Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Redeeming Lawful Money saves couple from foreclosure

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Redeeming Lawful Money saves couple from foreclosure

    I think we have a new word to add to our vocabulary... decisioner. I keep a brain trust of about 120 competent courts (record-forming). I just want to share something...
    "Hi David:

    "Latest update. While researching our options I came across law stating, basically, a servicer cannot foreclose "If a borrower submits a complete loss mitigation application [..] more than 37 days before a foreclosure sale ..." See paragraph (g) here:

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/1024.41

    "So we hustled to submit a complete "loss mitigation application." These are also called "loan mods." Lo and behold we were just approved for HAMP Tier 1 at 2% (whatever that means). See attached.

    "Considering the mortgage hasn't been paid in over 4 years (saving about $70k), a Ch 13 bankruptcy filing by attorney to stave off foreclosure would cost about $5k and restructure debt into a similar monthly payment, this doesn't appear too bad of an option to continue living in the family home (worth $390k according to the servicer) and ride out the financial collapse. Factor in the wife & kids too.

    "Interesting thing came up while getting everything together for the application. They wanted tax returns, if I was "self-employed",etc. Told them I was making lawful money but not "self-employed" as defined by statute. They thought the Joint tax return was incomplete, no Schedule C (for business) & wanted it. Told them there was no Sched C; not required, and return was complete. Put together profit/loss statements at their request. The rep responded with something like "if it's not on the tax return the loan company cannot count it." Told them that was their decision, not mine."

    Then a few days later, he shared.
    "one more thing. If you take the new, modified monthly payment and divide by the HAMP Tier 1 figure of 31%, you get exactly my wife's income. So the "decisioner" did NOT take my lawful money income into the equation. It's not federal reserve income!

    "Your file is now with the decisioner awaiting review."

    http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...mp-tier-2.html

    The logical next step would be to conclude if both husband and wife were redeeming lawful money, the new payments would be extraordinarily low.


    Regards,
    David Merrill.
    Serious about Redemption and Trusts? Visit: www.lawfulmoneytrust.com

  • #2
    I don't know if that term decisioner is something used internally or if the Relationship Manager just came up with that on his own. But clearly he wasn't making the decision.

    As part of the loan mod application process we had to submit tax returns, pay stubs, bank statements, some bills, etc. So we complied and provided a complete financial picture really, not hiding anything. They saw what we were making in income with deposits right there on the bank statements. The fact that the bank DID NOT COUNT my lawful money income came as a surprise to me - wasn't expecting that. I assumed they'd count it as it would have been in their favor - a higher mortgage payment. But it turns out what the Relationship Manager said on the phone - if it's not on the tax return we can't count it - was true. My lawful money income was different. Something prevented them from counting it and my conclusion is, it was the law. This would indicate our currency system really is dual capacity.

    Thank you!
    Last edited by Seven; 12-14-2016, 07:41 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      I sure appreciate your sharing that.

      Serious about Redemption and Trusts? Visit: www.lawfulmoneytrust.com

      Comment

      Working...
      X