Court: Woman Can Keep The Mortgage Modification Bank Of America Said Was An Error

What happens when Bank of America offers a customer a mortgage modification then tries to foreclose on her home anyway? In the case of a New Jersey woman who was paying her mortgage when BofA claimed her modification offer had been an error, a court took her side, allowing her to keep her home.

The appeals court said it was puzzled why the lender would even try to foreclose on the woman, because she “unlike many, is actually paying her mortgage,” reports the Associated Press.

Sylvia made payments on her $591,913 mortgage as part of a loan modification program that Bank of America said she qualified for in March 2010.

Despite her consistent, timely payments, the bank claimed the letter of acceptance into the modification program was an error and that she was never supposed to get a permanent modification.

Too bad, said the court, as to “eventually pull the rug out” after having debtors make payments with the promise of a modification bordered on being “unconscionable.”

Bank of America, unconscionable? You don’t say.

*Thanks for the heads up, Pat!

Morris County woman who obtained mortgage modification can keep home, court rules [Associated Press]


Edit Your Comment

  1. humphrmi says:

    It’s nice seeing common sense make a comeback.

    • buddyedgewood says:

      Commonsense never went away, it was just hidden behind the $$$$$, forgotten by consumers and lenders alike. Still is for the most part, IMHO…

    • Lyn Torden says:

      Nothing has changed. This woman always had commonsense. BoA still has none.

      What’s different is that a appeals judge/panel with commonsense has been encountered.

      Now if only we can get all those cases in front of this appeals court where people are foreclosed on because the bank rep told them they first had to miss 3 payments in a row to qualify for a modification, and then lost their home because the bank treated the 3 missed payments as a default.

  2. bikeoid says:

    BOA : Prime WCIA contender! “We had our fingers crossed when we typed up that letter of acceptance into the loan modification program”

    • longfeltwant says:

      No way. Stealing peoples homes (and muscle cars!) is NOTHING compared to releasing a video game with a storyline which leaves some players unsatisfied. Get your priorities straight, man.

  3. sherrietee says:

    I hear they downgraded BoA. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bank.

  4. Fubish says: I don't know anything about it, but it seems to me... says:

    Yesterday, Moody’s downgraded BoA to near-junk bond status. They also downgraded those wonderful folks at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup.

    • Costner says:

      And yet their stock prices are increasing today. So investors don’t seem to care…. which explains a lot about the stock market and the financial services industry.

      • homehome says:

        I’m an investor and I don’t care either. Most investor realize while ones like these are actually the banks fault and are valid, for every one that is valid there’s 10 to 20 that aren’t.

    • CubeRat says:

      I honestly believe that the rating companies are doing vindictive rating now. They rated so many Alt A CDO as AAA that quite obviously were not AAA, then got called on it. Wasn’t it the Dodd-Frank bill that said these ratings can’t be used in many situations? I think the rating companies are now downgrading anything unpopular to make it appear that they are doing their jobs. Just like many banks have so tightened loan requirements. Both are trying to say, “see…see, we know what we’re doing..don’t blame us”. There is so much BS, farmers could shovel it and save on chemicals.

      Now, here Moody’s has listed their ratings on BofA-Citi-GS, but if I were betting on long term success, I’d bet any of those banks before I’d bet on Moody’s.

  5. Costner says:

    At what point does someone at BOA actually just say “we suck at this – let’s get out of banking and try something where our customer service knowledge could be more useful… like offering logistical support to various dictators and cladestine terrorist organizations around the globe”.

    • RandomLetters says:


    • Sneeje says:

      Because offering their kind of “customer service” to people that can fight back will actually get BoA executives killed.

      Now, if they wanted to start a “consulting service” targeted at that demographic they might actually have something…

    • HalOfBorg says:

      Maybe they can take over CS at Sears??

  6. dush says:

    If it had just been the letter and they hadn’t actually setup new payments and accepted them that would be one thing. Can BofA get any more ridiculous at this point?

  7. Elder Feller says:

    Ahhhh – the BoFA buffons finally get a long overdue taste of ther own medicine. Anyone feel sorry for them? ………. Nope….. didn’t think so!!!

  8. oldwiz65 says:

    Amazing to find a judge not in pay of BofA. At least there are a few honest judges who care about people.

  9. Lyn Torden says:

    ‘The appeals court said it was puzzled why the lender would even try to foreclose on the woman, because she “unlike many, is actually paying her mortgage”‘

    The appeals court judges are obviously not keeping up with the news.

  10. Mandark says:

    The court’s decision is moot.

    We’ll just send the police to remove the woman anyway. It’s not like we haven’t done it before.



    Our motto is: Shut your hole or you’re next.

  11. AllanG54 says:

    This year’s WCIA contest is going to be a toughie between BoA and Shittybank.

  12. calchip says:

    I remember reading an article where this is SOP for BofA. Do a “trial” modification that keeps people paying for another few months, and throw them out anyway. It’s a scam to bleed more money before foreclosing.

    Glad this judge saw through it.