Letters re Wells Fargo cancelling HAMP trial period

My Complaint to the OCC

Karen Marie Kline
XXXXXXXXXXXX
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507

May 13, 2010

John G Stumpf, President and CEO
Corporate Offices Wells Fargo
420 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94104

Dear Mr. Stumpf,

I am one of your mortgage loan customers and I am writing to you because
I am frustrated and concerned by the way my mortgage loan has been
handled in relation to the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).

I was offered a HAMP trial modification period, which I finalized by
timely calling in and scheduling payments as per the 9/22/09 letter I was
sent by Ben Windust.

What happened thereafter makes it appear that Wells Fargo Home
Mortgage's offer of a HAMP trial modification period was in bad faith and
fraudulent.

I have tried to address these problems by writing to Ben Windust.

The responses I received, however, signed by Sarah Butts, raise questions
rather than resolve problems.

I hope you will help me.

Here is a summation I am preparing in order to complain to the Office of
the Comptroller of Currency:

To resolve my complaint that Wells Fargo acted in bad faith, with deceit
and fraud, in handling my mortgage in a HAMP trial period I asked WF to
recognize that I finalized WF's 9/22/09 HAMP trial period offer when I
called WF on 9/26/09 and scheduled three payments; to send me the
package of information I was promised; to remove legal fees since 9/22/09;
to return $61.32 (required in excess of 31% of my gross income) times
three; and to provide a proper 31% HAMP payment with the information
package.

Chronology:
On 9/22/09, Ben Windust, Sr. V.P., WF Home Mortgage, wrote, “We've
gone back and carefully reviewed your situation and the information you
provided... You may be eligible for a trial modification plan under the
government's Home Affordable Modification Program... You must call us
to finalize this offer by October 6, 2009 so that we can establish your trial
modification plan... During this phone call we'll schedule a date for your
first trial payment... You will need to make two additional payments...
Within a week of setting up your trial period we will send you a package of
information that clearly spells out the full terms and the documentation that
you need to supply.”

I called on 9/24/09 and finalized. Three payments at the new rate of
$279.56 were scheduled with a $20 check fee added to my 1st payment:
10/4/09: $299.56 confirmation #7088478093; 11/4/09: $279.56
confirmation #7088478234; 12/4/09: $279.56 confirmation #7088478287.

The package of information promised in WF's 9/22/09 letter was never
sent.

Citing the HAMP trial period WF lawyers would not answer my discovery
requests in my home's foreclosure. At the same time WF lawyers would
not vacate their 10/19/09 summary judgment hearing. At the hearing the
judge stayed the case.

On 10/20/09, WF wrote that because I did not keep WF's forbearance plan
I was taken out of the trial period. WF's 8/15/09 plan required a
$34,342.78 balloon payment on 2/1/10. I did not have that nor could I
afford $432.28 payments so I hadn't signed.

On 10/27/09 I spoke with Duane at the number in WF's 10/20/09 letter: 1-
800-678-7986. He transferred me to a senior rep, Blair, who said that on
10/20/09 WF lawyers told WF to take me out of the HAMP trial period.

Still WF cashed my scheduled trial period payments, even after writing on
11/30/09, “after carefully reviewing the information you've provided, we
are unable to adjust the terms of your mortgage. This decision was made
because you did not provide us with all of the information needed within
the time frame required per your trial modification...”

During the three months of trial period payments I did not have enough
money to make ends meet so I wondered if $279.56 was 31% of my
monthly income. It was not. 31% of my $704 income was supposed to be
$218.24. So WF was taking $61.32 of my $62 supplemental income for
my disability due to traumatic brain injury.

I wrote to Ben Windust about this, asking for a refund. Sarah Butts
replied, 4/15/10, that WF used financial information they had on file for
me “at that time,” so the payment was 31% and there would be no refund.

