What is the name of your state? Ma.
OK - I posted before how my mortgage company did not process my FHA loan properly and that as a result our loan was never insured. We then fell behind in payments and were not eligible for the FHA insurance. We hired an attorney who filed an inquiry with them and this is what their response was:
They admitted mortgage #1 (closing date Oct 2002) was actually insured March 8 2004.
WRT our FHS Streamline loan (March 15, 2004)
They then went on to say that the lender has 60 days to file required documentation including payment history in order to insure loan. They also said when our paperwork was being "prepared" (which iow - means they never submitted it) we were already overdue for our May and June payments and that the loan "would have been uninsurable"
Bunch of things wrong here:
#1 - when reading about what quality control is SUPPOSED to look at when reviewing a loan this was their guideline:
Determine whether the loan was submitted for insurance within 60 days of closing or included a payment history showing the loan was current when it was submitted for mortgage insurance.
So first lie was-a loan submitted within 60 days needs payment history for approval, where it is clear that as long as proper documents are received in the 60 days payment history is not required.
#2 - saying our loan would have been uninsurable with may and June past due is a lie as well:
From HUD guidelines:
If any mortgage trade line including mortgage line-of-credit
payments, during the most recent 12 months, shows:
3 or more late payments of greater than 30 days; or
1 or more late payments of 60 days plus one or more 30-day late
payments; or
1 payment greater than 90 days late,
the loan application must be referred to a DE underwriter for review.
EVEN in the cases above it is not automatic rejection - it would just need manual underwriting. BUT since at most we had 1 60 days late this would not even apply.
and the biggie -
from their own admission when they "prepared" the paperwork our June payment was already overdue. They had 60 daqys from March 15 to file paperwork, that means May 15. SO they admitted in writing to negligently servicing our loan not once but twice (by saying the first loan was insured in March 2004, not 12 - 02 as required) AND they out and out lied to us about the policies of FHA .
They closed their letter by saying - although we do not qualify for FHA relief - they may have options to help us out.
HAHA. Oh and the letter was dated December 14 and my attorney received it January 3. Lovely huh?
So now what - it seems as though this is a case where the whole contract could be deemed so flawed it can not even be enforced - they can not give me the loan I agreed to and was promised - and why would I trust them with the loan now that I know how negligently they serviced my loan - I thjink they should have to find a way to get our loan FHA insured or eat it. What do you all think?
OK - I posted before how my mortgage company did not process my FHA loan properly and that as a result our loan was never insured. We then fell behind in payments and were not eligible for the FHA insurance. We hired an attorney who filed an inquiry with them and this is what their response was:
They admitted mortgage #1 (closing date Oct 2002) was actually insured March 8 2004.
WRT our FHS Streamline loan (March 15, 2004)
They then went on to say that the lender has 60 days to file required documentation including payment history in order to insure loan. They also said when our paperwork was being "prepared" (which iow - means they never submitted it) we were already overdue for our May and June payments and that the loan "would have been uninsurable"
Bunch of things wrong here:
#1 - when reading about what quality control is SUPPOSED to look at when reviewing a loan this was their guideline:
Determine whether the loan was submitted for insurance within 60 days of closing or included a payment history showing the loan was current when it was submitted for mortgage insurance.
So first lie was-a loan submitted within 60 days needs payment history for approval, where it is clear that as long as proper documents are received in the 60 days payment history is not required.
#2 - saying our loan would have been uninsurable with may and June past due is a lie as well:
From HUD guidelines:
If any mortgage trade line including mortgage line-of-credit
payments, during the most recent 12 months, shows:
3 or more late payments of greater than 30 days; or
1 or more late payments of 60 days plus one or more 30-day late
payments; or
1 payment greater than 90 days late,
the loan application must be referred to a DE underwriter for review.
EVEN in the cases above it is not automatic rejection - it would just need manual underwriting. BUT since at most we had 1 60 days late this would not even apply.
and the biggie -
from their own admission when they "prepared" the paperwork our June payment was already overdue. They had 60 daqys from March 15 to file paperwork, that means May 15. SO they admitted in writing to negligently servicing our loan not once but twice (by saying the first loan was insured in March 2004, not 12 - 02 as required) AND they out and out lied to us about the policies of FHA .
They closed their letter by saying - although we do not qualify for FHA relief - they may have options to help us out.
HAHA. Oh and the letter was dated December 14 and my attorney received it January 3. Lovely huh?
So now what - it seems as though this is a case where the whole contract could be deemed so flawed it can not even be enforced - they can not give me the loan I agreed to and was promised - and why would I trust them with the loan now that I know how negligently they serviced my loan - I thjink they should have to find a way to get our loan FHA insured or eat it. What do you all think?