NEW Bank of America Authorization

NEW BOFA Letter of Authorization... only licensed agents or attorneys can be authorized on accounts now? That rules out an assistant being authorized to follow up on even mundane "Did you get the fax?" calls... escalating with BOFA

See link: http://realestateagent.bankofamerica.com/content/documents/tpa.pdf

Views: 4225

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cliff Stanwick on March 25, 2012 at 6:02am
Permalink Reply by Joseph Alfe on March 25, 2012 at 7:01am

Cliff, thank you for making my point EXACTLY! If we as an industry don't get our act together and push for some sort of unified and accepted short sale best practices, then idiot lawmakers will do it for us like they did here. By following NC state law, you as an agent may be forced to violate your Fiduciary Duty to the seller.  Moronic laws like they have in New Jersey, where you have to be a debt adjustor to negotiate short sales, Florida, where you have to be a mortgage broker, or Georgia, where agents can't negotiate short sales at all are what happens when an industry like ours lets the politicians set the standards instead of the professionals. 

Permalink Reply by Kathleen Couch on March 25, 2012 at 9:43am

Thank you Joseph.  I also was an Equator Beta Tester.  But I am not an agent.  I help homeowner's and agents with their short sale needs. I follow the laws of my state.  Also, 99% of my short sales close.  It would have been 100%, but one that an agent messed up, then gave to me, did not close.  Yes, I get complimented all the time by BOA and other bank negotiator's on completeness, and responsiveness.

If Bank of America grades me on Equator, how can they justify, "kicking me out".  And, of course BOA is biggest, but they don't own Equator, and many other servicers use Equator.  Imposing rules on the rest of Equator would really be "strong arming" the others who don't have an issue with good negotiators.

Permalink Reply by Satar Naghshineh on March 25, 2012 at 2:49pm

Joseph, just to let you know, they don't consider 3rd party fees as acceptable closing cost and they said they caught wind that these are being passed off to the buyer.

I honestly think it is a way to get rid of negotiators who are working for investor clubs or organizations to get a great deal for the buyer. They will probably match up the names of the authorized personal to the listing contract and maybe flag that file for auditing in a few years.

Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on March 25, 2012 at 7:01am

Here's an "opinion" written by an attorney for one of the local Associations in CA - it applies to CA law.

 

My 3rd Party Agreement and Disclosure is 2 pages, 22 bullet points and signed by both agents, both of their brokers, all Buyers and all Sellers.  It is initially signed by the seller when the listing agent / broker takes the listing and subsequently signed by the Buyer's side when the offer is accepted.

 

 

Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Joseph Alfe on March 25, 2012 at 7:11am

It's a start.  Basically, it says that negotiators must be licensed and must provide disclosures regarding duty and compensation.  The only thing I don't agree with is the fact that only real estate licensees can negotiate.  There is absolutely nothing in being an agent that qualifies you to negotiate.  This is why I am pushing for a separate short sale license. There needs to be best practices and minimum competencies set. For those who will complain "Why do I need another license.." the answer is why wouldn't you? You spend money on worthless designation classes, why not have a state license? The agents who are good will have no problems, and the weekend warriors and yahoos in our business will have to turn their short sales over to their licensed collegues.  Same with third party negotiators.  There are good ones who deserve a spot at the table, and the rest can go away.

Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on March 25, 2012 at 7:19am

Joseph, although I tend to agree with you, I think it is doubtful we will see a Short Sale Negotiator license for each of the 50 States plus our territories. Heck, we can't even get a RE license to work across all States.  I'm licensed in CA and TX but neither of those have reciprocity with any other state.  Georgia is the only state that allows reciprocity for all states (except Florida!). 

 

State Licensing is too political, and by the time the first license would have been established, the short sale cycle will likely be history and thus forgotten.

 

Good effort however.....

Permalink Reply by Tabitha on March 25, 2012 at 11:01am

In Oregon they passed the state law that you have to be a licensed & bonded debt management company or mortgage loan originator to negotiate short sales.

Permalink Reply by Cindy Nordstrom on March 26, 2012 at 11:50am

Hi Thom,

Can you share your source with me for the attachment? I was discussing some of these things with my broker and he is interested to know who this comes from. (We are in CA) Feel free to private email me if you like at [email protected].

Thanks!

Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on March 26, 2012 at 12:33pm

Cindy -

I sent an e-mail to you at the address you provided.

Thom

Permalink Reply by Lori & G-II Klindera/Varrato I on March 25, 2012 at 8:49am

Ok, so I have watched and read many of the commentary about the new BofA LOA. Before I offer my thoughts, know that my wife and I are in this industry for well over ¼ of a century. We, like many on this forum, have been knee deep in the short sale ‘cottage niche’, that was created as the end product of very pour lending practices unleashed upon the public by our ‘brain dead’ congressional leaders, for the past 6 years.

