Michigan’s Moratorium Mandated Modification Meeting – An Example

- DETROIT, BIRMINGHAM, BLOOMFIELD,talked a lot, so it was difficult at first to get her to listen.
ROCHESTER, ROYAL OAK, TROY, MICHIGANShe seemed intent on just talking over us and telling us
I just had my first experience with Michigan’s newit was too bad they couldn’t do anything for my
90 day foreclosure moratorium laws and the meetingclient. When I pressed her to explain how they came
with a lender representative the laws mandate. It wasup with their numbers, she impressively rattled off a
pretty interesting.bunch of figures and calculations.
A homeowner was referred to me to assist her withRight at this point an average homeowner would
her meeting. Seems she’s been trying to get herprobably have given up and thrown in the towel –
FHA loan modified for over 6 months and has beenexactly what the lenders want. I can’t imagine a
getting the standard run-around. During this time shehousing counselor being of any use at this point either.
hasn’t made any payments and the lender wasI stood my ground though and kept asking questions. I
threatening foreclosure.also got “Sam” to print off HUD’s
I had her send me over her budget and mortgagemodification guidelines off the web (even though I had
papers before the September 17th meeting, so I couldthem with me) and asked “Sarah” to locate a
be prepared to assist her. I also carefully reviewedcopy also.
HUD’s new guidelines for FHA loan modifications.The first mistake they had made was in regard to my
To be eligible for the this meeting, my client first had toclient’s income. Once I got “Sarah” to stop
meet with a housing counselor approved with thetrying to talk over and intimidate us, I was able to show
Michigan State Housing Development Authorityher where her mistake was. Seems they calculated
(MSHDA) or the United States Department of Housingand input my client’s take-home pay instead of the
and Urban Development (HUD). As she’d alreadyrequired gross pay. This was a mistake of almost
done this, I reviewed the paperwork they had given50%. “Sarah” tried to get around this by stating
her, along with their budget suggestions. It was a joke.the guidelines allowed them to bump up the take-home
Their best advice was to work more hours or get apay by 125%. When I asked her to show me where
second job – easy advice to give, but not practicalthis was allowed, she had “Sam” pull out
with unemployment as high as it is. The counselingguidelines she had earlier sent him. Indeed, what was
session was required, but seemed to be a waste ofwritten there supported her statement. Unfortunately
my client’s time.for “Sarah”, the guidelines she referenced to
Interestingly, Michigan’s new 90 day foreclosuresupport her position were not HUD’s latest
moratorium laws allow a homeowner to request thatguidelines. For someone that talked as much as she
the housing counselor accompany them to theirdid, she didn’t have much to say when I pointed this
meeting with the lender’s representative. Based onout.
the materials and suggestions they gave my client, I doFrom there I dove into the mistakes they had made on
not recommend this!my client’s debts and expenses. “Sarah” and
My client’s lender had selected a law firm inI had an interesting discussion on the difference
Southfield to be their representative. The firm statesbetween a “debt” and an “expense”.
on their website that they have over 30 years ofAround this time, “Sarah” started asking us to
experience representing mortgage servicers andhold while she went and checked with her manager on
they’re a FNMA retained attorney for the state ofmy questions.
Michigan.In the end, my client was tentatively approved for a
I was expecting we’d meet with a seasonedloan modification that would drop her payment by
attorney from the firm with an ego problem. Instead,around 16% which equals just over $300/month. All
we met with what appeared to be a junior attorneyshe has to do to qualify is send in updated paystubs
(who I’ll call “Sam”, but that’s not his realand prove her car is paid off. Of course she was
name) who was very nice and easy to deal with.hoping for even a lower payment (doesn’t
The session began with “Sam” printing out aeveryone?), but what she got is the maximum allowed
modification analysis the lender had already done. Theunder HUD’s modification guidelines.
bad news was that according to the analysis, my clientAfter we settled on everything, “Sam” surprised
didn’t qualify for a loan modification. I’m notme by telling my client that she was smart to bring the
going to get into all the different variables and the mathright attorney to represent her, as every other
here, but the bottom-line was that her debt-to-incomehomeowner he’d represented lenders against had
ratios were too high.brought an attorney that’d done nothing for their
At least according to their analysis. There wereclient, if they brought an attorney at all.
several flaws in their analysis though. They didn’tIt was his turn to be surprised when I told him I
have my client’s income or debts correct, in factwasn’t an attorney, but was a multi-certified
they were way off. We started to go over thesemortgage lender. He then gave me perhaps the best
errors with “Sam”, but he said he wasn’tcompliment you can get from an attorney, telling me I
authorized to change anything. He was nice enoughshould be one.
though, to phone his contact at the lender and get herHe also asked for my card and said he’d like to
to agree to go on speaker phone. Let’s call herrefer me to his own homeowner clients.
“Sarah”. “Sarah” was pretty nice, but