.jpg)
loan modification and accepting mortgage payments
Steve, you could propose an adequate protection stip extending the payback of the post-petition difference over months or years due to the screwup while you re-do the Mod.
Steven L. Bryson
Attorney at Law
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist
State Bar of California
Board of Legal Specialization
310-477-4555
www.file4bankruptcy.com
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 2:38 pm
Subject: [cdcbaa] loan modification and accepting mortgage payments
Have a confirmed chapter 13 plan.
Clients receive an offer from bank to modify their home loan. Clients submit the package and shortly thereafter they receive a "trial period" modification. Clients timely send it the fully signed package along with trial period payments, and have made payments since May of last year. Client sends of copy of her ledger in every time she makes a payment. It is a thing of beauty to behold.
In December of last year, bank says, oh no, bank did not receive the signed package timely, did not receive payments timely, or some not at all, so, no modification, here is the stay relief motion, etc., etc.,
I oppose the motion, and after two continuances for the bank to get its story straight and have the bank custodian sign anything other than a generic declaration, bank is saying that they just did not get the fully signed package back in time. Bank concedes all of the trial period payments were received. Bank still wants relief, because no signed agreement timely received. (Declaration does not say when the agreement was received by the Bank)
Tentative ruling is motion denied because the bank is adequately protected. All payments were received. I submit on the tentative.
Well, bank wants a hearing. Attorney for the bank shows up and says, but the bank has to accept the payments, so the Bank cannot be sandbagged by accepting payments and not allowed to argue there is no agreement because the signed documents were never timely received.
Court agrees with bank, states the relief from stay motion cannot resolve whether there has or has not been a modification (I guess that is my cue to file an adversary for declaratory relief), and continues the whole thing 60 days for my clients to apply for a new modification to make the whole thing moot.
Anyone else run across this fact situation? Any other way of resolving this without an adversary for dec relief arguing the modification has been performed? btw, clients never received a 30 day turn down hamp letter. (Another reason for the 60 continuance).
Steve Burton
Steve, you could propose an adequate protection stip extending the payback of the post-petition difference over months or years due to the screwup while you re-do the Mod.
Steven L. Bryson
Attorney at Law
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist
State Bar of California
Board of Legal Specialization
310-477-4555
www.file4bankruptcy.com
-----Original Message-----
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Have a confirmed chapter 13 plan.
Clients receive an offer from bank to modify their home loan. Clients submit
the package and shortly thereafter they receive a "trial period" modification.
Clients timely send it the fully signed package along with trial period
payments, and havemade paymentssince May of last year. Client sends of copy
of her ledger in every time she makes a payment. It is a thing of beauty to
behold.
In December of last year, bank says, oh no, bank did not receive the signedpackage timely, did not receive payments timely, or some not at all, so, nomodification, here is the stay relief motion, etc., etc.,
I oppose the motion, and after two continuances for the bank to get its story
straight and have the bank custodian sign anything other than a generic
declaration, bank is saying that they just did not get the fully signed package
back in time. Bank concedes all of the trial period payments were received.
Bank still wants relief, because no signed agreement timely received.
(Declaration does not say when the agreement was received by the Bank)
Tentative ruling is motion denied because the bank is adequately protected.payments were received.I submit on the tentative.
Well, bank wants a hearing. Attorney for the bank shows up and says, but the
bank has to accept the payments, so the Bank cannot be sandbagged by accepting
payments and not allowed to argue there is no agreement because the signeddocuments were never timelyreceived.
Court agrees with bank, states the relief from stay motion cannot resolve
whether there has or has not been a modification (I guess that is mycue to file
an adversary for declaratory relief), and continues the whole thing 60 days for
my clients to apply for a new modification to make the whole thing moot.
Anyone else run across this fact situation? Any other way of resolving this
without an adversary for dec relief arguing the modification has been
performed? btw, clients never received a 30 day turn down hamp letter.(Another reason for the 60 continuance).
Steve Burton
Have a confirmed chapter 13 plan.
Clients receive an offer from bank to modify their home loan. Clients submit the package and shortly thereafter they receive a "trial period" modification. Clients timely send it the fully signed package along with trial period payments, and have made payments since May of last year. Client sends of copy of her ledger in every time she makes a payment. It is a thing of beauty to behold.
In December of last year, bank says, oh no, bank did not receive the signed package timely, did not receive payments timely, or some not at all, so, no modification, here is the stay relief motion, etc., etc.,
I oppose the motion, and after two continuances for the bank to get its story straight and have the bank custodian sign anything other than a generic declaration, bank is saying that they just did not get the fully signed package back in time. Bank concedes all of the trial period payments were received. Bank still wants relief, because no signed agreement timely received. (Declaration does not say when the agreement was received by the Bank)
Tentative ruling is motion denied because the bank is adequately protected. All payments were received. I submit on the tentative.
Well, bank wants a hearing. Attorney for the bank shows up and says, but the bank has to accept the payments, so the Bank cannot be sandbagged by accepting payments and not allowed to argue there is no agreement because the signed documents were never timely received.
Court agrees with bank, states the relief from stay motion cannot resolve whether there has or has not been a modification (I guess that is my cue to file an adversary for declaratory relief), and continues the whole thing 60 days for my clients to apply for a new modification to make the whole thing moot.
Anyone else run across this fact situation? Any other way of resolving this without an adversary for dec relief arguing the modification has been performed? btw, clients never received a 30 day turn down hamp letter. (Another reason for the 60 continuance).
Steve Burton
The post was migrated from Yahoo.