Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Exploiting Borrowers Amidst the Foreclosure Crisis

Posted by Antoine Morris, Drum Major Institute at 3:05 PM on May 8, 2008.


Mortgage lenders are abusing bankruptcy courts to rake in more money from homeowners.
moneybags

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

On Tuesday, May 6th, a Senate Judiciary subcommittee held a hearing on abusive practices perpetuated by mortgage lenders in the bankruptcy court system. Businesses and consumers often turn to bankruptcy courts as they liquidate their assets in an effort to workout reasonable payment plans with their creditors. For families on the brink of losing their homes, bankruptcy courts play a key role in allowing at-risk homeowners one last chance to keep their homes.

In recent months, however, some mortgage services such as Calabasas, California based Countrywide Financial Corporation have come under intense scrutiny for foreclosing homes prematurely only to pile on unnecessary and costly fees on borrowers during bankruptcy proceedings.

Steve Bailey, the Chief Executive for Loan Administration at Countrywide, however, disputed those allegations. In a prepared statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts, he said, "Countrywide is committed to helping our borrowers avoid foreclosure whenever they have a reasonable source of income and a desire to remain in the property."

He also claimed, "Recent media reports alleging that mortgage servicers are systematically charging excessive fees and using the bankruptcy process to push borrowers into foreclosure or abusing the process more generally are inaccurate." Bailey attributed any perceived abuses to no more than run of the mill "individual employee errors."

Countrywide's track record of overcharging borrowers facing foreclosure and during bankruptcy proceedings, however, suggests otherwise. One New Jersey couple who owned their home for the last 10 years were served with foreclosure papers by Countrywide and were inexplicably charged expensive flood insurance that they could not afford and did not need. It took months to resolve the error. Meanwhile, they fell behind on her mortgage payments.

In several other instances, the mortgage company has also been accused by attornerys representing borrowers and U.S. Trustees in bankruptcy courts of inflating overdue mortgage payments and fabricating documents to bolster their claims and collect more money in bankruptcy court.

Robin and John Atchley's experience with Countrywide seems to be emblematic of these very same abuses. In 2004, the Atchley's moved from a mobile home to what Robin Atchley described as her family's dream home in Waleska, Georgia. After securing a home loan from American Freedom Mortgage her mortgage was sold to Countrywide. During Mrs. Atchley's grieving period after her sister's death, she took unpaid leave from her job at the U.S. Postal Service. Soon afterwards, the Atchleys fell behind on their mortgage payments by about three months worth.

Apparently, that was enough for Countrywide to initiate foreclosure proceedings against the Georgia family and create what Atchely called a "tug of war" over her home. The Atchleys hoped the bankruptcy court would allow her and her husband to pay off her debts and keep their home. But the Atchley said all Countrywide wanted to do was " take advantage of our predicament and to profit from our struggle." In fact, at one point, Countrywide alleged that the Atchley's owed an extra $14,000 on her home loan and $2,250 for other unspecified fees.

Neither of those extra charges were substantiated once they were vigorously challenged by her attorney.

Katherine Porter, a bankruptcy law expert who has studied 1700 bankruptcy cases, told the Subcommittee that the Atchleys suffered an all too common fate. Porter said of the bankruptcy cases she researched "mortgage servicers disregard(ed) bankruptcy law" more than half the time.

Mortgage services frequently misapply payments during the bankruptcy case or fail to disclose post-bankruptcy attorneys fees and property inspection charges or simply not itemized their fees at all in an effort to overcharge borrowers. Porter contends that such a pattern of falsifying or withholding documentation demonstrates a deliberate attempt to manipulate a system intended to help those trying to avoid financial ruin.

An unpersuasive defense from Bailey of Countrywide's treatment of the borrowers like the Atchleys led Senator Chuck Schumer, chairman of the Subcommittee, to conclude "Companies know that the hapless homeowner is too poor, too unsophisticated or too overwhelmed to challenge often blatantly fraudulent demands for payment."

The Atchleys eventually lost their home and are currently living with other family members until they can save enough money to rent a place of their own.


Republican Procedural Tactics Throw Mothers Under the Bus
Mothers are the latest casualty in attempts by the GOP to gum-up the works in congress.
Post by Julia . May 11, 2008.
Intelligence Contractor Wasn't Pleased When We Showed up at its Shareholder's Meet
We were shareholders, but apparently not the right kind.
Post by Tonya Hennessey. May 10, 2008.
Missouri Nuns Fight Voter Disenfranchisement
After their Indiana sisters were disenfranchised, Missouri nuns are mad as heck and not gonna take it anymore.
Post by Jill Hussein C.. May 9, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Why we need more Government regulation.
Posted by: peacekeepertwo on May 9, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is just one example of an Administration That put the military, Above the needs of The people. I believe money that was Suppose to be used to fund agency's, that defend consumers, was diverted to the Bush Wars. Who says the president has no Control over the Economy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If this appalls you, don't vote for Obama
Posted by: manderson on May 9, 2008 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...because he voted for the Tort Reform act of 2005, which limits the size, scope, and number of lawsuits. You'll get no relief from ANY of the candidates, Democrap, or Repuglican.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eat a banker, BBQ a CEO, parboil a politician, serve up a mutlinational
Posted by: thekidde on May 9, 2008 4:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
corporatist with steamed veggies. Gated communities would seem to be at risk - about time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]