Skip to main content
index page

complaint against Bank Of America

Submitted by on Sat, 07/18/2009 - 15:30
Posts: 202330
Credits:
[Donate]

Does any one know the address or fax number to file a complaint against bank of america, that some one will actually answer


bank of america was suppose to be doing a loan modification for me . They sent me papers to sign and send back to them , the papers was for them to take what payments we was behind on put at the end of our note and they raised our payment.


Submitted by on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 07:11

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


[COLOR=black]I have written the CEO of Bank of America at[/COLOR]
[COLOR=black] Mr. Kenneth D. Lewis, CEO of BA, [/COLOR][COLOR=black]
[/COLOR][COLOR=black]100 N. Tryon Street[/COLOR][COLOR=black]
[/COLOR][COLOR=black]Mail Code NC-1-007-18-01[/COLOR][COLOR=black]
[/COLOR][SIZE=3][COLOR=black]Charlotte[/COLOR][COLOR=black], NC 28255[/COLOR][COLOR=black] [/COLOR][/SIZE]
[COLOR=black]
[/COLOR][COLOR=black]because of the way this company and some customer service representatives handled the credit reporting of my Short Sale and the way they actually show our 2nd mortgage as active in their system. I have asked him in my letter to remove the 2nd mortgage as shown in their system as active because my house was short sold already on July 9, 2008. One of the conditions in the short sale is that there is no deficiency judgment against us for both 1st and 2nd mortgage and that is included in the escrow papers and was also confirmed via email by their negoatiator, Adam Herson on June 4, 2008 . Per teller of Bank of America in San Diego we still have this Mortgage showed as active. Per Shawn of BA with direct line of 800 669 6607 ext 8753, this 2nd Mortgage still shows active., was referred to the Negotiator Adam Herson who is now a Manager on November 11, 2009 but never returned the call. Can I sue Bank of America for fulfilling the terms of condition at closing? [/COLOR][COLOR=black]

[/COLOR][COLOR=black][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/COLOR]


Submitted by on Mon, 11/23/2009 - 15:05

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


There is a fine line regarding short sales. Most times when you are negotiating a short sale the second mortgage is not included. It is especially true if you are dealing with two different lenders. What you need to know is if BOA agreed to release you from the debt, or just release the mortgage. If they only agreed to release the mortgage, then you are still responsible for the debt. It's just that the bank at that point can't take anything from you. You can't rely on emails, you have to look at what the written short sale agreement said. .


Submitted by Mary Adkins Matthews on Mon, 11/23/2009 - 17:43

Mary Adkins Matthews

( Posts: 755 | Credits: )


There is a new Bank Of America CEO Brian Moynihan and the above post is an old one. If you make a complaint to the CEO, it will go to someone there in his office that should contact you.


Submitted by Mary Adkins Matthews on Sat, 02/13/2010 - 19:20

Mary Adkins Matthews

( Posts: 755 | Credits: )


[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]The current raid on law firms representing people in modifications, is a way to deflect the press from reporting what is really going on. Which is the abusive modification process that is taking place by BofA and other too big to fail banks. Let's face it, the elephant in the room is not the American Dream concerning health care, but the American nightmare concerning the loan modification process. It is OUTRAGEOUS, considering that they have received a bail out from the American Tax Payer, who is also the average American Home Owner. After receiving a bail out in the billions from the American people, these banks have the audacity to h[/SIZE][/FONT]arass[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2], delay and humiliate us during the loan modification process called HAMP. How long do these banks think that the American people will tolerate this? One of the BofA representatives even went as far as telling me that the government can not tell them what to do. I found this strange, because I never mentioned the government with the BofA representative. So, I can not help but feel that BofA is bitter and is taking it out on those of us seeking a loan modification. It is also readily apparent, that BofA feels that they only have to meet their obligation to the government by CONSIDERING a loan modification with zero accountability. It is time that we make BofA accountable!

BofA knows very well that the average homeowner requesting a modification does not have the funds to represent themselves legally. So, the FBI raiding one of the largest and most reputable law firms, will only serve these banks potential agenda. An agenda that might be to scare any law firms from representing the people. This current action by the FBI is not the solution, but a symptom of the over all problem. It is also blurring the lines in regards to who the real bad guys are. It will also further delay the process of reputable law firms like United Law Group from filing legitimate law suits. In retrospect, United Law Group is not only helping me represent myself in this law suit, but every American who is going through the loan modification process.
So please, help me and United Law Group send a message to BofA which states, that we will no longer tolerate their potentially irregular, fraudulent and abusive business practices. In the end, the American tax payer did not fail to deliver the BofA bail out in record time, but BofA failed to deliver the American Tax Payer’s bail out in the form of a loan modification. It reminds me of that song by John Lennon and
[/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=3]George Harrison [/SIZE][FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]titled "[/SIZE][/FONT]Piggies[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]" I invite you to listen to this song on youtube and see if it appropriately fits.

