ServiceLink Sent House to Auction demanding $24k on a $80k sale 1 hour Before Auction
We haven't lost a house in for several months and suddenly, POP, ServiceLink sends the house to Auction after demanding a $24,000 soft note payable over 10 years from the homeowner on a $80k sale. This really steams me ESPECIALLY as they requested a higher offer, we found another buyer and they submitted such offer and "approved" it. Right before auction, they pull this. It is my belief that they negotiate in bad faith from the very beginning.
Here's an interesting note on ServiceLink and their payment program. SL demands 1% of the sales price and will take it from the Realtor commissions. Because they are taking fees from the sale, it can be argued that it is a fee from the property owner/debtor. As such fees increase the deficiency amount, ServiceLink may be in violation of the new FTC MARS Rules in regards to disclosure and fees even though they are a contractor to the lender.
I'm also looking at other FTC Rules in regards to Mortgage Lenders and Disclosure requirements.
I'll keep everyone informed on this.
tjs
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Smitty on
-
OMG Todd, you HAD AN APPROVAL and they did this? I haven't dealt with SL yet but a friend of mine did and told me some things and I was shocked. In the approval my friend got she said that there was a $2000 fee that the SELLER had to come to the table with??!?!?!?!? I agree that now the homeowner has to either deal with a larger deficiency OR a larger tax liability if the deficiency is waived.
Is SL also using the proper "disclosures" under the new FTC MARS law? If they are negotiating and not lawyers, aren't they held to the same rules the rest of us are?? This is a good post Todd.
I can't believe they wanted $24,000 on an $80,000 sale. Pffff.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Todd J Sullivan J.D. on
-
It was an absolute shock to us. Unfortunately, closing would have occured prior to the January prohibition on fees. I was trying to push it out to hammer them on the fee and MARS issue, but I beleive they were making more money on the transaction by sending it to auction.
**Next time we have a Service Link short sale, I will file with the FTC and our State AG's office against them and an injunction. Unfortunately, IndyMac/OneWest/ServiceLink short sales are becoming so time consuming that I'm about ready to stop taking any short sale referrals (mainly form our Realtors) that have those lenders. Although we have had some successes, the time it takes and frustration is becoming too much.
****When a lender or servicer holds out to the public that they will accept short sales and negotiate such, they have a Duty of Good Faith in their conduct. This DFG is completely missing with some lenders. It's my hope that I can file several actions against the worst lenders this year. Maybe under our Pro Bono work since our clients can't aford the litigation and are exhaustive by the process.
Thanks for the comments. I'm thinking of creating an In-Depth Blog of information for Realtors and Homeowners on what I consider to be Attorney Negotiated Short Sale Legal Service Products.
Smitty said:OMG Todd, you HAD AN APPROVAL and they did this? I haven't dealt with SL yet but a friend of mine did and told me some things and I was shocked. In the approval my friend got she said that there was a $2000 fee that the SELLER had to come to the table with??!?!?!?!? I agree that now the homeowner has to either deal with a larger deficiency OR a larger tax liability if the deficiency is waived.
Is SL also using the proper "disclosures" under the new FTC MARS law? If they are negotiating and not lawyers, aren't they held to the same rules the rest of us are?? This is a good post Todd.
I can't believe they wanted $24,000 on an $80,000 sale. Pffff.
-
© 2024 Created by Short Sale Superstars LLC.
Powered by
**********************************
like buttons