{"id":188532,"date":"2010-09-09T16:23:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-09T21:23:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2010\/09\/09\/a-court-case-to-watch-on-hamp\/"},"modified":"2010-09-09T16:23:00","modified_gmt":"2010-09-09T21:23:00","slug":"a-court-case-to-watch-on-hamp","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2010\/09\/09\/a-court-case-to-watch-on-hamp\/","title":{"rendered":"A Court Case to Watch on HAMP"},"content":{"rendered":"

A federal court in California has ruled that a borrower is an intended 3rd<\/sup> party beneficiary of the HAMP program<\/a>, and so has standing to sue the bank for acting in bad faith:<\/p>\n

This is getting interesting. A judge in U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, has issued an order that may just answer a few prayers of many homeowners. Here\u2019s what happened\u2026<\/p>\n

A San Diego homeowner, by the name of Ademar Marques, was applying for a loan modification, and, although it might be hard for many readers to believe, his servicer, Wells Fargo, dba, America\u2019s Servicing Company, wasn\u2019t being very nice about it, or even cooperating at all. It seems that Wells Fargo wanted to just skip all of those messy and time-consuming formalities required when considering someone for a loan modification, and just jump straight into foreclosure.<\/p>\n

Mr. Marques filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo\u2019s America\u2019s Servicing Company because he read about the Home Affordable Modification Program (\u201cHAMP\u201d) and the program\u2019s guidelines said that his servicer was \u201cREQUIRED\u201d to screen him for a hardship, and consider him for a loan modification. He also alleged that he qualified for the loan modification program based on all of the published guidelines, and that his servicer, a participating servicer in HAMP never said that his loan could not be modified, they just refused to modify it, and instituted foreclosure proceedings.<\/p>\n

Well, I never! The gall of some servicers. Have you ever heard of such a thing? Actually, I have. But not more than 30-40 times a day for the last two years.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The court ruled that as a participant in HAMP, the bank was obligated to review Ademar Marques case, and in not doing so, they breached their HAMP contract, and so do not have the right to foreclose.<\/p>\n

Here is the money quote:<\/p>\n

Are you digging this? Best I can make out, if you\u2019re the intended third party beneficiary to a federal contract you can sue for breach of contract. So, if it says in the contract that the servicer \u201cMUST\u201d do something, and that servicer doesn\u2019t do it\u2026 you the borrower may be able to sue the servicer for breaching that contract.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

If Wells appeals, and if I were them, I wouldn’t, because settling in this one case loses them a mortgage, and if the court of appeals rules against them, it becomes case law for a large swath of California, but bankers are not know for cutting their losses.<\/p>\n

If there is an appeal, and Mr. Marques prevails, then it is certain that Wells Fargo will appeal to the Supreme Court, and I would bet 5 to 1 odds that if it gets that high, then the Obama administration will argue for the malefactor banks, because that’s how they roll.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A federal court in California has ruled that a borrower is an intended 3rd party beneficiary of the HAMP program, and so has standing to sue the bank for acting in bad faith: This is getting interesting. A judge in U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, has issued an order that may just answer …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[970,1004,972,1088],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-188532","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption","category-finance","category-justice","category-real-estate"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188532"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=188532"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188532\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188532"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188532"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188532"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}