• English
  • Español
AGENTS: Did you know you can share a personalized version of this post? Learn more!

(English) Did Modification Programs Work?

Disculpa, pero esta entrada está disponible sólo en Inglés Estadounidense.

Miembros: ¡regístrese ahora y configure su Post Personalizado & empiece a compartirlo hoy!

¿No es un miembro aun? Haga un clic aquí para aprender más acerca de la nueva función de KCM, Post Personalizados.

Have You Set Up Personalized Posts Yet? | Keeping Current Matters
6 comentarios
  1. Bob Phillips
    Bob Phillips Dice:

    Not sure where you got your numbers – perhaps by Googling an incorrect name. The “hope” program is actually HOPENOW.com, and here’s their 2010 year end report, showing FAR higher numbers than the 400k you came up with:


    By the way, the combo of HAMP and HOPENOW has saved almost twice as many homeowners from the auction block.

  2. Steve Harney
    Steve Harney Dice:


    Thanks for your comment. We got our numbers directly from the Congressional Oversight Panel report issued last week. The numbers are a direct quote from the 233 page report which is linked in the blog post.

    If you read the report, you will see that Hope for Homeowners is a totally different program than Hope Now. We were reporting on the GOVERNMENT modification programs funded by TARP funds (which was clearly explained in the first paragraph of the blog).

    Hope Now is a private program which has done some remarkable work. However, they were not the subject of the blog.

  3. Bob Phillips
    Bob Phillips Dice:

    OK, Steve, thanks for the clarification. I’m hoping – no pun intended – that Congress isn’t as short-sighted as they seem, to think that the two programs you’ve blogged about, are the only game in town, and thus, the whole shebang is a failure.

    Without the pressure of the HAMP program nipping at their heels, the consortium of lenders who revamped into a slightly more palatable – to them – HOPENOW program might never have had the comparatively more substantial success, that they’ve had.

    Again, the combination of all these programs still saved a lot more houses, than those that eventually went to foreclosure. More mods than foreclosures sounds like a success to me.

  4. Thomas McGiveron
    Thomas McGiveron Dice:

    Don’t forget all the short sales that realtors have done to help people avoid foreclosure entirely! I remember hearing that a large portion of homeowners who got loan mods ended up defaulting anyway AND the verdict is still out on those that did get loan mods and are current.

    The way I look at loan mods is – life can change on a dime – and to modify a home that’s upside down in value by over 35% – is very questionable – financially. Does it make sense to do a modification on a loan whereby they do all these fancy things with the borrowed money – meanwhile – some day – you have to repay the whole enchilada?

    I’m not against or for loan mods in general. I just think SOME people should just get the heck out of a majorly declining asset. I am a big advocate of personal responsibility – you borrow money and you pay it back – but savvy bankers/brokers and a ton of investors who made millions of dollars on the upswing – are living high off the hog – even today – and some schmuck in Commack, NY – got a loan mod on a home they paid $500,000 for in 2005 that’s worth $360,000 today…good for them???? Their mos payment went from $3,900 to $3200 and their in the tank on value by more 140 g’s – I don’t about the “success” of that deal…

    verdicts still out on ALL THIS.


Trackbacks y pingbacks

  1. […] house values. This was one reason that they funded the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). via kcmblog.com GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); […]

Dejar un comentario

¿Quieres unirte a la conversación?
Siéntete libre de contribuir!

Deja una respuesta

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *