Wells Fargo Mortgage Modification is a Scam


Liar, Liar Pants on Fire

21) The Lie:
“It is important to note that a Home Preservation Agent (Specialist) is not assigned until all requested financial documentation is received.”
This sentence appears in correspondence written by members of the WFHM president's office staff either to me or to the Arizona Attorney General's Office in response to my complaint against the bank. It's part of their ongoing attempt to pretend that it took them seven months to complete the first review of my mortgage for modification because I just would not cooperate and send them the documents they needed. (Never mind that I sent docs 13 times - once after the review was supposedly completed!)

The sentence, or a slightly altered version, appears in the following letters:

So, imagine my surprise when, during an August 15, 2011, phone call, I got transferred directly to a home preservation specialist. The call was made to one of WFHM's generic customer service phone queue numbers to find out what documents I needed to send to initiate round four mortgage mod request. The rep asked a few questions about my income and expenses, no doubt feeding them into a computer program, and then asked if she could transfer me to a home preservation specialist. And I hadn't sent any documents at all.

The Truth:
Darned if I know. It appears that you may or may not have to send reams of paperwork one or more times in order to escape the phone queue and actually get to talk to a person who might or might not handle your review for a while or until it is completed. What an efficient, transparent system Wells Fargo has designed.

22) The Lie:
You didn't send the paperwork #6.
I initiated a third request for a mortgage mod on June 15, 2011, when the attorney who is acting on my behalf for this round, faxed documents to WFHM as requested in a June 13, 2011, phone conversation with Shamika in the customer service phone queue. To date WFHM has provided no written acknowledgement of receipt of documents, description of the evaluation process or timeline, or request for more documentation.

In spite of not requesting any further documents, it turned out that WFHM had evaluated my initial package and determined additional documentation was needed. There is a very specific process for requesting documents. (See below) WF ignored that - again - and instead created a complete farce.

First, Mr. Lingren had failed to return the voicemail message my counsel left while I was meeting with her in her office on June 13, 2011. She left Mr. Lingren voicemail messages on June 24, 2011, and June 29, 2011, asking him to call her regarding the status of the modification request, including any requests for documents. When she did not get a hold of him by June 29, 2011, she redialed his number, did not enter his extension number and spoke to another representative, Stephen Nutt. Mr. Nutt said that Mr. Lingren noted in the file that my case had been closed because we failed to submit required documents by a deadline of noon on the previous day, June 28, 2011. Remember, we never received any communication of any kind requesting any documents by that deadline.

Mr. Nutt checked the electronic notes for a list of documents that Mr. Lingren required. Failing to find the list, the resourceful Mr. Nutt then located Ms. Halifax in a meeting, had her provide him with the list of documents and conveyed that to my counsel, who passed it along to me. Mr. Lingren later admitted to my counsel that no letter requesting documents was ever sent.

The Truth:
According to the Freddie Mac servicer guidelines, the following should have happened after WFHM received the faxed documents:
“Within 10 Business Days following receipt of an Initial Package, the Servicer must acknowledge in writing the Borrower's submission of the Initial Package by sending the Borrower a confirmation that states that the Initial Package was received and describes the Servicer's evaluation process and time line.” Freddie Mac Single-
Family Seller/Servicer Guide, Volume 2, Chapter 65.5.1(a)

Then, this should have happened:
“If the Servicer receives an incomplete Initial Package or needs additional documentation to verify the Borrower's eligibility and income, the Servicer must send the Borrower an incomplete information notice that lists the additional required verification documentation. The incomplete information notice must include a specific date by which the documentation must be received, which must be 30 calendar days from the date of the notice.” Freddie Mac Single-Family Seller/Servicer Guide, Volume 2, Chapter 65.5.1(a)

This is a remarkably simple and clearcut process. Not like that ridiculous rigamarole described above.

23) The Lie:
You can't be considered for HAMP again. It's a "one-time shot."
During an August 15, 2011, conference call with my legal counsel, myself and WFHM collections, the call was transferred to Larry Parkos, who identified himself as a home preservation specialist.

He reviewed the financial info. the customer service rep took and then said it looked like “we will be working on a modification” and mentioned that it would be through Freddie Mac. My counsel asked whether that would start with HAMP and then progress to in-house and he said no, in-house only. He said because I had already been denied HAMP, I could not apply again. Later in the conversation he again referred to only being able to apply once for HAMP, calling it a “one-time shot.” I said my understanding was that only applied to someone who had been placed into a trial modification, which I have not. He stuck by his “only once” statement, but repeated he would review my file to see whether I could get back in HAMP.

The Truth:
Continued Eligibility for HAMP
A borrower who has been evaluated for HAMP but does not meet the minimum eligibility criteria described in the “HAMP Eligibility” section of Supplemental Directive 09-01 or who meets the minimum eligibility criteria but is not qualified for HAMP by virtue of a negative NPV result, excessive forbearance or other financial reason, may request reconsideration for HAMP at a future time if they experience a change in circumstance.

 Supplemental Directive 10-01
Home Affordable Modification Program – Program Update and Resolution of Active Trial Modifications

More Lies >

Copyright 2013 WellsFargoMortgageModScam.com
If you, too, are fighting to keep a mortgage lender from taking your home, please feel free to use any materials provided on this site for your personal use. Just provide a link back to this site.