loan modification

Ohio AG File Deceptive Practices Suit Against HomEq

Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray today announced a lawsuit filed against Barclays Capital Real Estate dba HomEq Servicing, headquartered in New York, for issuing unfair loan modification agreements and providing inadequate, incompetent customer service to Ohioans who were at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure. HomEq is a participant in the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).

According to the lawsuit filed today in Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, Ohio homeowners in need of loan modifications through HomEq to save their homes from foreclosure were forced to enter into one-sided agreements. The unfair and deceptive agreements released HomEq of all liabilities and required borrowers to waive their rights to defenses and agree to pay additional fees.

Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that HomEq violated Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act (CSPA) through incompetent and inefficient customer service by failing to return consumer calls or respond to repeated inquiries, losing borrowers’ documents and failing to offer timely and affordable loss mitigation options.

“There has been ample time for loan servicers to strengthen their efforts and start making a significant difference in preventing home foreclosures,” said Cordray. “Unfortunately, many servicers have instead repeatedly chosen to aggravate the crisis through noncompliance and excuses. As I see it, for every excuse, hundreds of families become more vulnerable to losing their homes. In Ohio, we have zero tolerance for any more excuses.”

Today’s lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction from the continuation of unfair and deceptive loan modification practices as well as consumer restitution, civil penalties and damages.

HomEq services more than 10,000 subprime loans in Ohio and became a HAMP participant in August. According to the December Servicer Performance Report issued by the U.S. Treasury, it is one of the lowest performing servicers in terms of loan modifications initiated. 

The lawsuit against HomEq marks the third filed by Cordray against a loan servicer operating in Ohio. In July, Cordray became the first state attorney general to file a lawsuit against a servicer for CSPA violations. That lawsuit, filed against Carrington Mortgage Services, is pending in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. Carrington recently issued its third, 60-day moratorium on home foreclosures in response to the lawsuit.

On Nov. 5, 2009, Cordray filed a lawsuit against American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. for numerous CSPA violations including issuing unfair or deceptive loan modifications to Ohioans. The case is currently pending in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court.

loan modification

Nevada Attorney Files Class Action Against BofA For Violating HAMP

Gerard Ramalho, KVBC-TV

There’s more evidence the foreclosure crisis in Southern Nevada is far from over.

As more homeowners find they aren’t having any luck trying to work with their lenders, one local attorney is filing suit against one of the largest lenders of all: Bank of America.

It’s also important to remember that Bank of America took over Countrywide, which means they own a good number of loans here in the valley.

The suit was filed on behalf of homeowners facing foreclosure who say there has been no progress made with regard to negotiations with their lender. And, as the president has discussed, there are actual laws in the books requiring lenders to negotiate with homeowners.

However, throughout Southern Nevada, many insist it’s simply not happening.

“And that’s why what we’re calling for in this lawsuit,” explains attorney Matthew Q. Callister. “(It) is an automatic stay of any further Bank of America foreclosures until such time as every Southern Nevadan avails himself of his right under federal law to have that fundamental ‘good faith’ negotiation.” 

The class-action suit against Bank of America represents about 30 people so far; it alleges that the bank has failed to act in accordance with a section of the government’s Making Home Affordable program, saying the lender has “refused to evaluate loans” and “failed to suspend foreclosure proceedings.”

Callister says Bank of America accepted TARP funds and now refuses to do what was required as part of the acceptance.

Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also criticized Bank of America in a letter, suggesting that the bank’s “reputation will suffer unless more resources are directed to our state.”

The lawyer says his clients want to save their homes and are willing to work out a deal. He expects countless more Bank of America customers are in the same boat.

“We’re not demanding that everybody get, or any body gets, a principal reduction,” Callister continues. “We’re just demanding what the law requires already.”

Many of the customers’ stories are similar; they attempt to negotiate with their lenders but are passed around to different representatives. In some cases they think the negotiations are going well yet come home to find a foreclosure notice on their home.

