My wife and I received letters from attorneys representing the holder/servicer of our mortgage - U.S. Bank. The letter was postmarked February 11th, 2011.
The Letter: ‘This law office has been instructed to institute foreclosure proceedings. You have the right to dispute this debt, by notifying in writing, within 30 days from the receipt of this notice that the debt or any portion thereof is disputed. Upon receipt of your written request the law office will obtain a verification of the debt or if the debt is founded upon a judgment, a copy of the judgment, and forward such verification to me. If they receive no written request from me in 30 days they will assume that the debt is valid.’
The letter then goes on... ‘If the original creditor is different from the creditor named above (U.S. Bank National Association) then upon my written request (also within 30 days of receipt of this same notice) I will be provided with the name and address of the original creditor.’
Background: We first met with a lawyer in January. Our original plan was to make final payment the middle of March and turn in all paper work at the same time. He would file a Chapter 7 for us at the end of March. When my wife and I developed this plan we believed there was a real possibility we would not nearly be this far along in the foreclosure process. You see, we had hoped to remain in our home until this coming September for two very important reasons; first, to save additional dollars for the inevitable move, and second, so our children could go to the same school for one more year - we don’t expect to find a rental in this school district. Just so you understand, we did not discuss this plan with our lawyer, it is really more our hope than a plan, and we did not try to take advantage of the inevitable HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) notices that were offered last month. After all, by the time US Bank actually seen fit to make this a possible option it was way to late - they wouldn’t even discuss it with us when we inquired on three different occasions since May 5th, 2009. I didn’t even return the paper work for the possible modification when they sent a letter last month. I felt it was not honest to do so, after all, we knew we couldn’t do anything about the second mortgage or the HELOC, besides, we had no intention of staying. I almost wish we had. We have since received notice from our lender that any options available to try and keep our home have been taken off the table; which leads me to my questions.
The letter above appears to be affording us two separate and distinctly different options. The first option affords us an opportunity to dispute the debt, and the second to inquire if the original creditor is different than the present one (U.S. Bank National Association), which we believe it is. Is that correct - two different options? Or is it a lot of legalese that says the same thing twice? If it is two separate options, can someone please take the time to explain if they have experience doing either, or both? And finally, what would be an example of a letter that disputes the debt? I have read a great deal, and even recall an example in the foreclosure process where the mortgagee disputes the loan based on the color blue - obviously an example, but not one I feel is adequate, unless you feel the entire affair of bankruptcy is a laughing matter, which I do not. Look, please chime in if you think what I am considering doing is a waste of time, is unethical, or effectively does not buy me and my family additional time to prepare for the inevitable - the sale of our home by the bank and the expected move to a rental.
On a final note - just in case somebody is reading this and they hold a position in a lending institution who has final say on a HAMP applicant who fits every criteria for a mod, except they are NOT behind on their payments, you may want to listen to them when they explain to you that if you do not complete the mod it will lead to default. It just might make a big difference in both of your lives - you and the applicant.
Thanks.
The Letter: ‘This law office has been instructed to institute foreclosure proceedings. You have the right to dispute this debt, by notifying in writing, within 30 days from the receipt of this notice that the debt or any portion thereof is disputed. Upon receipt of your written request the law office will obtain a verification of the debt or if the debt is founded upon a judgment, a copy of the judgment, and forward such verification to me. If they receive no written request from me in 30 days they will assume that the debt is valid.’
The letter then goes on... ‘If the original creditor is different from the creditor named above (U.S. Bank National Association) then upon my written request (also within 30 days of receipt of this same notice) I will be provided with the name and address of the original creditor.’
Background: We first met with a lawyer in January. Our original plan was to make final payment the middle of March and turn in all paper work at the same time. He would file a Chapter 7 for us at the end of March. When my wife and I developed this plan we believed there was a real possibility we would not nearly be this far along in the foreclosure process. You see, we had hoped to remain in our home until this coming September for two very important reasons; first, to save additional dollars for the inevitable move, and second, so our children could go to the same school for one more year - we don’t expect to find a rental in this school district. Just so you understand, we did not discuss this plan with our lawyer, it is really more our hope than a plan, and we did not try to take advantage of the inevitable HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) notices that were offered last month. After all, by the time US Bank actually seen fit to make this a possible option it was way to late - they wouldn’t even discuss it with us when we inquired on three different occasions since May 5th, 2009. I didn’t even return the paper work for the possible modification when they sent a letter last month. I felt it was not honest to do so, after all, we knew we couldn’t do anything about the second mortgage or the HELOC, besides, we had no intention of staying. I almost wish we had. We have since received notice from our lender that any options available to try and keep our home have been taken off the table; which leads me to my questions.
The letter above appears to be affording us two separate and distinctly different options. The first option affords us an opportunity to dispute the debt, and the second to inquire if the original creditor is different than the present one (U.S. Bank National Association), which we believe it is. Is that correct - two different options? Or is it a lot of legalese that says the same thing twice? If it is two separate options, can someone please take the time to explain if they have experience doing either, or both? And finally, what would be an example of a letter that disputes the debt? I have read a great deal, and even recall an example in the foreclosure process where the mortgagee disputes the loan based on the color blue - obviously an example, but not one I feel is adequate, unless you feel the entire affair of bankruptcy is a laughing matter, which I do not. Look, please chime in if you think what I am considering doing is a waste of time, is unethical, or effectively does not buy me and my family additional time to prepare for the inevitable - the sale of our home by the bank and the expected move to a rental.
On a final note - just in case somebody is reading this and they hold a position in a lending institution who has final say on a HAMP applicant who fits every criteria for a mod, except they are NOT behind on their payments, you may want to listen to them when they explain to you that if you do not complete the mod it will lead to default. It just might make a big difference in both of your lives - you and the applicant.
Thanks.
Comment