lawsuit in Federal Court to stop the harassing phone calls from Bank of America. They received a default judgment when Bank of America failed to respond to their lawsuit in a timely manner. The lawsuit stemmed from Bank of America making hundreds of robo-calls to the Coniglios. Sometimes they received as many as 5 phone calls a day. Jason Coniglio, the parties’ son, stated “we would be out to dinner and they would ring my mother’s cell phone, then they would ring my dad’s cell phone and then when we got back to the house, there would be another message on the answering machine.” Their son, Jason, works as a mortgage broker. He diligently tried to help his parents get a mortgage modification. Unfortunately, he could never get anyone from Bank of America to cooperate with him. Their lawsuit was pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The damages were $500 per call and they were tripled. The Coniglios’ attorney stated “the borrowers, the people who own those phones, you do have a right to privacy. And when they say to stop, you have to stop.”

Bank of America had asked the court to reconsider this large award against them. However, the judge denied their request.

Conclusion

When banks misbehave, they can be punished by taking legal action against them.

foreclosure defense lawyer in New YorkElliot Schlissel is a foreclosure defense lawyer. He represents families throughout the Metropolitan New York area who have problems dealing with banks related to mortgage modifications and foreclosure lawsuits.

Bank’s Bad Faith When Negotiating Mortgage Modifications

To watch today’s video blog, please click on the link below:

http://youtu.be/Zj0VcXXNwl4

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense lawyer.  He and his associates have been helping homeowners stay in their homes for more than 45 years.  His phones are monitored 24/7.  Please call for a consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or send an email to schlissel.law@att.net.

HAMP Mortgage Modifications

To watch today’s video blog, please click on the link below:

http://youtu.be/28MzOIkq3Ws

Elliot S. Schlissel is a foreclosure defense attorney.  He and his associates have been representing homeowners and keeping families in their homes for more than 45 years.  Elliot defends foreclosure litigation and helps his clients obtain mortgage modifications.  He can be reached for consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or by email to schlissel.law@att.net.

Foreclosure Defense in Valley Stream, Lynbrook, Baldwin, Malverne, Freeport, Oceanside, Long Beach, Elmont, Lakeview, West Hempstead, Hempstead, Merrick and Bellmore, New York

We represent individuals throughout the New York Metropolitan area with divorce and child custody, personal injury, car accident, wrongful death, estate administration, nursing home and medicaid issues

The information you obtain at this website is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your particular legal issue. This is attorney advertising.

This is attorney advertising. This website is designed for general information purposes only. The information presented on this website shall not be construed to be legal advice. If you have a legal problem you should consult with an attorney.

Copyright © 2018 By The Law Offices of Schlissel DeCorpo. All Rights Reserved.