Deadline to Request Review Under the Independent Foreclosure Review Extended to July 31
WASHINGTON–People seeking a review of their mortgage foreclosures under the Federal banking agencies’ Independent Foreclosure Review now have until July 31, 2012, to submit their requests.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve) today announced that the deadline for submitting requests for review under the Independent Foreclosure Review has been extended. The new deadline, July 31, 2012, provides an additional three months for borrowers to request a review if they believe they suffered financial injury as a result of errors in foreclosure actions on their homes in 2009 or 2010 by one of the servicers covered by enforcement actions issued in April 2011.
The deadline extension provides more time to increase awareness of how eligible people may request a review through the Independent Foreclosure Review process and to encourage the broadest participation possible.
As part of enforcement actions issued in April 2011, the OCC, Federal Reserve, and the Office of Thrift Supervision required 14 large mortgage servicers to retain independent consultants to conduct a comprehensive review of foreclosure activity in 2009 and 2010 to identify borrowers who may have been financially injured due to errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process. If the review finds that financial injury occurred, the borrower may receive compensation or other remedy.
Borrowers are eligible for an Independent Foreclosure Review if they meet the following basic criteria:
- The mortgage loan was serviced by one of the participating mortgage servicers.
- The mortgage loan was active in the foreclosure process between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010.
- The property securing the mortgage loan was the borrower’s primary residence.
4F here… Funny how they only list 3 in the press release. Here is all of the eligibility criteria…
Itemized list from testimony
- The borrower was not in default pursuant to the terms of the note and mortgage at the time the servicer initiated the foreclosure action.
- The servicer initiated foreclosure or conducted a foreclosure sale in advance of the time allowed for foreclosure under the terms of the note and mortgage or applicable state law.
- The borrower submitted payment to the servicer sufficient to cure the default pursuant to the terms of the note and mortgage, but the servicer returned the payment incontravention of the terms of the note or mortgage, state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering payments when in default.
- The servicer misapplied borrower payments, did not timely credit borrower payments(including failure to properly account for funds in suspense), or did not correctly calculate the amount actually due from the borrower, in contravention of the terms of the note and mortgage, state or federal law, investor requirements, or the servicer’s stated policy covering application of payments.
- The borrower paid a fee or penalty that was impermissible.
- A deficiency judgment was obtained against the borrower that included the assessment of a fee or penalty that was impermissible.
- The servicer placed an escrow account on the mortgage and the placement resulted in monies paid by the borrower into escrow in contravention of the terms of the note or mortgage, state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering escrow accounts.
- The servicer placed insurance on the mortgage and the placement resulted in monies paid by the borrower towards insurance in contravention of the terms of the note or mortgage,state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering placed insurance.9.
- The servicer miscalculated the amount due on the mortgage and secured a judgment against the borrower for an amount greater than the borrower owed.
- A borrower’s remittance of funds to a third party acting on behalf of the servicer was no tcredited to the borrower’s account.
- The borrower was performing under the terms of an approved trial loan modification oran approved permanent loan modification, but the servicer proceeded to foreclosure incontravention of the terms of the modification offered by the servicer to the borrower.
- A borrower was denied a modification in contravention of the terms of the governing modification program or the servicer’s stated policy covering modifications.
- There is evidence that the borrower provided or made efforts to provide completed documentation necessary to qualify for a modification within the period such documentation was required to be provided by the governing modification program and the servicer denied the loan modification in contravention of the terms of the governing modification program or the servicer’s stated policy covering modifications
- The servicer initiated foreclosure or completed a foreclosure sale without providingadequate notice as required under applicable state law
- The servicer foreclosed on or sold real property owned by an active military servicemember in violation of SCRA.
- The servicer did not lower the interest rate on a mortgage loan entered into by a military servicemember, or by the service member and his or her spouse jointly, in accordance with the requirements of SCRA.
- The servicer failed to honor a borrower’s bona fide efforts to redeem a sale under applicable state law during the redemption period.
- The borrower was protected by the automatic stay under the bankruptcy code and a courthad not granted a request for relief from the automatic stay or other appropriate exceptionunder the bankruptcy code.
- The borrower was making timely pre-petition arrearage payments required under an approved bankruptcy plan and was current with their post-petition payments.
- The borrower purchased a payment protection plan; was or should have been receiving benefits under the plan; and those benefits were not applied pursuant to the contract.14
- The servicer was not the proper party, or authorized to act on behalf of the proper party,under the applicable state law to foreclose on the borrower’s home, and this resulted in or may result in multiple foreclosure actions or proceedings.22. The servicer failed to comply with applicable legal requirements, including those governing the form and content of affidavits, pleadings, or other foreclosure-related documents, where such failure directly contributed to: (a) the borrower paying fees,charges, or costs, or making other expenditures that otherwise would not have been paid or made; or (b) the initiation of a foreclosure action or proceeding against a borrower who otherwise would not have met the requirements for initiating such an action
- The servicer failed to comply with applicable legal requirements, including thosegoverning the form and content of affidavits, pleadings, or other foreclosure-relateddocuments, where such failure directly contributed to: (a) the borrower paying fees,charges, or costs, or making other expenditures that otherwise would not have been paidor made; or (b) the initiation of a foreclosure action or proceeding against a borrowerwho otherwise would not have met the requirements for initiating such an action.
Participating mortgage servicers include: America’s Servicing Company, Aurora Loan Services, BAC Home Loans Servicing, Bank of America, Beneficial, Chase, Citibank, CitiFinancial, CitiMortgage, Countrywide, EMC, Everbank/Everhome Mortgage Company, Financial Freedom, GMAC Mortgage, HFC, HSBC, IndyMac Mortgage Services, MetLife Bank, National City Mortgage, PNC Mortgage, Sovereign Bank, U.S. Bank, Wachovia Mortgage; Washington Mutual, Wells Fargo; and Wilshire Credit Corporation.
There are no costs associated with being included in the review. For more information, borrowers can call 888-952-9105, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.-10 p.m. ET or Saturday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. ET or visit www.federalreserve.gov/consumerinfo/independent-foreclosure-review.htm or www.occ.gov/independentforeclosurereview.
OCC Foreclosure Fraud Review Tips from 4closureFraud.org
Add details and documents that are specific to your case.
Don’t neglect other issues; escrow manipulation, misapplication of payments, and the recording/use of false/fraudulent/questionable/fabricated documents for the purpose of foreclosing.
Quote any applicable state statutes (ie: notarization procedures, felony recording false property records) that apply.
The OCC Press Release from Nov 2011 on the Independent Review process with links & phone numbers is here.
Dec 15, 2011 National Consumer Law Center press release demanding the reviews be removed from the OCC and taken over by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau here.
Julie Williams, First Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel Office of the Comptroller of the Currency provided written and verbal testimony to Congress on December 13, 2011. She enumerated the faulty OCC Interdependent Foreclosure Fraud Review Process. Please read her testimony here.