I wrote back that on 5/21/09 WF confirmed receipt of my correct,
financial information: $704, verified by a HOPE NOW representative from
Money Management International:

Time: 5/21/2009 2:31:19 PM
Sent to 8663597363 with remote ID ""
Result: (0/339;0/0) Successful Send
Page record: 1 - 17
Elapsed time: 13:56 on channel 13

I wrote that my financial information had not changed.

Sarah Butts also wrote in her 4/15/10 letter that on October 20, 2009 I was
sent the package of information I'd been promised.

I replied that lenders are disallowed by HAMP from requiring cash
contributions so WF's October 20, 2009 letter referencing a requirement of
$34,342.78 could not be the package of requirements for HAMP that was
promised in WF's 9/22/09 letter.

In her 4/15/10 letter, Sarah Butts concluded my case had been
investigated, was now closed and she would not answer further letters.

I look forward to your help. I'll hold off complaining to the Office of the
Comptroller of Currency for ten working days in the hope of a response
from you. I can't wait longer because on Monday, May 10, 2010, I
received a paper filed by Wells Fargo lawyers in the foreclosure.

Sincerely,
Karen Marie Kline

Copies: Ben Windust, Senior Vice President
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10368
Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

Sarah Butts
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10368
Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

Wells Fargo's Less than Honest Response

Karen Marie Kline
XXXXXXXXXXX
Loan number XXXXXXXXXXX
April 30, 2010
Ben Windust, Senior Vice President, and Sarah Butts
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10368
Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

Dear Mr. Windust and Sarah Butts,

Key statements in your April 15, 2010 letter, mailed April 19, 2010 are
either mistakes or malicious dishonesty. Plus, your letter shows a clear
violation by Wells Fargo of Home Affordable Modification Program
(HAMP) guidelines. Therefore I must ask you some questions (basic to my
complaint to the OCC Administrator of National Banks/Treasury):

1. How did the Wells Fargo system have incorrect financial information
for me “at that time” (September 22, 2009) when I had sent in my correct
financial information, to include banks statements and budget verified by
Hope Now representatives, on May 21, 2009:

Time: 5/21/2009 2:31:19 PM

Sent to 8663597363 with remote ID ""

Result: (0/339;0/0) Successful Send

Page record: 1 - 17

Elapsed time: 13:56 on channel 13

2. Without change from May 21, 2009 to September 22, 2009 my income
consisted of social security, supplemental income, and a few dollars a
month from my website, together adding up to $704; so why did Wells
Fargo say 31% of my income was $279.56? Isn't 31% of $704 actually
$218.24?

3. Isn't it true that $218.24 plus my $62 supplemental income, which I get
because of my disability, adds up to $280.24 which is less than a dollar
different from the $279.56 Wells Fargo falsely said was 31% of my
income?

4. If 31% of my income was actually $218.24, but Wells Fargo wrongly
calculated it to be $279.56, then isn't it true that Wells Fargo owes me a
refund of $61.32, which is the difference, for each of three months?
5.And, isn't it true that $61.32 is almost exactly the amount of my
supplemental income which is $62.00?

6. Isn't it true that the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)
says, “Servicers will follow the Standard Waterfall described below to
reduce monthly payments to the 31% Front-End DTI Target defined
above” ?

7. Isn't it true that the Home Affordable Modification Program says, “The
investor may not require the borrower to contribute cash” ?

8. It is also true, isn't it, that Wells Fargo in its October 20, 2009 letter,
copy attached, which you referenced, asked me to contribute $34,342.78?

9. Because the lender is disallowed by HAMP from requiring me to
contribute cash, the October 20, 2009 letter requiring $34,342.78 could not
be the package of requirements for HAMP that was promised to me in the
September 22, 2009 letter. Isn't that true? Or, is it a violation of HAMP
guidelines?

10. Why were no messages left for me if indeed attempts were made to
reach me by phone after September 22, 2009?

11. Why, prior to September 22, 2009 and prior to the offer of HAMP
loan modification, did Wells Fargo employees hang up when I answered
the phone? (See my letter of October 28, 2009.)

