On Friday, November 2nd, MAAPL Coordinator Grace Ross was interviewed by WGBH’s Phillip Martin as part of WGBH’s “30 Issues in 30 Days” series. In this interview, Grace talks about the foreclosure crisis in Massachusetts, its impact on the state economy, and how this issue affects the current political campaigns.
You can listen to the full interview on WGBH’s Web site.
While the Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending did not get to do the comprehensive interview and voter education process of Register of Deeds Candidates across the state as we discussed – we did send foreclosure questions to the key contested races – which will be determined in the primary TOMORROW, Thurs, Sept. 6th
REMEMBER TO VOTE in the Primary TOMORROW.
In Hampshire county, three Democrats vie for the Register of Deeds – in fairness, we asked our questions very last minute but here are their answers:
Bonnie McCracken:
1. What have you done in the past to help halt or reverse foreclosures?
RESPONSE: Because of my background in foreclosures and real estate law, I have been able to halt several foreclosure because of the errors I found in the recorded documents, i.e., Banks did not hold title to the property they were attempting to foreclose on. I am the co-author of legislation that protects our deployed service members from foreclosure under the Valor Act signed into law on May 31, 2012. My legislation transfers the burden of proof of notice of deployment from the soldier to the Bank. The Bank now has to prove that a soldier is not deployed.
I will remember that although our homes are important, it is the individual, families and communities that have the expectation and right to strong advocacy from the their elected Register.
2. The “robo-signing” of documents to be recorded at the Registry of Deeds is now broadly known – these issues include the signing of affidavits not under personal knowledge, documents not signed by the named signatory, and notarizations not compliant with state law. In South Essex, the Register has publicized questionable signatures and provided homeowners with legal affidavits where he has clear evidence.
RESPONSE: The governor signed legislation on August 3, 2012 making Robo-signing illegal. It is the duty of the Register to uphold and enforce the laws of the Commonwealth as it pertains to the documents recorded at the Registry of Deeds. This illegal activity not only has a detriment impact on individuals and family, the cost can also be felt in our communities. As such, I will work to halt continuing violations as well to recover the cost and losses that our communities has suffered as a result of this illegal practice.
What is your position in regards to how you would plan to handle these situations?
RESPONSE: I have consulted with Register O’Brien’s office about implementing these same affidavits in Hampshire County. This will put all parties on notice of these questionable [signatures] documents. In addition, I would place necessary procedures in place to share this information, where appropriate, with local enforcement agencies.
3. Some of the illegalities in recorded foreclosure documents may begin to be subject of criminal investigations under Chapter 266, Sect 35(a),
A. If these documents are brought to your attention, how would plan to handle them?
RESPONSE: I will work with with the authorities and conduct my own investigation of the records at the Registry of Deeds. I have already started to compile files of [alleged/possible] fraudulently foreclosed properties in Hampshire County.
B. If a D.A. in your area was intending to prosecute such fraud cases and asked your office for research assistance in identifying similar questionable documents, would you immediately put resources at their disposal? If not, under what circumstances would you?
RESPONSE: I have already identified properties with questionable documents and I would bring these to the immediate attention of the D.A. Because the DA office does not include staff attorneys with real estate background this office would need my extensive background and knowledge of foreclosures and robo-signing to be able to take action against these banks. I will be able to expedite this matter because of the research I have already done on properties in Hampshire County.
4. The best means for enforcing compliance with certain municipal ordinances designed to require lenders to follow best practices in resolving mortgage defaults pre-foreclosure and to create local enforcement of health and safety standards on foreclosing properties require Registers to require additional documented compliance by lenders to record a foreclosure –
If elected, would you use the powers of your office to enforce municipal ordinances and bylaws?
RESPONSE: I would not record any foreclosure documents unless there was an affidavit signed by the municipality stating that the bank complied with the ordinance.
5. Legal Rulings are beginning to come down ruling certain widespread practices by the lending industry as illegal in the Commonwealth.
A. Where such rulings demonstrate that certain practices in the creation of documents to be recorded are now adjudicated to be fraudulent, would that change your procedures as a Register? What if you were informed about such a ruling?
RESPONSE: It is time that the Registers of Deeds in the Commonwealth update the recording standards and practices to address this issue making fraudulent documents un-recordable. We should make it clear to financial institutions and their legal representatives that continuing these practices will be costly. As new ruling come down, where appropriate standards and procedure in the Registry should be revised to reflect these changes. The new foreclosure law did not directly address how to address existing defective foreclosure titles. I would work the local bar and legislators to remedy this situation.
B. What if you were shown that such fraudulent documents were still being submitted for recording at your Registry?
RESPONSE: Those who are held responsible for ensuring the integrity and reliability of the land records must also be held accountable for the continued submission of fraudulent documents. REBA has made a strong argument as to the public policy interest and the restriction of conveyancing to persons qualified and trained to protect the integrity and reliability of our land record and system. The SJC has held that analyzing title abstracts and other records to render a legal opinion as to marketability of title –does constitute the practice of law in Massachusetts. However, the Register is in the unique position of identifying continuing violations, educating the public, and holding attorneys [including the Attorney General’s office] accountable.