God bless,
John Wright
Tax Payer and Home Owner
[/SIZE][/FONT]


Submitted by on Thu, 03/25/2010 - 19:18

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2] Let's face it, the elephant in the room is not the American Dream concerning health care, but the American nightmare concerning the loan modification process. It is OUTRAGEOUS, considering that they have received a bail out from the American Tax Payer, who is also the average American Home Owner. After receiving a bail out in the billions from the American people, these banks have the audacity to h[/SIZE][/FONT]arass[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2], delay and humiliate us during the loan modification process called HAMP.

[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]
AMEN to that
[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]
[/SIZE][/FONT]


Submitted by tyleeash on Fri, 03/26/2010 - 15:59

tyleeash

( Posts: 143 | Credits: )


am in a lawsuit with BofA for a nearly identical situation. I paid my mortgage payment on time for nearly 5 and half years until the economic crisis and housing crisis hit and cut my 25 year small business revenue in half. Which incidentally cut my income in half. These greedy banks caused this by flooding the markets with loans where people did not qualify. They caused this whole thing and we all lost all our equity. But I would appreciate anyone who would like to support me in comments in regards to my lawsuit at :

http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20100323/bs_prweb/prweb3766544_1

I have been told that some of the higher ups at BofA read my article. So it would be a perfect opprotunity for you to express what you feel about BofA.

We need to all stand together on this! It reminds me of that song by John Lennon and George Harrison titled "Piggies" I invite you to listen to this song on youtube and see if it appropriately fits.

Have you seen the little piggies
Crawling in the dirt
And for all the little piggies
Life is getting worse
Always having dirt to play around in.

Have you seen the bigger piggies
In their starched white shirts
You will find the bigger piggies
Stirring up the dirt
Always have clean shirts to play around in.

In their ties with all their backing
They don't care what goes on around
In their eyes there's something lacking
What they need's a damn good whacking.

Everywhere there's lots of piggies
Living piggy lives
You can see them out for dinner
With their piggy wives
Clutching forks and knives to eat their bacon.


Submitted by on Wed, 03/31/2010 - 16:55

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


Before we start throwing the banks under the bus, I suggest we all read this report by the Special Investigator General of TARP. If you do not have the time to read the entire report, please just read the summary on page 2

http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/audit/2010/Factors_Affecting_Implementation_of_the_Home_Affordable_Modification_Program.pdf


Submitted by Mary Adkins Matthews on Wed, 03/31/2010 - 17:22

Mary Adkins Matthews

( Posts: 755 | Credits: )


I am not sure what the TARP report (page two) has to do with BofA's potentially irregular, illegal and fraudulent business practice. BofA sent a letter out to myself and millions offering us a modification. However, it stated that we had to make three monthly trial payments and meet the qualifications. In my case, my trial period payment was actually more than my mortgage. I did everything I was told and met the qualifications of approval for HAMP. I even received permission from one of the BofA reps to record the conversation where they said "It is not your fault and you have done everything right and qualified. It is BofA’s fault." However, it has been NINE months and all BofA keeps saying is "we highly urge you to continue making your trial period payment." Ummmmm...the trial period time was THREE months and not nine months and counting. Which incidentally, if I could afford nine months of trial payments (higher than my mortgage) I guess I would not need the modification to begin with. Of Bank of America’s part, it is nothing other than a breach of contract.
Lets also not forget how the housing crisis was caused in the first place. Which was because the little piggy banks figured out that they could sell off the bad loans to Wallstreet and have zero accountability in the end. Loans that they gave out with virtually no employment documentation. Not to mention that they would turn around and take a nearly $25 billion dollar bail out that they said they later did not need. What did they do with that $25 billion dollars while they had it? Probably made interest off of just borrowing it. Maybe they should consider changing their name to "Bank of Defrauding America."
I have been hearing all over the news about these news about these potentially loan modification companies that 1. Ask for up front money. 2. Route your calls to a call center. 3. Do not actually end up doing the modification. In my opinion, they just perfectly described Bank of America! Bank of America is potentially one of the largest loan modification scams out there.
Now the banks are claiming that people are asking for modifications that do not need them. Do they mean like how they borrowed $25 billion dollars and did not really need it?
Listen, the right ones have been thrown under the bus. If it walks like a piggy, talks like a piggy, by golly, it’s a piggy!
 