I am reiterating: In order to resolve the problems in the simplest terms
possible I am asking Wells Fargo: 1.) to recognize that I finalized Wells
Fargo's offer of a trial period in HAMP when I called Wells Fargo on
September 26, 2009 and scheduled my three HAMP trial period payments
as outlined in Mr. Windust's September 22, 2009 letter; 2.) to send me the
package of information that I was promised by Wells Fargo in the event I
finalized Wells Fargo's offer of a HAMP trial period; 3.) to remove any
legal fees that were or might be billed to me from September 22, 2009
when I was offered the HAMP trial period; 4.) to return to me $61.32
times three for the three monthly payments I made, since the $61.32 was
required in excess of 31% of my gross income: and 5.) to provide a proper
31% HAMP payment with the package of information.

I will not be calling you directly, but thank you for your number. I have a
brain injury and it's hard for me to talk. It's much easier to write, since that
is slower.

Sincerely,
Karen Marie Kline

Note to first line of letter - I was told the correspondence WFHM
received was from “WF lawyers”.

Karen Marie Kline
XXXXX
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
Loan number XXXXXXXX

February 8, 2010

Ben Windust, Senior Vice President, and Sarah Butts
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10368
Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

Dear Mr. Windust and Sarah Butts,

Your letter dated February 3, 2010 cannot be true given what your
previous letters actually said.

For instance, your September 22, 2009 letter, attached, said that after I
finalized my “acceptance of this offer” by calling in before October 6, 2009
and scheduling three payments at the new rate Wells Fargo would send me
“a package of information that clearly spells out the full terms and the
documentation you need to supply.” I finalized on Saturday, September
26, 2009 but Wells Fargo never sent me the promised package of
information.

Your September 22 letter also said, “During this phone call, we'll schedule
a date for your first trial payment.” That was done, the trial payment was
scheduled, as were the subsequent two payments which your letter of
September 22 talked about: “You will need to make two additional
payments,” and that too was done. Wells Fargo accepted and cashed over
a three month period my three trial period payments, yet no information
package was sent to me.

Then, when I was denied just before the end of three months, the letter
said I had been denied because I had not sent in all the things I had been
asked for, only as stated above, no package stating what I needed to send
in was ever sent to me: I was not asked for anything.

In terms of Wells Fargo taking my social security supplemental income,
that was a part of my GROSS income.

The amount that was demanded in the HAMP letter from Mr. Windust and
subsequently taken by Wells Fargo was supposed to have been 31%. Only
Wells Fargo took more than 31% of my gross income.

Whether I was accepted or denied, the fact is that Wells Fargo offered me
a HAMP trial period, I did what I was asked, even though the amount,
demanded (as I later learned) was not acceptable under the government
terms of the program. I was denied only after Wells Fargo took all of my
supplemental income on top of the allowable 31%. My supplemental
income which was taken in excess of what the HAMP program designates
must be returned to me.

I am reiterating: In order to resolve the problems in the simplest terms
possible I am asking Wells Fargo: 1.) to recognize that I finalized Wells
Fargo's offer of a trial period in HAMP when I called Wells Fargo on
September 26, 2009 and scheduled my three HAMP trial period payments
as outlined in Mr. Windust's September 22, 2009 letter; 2.) to send me the
package of information that I was promised by Wells Fargo in the event I
finalized Wells Fargo's offer of a HAMP trial period; 3.) to remove any
legal fees that were or might be billed to me from September 22, 2009
when I was offered the HAMP trial period, or alternatively from
September 26, 2009 when I finalized my acceptance of the offer; and 4.)
to return to me my supplemental income which was taken in excess of 31%
of my gross income.

Sincerely,

Karen Marie Kline

Health Boundaries Bite

Karen Marie Kline
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
Loan number XXXXXXXXX
Number at top of letter from you: XXXXX

October 28 , 2009

Written Correspondence
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10335
Des Moines, IA 50306-0335

Dear Wells Fargo,

Before I write for help from US government entities assigned to deal with
bank/mortgage problems, I have been advised to write to you in hopes of
resolution. I am, therefore, writing to you.

