Subject: Re: FW: Moratorium info
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:40:30 -0400
From: <leslie_bromer@hud.gov>
To: Dave Cunningham
Dave,
Let me see if we can't clarify your issue.
All outstanding guidance (Handbook 4330.1, Rev-5 & various Mortgagee
Letters) from HUD provides that to be covered by a moritorium, the borrower had
to be directly affected by the disaster,....either due to property damage with
the property being located in a FEMA designated jurisdiction or by a disruption
of income (the borrower's employer or source of income was in a FEMA designated
jurisdiction and was affected by the disaster). There are plenty of both
situations stemming from both Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita.
Now let's review your issue....Someone asked what should they do if the
property was in a disaster declared jurisdiction, there had been no contact
from the borrower, but a recent exterior inspection conducted did not appear
to show any damage. .....Would this case be covered by the moritorium? When I, and
several others on the call recommended caution,.... and we all recommended to
give the mortgagor the benefit of the doubt, I was assuming that the default
and the inability to reach the borrower was reasonably within the window of
time that could possibly be due to the disaster. WIth the hundreds of thousands
of people that were evacuated, and many still unable to access their homes,
even after 6 weeks there are still going to be many loans where you have had no
contact.
Most mortgagees have methods that assist you in identifying borrower behavior.
It would be simple to identify those borrowers that were impacted by the
disaster if the first delinquent payment for the history of the account was the
September 2005 installment. Obviously, you need to give those borrowers the
benefit of the doubt. But (unfortunately) there are some borrowers that have a
pattern of becoming one or two payments behind...and then catching up.....you
have to also give the benefit of the doubt to those borrowers that maybe missed
the August (and maybe even the July) payment, especially if that borrower has
has a similar payment pattern in the past....Especially in the worst hit areas.
What was perhaps missing on the call was some clarity as far as situations that
you mentioned in your email. An account that has been vacant since
11/26/03....clearly has had something else as the reason for the default. You
didn't state the date of default, but I'd have to guess that it dates back to
at least 11/03. Why hasn't foreclosure been completed as yet? Is there a
current bar to foreclosure due to either a bankruptcy or some other
litigation??? There is obviously some other complication on this case. The
default appears not to have been caused or worsened by the disaster, therefore,
the moratorium would not apply.
Thanks, Leslie
Leslie Bromer
Office Of Single Family Asset Management
Servicing Team Leader
(202) 708-0614 x 2309
Fax 202-708-5966
From: Dave Cunningham
10/14/2005 01:04 PM
To:<Leslie_Bromer@hud.gov>
Subject:FW: Moratorium info
Leslie,
Would you be able to provide us something in writing indicating what was stated
in your call yesterday? We interpreted that HUD wanted a 90 day moratorium on
all these loans regardless of what is stated below. Are you indicating that HUD
has a different opinion and we should start the FC action on these loans prior
to the 90 days expiring?
Thanks
Dave Cunningham
Foreclosure Manager