This is an open class-action complaint. Meaning, if you feel Bank of America hasn’t acted in good faith with your loan, you can contact Matthew Q. Callister, the attorney on this case, at www.call-law.com or  702-385-3343. (See the story here)

loan modification

Anatomy Of A Failed Foreclosure Program

Just how badly is President Obama’s $75 billion foreclosure program working out? Consider these newly-released numbers: Out of every 100 homeowners who came to JPMorgan Chase for help under the program, just 15 have or will likely receive a permanent payment reduction.

What happened to the other 85? For every 100 trial plans initiated from April through September 2009 under the Home Affordable Modification Program:

• 29 borrowers did not make all required payments under their trial plan;
• 20 borrowers did not submit all documents required for underwriting;
• 31 borrowers submitted all required documents but the documents did not meet HAMP underwriting standards, due to such things as missing signatures or nonstandard formats;
• 4 borrowers were or are likely to be rejected for undisclosed reasons;
• 1 borrower will not or is not likely to get their payment lowered.

The data comes from the prepared remarks bank officials plan to make Tuesday before the House Financial Services Committee. The testimony was posted Monday on the committee’s website. (Read more)

loan modification

PMI INTRODUCES NEW VIDEO TO HELP DISTRESSED HOMEOWNERS

Navigating the U.S. Treasury’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)

Walnut Creek, CA, November 19, 2009 /PRNewswire/ — PMI Mortgage Insurance Co., (NYSE: PMI) today introduced a new video to help homeowners experiencing financial hardship understand the benefits of the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) and how they can take advantage of this important program. HAMP is the national loan modification program offered in the Obama Administration’s Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan which mortgage servicers are implementing broadly to bring long-term affordability to homeowners struggling to keep their homes. Navigating the Home Affordable Modification Program, one of the first videos available for homeowners, explains the benefits, eligibility requirements and types of adjustments that can be made to mortgage loans. The video also provides a realistic example of a couple’s experience before-and-after receiving a HAMP modification.

“Foreclosure prevention is critical to the U.S. housing market and the stability of communities,” said John Jelavich, head of PMI’s Homeownership Preservation Initiatives group. “Distressed homeowners who are facing the prospect of losing their home need to know that help is available for those truly interested in saving their homes. This instructional video leverages the growing popularity of internet-based video to give homeowners an overview of how HAMP works and their important role in the process.”

Navigating the Home Affordable Modification Program is divided into two parts. Part I is a basic orientation for viewers who may not have heard of HAMP, the objectives of the program, how to determine if your loan is owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and how to find out if you qualify. Part II discusses the information homeowners need to provide their mortgage servicer, demonstrates how affordability is achieved through a realistic example, and the steps homeowners need to take to ensure success in modifying their loan.

Additional information about alternatives to foreclosure can be found on www.HomeSafePMI.com. Sponsored by PMI Mortgage Insurance Co., the site offers a Mortgage Options Assessment Tool that enables homeowners to organize, calculate, and produce reports on their current financial situations prior to meeting their servicer or counselors to discuss solutions to foreclosure. This free tool is available to anyone.

About PMI Mortgage Insurance Co.

The PMI Group, Inc. (NYSE: PMI), headquartered in Walnut Creek, CA provides credit enhancement solutions that expand homeownership while supporting our customers and the communities they serve. Through its wholly and partially owned subsidiaries, PMI offers residential mortgage insurance and credit enhancement products. For more information: www.pmi-us.com.

loan modification

Loan Company Goes Dormant, Hundreds Could Lose Homes

A local loan-modification company is going out of business, potentially leaving hundreds of homeowners in jeopardy of losing their homes.

 By ANA GARCIA and FRED MAMOUN, NBC News Los Angeles

Updated 8:25 AM PST, Thu, Nov 19, 200

 Hundreds of homeowners who turned to an Orange County mortgage-modification company for help may be in jeopardy themselves and don’t know it. The company appears to have shut down.

 Company insiders say they have come forward to warn the public because they’re afraid people will lose their homes. 