 


Submitted by on Tue, 04/06/2010 - 22:18

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


Thomas Jefferson 1802
???I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered..???


Submitted by on Tue, 04/06/2010 - 22:36

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


I am certainly not a big fan of Bank of America but what I was trying to point out is that while the process isn't very streamlined, the banks have to work with the guidelines Treasury has provided.
The Special Investigator was appointed by President Obama to manage the TARP money. The SIG is in no way affiliated with the banks.
When you said BofA "offered" you a modification you were 100% right. It was an offer, not a guarantee of a modification. That was a huge point of contention in the report. An "offer" does not help you keep your home, but Treasury pressured banks into making "offers."
If your trial plan payment was higher than your regular mortgage payment, why stay in the plan? You do not have to stay in the plan. Just go back to the regular mortgage payment. Permanent modification payments can increase if your prior loan was a non-escrowed loan, but the trial plans do not establish escrow accounts. The amount to establish the escrow account would be capitalized onto the loan amount. Were you close to foreclosure before entering the trial plan? Are you using the HAMP program to stall a foreclosure?
The housing crisis didn't start with "piggy" banks suddenly realizing they could sell mortgages on the secondary market, rather it was politicians, on both the right and left sides of the aisle deciding that owning a home should be a right. Not everyone should be a home owner. Not everyone has the funds at hand to make major repairs to a home. Not everyone has the motivation to care for a home. There is no right to home ownership, and it should never have been suggested there was.
Now turning our attention to the notion that banks did not need the TARP money. That is correct, not all banks needed TARP to survive, but Treasury made a determination they all did. Why would they do that? If in your neighborhood, one bank took TARP money and one didn't, where would you want to bank, so Treasury decided all the big banks should take TARP money. Guess what, most of the TARP money has been paid back with a profit. On April 5th Treasury reported $181 billion has been paid back to Treasury. Total bank investments of $245 billion in FY2009 that were initially projected to cost $76 billion are now projected to bring a profit. Taxpayers have already received $14 billion through just interest and dividends and that number could be considerably higher by the end of this year.
The loan modification company you refer to ask for something the banks don't. A fee to even start. All the banks ask for is scheduled trial payments. The mod companies will want from $1500-$4500 to do what you can for free, and you get the same results they do.
Are there people asking for modifications that need them and can make the modified payment? Yes Are there people out there gaming the system and either do not need the modification or cannot make the modified payment? Yes. You complain that banks took help they didn't need, but lament the fact not everyone will qualify for HAMP. You can't have it both ways.


Submitted by Mary Adkins Matthews on Wed, 04/07/2010 - 15:03

Mary Adkins Matthews

( Posts: 755 | Credits: )


You stated: “It was an offer, not a guarantee of a modification.”

Answer: You are right. However, it did say that if I met the qualifications, I would indeed receive a modification. Which I met the qualifications. As well as I met their time lines. But in my situation, they said I was approved. Some Days I am told I am approved and other days they tell me that I am not approved. One day they sent me a letter stating that if I did not give them a large some of money, they would not consider me for HAMP. Which incidentally, is nothing short of extortion and is illegal.

You stated: “If your trial plan payment was higher than your regular mortgage payment, why stay in the plan? Just go back to the regular mortgage payment.”:

Answer: Well gee MCA, I guess I would not have asked for a modification if I could afford the original plan. Does that really make any sense? The answer is actually pretty simple when you think about it. I could no longer afford the original plan and that is why I applied and qualified for the HAMP. Please realize that I was not one of these people who purchased a house he could not afford. Let’s remember that I paid on time for 5 years. Never the less, I could afford a higher THREE MONTH trial period payment for THREE MONTHS. Not for as long as they want to extend the trial period out to. Which by the way, it has been NINE months and they still have not sent me anything. I am sure the bank would love to turn it into a FIVE YEAR trial payment.