My problem is that Wells Fargo and its lawyers appear to be using HAMP
loan modification to avoid discovery rather than for the purpose for which
it was created and I am asking Wells Fargo: 1.) to recognize that I
finalized Wells Fargo's offer of a trial period in HAMP when I called
Wells Fargo on September 26, 2009 and scheduled my three HAMP trial
period payments; 2.) to send me the package of information that I was
promised by Wells Fargo in the event I finalized Wells Fargo's offer of a
HAMP trial period; and 3.) to remove any legal fees that were or might be
billed to me from September 22, 2009 when I was offered the HAMP
trial period, or alternatively from September 26, 2009 when I finalized my
acceptance of the offer.

Here is what has happened:

I applied to Wells Fargo for Home Affordable Modification Program help
in March, 2009. I enlisted HOPE NOW help and a counselor called in
with me several times. During one call, several months down the road, we
were told that my file had not been updated since 2005.

I repeatedly complied with Wells Fargo's requests that I send in my
documents with current dates and new signatures.

At the same time I have been counterclaiming in Wells Fargo's
foreclosure action that Wells Fargo has dealt with me in bad faith. In
order to prosecute my case I sent Interrogatories and Requests for
Production to Wells Fargo via its lawyers. In response I was given only
three answers: the name of the person actually answering the questions,
her job title: lawyer, and her work address.

Thereafter I sent a letter pursuant to rule 1-037 NMRA requesting proper
answers to my other questions and I explained why I needed them. When
the deadline for proper responses drew near Ms. Charney's legal assistant
called me and said that they weren't going to answer my discovery and
that I was in a forbearance plan. Only I'd never heard about any
forbearance plan prior to the legal assistant mentioning it.

Thereafter Wells Fargo sent me a letter saying there was a moratorium
during the forbearance plan, and that I should sign the enclosed
agreement. However, the agreement said I would pay $480+/- a month on
my mortgage followed by a balloon payment in February, 2010 of about
$34k. I don't have that kind of money, for either the $480 monthly
payments or the huge balloon, so I could not in honesty sign the
agreement and I did not.

I filed with the court a statement that I would agree to a two week delay
but after that I had to work on prosecuting my case. Although Ms.
Charney and her assistant said they would file something re the
moratorium, they did not file anything.

In time I sent Wells Fargo Requests for Admissions, many of which
mirrored my Interrogatories. None of my Admissions was timely denied.
As a result the Admissions are deemed admitted and conclusively
established under Rule 1-036 NMRA.

Meanwhile, on September 22, 2009, just before the deadline to deny,
Wells Fargo wrote to me offering a Home Affordable Modification
Program Trial Period. In its letter Wells Fargo wrote that I could “finalize
this offer” by calling in by October 6, 2009 so that Wells Fargo could
“establish your trial modification plan.” The letter also said, “Within a
week of setting up your trial period, we will send you a package of
information that clearly spells out the full terms and the documentation
you need to supply.”

I finalized the offer by calling in on September 26, 2009 and scheduling
three modification plan payments for which I was charged $20 (whereas
Wells Fargo's letter had said it would be free). Thereafter I did not receive
the package of information that had been promised in the September 22,
2009 letter.

At the same time Wells Fargo's lawyers refused to agree to vacate the
October 19, 2009 foreclosure hearing on Wells Fargo's motion for
summary judgment. This was particularly worrying to me because HAMP
guidelines specifically say that foreclosure is to be suspended during the
trial period.

At the last minute Wells Fargo's lawyers produced a motion to continue,
while still refusing to sign the simple order I had proposed to vacate the
hearing. I objected that continuing is not the same as suspending. Ms.
Charney refused to talk to me on the phone about the October 19, 2009
summary judgment hearing. She hung up when I answered and did not
return any of my three calls when I called back and left messages. I also
objected that the lawyers were dishonest in their motion to continue and
had falsified the order when they filled in the line above my name saying
they had been unable to reach me.