Now, where BofA writes: “…shall not knowingly misrepresent or omit to state, any material fact in order to induce the Borrower(s), BANA, the lender, the investor or the insurer to agree to the terms of a Short Sale that the Borrower(s), BANA, the lender the investor or the insurer would not have agreed to had all material facts been known, and…”

Consider this; BofA may be trying to head off egregious fraudulent activity at the point of sale. We recently came across a transaction where the buyer, of a property closed as a short sale in early December 2011, is under contract for $75,000 more than the property sold for as a short sale, just 100 days earlier. The appraiser for today’s buyer says, “…based on comparable sales at the time of the short sale, the property could have sold between $20,000 and $30,000 higher than the short sale price.

Additionally, what if the higher price could minimize or eliminate a promissory note or even better, eliminate any deficiency pursuit?

These are the types of transactions that really get under the bank’s skin. These types of transactions are the ones that spawn these seemingly ‘knee jerk’ reactions by the banks.

And… although there are a few banks that should be taken out back behind the wood shed and have the living daylights beat out them with a hickory switch; remember folks, for the most part, the banks are NOT our enemy. While many, if not most of them, have done some pretty egregious things to their borrowers in the past, most have had their butts kicked by every state in the union and also by the Department of Justice. I’m not suggesting that we give the banks a ‘pass’ for all of the destructive things the banking industry has thrust on the backs of hard working Americans, but I am suggesting that when we see forms like the BofA LOA; that… while I believe are well intended, end up with unintended negative consequences that can potentially stall housing recovery solutions, we should offer and perhaps even insist on changes to their initiatives that are more cooperative to the entire process.

I agree with many who feel that the LOA opens a very large “fiduciary” can of worms. Nevertheless, if we break our fiduciary down to its simplest aspects, that is that we do the best job we can for our ‘clients’, advocating for them, then isn’t helping the seller sell his/her home for the highest and best price available a pretty good idea? Is it truly a bad thing that the seller’s lender/servicer ask if there are higher offers on the table or being held as backup offers? Is it truly a bad thing that the first buyer be advised that the seller’s bank is going to counter the buyer’s offer for a higher figure, that may be consistent with higher backup offers? Think about it. The scenario is not much different than the buyer being bumped by the servicer/lender due to a BPO disparity between offered price and BPO.

The bottom line is this, at the end of the day, if the BofA LOA or any other form or initiative can help speed up the process and/or isolate and disrupt fraudulent or deceptive practices, then why not get behind such an effort. Let’s not fight the banks but rather help them understand why their methods may be ‘counterproductive’ and then offer alternate solutions.

Forums like this are a great place to exchange ideas. Hopefully, the thread within this discussion will find its way to the right folks at BofA.

Very Respectfully,

G-II

Permalink Reply by Smitty on March 25, 2012 at 2:25pm

(Sigh) - this is what is sooo anoying.  Everyone touting fraud fraud fraud, or scam, etc., without having intricate details.  Buying a house for one price one day and selling it 100 days later for $75,000 is NOT FRAUD.  BUYING IT one morning and selling it the same afternoon for $75,000 IS NOT FRAUD, but the lenders are making it look like fraud because THEY don't like it.  I don't work for the lender.  I work for the SELLER.  There is NO LAW that states you can't buy and resell the same exact property for profit 100 days later or 10 hours later, but lien holders and investors like Freddie Mac don't like it because they feel that they are entitled to that higher price.  I would seriously HOPE the lower price had no pursuit of deficiency or promissory note, but I wouldn't know that because I'm not involved in the sale.

 

Go ahead and look up how many people have been arrested for short sale flip fraud.  Come back and post how many cases you've found.  I can tell you what you WILL find, which are REPORTS of fraudulent behavior from agencies like Corelogic, where a bulk of their money comes from software that alerts lenders of suspicious files.  Let's see....If I could increase my profits, how would I do that??? Oh yes, lets report to the lenders how much money they MIGHT BE LOSING with bias studies...then they will buy more software.

Anyways, this is completely off topic, but I'm sick of hearing how much short sale flip fraud there is, when not one person can list more than two cases of flip arrests. 

Joseph is right. This language shifts the responsibility to BOA.  Do I think this new LOA is going to HUGELY affect my business?  At this moment, no, but I can't tell the future and I wouldn't presume to. I still maintain that there is no way that an attorney who does boutique practice in short sales is going to be the only one on the phone all day long or even remotely working on these files.  I know of 3 boutique firms where I am with a staff of 5-6 admins and NONE are licensed other than the attorney.  I don't see them sweating this stupid LOA regarding the negotiating part. As far as shifting the fiduciary responsibility, I would have to have a discussion with one of them to really see if it was something that was disturbing them.

RSS

Members

© 2024   Created by Short Sale Superstars LLC.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

********************************** like buttons ************************