Why I Needed The Modification:
I own and operate a driving school. It has been in business for 25 years and I have never seen it this bad. The current housing crisis and recession hit my customer base hard. This is because parents could care less if their kids were taking their state required driving while losing their homes. This would result in my income being cut more than in half. Thus causing me to not be able to any longer afford payments. In other words, what the little Piggy Banks did, hurt my customer base. Which incidentally, I did not get a $25 billion dollar bail out to save my company. This modification would allow me to keep my home, save my driving school and help my employees stay employed. As well as it would help the economy. It only seems right that the Piggy banks give people like me a modification. Especially since it would not only help myself, but the economy. As well as they caused the whole thing in the first place.

You asked the following questions, please allow me to answer:

1. “Were you close to foreclosure before entering the trial plan? “: I had just received a
letter of “intent to accelerate foreclosure.” But I was not in foreclosure.

2. Are you using the HAMP program to stall a foreclosure? : I was using it for what it
was intended to be used for. Which was a program that includes opportunities to
modify or refinance your mortgage to make your monthly payments more affordable.
AS I stated above, they had sent me a “Intent to Accelerate Foreclosure.”


You stated “The housing crisis didn't start with "piggy" banks.....” and then suggested it was the fault of Congress. Well that is equivalent to saying that car jacking started with Henry Ford. Or blaming the homeowner for the thief that broke into their house, for leaving the doors unlocked. It is simple, the banks found and exploited a loophole to make large amounts of money. They used this loophole fully knowing that they were severely hurting the American Economy. It was pure greed and just like one President said “They were hungover when it was all done.” Which each one of these CEO’s were fully equipped with “golden parachutes.” So we can sit here and keep blaming the homeowner (Congress) for leaving their doors unlocked, or we can make the Piggy Banks accountable for their actions.

According to an article I read, last Friday Citigroup CEO Charles Prince apologize to the commission stating:

"I'm sorry the financial crisis has had such a devastating impact for our country.

A bipartisan panel examining the ORIGINS OF THE CRISIS. I'm sorry about the millions of people, average Americans, who lost their homes. And I'm sorry that our management team, starting with me, like so many others could not see the unprecedented market collapse that lay before us.”

“Prince left the bank in 2007 with almost $40 million in bonuses, shares and options. Citigroup paid Rubin more than $120 million for his work at the bank over several years.
Bad bets on repackaged debt securities, consumer loans and other assets forced Citi to take three separate government rescue packages totaling $45 billion, more than any other major bank. When the dust settled, taxpayers held about a third of Citigroup's common stock and $27 billion of its debt.”

"Chuck Prince, former chief executive of Citigroup, apologized for his role in the crisis that roiled the U.S. economy."

So Clearly MCA, the above statement shows that the former CEO had a role in it and apologized. So it is not only myself that is saying that it started with the Piggy Banks, but the Former CEO of Citigroup and the commission itself! So lets not once again blur the lines on where the ultimate perpetrators were. Blurring the lines seems to be a popular trend with the banks. They love to try and make people focus on the loan modification companies. Which there is a clear line between a modification company and a law firm. Never the less, the bad modification companies would only rise after what the Piggy banks did to the American economy. Which comes close to what Thomas Jefferson said when he stated:

“the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered..’

The Article further stated:
“Vice Chairman Bill Thomas pushed the Citi executives for some explanation of how they personally square the bank's financial calamities with their own lavish compensation packages, “saying, "Behavior has to have consequences.” (Yahoo News)

My Comment: Well it sounds like Vice Chairman Bill Thomas is calling them PIGGIES too! BUT YAH LITTLE PIGGIES! HOW DO YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION?!

Like I said MCA, if walks like a piggy and talks like a piggy, by golly, it’s a Piggy!

You stated: “The loan modification company you refer to ask for something the banks don't. A fee to even start. All the banks ask for is scheduled trial payments. The mod companies will want from $1500-$4500 to do what you can for free, and you get the same results they do.” Tomato/Tomata MCA! The invitation clearly required money up front in the requesting of the three month trial payment. Which also stated they would give a modification, if the applicant qualified. My point is not so much to argue if a modification company should be able to charge, my point is that Bank of America and HAMP are guilty of the very thing they have been trying to make us frown upon. There is no difference! However, there is a difference between a bad loan modification company and a law firm assisting with a modification.

You stated: “what you can for free, and you get the same results they do.”: So what! There is a lot of things we can do for free or ourselves that American pay for. There is nothing weird about hiring an expert in the filed. It does not make the ones offering the service a criminal, unless they promised they could get them a modification. Everyone loves to blur the lines on that one and say that the government and banks warned people about these companies. They stated “Be careful of loan modification companies who charge up front and promise a modification.” Key warning in that sentence was “ and promise a modification.” Never the less, it is not unusual that American’s would pay an expert, like a law firm to represent them. It is also not unusual that a law firm would ask for a retainer. This is just another way for the banks blur the lines on who the bad guys really are.