At the hearing I quoted from the Home Affordable Modification Program
Guidelines repeatedly and repeatedly said that the hearing should not have
been held.

On October 27, 2009, I received a letter from Wells Fargo dated October
20, 2009 saying that a forbearance plan had been approved (failing to note
that I had not been able to agree because of the huge amounts of money it
required from me) and that because I did not keep the agreement I was
taken out of the trial period.

I immediately called Wells Fargo at the number listed: 1-800-678-7986,
and spoke with a series of Wells Fargo representatives beginning with
Duane, and progressing to a senior rep named Blair. Basically I was told
that on October 20, 2009 Wells Fargo's lawyers told Wells Fargo to take
me out of the HAMP trial period.

I am concerned by this because it appears to be a tactic meant to punish
me for not going along with the deceit the lawyers incorporated into their
Motion to Continue, as well as a tactic to avoid responsibility for refusing
to vacate the hearing on their motion for summary judgment which the
HAMP guidelines clearly say should not have been held while I was in the
trial period.

The problem, then, is that Wells Fargo and its lawyers appear to be using
the HAMP trial period to avoid discovery rather than for the objectives
identified by the United States government when the program was set up
and Wells Fargo agreed to participate; and, Wells Fargo's lawyers appear
to have violated the HAMP guidelines be refusing to sign the simple order
vacating Wells Fargo's summary judgment hearing.

Further, it is not acceptable under HAMP to ask me, a borrower, for cash
for the Modification, so that appears to mean that the $20 fee to set up
my three trial period payments was not envisioned by the US Treasury.

Arbitrarily excusing/explaining the termination of my HAMP trial period
on the basis of my non-agreement to the $34k balloon payment that was
part of Wells Fargo's $480+/- monthly payment forbearance plan appears
to violate the same HAMP guideline. (I'm not sure it was all right for
Wells Fargo to ask me to pay the Escrow Account, which I did pay in the
amount of more than $400.)

The fact that Wells Fargo said it would not cooperate with discovery, the
fact that my HAMP trial period was instituted before a critical discovery
deadline, and the fact that Wells Fargo and its lawyers arbitrarily
terminated my trial period the day after the prohibited hearing at which
they were given a stay of discovery, gives the appearance of Wells Fargo
using the HAMP program to avoid discovery.

In order to resolve the foregoing problems in the simplest terms possible I
am asking Wells Fargo: 1.) to recognize that I finalized Wells Fargo's offer
of a trial period in HAMP when I called Wells Fargo on September 26,
2009 and scheduled my three HAMP trial period payments; 2.) to send
me the package of information that I was promised by Wells Fargo in the
event I finalized Wells Fargo's offer of a HAMP trial period; and 3.) to
remove any legal fees that were or might be billed to me from September
22, 2009 when I was offered the HAMP trial period, or alternatively from
September 26, 2009 when I finalized my acceptance of the offer.

Sincerely,

Karen Marie Kline

Karen Marie Kline
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
Loan number
Number at top of letter from you:

November 8, 2009

Monika Leuang Van
Written Correspondence
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10335
Des Moines, IA 50306-0335

Dear Ms. Van,

Your letter dated October 29, 2009 sounds generic and doesn't answer
any of my questions.

Basically, I am concerned that Wells Fargo Home Mortgage used the
Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) trial period to avoid
discovery rather than for its intended purpose. I was about to write to the
Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks to complain
when I read that I'm supposed to write to the bank first, that's why I
wrote to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Written Correspondence.

Here, more concisely are my questions:

1.        Why I was not sent the things which Sr. Vice President Ben
Windust's letter of September 22, 2009 clearly stated would be sent to me
after I finalized my acceptance of Wells Fargo's HAMP trial period offer
by calling in before October 6, 2009 and scheduling three payments at the
new rate provided to me under HAMP? (I finalized on September 26,
2009.)