 Greenleaf Legal Services in Mission Viejo may bill itself as “loan-modification experts,” but during a recent visit, the place was a ghost town.

 Some offices were empty, others had stacks of client files apparently waiting to be worked on, and telephone message…

 http://www.nbclosangeles.com/around-town/real-estate/Greenleaf-Legal-Services-Mission-Viejo-Loan-Modification-70424972.html

loan modification

Special Forces Soldier Gets Scammed By “Friend” While On Tour In Iraq

I saw this story on the web.  If you can help his soldier, please do.  Remember – He puts his butt on the line so you don’t have to!

Locals come together to help out soldier who was scammed

By Sarah Cormier and Erin McClary
C & G Staff Writers

MOUNT CLEMENS — Members of the local community don’t like the way a soldier has been treated at home, and are banding together to do something about it.

When Kevin Robertson, a sergeant with the Army’s Special Forces, returned from this third tour of duty in Iraq in May 2007, he was astounded to find that many of his financial dealings were out of whack.

“He started to realize that something was really wrong. He didn’t know what had transacted,” said Elizabeth Geary, Robertson’s friend for at least 10 years.

Robertson discovered that a loan totaling $135,000 had been taken out on his home in Mount Clemens. The home was also going into foreclosure. Moreover, another home had been purchased in Robertson’s name in Florida for $340,000.

“He went to Iraq and that’s one big nightmare over there, and he comes home and it’s a worse nightmare,” said Geary.

How did it all happen?

According to Geary, one day before Robertson was deployed in November 2006, he gave power of attorney to a friend, Mark Powell, whom he had met at a gym several years ago in Sarasota, Fla.

“He had been convinced by a friend of his over in Sarasota to turn over his power of attorney,” said Geary, adding, “Kevin reluctantly did this and when Kevin came home … this man he took out two loans on this house.”

Geary lives in the house on Smith Street that Robertson owns and that Powell took the two loans out on. She said Robertson, who lives in Sarasota because that’s where the Special Forces train, had obtained the Mount Clemens home from his father, who had paid cash for the property and owed no money on it. She added that the Florida home, which Powell bought for $340,000, now appraises for $160,000.

Geary said that Robertson gave Powell no such permission to take out either loan or purchase a home.

“Kevin had no idea what this guy was going to do,” she said.

In fact, said Geary, she thinks that Powell targeted her friend from the beginning.

“There was Kevin sitting on a lot of equity, a lot of cash in the bank, he had a perfect credit score… so I think Mark befriended Kevin and I think he groomed him,” she said, adding that the day after Robertson left, Powell transferred all of the money from Robertson’s account to Powell’s wife’s.

In September 2008, Powell pled guilty to one count of false pretenses over $20,000, but the judge decided that if he paid one-third of the restitution amount within 11 months, he would be allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. He was also sentenced to 11 months of probation and 100 hours of community service. A sentence review hearing, to make sure Powell is following the guidelines, is scheduled for 8:30 a.m. on Nov. 5.

Neither Powell’s attorney, Julie Hlywa, or Robertson’s attorney, Robert Vickrey, returned a phone call for comment.

“It’s been a very, very heartbreaking situation,” said Geary, who said she will continue helping Robertson take care of all of the remaining legal obligations surrounding the case while he’s back in Iraq.

However, Geary isn’t the only one fighting the soldier’s battle back at home. Now that they’ve won over the Mount Clemens City Council, L’Anse Creuse High School teacher Suki VanDerMass and her Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) will attempt to help Robertson with a Battle of the Bands fundraiser Oct. 24.

The group entered City Hall with a booming drum line Oct. 5 to show council members they meant business, VanDerMaas said.

“The city of Mount Clemens decided that on ‘Make A Difference Day,’ that we were going to adopt a soldier,” she explained. “I brought Elizabeth to my SADD group, she told them (Robertson’s) story and we decided, ‘OK, we’re going to adopt him.’ But we had to get City Council on board first.”

“It’s a wonderful thing that the community is rallying around him like they are” added Geary.