You stated: Are there people asking for modifications that need them and can make the modified payment? Yes Are there people out there gaming the system and either do not need the modification or cannot make the modified payment? Yes. You complain that banks took help they didn't need, but lament the fact not everyone will qualify for HAMP. You can't have it both ways.”

My Response: I don’t really understand how the Piggy Banks taking a hand out they did not need and not everyone qualifying for HAMP fits with your last comment “You can not have it both ways.” What do you mean? They are clearly two different things, because it is clear it really is both ways. The Piggy Bank took a hand out they did not need and not everyone qualifies for HAMP. But maybe I am not understanding what you are trying to say.

It is readily apparent that you have not gone through the HAMP process with Bank of America. You would not believe the things that the BofA reps say on the phone. I would not believe it had it not me been hearing it with my own ears. So, I bought a recorder and asked for permission to record the phone call. Sometimes they said no and I could not record it. However, sometimes they said yes and I recorded. So I intend to use them in court because they clearly say:

“You have done everything required and have met all the qualifications.”
“This is not your fault, it is Bank of Americas fault.”
“We are just so busy and that is why you do not have it.”
“Congratulations! You were approved.”
“You will not be disqualified if you do not continue to pay beyond the three months.”
“We encourage you to pay, but you will not be disqualified.”
“We got this underwriter job as a promotion. We all just answered phone before this.”
“You know that we do not really work for BofA right? We are contracted.”
“I am the underwriter and I just approved you.”

Now these were the nice representatives. You should hear the hostile ones.

“Why don’t sell your house.” snarky tone.
“The government can not tell us what to do” snaky tone
“You will be disqualified unless you give us this large sum of money.”
“Life’s not fair!” snarky tone
“Because I can” when I asked the lady why she was talking to me this way.

Apparently they forgot they gave me permission to record them.

So unfortunately MCA, it is not only I who disagree with you on where it started, but the commission and apparently even the former CEO of Citigroup. I mean at least he said he was sorry MCA. I guess I can not blame the former CEO of Bank of America for not apologizing. It seems he has been pretty busy lately with a headline that reads:

“Ken Lewis, the former chief executive of Bank of America, is being charged with fraud over the firm's controversial takeover of rival investment bank Merrill Lynch”

That is why I think they should change their name to “Bank of Defrauding America.”

In the end, they even tricked the President of the United States with HAMP. I guess Bank of America is potentially telling the President what they tell us on the phone “Didn’t you read the fine print Mr. President? It said we only have to offer modifications, not give them!” Well if Bank of America is arrogant enough to do it to the President of the United States, I guess they can certainly do it to us.

I do not believe there was anything in the special investigators investigation of TARP that said that Bank of America had the right threaten that I would not qualify for HAMP unless I gave them a large sum of money beyond the three month trial period.

It is time for American’s to stand up against these Piggy Banks. Bank of America has potentially used irregular, fraudulent, unfair, illegal business methods concerning HAMP and should be brought accountable. Bank of America has tried to blur the lines on who the bad guys are by wanting to talk about those bad modification companies, law firms, congress and now even the actual homeowner themselves. It is nothing other than propaganda.


If you agree with me, please feel free to support me with your comments on:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20100323/bs_prweb/prweb3766544_1


Submitted by on Sun, 04/11/2010 - 23:27

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


P.S. MCA
You Also Stated:
"Guess what, most of the TARP money has been paid back with a profit. On April 5th Treasury reported $181 billion has been paid back to Treasury. Total bank investments of $245 billion in FY2009 that were initially projected to cost $76 billion are now projected to bring a profit. Taxpayers have already received $14 billion through just interest and dividends and that number could be considerably higher by the end of this year."
Answer: Well sure they made a profit MCA!!! If you loan me $25 billion dollars, I am sure I could make a profit too! I also promise to give it back when I done collecting the interest. With that being said, the American Tax Payer did not give it to them to just make a profit. They gave it to them as an incentive to give loan modifications.
Also you stated: "Now turning our attention to the notion that banks did not need the TARP money. That is correct, not all banks needed TARP to survive, but Treasury made a determination they all did. Why would they do that? If in your neighborhood, one bank took TARP money and one didn't, where would you want to bank, so Treasury decided all the big banks should take TARP money. "
Answer: So you are saying that Bank Of America’s answer for taking $25 billion dollars that they did not need is "The United States Government MADE US TAKE IT?" The very same bank that is telling us during a loan modification "The government can’t tell us what to do!" Pleeeeease! Like you said MCA, you can not have it both ways.


