Bank Falsely Accuses Client of Canceling Loan Mod

RON and CLAUDIA L. vs. BANK OF AMERICA

Case settled December 2012

Client received an invitation from the bank to apply for the Home Affordable Modification Program. They applied and were approved for a permanent modification. The bank sent a notary to come to the Client’s home to notarize and accept delivery of the HAMP Agreement which contained the terms of the loan modification. In accordance with the HAMP Agreement, the Clients began making the payment of $3,151.04 each month. After three months Bank of American sent the Clients a letter stating "We are not considering your request for a modification because after being offered a Trial Plan Payment, you notified us that you did not wish to accept the offer. At your request, the offer has been cancelled. "

Our clients never cancelled the modification request and never rescinded the Agreement. The Clients came to the Law Offices of John Thomas Dzialo and we filed suit. against Bank of America for Breach of Contract, Breach of The Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing and Violation of The Unfair Competition Law. The Clients prevailed and they had their HAMP Agreement reinstated and the foreclosure sale was stopped in its tracks.

The Clients were also reimbursed for their attorneys fees.

Bank Denies Dying Employee Loan Modification

Eugene M. vs. “The Bank”

Case Settled September 12, 2012

Due to the confidentiality agreement signed at settlement we are unable to disclose our client’s last name or the name of the bank we filed suit against. Our client Judith was an 18 year employee of “The Bank,” a large national institution,┬áthe same bank that held the mortgage on her home as well as two investment properties. In 2009 Judith was diagnosed with terminal Cancer. As the family’s sole income earner, she knew her husband would need a reduced mortgage payment in order to keep their home after she passed away. Bound and determined to make sure her husband could remain in their home she entered into the loan modification process. Judith took comfort in knowing that her beloved employer would certainly fast track her request for a loan modification so she could focus on her treatments and spend her time with family and friends. She was wrong! The Bank instead put Judith through 20 months of agonizing paperwork in a quest to obtain a simple rate reduction on a mortgage that had never been paid late. Finally, she was approved for a loan modification, signed the documents in her hospital bed, and passed away three days later. “The Bank” rescinded the loan modification two weeks after Judith died. The Bank then decided to put her widowed husband through another 20 months of hell for a new loan modification. “The Bank” convinced a very frail and distraught Eugene to begin withdrawing his savings to payoff credit cards that Judith had left behind, and a second mortgage. The second mortgage was severely under water and was secured against a condo in Florida the couple had purchased for retirement. After Judith’s death it was unlikely Eugene would ever visit the condo again. Nonetheless, “The Bank” pressured him into paying off the second to improve his chances of getting the elusive loan modification. After all the debt was paid off, “The Bank” denied Eugene his loan modification and threatened him with foreclosure. After filing suit against “The Bank,” a settlement was negotiated in September of 2012. “The Bank” awarded our client $190,000, modified the mortgages on two of his properties to 2% fixed for 40 years and then reimbursed him for all of his attorney’s fees.

Dzialo Law Stops Foreclosure, Negotiates Loan Modification

MARIA F. vs. SPS

Case Settled April 2013

Client had been denied a loan modification after multiple forbearances and trial plans. The client was facing imminent foreclosure, but we negotiated a permanent loan modification with principal reduction.

Re-Opened Dismissed Case after Ill-Advised Settlement

NEIL B. vs. GMAC

Case Settled November 2013

Before retaining our firm, the Client had voluntarily dismissed a previous lawsuit and signed an ill-advised settlement that left his family facing imminent eviction. Client is an active duty serviceman who was unaware of his rights under the Service Member Civil Relief Act. After we were brought into the case, our motion to vacate both the dismissal and settlement agreement was successful based on the argument that the trustee sale was void. Title was restored in the client’s name and a Complaint for monetary damages is being negotiated.

Dzialo Law Saves Home for Mother Diagnosed with Cancer

ROBERT D. vs. AURORA

Case Settled November 2013

Clients – husband and wife with three children – were trying to keep their home after the wife was diagnosed with stage three pancreatic cancer and medical bills destroyed their savings and overwhelmed their monthly income. Clients’ loan modification efforts stalled and foreclosure was imminent. We filed suit and the court enjoined the trustee sale. The clients are now in a trial plan agreement with the lender.