When VanDerMaas, who advises the L’Anse Creuse High School’s SADD group and also teaches special education and social studies, asked her students how they wanted to help, they already had their minds made up: “They said, ‘We’re going to do a Battle of the Bands.’”

VanDerMaas ended up networking her way into a few of the city’s well-known venues and was able to secure locations for the event and band auditions.

Battle of the Bands is taking place at the Emerald Ballroom Oct. 24. Tickets are $10 for adults, and kids 10 and under get in free as long as they bring a pack of gum to donate.

VanDerMaas said Robertson told her one thing soldiers can’t get enough of in the desert is chewing gum. As a result, all the packs donated Oct. 24 will be shipped to troops overseas. Proceeds from admission costs will be donated to Robertson.

Aside from the entertainment at Battle of the Bands, concertgoers can also enter raffles to win a weekend in Boyne Mountain or a gift basket filled with service vouchers and merchandise from Mount Clemens businesses.

Local vendors will also be there selling hot dogs, and some of the proceeds will be donated toward the effort.

VanDerMaas said garage bands, kids who play in bands for local high schools, and even those who’ve graduated and just want to get up and perform will compete to benefit Robertson.

“When the economy’s bad and we’re hurting, there’s always someone that has it way worse,” VanDerMaas concluded. “And Kevin, I mean, we really got to step up.”

For details about Battle of the Bands, call Suki VanDerMaas at L’Anse Creuse High School, (586) 783-6400 ext. 2083.

You can reach Staff Writer Sarah Cormier at scormier@candgnews.com or at (586) 498-1095.

loan modification

Sorry California, Your Right To Legal Counsel Is About To Be Taken Away!

By Martin Andelman

What do you call 500 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?  A good start.

Very funny stuff, right?  Unless, of course, you’re being sued… or you’re charged with a crime… or you’ve just been fired without cause… or if your spouse just walked out after 20 years… or if you’ve been cited for Driving Under the Influence… or harmed as a result of another’s gross negligence.  When you need an attorney to enforce or otherwise protect your rights, you’re not laughing at lawyer jokes nearly as much.  In fact attorneys, I would imagine, get hugged a lot too… maybe just as often as they’re made fun of, I don’t really know.

From its very beginning, American society has been based on law… and forged by lawyers.  Our lawyers have been charged with setting our nation’s values—through the “landmark cases” that brought major reforms, and through the trust in a lawyer’s day-to-day dealing with his or her clients.  In point of fact, our lawyers must be the conscience of our legal system, and of the people—because if not them, who?

It occurs to me that there are certain professions that we need to trust in our society, and attorneys are one of them.  Police officers are another and physicians a third.  Police brutality, for example, is seen as being the very serious offense that it is, not solely because of its victims, but because it threatens to teach a segment of society that the police cannot be trusted.  And that can be a very dangerous thing.

Police officers, for the most part, are looking out for our safety and if we don’t trust them, it’s quite possible that we could be harmed as a result, perhaps fatally harmed.  And physicians are another group of professionals that in general we need to trust, because if we don’t, we put our health at risk.

Attorneys are a profession that we need to trust when we need them.  We trust that what we tell our lawyer is “privileged,” meaning that our lawyer is prohibited from disclosing whatever we’ve said to others. And it’s important that we trust this to be the case, because if we can’t tell our lawyer the truth, he or she may not be able to provide us with a proper defense and we may be deprived of life, liberty, or property as a result.

Yet, here in California, the legislature is dangerously close to passing a bill that would establish quite clearly that lawyers… all lawyers… are individuals not to be trusted.  And even more so, that attorneys in large number are the type of criminals that left unchecked would plot to steal $3,000 from homeowners distressed as a result of being at risk of losing their homes.

The bill in question, California Senate Bill 94, which was proposed by Banking & Finance Committee Chair, Senator Ron Calderon, was originally designed to prevent a company or individual from charging an upfront fee when offering to help a homeowner avoid foreclosure by working with his or her lender or servicer to obtain an agreement to modify the terms of his or her mortgage.