Submitted by on Mon, 04/12/2010 - 21:59

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


When I filed my lawsuit against Bank of America, myself and United Law Group thought of the many others out there in the same situation. It was then that we decided to educate the public on what these piggy banks are doing, as well as unite us all together as one voice. Please help me turn this David vs. Goliath modification process, into a Goliath vs. Goliath.
Please stand with me and United Law Group and send an email to Bank of America that states that we will no longer tolerate their potentially illegal, fraudulent, irregular and abusive business methods.
Divided we might have fell America, but united we must stand!
Please send your email directly to Bank of America and include the following:
1. Your name
2. Your complaint concerning your experience with Bank of America.
3. Please end your email with "I support the John Wright vs. BofA Lawsuit!"
4. Please send a copy of your email to [email]johns-wright@hotmail.com[/email]
Please send your email today to Bank of America at:
https://www3.bankofamerica.com/contact/?lob=general&contact_returnto=&state=VA
 
 


Submitted by on Tue, 04/13/2010 - 16:43

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


I added the CEO address to this one:

Please send your email directly to Bank of America and include the following:

1. Your name
2. Your complaint concerning your experience with Bank of America.
3. Please end your email "I support John Wright vs. BofA Lawsuit!"
4. Please send a copy of your email to [email]johns-wright@hotmail.com[/email]
5. Please send your email to both BofA link below and the CEO email
 
BofA Linked Email:
https://www3.bankofamerica.com/contact/?lob=general&contact_returnto=&state=VA

CEO Brian Moynihan:
[email]brian.t.moynihan@bankofamerica.com[/email]


Submitted by on Wed, 04/14/2010 - 22:10

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )


Please do not post the same information over and over. It will be considered spam. I did delete your repeated posts so there is no need to worry about that.

I think we just need to agree to disagree at this point. I will say one last thing on this subject matter. The government is the one that was paid back all the money at a profit, NOT the banks. I think you just misunderstoood what I wrote.

In conclusion, again I am NOT a big fan of Bank of America but when it comes to the HAMP program, the government has admitted that the problems in the program are not the banks fault. The changes being made constantly to this program and the fact that there were never clear guidelines to follow has caused more problems than imagined for ALL banks, not just Bank of America. This is what was stated in the SIG report sent out from the government


Submitted by Mary Adkins Matthews on Tue, 04/20/2010 - 18:50

Mary Adkins Matthews

( Posts: 755 | Credits: )


First of all I wanted to thank you for deleting the multiple postings. I will be more careful next time. Also, thank you for keeping my other comments.
I think you are right that we will probably have to agree to disagree. Though I know that is what the SIG report is saying, I also feel that the Banks used it as another loop hole. For example, I think Bank of America used it as a loop and an excuse. But it is not rocket science and Bank of America could have and should have been able to process our modification request within 9 months. Regardless of the fact that it is a govt. supported program, it was Bank of America's name on those offers and contracts they sent out. The SIG report does not justify telling their customers one day that they are approved and the next day they are disqualified. The Government is not responsible for Bank of America sending a threatening letter that stated the customer had to give them thousands of dollars of back payments to avoid being disqualified. Which incidentally Bank of America turned around and said that it was "a mistake and to disregard it." The SIG report does not say that it is the governments fault that Bank of America has bad customer service. Now with that being said, I too believe that the Government should have closed these loop holes from the beginning, but I am still not willing to blame the home owner for not locking their doors. I believe that Bank of America is using these loopholes as an opportunity to exploit. Which there much evidence to suggest this fact. Such as higher ups from one bank stating to Diane Sawyer "They over load their reps on purpose and know that they will not be able to facilitate the modification request within a reasonable time." So I think there is much more evidence to state that they are delaying on purpose.


But I guess you are right that we must just agree to disagree. But thank you for taking the time to hear me out on this issue. Also thank you for the respect that you have shown towards me and my comments.
Sincerely,
John Wright Vs. Bank of America
http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20100323/bs_prweb/prweb3766544_1


Submitted by on Thu, 04/22/2010 - 14:33

( Posts: 202330 | Credits: )