2.        When will I be sent the things that were promised if I finalized
Wells Fargo's HAMP trial period offer?

3.        Where in HAMP US Treasury Guidelines does it permit lawyers
to use the trial period to avoid discovery? (Wells Fargo phone reps said
the correspondence upon which my cancellation was based was from
Wells Fargo lawyers.)

Surely my “necessary loan information” was thoroughly reviewed before
offering me the HAMP trial period. Wasn't it?

So, the questions now are those above: 1-3. I look forward to your
specific answers and to having my finalized trial period reinstated. I will
gladly wait another ten days for resolution.

Sincerely,

Karen Marie Kline

Karen Marie Kline
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
Loan number
Number at top of letter from you:

November 8, 2009

Ben Windust, Senior Vice President
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
PO Box 10368
Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

Dear Mr. Windust,

When I called Wells Fargo Home Mortgage about the cancellation of my
Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) trial period after I
had finalized my acceptance of Wells Fargo's offer, see attached letter
from you with my notes, and one day after Wells Fargo achieved a stay
of my discovery I was told to write to “Written Correspondence”; a copy
of my letter is attached.

Wells Fargo's response dated October 29, 2009 sounds generic and
doesn't answer any of my questions.

Basically, I am concerned that Wells Fargo Home Mortgage used the
HAMP trial period offer that it extended to me to avoid discovery rather
than for the trial period's intended purpose. I was about to write to the
Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks to complain
when I read that I'm supposed to write to the bank for resolution first.

Here are my questions and the issues needing resolution:

1. Why I was not sent the things which your letter of September 22, 2009
clearly stated would be sent to me after I finalized my acceptance of
Wells Fargo's HAMP trial period offer by calling in before October 6,
2009 and scheduling three payments at the new rate provided to me under
HAMP? (I finalized on Saturday, September 26, 2009.)

2. When will I be sent the things that were promised to me by you and
Wells Fargo if I finalized Wells Fargo's HAMP trial period offer?

3. Where in HAMP US Treasury Guidelines does it permit lawyers to use
the trial period to avoid discovery? (Wells Fargo phone reps said the
correspondence upon which my cancellation was based was from Wells
Fargo lawyers. See attached letter.)

I look forward to specific answers and to having my finalized trial period
reinstated.

Because I began asking Wells Fargo Home Mortgage for Home
Affordable Modification in March, 2009, and, I resubmitted my
information on a nearly monthly basis, I trust Wells Fargo Home
Mortgage had ample time to thoroughly review my necessary loan
information prior to you sending me Wells Fargo's offer of the HAMP
trial period.

That being true, I trust that ten additional days will be ample time for
resolution of the issues that I have presented to include reinstating my
HAMP trial period and sending me the promised materials and documents.

Sincerely,

Karen Marie Kline

Copy of

letter

on this page also

attached...

http://www.health-boundaries-bite.com
Your fingernails reflect your health --
Learn some warning signs --

Karen Kline

Letters to and from Wells Fargo re:
Home Affordable Modification Program
(HAMP)

The HAMP guidelines are quite clear. Wells Fargo, however, has not
followed those guidelines with me. I therefore looked for the place to
complain, Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks , and
learned that I was required to try to solve my problems with Wells Fargo
before complaining.

Again Wells Fargo sent a questionable response

Says:

from WF Lawyers

Wells Fargo's

letter

dated

October 20, 2009

(shown directly

below)

Wells Fargo responded unbelievably quickly

Says:

from WF Lawyers

May 3, 2010 - Wells Fargo is not considered a national bank for purposes of
complaining to the Comptroller of Currency about violations of the HAMP
guidelines. GAO (Government Accounting Office) appears to say complaints
to company presidents worked best. Since I objected OCC has clarified their
site to include Wells Fargo as a national bank.