Now widely referred to as “loan modifications,” there is little question that few homeowners knew of such terminology just a few years ago.  But as the foreclosure crisis steadily tightened its grip on California homeowners over the last 18 months, the term loan modification has quickly become a part of the lexicon.

Initially, many who had been employed in the mortgage industry prior to its meltdown, seeing it as a variation of a refinance transaction, entered the completely unregulated field, and predictably problems ensued.  And although neither the precise cause, nor the extent of these problems has been ascertained, there is no question that some percentage of the operators of these early loan modification companies were unscrupulous con artists who defrauded homeowners out of several thousand dollars by promising to save their homes from foreclosure.

How many scams took place?  No one is certain, but any number is too many according to some.

The State of California’s response was less than coordinated.  The Attorney General and Department of Corporations was one possibility for regulation and enforcement, the California Department of Real Estate was another, and when law firms entered the picture, the California Bar Association was a third.

The initial front-runner was the Department of Real Estate, who introduced their “Advance Fee Agreement,” beginning in October of 2008.  The idea was simply to allow licensed individuals to accept a fee in advance, but required that fee to be placed in a trust account and only withdrawn as earned.  Months later, the Attorney General introduced the requirement that individuals post a $100,000 bond in order to operate as a foreclosure consultant.

Law firms, however, who were already well regulated and under the jurisdiction of the California Bar, remained law firms and presumably functioned as such.

Then, beginning in late 2008 and into early 2009, the California Bar started to receive an inordinate number of complaints each month, between 900-1100, and the sheer number in addition to the allegations was troubling to say the least.  It seemed that some attorneys were allowing firms to operate under their license to practice law, but no law was actually being practiced at the organization in question.  Mortgage brokers had realized that one way around the DRE’s Advance Fee Agreement, which limited the cash flow a company could utilize, was to become an “attorney backed firm,” a hybrid with no basis in law or business convention.

The California Bar sent out an Ethics Alert in February of 2009, warning attorneys that the Bar Association did not condone such practices, and that any attorney involved in such a scheme could be at risk of losing their license to practice law.  The Bar faced a significant problem with the volume of complaints, however.  An attorney had to read each complaint to determine what type of allegation each contained and having never before received anywhere the number being received, they were dramatically understaffed.

Then in February of 2009, Senator Calderon introduced SB 94 and the committee meetings began.  The bill passed through the Senate Banking and Judicial Committees in May and Senate Appropriations in early June.  The bill as written at that time would prohibit mortgage and real estate licensed individuals from accepting advance fees in connection with a loan modification, but attorneys were largely exempt.

Then, just days before July 4^th, with the California Assembly’s Committee on Banking and Finance scheduled to hold a hearing on a similar bill (AB 764) on July 6^th, the bill was amended to ban attorneys from accepting any fees or retainers in advance when representing a client in connection with a loan modification.

The negotiations to obtain a loan modification were widely believed to be 3-4 weeks… but in truth often required 5-9 months, and as a result, the effective outcome of SB 94 and/or AB 764 would be that no attorneys could afford to take on a client who was seeking representation in the negotiations with their lender.  And this would effectively deprive California’s homeowners from being able to engage legal representation.

Attorneys who defend the most unpopular accused persons are especially important.  The more heinous or unpopular the offense, the more necessary the right to counsel, and one of the hazards of pre-trial publicity is that the jury pool can become “tainted”.  Newspaper articles, talk shows, the many opinionated programs on cable television can all serve to poison the public against a defendant… and in this case the defendant is the legal profession, access to which is now crucial to hundreds of thousands of homeowners if they are to remain in their home.

One of the most misunderstood phrases in literature is from Shakespeare.  Shakespeare’s exact line, ”The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers,” was stated by Dick the Butcher in ”Henry VI, Part II”.  Dick was a follower of the rebel Jack Cade who thought that if he disturbed law and order, he could become king.

Shakespeare meant it as a compliment to attorneys and judges who instill justice in society.

