Forensic Loan Audit : Mortgage Auditing : Auditors: Mortgage Fraud : Loan Auditors : Predatory Lending : Mortgage Litigation : Stop Foreclosure Law : Mortgage Compliance : Attorney : Lender Violations

Testimonials - Forensic Auditing Company
Loan Auditing Software - Loan Auditing Software is DANGEROUS and MISLEADING!
Training and Support - Become more knowledgable about violations and foreclosure defense
CLE Calandar - Attorney CLE classes on Foreclosure Defense and Understanding Violations
CPE Calandar - C.P.A. and Accountant CPE Credit Courses
Case Management Software and Solutions - Streamline your case management
Document Management and Storage - File Retention, Storage, Conversion, and Real Time Access
Learn Tactics and Strategies of Borrower Mitigation - Visit USLA's Loan Settlement and Foreclosure Defense Blog

foreclosure attorneys for loan modification

audit attorneys http://www.loansettlementusa.com/
structured settlement expert witness for mortgage litigationexpert testimony foreclosure case law respa statutes truth in lending laws motion to dismiss holder in due course forensic audit used in court truth in lending statutes respa laws motion for summary judgement lost note affidavit formal complaint sample respa demand letter

mortgage fraud

mortgage violations

mortgage auditing

mortgage modification

modify my mortgage

find fraud in my mortgage

audit my mortgage

mortgage document review

truth in lending

predatory

forensic loan auditor

auditing my loan

Forensic loan analysis

loan audit

Forensic loan audit

forensic loan audit

lender audit

motion to dismiss

tro temporary restraining order

motion for injunctive relief

mortgage securitization

lost note affidavit

sample respa demand letter

sample respa non-compliance letter

formal complaint

Audit my servicer

Respa violations

loan modification

loan modification review

get a loan modification

tila violations

stopping foreclosure

stop foreclosure

foreclosure attorneys in florida

florida bankruptcy law

forensic audit software

florida foreclosure law

predatory lending

predatory loan

forensic loan software

Forensic Loan Auditing Company

mortgage fraud investigators

mortgagefraudexaminers

mortgage audit companies

attorney for loan modification in california

structured settlement

expert witness for mortgage litigation

expert testimony

holder in due course

forensic audit used in court

foreclosure case law

truth in lending laws

truth in lending statutes

respa laws

respa statutes

motion for summary judgement

cle credits

cle credits on real estate law

cle credits for mortgage law

common law torte used in foreclosure defense

Loan modification attorney

Short sales

Loan Settlement

loan settlements

loan settlement

debt settlement

respa

truth in lending

Forensic Auditing Software

How to become an Auditor

Avoid foreclosure

Litigation against my lender

Mortgage auditing company

Loan auditors

Loan auditing

loan auditing companies

foresic loan auditing companies

loan audit attorneys

best forensic mortgage loan auditing company

bankruptcy modification

Chapter 13

bankruptcy loan modification attorney

servicer audit

mortgage compliance audit

mortgage document review
temporary restraining order used in foreclosure

motion for injunctive relief mortgage securitization common law torte used in foreclosure defense sample respa non-compliance letter cle credits cle credits on real estate law cle for mortgage law

Create Account: Passcode

To create an account please enter the account creation passcode.

83% of Mortgages Have Violations.
Know the Facts!

Facing Foreclosure?
Lender at Fault?

Mortgage Violations?
How Much Are You Owed?

Attorney?
A Must for Your Practice!

What Lies in Your Loan?^TMOrder Your Forensic Loan Audit

Victim of Mortgage Fraud?
Want the Facts?

The Most Comprehensive and
Accurate Forensic Loan Analysis!^TM

Need Loan Modification?
Fight Your Lender With Evidence!

Loan Settlement!
Know How To Navigate with USLA Litigation
Support and Services!

RECENT FILES AUDITED:

ACTUAL AUDITOR NOTES:This is a Hybrid Option Arm loan that allows 120% negative amortization. The servicing
disclosure was in the file, however, the initial Good Faith Estimate and the initial Truth in
Lending disclosures were not in the supplied documents. As all three of these documents are
required to be disclosed to the borrower within 3 days of the application, there is some
evidence that this may not of occurred. Additionally, this loan allowed a negative amortization
that would bring the loan balance to exceed the appraised value.

ACTUAL AUDITOR NOTES: In section One of the Note "1. BORROWER'S PROMISE TO PAY" the principal amount was blank. This would indicate that there is no consideration provided for this loan. The documents
provided included a "Limited Power of Attorney" to correct paper work mistakes. However that
POA excludes changes in the loan amount or terms.

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES:The audit report produced a number of loan exceptions. Most of the exceptions were produced
because of the limited number of documents provided in the audit. This was a stated income
loan. The application provided show the previous housing expense at $2600.00 and the new
housing expense over $9000.00. This payment shock is unacceptable without some
explanation by the underwriter as to how the borrower was to meet this obligation. This loan
should not have been made.

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES: This transaction was a ten year interest only First Lien Mortgage Loan. The amount of the loan was $279,500.00. This amount is within the conventional limits and is covered by the State or Federal Home
Ownership Equity Protection Act.This loan was made for a new home built by Lennar Homes. Lennar Homes
also owns the loan origination company, the lender and the title company used in this transaction.
The documents provided did not include a notice of Affiliated Business Disclosure required when two or
more of the participants rendering services on a home mortgage are related by ownership of 1% or
greater.

