Class Actions for Modifications or Divine Intervention

As stated in an earlier post, there is no private right of action under the Home Affordable Modification Program ("HAMP") or any of its siblings. Congress, the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and all of the alphabet soup of regulators (FDIC, OCC, OTS, TARP Oversight, etc), evidently did not want (or caved-in to the mortgage investment community) homeowners to be able to sue mortgage servicers and actual lenders just because the servicers and lenders uniformly and regularly ignore the intent and actual RULES and REGULATIONS set out in the MHA/HAMP enacting legislation/rule-making.

The lack of this "private right of action" means that no matter how slip-shod, devious, lying, resistant, unethical, and immoral the servicers and lenders are in reviewing, analyzing, and denying modifications, homeowners/borrowers CANNOT sue in Federal Courts, and specifically Bankruptcy Courts, to force a modification OR sue because the servicer/lender has REFUSED to follow Federal regulation, rules, and guidelines. Even if the home is foreclosed and sold after the servicer/lender promised a modification, Congress and the White House, in their hurry to curry favor with the Banking interests (Goldman Sachs, Chase, Bank of America) and keep lobbyists happy, failed to put any teeth in its MHA/HAMP legislation.

Only the regulators like the Treasury, FDIC, Office of Thrift Supervision ("OTS"), Federal Reserve, can even recommend/urge/push the Banks and Investors in mortgages and Mortgage-Backed securities to follow the rules. There are no teeth in the rules and regulations.

Some State Courts have seen fit to force Lenders and servicers to show that they have acted in good faith when a Homeowner manages to get before a judge. The key here is "acting in good faith". If there has been no "good faith", or worse, demonstrated "bad faith", State Courts are allowing injunctions to stop foreclosures. No one expects there to be a modification when a homeowner is 30 months behind and cannot make a payment even if it based on 2% interest rate for 40 years, unless the problem was fraud in the origination of the loan. But most issues are regular people with regular problems in today's economy: job loss, reduced income, illness or death.

The exception may be CLASS ACTION SUITS. Simplifying a complicated legal issue, simply put, if there can be shown that as a pattern and practice a lender/servicer systematically and consistently rejects modifications, or acts so negligently as to de facto reject modifications (never gets paper processed etc), and there are enough diverse persons affected, then there may well be a "CLASS" of persons affected enough to demonstrate that all are "third-party beneficiaries" of the federal law.