To pass into law a piece of legislation that so clearly, thoroughly and seriously maligns the legal profession, based on allegation and innuendo would cause our society harm that could conceivably last for generations.  To believe that attorneys in large number are defrauding distressed homeowners out of $3,000 fees for work that can take many months to complete, stretches the imagination past the point of credulity.

Most notably, CNNMoney.com recently asked homeowners who attempted to obtain a loan modification through the HAMP program WITHOUT ASSISTANCE OF ANY KIND to write in and share their experiences.  Well over 500 letters were received and the overwhelming number expressed intense feelings of extreme dissatisfaction and disappointment.

Additionally, in the last two weeks, we have all learned that banks and servicers have not fulfilled their promises to modify mortgages per the agreed to terms of HAMP, much to the administration’s chagrin.  Treasury Secretary Geithner and President Obama have both admitted the program has not worked effectively and now promise tighter controls.

A review of the complaints received by CNN.com clearly shows that those losing their homes and unable to obtain the help promised by the administration are crestfallen and angry at the failure of their government.

To effectively brand attorneys as untrustworthy thieves and scammers, based on complaints that to this date remain unread, in light of the recent evidence and testimony in Congress, would be unconscionable and result in irreparable harm to California’s homeowners and potentially all Americans who need access to legal representation today, perhaps more than ever before in our nation’s history.

I urge you to speak out immediately against this poorly conceived legislative proposal that would effectively deprive homeowners in California from their right to counsel and damage the reputations of attorneys throughout the nation.

 

The answer is enforcement of existing laws, not new legislation that will make it illegal for reputable attorneys to charge reasonable fees to clients who wish to engage their services.  Because homeowners need help.

IF YOU’RE WILLING TO  STAND UP AND BE COUNTED,

PLEASE EMAIL ME RIGHT AWAY AT:

MANDELMAN@MAC.COM

 

And please forward a link to this article to everyone you know.

This threat is very, very real.

loan modification

From The Land of Fruits and Nuts Arises a Queen

Since starting MFI-Miami last June and MFI-Mod Squad in January 2009, I have seen a lot of messianic types with delusions of grandeur spring up. They claim to be consumer watch dogs or fraud fighters. They usually come and go like minor characters in a daytime soap opera.

These self proclaimed fraud fighters also have narcissistic revenge fantasies. They believe they’re not at fault for losing their homes. They rant on the Internet and are usually gone in a month or two.  I usually ignore these people, but I do respond when someone posts blatant lies about MFI-ModSquad.com and my companies.

Last week, a site called Bad Biz Finder posted a story about MFI-ModSquad and MFI-Miami.  In the story, the allegedly anonymous owner wrote that I told her “decoy” that my friend Pat Pulatie (LoanFraudDetective.com) ran my California operation.

I’ve never had a California operation and never claimed to have one. The owner of Bad Biz Finder also claimed that loan modification companies like CDA Law Center pay me to get my seal of approval. She doesn’t believe that I pay for this site out of my own pocket. To this, I say prove it. If not, then in the immortal words of Eric Cartman of South Park, ‘Shut your pie-hole!’”

Who is the anonymous blogger from Bad Biz Finder who claims she must remain anonymous because she fears incurring bodily harm? Her name is Erin Baldwin.

Who is Erin Baldwin? She own The Baldwin Companies and Baldwin Business Consulting, which operates at 24310 Moulton Parkway, Ste. 536, in Laguana Hills, California.

What does Baldwin Business Consulting do?  According to the press clippings on the site, Erin — the owner — charged her clients $5000 dollars to write a business plan using a template from an office supply store and then introduced her clients to several bankers to get them a business line of credit for $30,000.

All this seems fine.  However, the going rate for writing a business plan is under $500 and, up until last year, banks were giving $30,000 lines of credit to anyone with a pulse and decent P&L statements. The going rate for using a commercial broker, if you needed one, for these lines was $1000.  She only made introductions to the banks to sidestep California regulations, which require commercial brokerage houses to be licensed.