June 8, 2010 - I filed my OCC complaint today after I received a dishonest
letter written by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, apparently, to reply to my
letter to Wells Fargo's President and CEO, John G. Stumpf. (All three things
are posted chronologically further down this page.)

and fraud in handling my mortgage's HAMP trial period I asked WF to
recognize that I finalized WF's 9/22/09 HAMP trial period offer when I
called WF on 9/26/09 and scheduled three payments; to send me the
package of information I was promised; to remove legal fees since 9/22/09;
to return $61.32 times three (required in excess of 31% of my gross
income); and to provide a proper 31% HAMP payment with the
information package. Copying to Wells Fargo's president did not help.

Chronology:
On 9/22/09, Ben Windust, Sr. V.P., WF Home Mortgage, wrote, “We've
gone back and carefully reviewed your situation and the information you
provided... You may be eligible for a trial modification plan under the
government's Home Affordable Modification Program... You must call us
to finalize this offer by October 6, 2009 so that we can establish your trial
modification plan... During this phone call we'll schedule a date for your
first trial payment... You will need to make two additional payments...
Within a week of setting up your trial period we will send you a package of
information that clearly spells out the full terms and the documentation that
you need to supply.”

I called on 9/26/09 and finalized. Three payments at the new rate of
$279.56 were scheduled with a $20 check fee added to my 1st payment:
10/4/09: $299.56 confirmation #7088478093; 11/4/09: $279.56
confirmation #7088478234; 12/4/09: $279.56 confirmation #7088478287.

The information package promised in WF's 9/22/09 letter was never sent.

Citing the HAMP trial period WF lawyers would not answer my discovery
requests in my home's foreclosure. At the same time WF lawyers would
not vacate their 10/19/09 summary judgment hearing. At the hearing the
judge stayed the case.

On 10/20/09, WF wrote that because I did not keep WF's forbearance plan
I was taken out of the trial period. WF's 8/15/09 plan required a
$34,342.78 balloon payment on 2/1/10. I did not have that nor could I
afford $432.28 payments so I hadn't signed.

On 10/27/09 I spoke with Duane at the number in WF's 10/20/09 letter: 1-
800-678-7986. He transferred me to a senior rep, Blair, who said that on
10/20/09 WF lawyers told WF to take me out of the HAMP trial period.

WF cashed my scheduled trial period payments even after writing on
11/30/09, “after carefully reviewing the information you've provided, we
are unable to adjust the terms of your mortgage. This decision was made
because you did not provide us with all of the information needed within
the time frame required per your trial modification...”

During the three months of trial period payments I did not have enough
money to make ends meet. I wondered if $279.56 was 31% of my
monthly income. It was not. 31% of my $704 income is $218.24. So WF
was taking $61.32 of my $62 supplemental income for my disability due to
traumatic brain injury.

I wrote to Ben Windust on 11/8/09 asking for a refund. Sarah Butts
replied, 4/15/10, that WF used financial information they had on file for
me “at that time,” so the payment was 31% and there would be no refund.

I replied that on 5/21/09 WF confirmed receipt of my correct, financial
information: $704, verified by a HOPE NOW representative from Money
Management International:

Time: 5/21/2009 2:31:19 PM
Sent to 8663597363 with remote ID ""
Result: (0/339;0/0) Successful Send
Page record: 1 - 17
Elapsed time: 13:56 on channel 13

I wrote that my financial information had not changed.

Sarah Butts also wrote in her 4/15/10 letter that on October 20, 2009 I was
sent the package of information I'd been promised.

I replied that lenders are disallowed by HAMP from requiring cash
contributions so WF's October 20, 2009 letter referencing a requirement of
$34,342.78 could not be the package of requirements for HAMP that was
promised in WF's 9/22/09 letter.

Ms. Butts 4/15/10 letter said my case was investigated, closed, and no
further letters would be answered.

My 3,399 Character Complaint to the OCC

My Complaint to the OCC