Good Loss Mitigation Training

I heard Cuomo offers a pretty good training course:

bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2....

Cuomo Subpoenas 14 Loan Modifiers, Plans Lawsuit (Update3)

By Karen Freifeld

June 9 (Bloomberg) -- New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo subpoenaed 14 loan-modification companies and plans to sue another one as part of a probe of the ???foreclosure rescue??? industry.

Cuomo said today he served an ???intent to sue??? on Uniondale, New York-based American Modification Agency Inc., known as Amerimod. He accused the company of charging illegal upfront fees and false advertising.

Loan modification companies, which get lenders to change the terms of mortgages to help avoid foreclosure, are capitalizing on the housing crisis and preying on desperate homeowners, Cuomo said. His investigation was spurred by homeowner complaints that the companies fail to deliver the services they promise, and he said they often leave consumers further in debt.

???Many of these companies charge upfront fees which are specifically prohibited by law,??? Cuomo said on a conference call. ???Sometimes homeowners even end up paying a higher cost after one of these companies gets involved.???

Cuomo said that in many ways the ???entire industry is a scam??? because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development provides assistance to struggling homeowners for free.

Success Rates

Cuomo said he served Amerimod and its owner and president, Salvatore Pane Jr., with an intent to sue. He said the company, which claims to serve consumers nationwide, often fails to deliver promised services and advertises misleading claims of success rates of 90 percent to 100 percent.

A call to the company for comment wasn???t immediately returned.

Among the 14 companies Cuomo subpoenaed were Nationwide Modification Agency Inc. in Hauppauge, New York; Global Modifications Inc., also known as The Law Office of Brett Margolin PC; and FLM Law Center LLP, also known as Federal Loan Modification Law Center and Federal Loan Modification, in Irvine, California.

Calls to Margolin, in Lake Grove, New York, and the other companies weren???t immediately returned.

The subpoenas request information on marketing strategies, fee structures and the services performed, Cuomo said.

nicely said!

The law office of Brett Morgolian, P.C. took two monthly payments that were airmarked for my mortgage payments. Stupid me. I was talking with Chris Sutter. Phone #'s: 877-285-5505 and cell # 513-628-2312. He was real nice with me and I got him all the paperwork her requested. I accually have all the copies and all comunication received from them. Which was very little to nothing.

I signed their agreement for them to handle my case on March 3rd. They reqeusted several documentations and I provided as noted abvove. I talked off and on with Chris for a couple weeks and then nothing. I Did not hear anything from them until, (they would not respond to my telephone calls, faxed letters requesting them to contact me and me elmailing them).

Nothing was done on my case until I called the Florida office May 1th, 2010. I had to threaten then with my mortgage going through foreclosure. I finally talked to a man named Jared. He explained that they had hunderds of filed for review and my was being re-assigned to anther ligigator. Fine. He she a "she" would be contacting me within the next day or two.

Hince, I received a telephone call, well, I call them, on June 6, and I was very professional but assertive, questions like what was being doing to my case. I talked to a Dolly Ashley.
She told me she would get my file and call me back. She called on June 10th (a thursday) and we discussed the status of my file, that is when I found out that I was being declined due to a modification I did last year, (about eight months ago), any who, she told me to take that Friday and the Weekend and She would call us back on Monday and we would tell her of our disission. She never call me. Never!!!!!

Then I wrote a letter on June 23 requesting the funds with reference to the dates I had outlined in my letter to received my $1,800 back due to their inability to help me. One reason for their denial was "that I should have made by request within three days of the date of this Agreement". This leads me to think that The date we sign the initial date of signing all of the legal pages was March 3rd. So, was I suppose to fill and request my monies back at that date. I am confused.

This is just the tip of the iceberge.

There is so much more I can write, but I will save it for another day.