So, how was Erin able to charge three times the going rate? She flirted with potential clients and told people that she attended Merrimack College and Harvard University. I guess those community education classes make nice padding for the resume because the people with whom I spoke have no record of her attending or graduating from either school.

So what qualifies Erin to be a wannabe Power Puff Girl? On Bad Biz Finder, she claims: “We here at Bad Biz Finder are a Consumer Advocate Group that has been around since the 1980s and we stay anonymous because we have been threatened in the past…” This is simply not true.  The state of California has no record of her or any of her companies being a consumer advocacy group. Baldwin Business Consulting has, by Erin’s own admission, only been around since 2003. Besides, threats are part of this business. I get an average of 5-6 of them per week.  Erin tries to remain anonymous because she doesn’t want people to dig into her past and discover that she’s a fraud.    She did exactly what she is accusing modification companies of doing.

So what’s the real story?  When the recession came, Erin’s ability to overcharge her clients disappeared faster than 100% financing with a 600 FICO. The problem was that she bought a seven-figure house in Costa Mesa during the boom and, when the recession hit, she was upside down and couldn’t afford it.

She lost her Barbie Dream House to foreclosure and, due to the fact that she bought her home using stated income, she was rejected for a modification by her lender. Now she uses this as her justification for going on an Aileen Wuornos-style killing spree against the modification industry.

In January, Erin posted a rant accusing Erik Duckworth and Jeff Davi at California DRE of taking bribes and kickbacks from Parsa Law Group. It appears that she didn’t like DRE’s investigation. But, when DRE requested assistance from her, she wrote: “However, the safety of our volunteers, the tactics we have in place and the consumers that are counting on us to place their interest first and foremost would be severely handicapped if we were to simply turn over all our information to the DRE.”

In other words, Erin didn’t have any information and DRE considered her an unreliable source.

Erin, listen to someone who actually knows what he’s doing. Anonymous bloggers have no real credibility. Only gullible consumers believe everything they read on the Internet. When state regulators or law enforcement officials ask for your assistance, give it to them without hesitation. By cooperating with the authorities, you can build credibility and be recognized by the national media as an expert in your field.  Also, shelling out $10 to register a domain name goes a long way toward making you credible.

After Erin posted her rant, Parsa Law Center filed a libel suit against her. Feldman Law Center also filed one against her as well.  She was even warned by Wordpress CEO Toni Schneider to tone down her rhetoric or he would pull the plug on her blog. All that did was infuriate her even more. Here’s her email response:

“Yes we are exposing fraud and thank God we are exposing the fraud. We’ve received thousands of thank you emails because of it. Somebody has to do it and so far no one is stepping up to the plate. Why did you start WordPress anyway? Don’t you believe in free speech? Isn’t it a free service to allow people to express themselves freely?
You cannot be an agent for change BY BEING APPROPRIATE. You’re going to ruffle some feathers along the way. How have you handled controversial blogs in the past? Did you shut them down? Did you censor them? Did you violate their constitutional rights? We’re sincerely interested in knowing the answers to these questions.
THERE ARE NO LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES REVIEWED ON OUR BLOG. If you read our posts you would see that all of our claims are substantiated. Please point out one that isn’t. The people that are flipping out are flipping out because they’ve been caught with their pants down and it’s humiliating and expensive to their scam.
Please email us the sections of your “terms of service” that allow you to censor us and violate our constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court of the United States of America has stated that:
“ABOVE ALL ELSE THE FIRST AMENDMENT MEANS THAT GOVERNMENT HAS NO POWER TO RESTRICT EXPRESSION BECAUSE OF ITS MESSAGE, ITS IDEAS, ITS SUBJECT MATTER, OR ITS CONTENT.” Police Department of Chicago V. Mosley (1972). Government rules by the law, and the law is decided in court, and the court is who must decide any matter pertaining to this subject. Your terms of service have no authority over The Supreme Court and the Constitution of the United States of America.
So stop hassling us.
Bad Biz Finder

This email is interesting because, for all the talk about her rights under free speech, she doesn’t allow opposing views on her blog. I guess she only believes in free speech for herself.