Controlled and Affiliated Business Arrangements (ABA)
An "affiliated business arrangement" (ABA) or Controlled Business Arrangement is defined in RESPA as
an arrangement where a person who refers settlement services has an "affiliate relationship" or "an
ownership interest of more than one percent in a provider of settlement services."

Why an ABA not disclosed a RESPA Violation
HUD tacitly understands that there are circumstances where a borrower's interests are best served by
working with entities who "bundle", or package, services. If the process results in lower costs for the
borrower, it is obviously advantageous to use a provider who can add value. For HUD, the concern is in
areas where the borrower ends up paying more, not less, for services. The Controlled Business
Arrangement is a circumstance where, if unmonitored or unregulated, borrowers could be steered to a
provider which does not add value, but adds cost, where upon in this circumstance both the loan
originator and the lender charged origination fees causing a higher cost to the borrower.
This transaction violates RESPA 3500.15

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES: The borrower's did not show on their application sufficient funds to close the loan. There is no
explanation for the additional funds. The payment shock on this loan was three times the
amount that the borrower had been paying. This in addition to the poor payment and credit
history of the borrower, made this a questionable loan and the lender should not have made
the loan.

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES: This is a 30 year adjustable rate mortgage amortized over 40 years with a balloon payment at
the end of 30 years. The HUD-1 provided in the review was changed and "penciled in" without
any acknowledgment by initialing by the borrower. The review package also included only one
copy of the borrower Right to Cancel. Two copies are required by the TILA law. Additionally,
the GFE estimate provided at closing indicated the loan term was 480 months with and
amortization period of 480 months. This was wrong as the term was 360 months and
amortization period of 480 months. The fees charged by the broker were excessive and are
indicative of an loan transaction provided to benefit the broker over the needs of the borrower.

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES: This is a 3/27 adjustable rate loan that refinanced with cash out a previous
loan that had only four months of seasoning. The borrower had good credit with a mid score of 717.
While legally permitted, this loan had excessive broker fees ($14,700.00) and the borrower could have
possibly qualified for a fixed rate product with a similar interest rate and loan terms with lower
fees. The broker would have difficulty passing the RESPA test for justifying the work that the
fees represented.

ACTUAL AUDIT NOTES: The Notice of Right to Cancel was not completed. The notice did not have a rescission date. This loan may be rescinded.

ACTUAL AUDITOR NOTES: The file contained only three copies of the "Borrower's Right to Cancel", there should have
been four copies or two copies for each borrower. The loan was originated by the borrower as
the borrower was a loan officer for the lender. This is not an industry "good practice" and
should have not been allowed. The borrower also provided a letter to the lender detailing the
reason for the refinance. The letter claimed the borrower wanted to replace their adjustable
rate mortgage with a fixed rate mortgage. This was a refinance of an adjustable rate mortgage
with a new adjustable rate mortgage. As the cost of the refinance was going to increase the
overall housing expense, it is difficult to understand how there would be a "net tangible
benefit" to the borrower.

ACTUAL AUDITOR NOTES:
This was a re-finance of an existing mortgage loan. The Right of Rescission or the Right to
Cancel provided in the file did not have a rescission date. Additionally only one copy was
provided. Under the TILA law, in a consumer refinance transaction, two copies of a disclosure
of Right of Rescission, disclosing the process and the date in which the borrower must exercise
that right, must be given to each borrower at closing. Based upon these documents, the TILA
law was violated and the borrower can rescind the loan. There is a Failure on the HUD-1 as
both the originator and the lender charged processing fees. It is sometimes common to see the
lender charge a small document review fee, but this was not the case. The deed of trust has
the borrower as a married woman. California is a community property state and the spouse
should have a right of rescission disclosure. This was not in the file.

The file contained only one copy of the right of rescission. The copy was not complete. It failed
to show the date of the transaction, or the date of the truth and lending disclosure or the date
of receipt of the Right to Cancel Notice. It also failed to show the date by which the rescission
period expires. Additionally, because California is a community property state, there should
have been two notices for each borrower or both married individuals. The application did not
indicate the borrower income, this would indicate a high level of irresponsibility on the part of
the lender as this would mean the lender accepted the borrower with no income.

The borrower was not qualified at a higher interest rate.
The borrower's interest rate, currently, and at the time of Application is 7.500%.
Debt-to-income ratio is very high at 7.500% and can increase to 10.500% in June
2009, and can increase 1.00% each year thereafter. The borrower was not
qualified for the interest rate ceiling of 13.500%.

The Adjustable Rate Mortgage Note includes inconsistent
mortgage terms.The loan documents indictate that the interest rate will adjust annually based on
a 6-month LIBOR index. Based upon industry standards and accepted practices,
the index should match the frequency of the interest rate adjustments, in this
case, the index should be a 1 year LIBOR.

It appears that the borrower was charged excessive fees at
closing. For each loan, the borrower was charged 4% for origination fees on the HUD-1
Settlement Statement. However, on the Good Faith Estimate, the 4% total fees
included origination fees, discount fees, and mortgage broker fees totaling 4%.
The HUD-1 does not differentiate the individual fees from the origination fees.

Mortgage Affordability Estimates-This was estimated by using the income stated on the
loan application.According to this estimate the borrower could afford to purchase a house
valued at $245,531 at the initial rate of 7.500% and a house valued at $159,294 at the ceiling
rate of 13.500%.

Based on the information provided in the file the borrower would need to have a yearly income
of $135,597.28 inorder to qualify for this loan. The borrower's income as shown on the loan application
is $9,840.84 per month or$118,090.08 per year.

SEE a Sample U.S. Lender Audit! CLICK HERE!