The problem with people like Erin Baldwin is that she believes that because she went through the foreclosure process, she’s an expert in foreclosure rescue or modifications. If you use that logic, you should be able to qualify for the Indy 500 after watching Speed Racer cartoons.

Erin will probably go on some Wagnarian rant on her site about this article but let her.  Her anonymity and fictitious resume have been exposed.

If you think her insane rants about the modification industry make great fiction you should read what she writes about her landlord because they towed her car for illegal parking but that is another story.

loan modification

People Begging and Kissing My Backside to Be Taken Off The List

Since I posted the 20 Worst List, I’ve received calls and emails from companies on the 20 Worst list.  All saying, “We’re one of the good guys, why are we on your list?”  Well, for starters, I’ve received complaints about you and from the research I have done, you’re operating outside the laws of the state you are in.   To which the California companies respond, “We contract out to a law firm so we don’t need to be DRE backed.  This means they would be in violation of the California Business and Professions Code Section 6152.  It’s a big no-no for a third party to collect retainers or solicit clients for an attorney in California.  My favorite is, “We have an in-house lawyer.”  You can have all the “in-house” lawyers you want but if you are not a law firm and are collecting an upfront fee, you need to be approved by DRE.  I even had one guy try to bribe me with $10k.   I didn’t know if I should be appalled or laugh.  It’s pretty simple, if you play be the rules and don’t rip people off, you won’t have the spotlight of MFI-Mod Squad on you.

I also received alot of media inquiries this week which was super cool.  Apparently, one of the reporters at the Geithner press conference had a copy of the press release I did about the 20 Worst Mod companies and was showing it to people.    I have some other investigative stories coming down the pipeline and may have some surprises next week as well.

loan modification

MFI-Mod Squad is offering a $3500 Reward

MFI-Mod Squad is offering a $3500 reward for information that leads to the arrest and conviction of Chris Campbell of Lionstar Financial.

MFI-Mod Squad works to expose illegally run loan modification companies. These companies convince desperate homeowners to pay them huge upfront fees and intend to take the money and run. That’s what happened to Dan Howard and Nickie Struthers, a Florida couple.
 
In August 2008, Dr. Howard’s fiancée, Nickie Struthers, was contacted by Chris Campbell about doing a mortgage loan modification. Mr. Campbell convinced the couple that he could save their house from foreclosure but needed a check for $3500 to do so. Instead of keeping his promise, Mr. Campbell made excuses for three months and sent them letters that he claimed were from their bank. The bank had never written those letters. So, Dr. Howard and Ms. Struthers contacted MFI-Mod Squad to investigate.
 
MFI-Mod Squad discovered:
 
·         Lionstar Financial is in direct violation of California Department of Real Estate guidelines, which require all modification companies that charge an advance fee to be approved and have their fee agreements approved. Lionstar hasn’t been approved. 
·         Chris Campbell and Lionstar lack proper licensing through DRE.
·         California law bars any foreclosure rescue company or loan modification company from charging an upfront fee if the client is in default.
·         Chris Campbell shared Dr. Howard and Ms. Struthers’ information with third parties without their consent.
 
Steve Dibert, owner of MFI-Mod Squad, attempted to contact Chris Campbell but was ignored. So, Dibert started publicizing the investigation of Lionstar Financial on the MFI-Mod Squad website, which has since been featured on CNBC and ABC News. 
 
“Chris Campbell finally started talking when his name was mentioned on national television. He gave pathetic excuses and bogus documents to my client and the media,” says Steve Dibert. “I know there are other victims, so I’ve decided to offer a $3500 reward for any information that leads to the arrest and conviction of Chris Campbell.”
 
If you have been a victim of Chris Campbell, have first hand knowledge of someone who was or know details of Lionstar Financial’s business dealings, feel free to email me.  Your information will be kept in the strictest of confidence.

Next Page »