First I would work to clearly establish the authority and power of the Register to reject such documents. Where fraud has been identified [such as by Court rulings], using the authorized powers of the Register, I would reject such documents. And, I would work with the Attorney General, Secretary of the Commonwealth, legislators, and local bar association to improve our land records system to ensure its integrity and reliability.
Timothy P. O’Leary:
1. What have you done in the past to help halt or reverse foreclosures?
I have not done anything.
2. The “robo-signing” of documents to be recorded at the Registry of Deeds is now broadly known – these issues include the signing of affidavits not under personal knowledge, documents not signed by the named signatory, and notarizations not compliant with state law. In South Essex, the Register has publicized questionable signatures and provided homeowners with legal affidavits where he has clear evidence.
What is your position in regards to how you would plan to handle these situations?
Unfortunately, as of this moment, the Register must still record the documents. My goal is to inform the homeowner of their rights to challenge these documents and provide links and information to resources available to stall the process and/or work out potential loan modifications.
3. Some of the illegalities in recorded foreclosure documents may begin to be subject of criminal investigations under Chapter 266, Sect 35(a),
A. If these documents are brought to your attention, how would plan to handle them?
I would alert the DA’s office and keep track of which lenders are suspect.
B. If a D.A. in your area was intending to prosecute such fraud cases and asked your office for research assistance in identifying similar questionable documents, would you immediately put resources at their disposal? If not, under what circumstances would you?
Absolutely.
4. The best means for enforcing compliance with certain municipal ordinances designed to require lenders to follow best practices in resolving mortgage defaults pre-foreclosure and to create local enforcement of health and safety standards on foreclosing properties require Registers to require additional documented compliance by lenders to record a foreclosure –
If elected, would you use the powers of your office to enforce municipal ordinances and bylaws?
Yes.
5. Legal Rulings are beginning to come down ruling certain widespread practices by the lending industry as illegal in the Commonwealth.
A. Where such rulings demonstrate that certain practices in the creation of documents to be recorded are now adjudicated to be fraudulent, would that change your procedures as a Register? What if you were informed about such a ruling?
Any documents determined to be illegal would be rejected as such.
B. What if you were shown that such fraudulent documents were still being submitted for recording at your Registry?
Again, Any documents determined to be illegal would be rejected as such.
Mary Olberding:
I am glad you take an interest in the race for Hampshire Register of Deeds. The foreclosure crisis is indeed a widespread tragedy. If elected, I look forward to working with you, your organization and other community interest groups to follow the law and assist distressed homeowners.
This issue is difficult and complex and deserves more time to it than I am able to give at the moment. With your request coming less than 48 hours before the polls open, I cannot devote the necessary time as I am already committed through Thursday.
Letter calls on governor to remove last minute anti-homeowner additions, prompt right-to-rent task force to action this year
BEACON HILL – Legal experts and housing advocates today called on Governor Deval Patrick to eliminate harmful measures included in foreclosure abatement legislation that awaits his signature or veto. In a letter penned by attorneys and advocates from Greater Boston Legal Services, Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending, and the National Lawyers Guild, the coalition called for immediate action to restore the integrity of the Act to Prevent Unlawful and Unnecessary Foreclosures, including:
Advocates were prompted to send the letter after efforts to remedy these issues in the State Senate failed late last week. If these provisions are left intact, estimates show a significantly greater number of Massachusetts families may be negatively impacted by the foreclosure abatement bill than those that might benefit from its protective measures. A copy of the full letter follows.
—–
Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending
maaplinfo@yahoo.com
July 30, 2012
Governor Deval Patrick
(Via Hand Delivery)
Massachusetts State House
Room 280
Boston, MA 02133
Dear Governor Patrick,
On behalf of thousands of Massachusetts families whose lives are impacted by foreclosure – and all Bay State residents and consumers harmed by the ongoing economic damage of this mortgage crisis – we ask that you take action to eliminate harmful measures included in the pending foreclosure legislation, House Bill 4323.
As an attorney who cut his teeth advocating on behalf of homeowners in the last, comparatively small, foreclosure crisis, you know firsthand the life-wrecking stress experienced by families facing foreclosure and eviction. And as an elected leader, you have dealt directly with the devastating impact the mortgage crisis has had on communities throughout the Commonwealth.
With this experience in mind, we ask that you not sign this legislation as-is, but that you step in to amend and address damaging provisions included within. Among the actions necessary to restore the integrity of this bill:
Addressing language that harms victims of illegal or fraudulent foreclosure is of the utmost importance. First, a new section, inserted at the last minute without notice, transforms this legislation into an anti-homeowner bill and overturns a recent Supreme Judicial Court decision that affirmed a legal protection that has existed for over a century. This new language irrevocably extinguishes the right of all homeowners to sue to get their homes back in cases where lenders have sold properties to third parties – despite not having the legally required promissory note. In Brockton, Springfield, Worcester, and many other communities hardest-hit by the foreclosure crisis, on-the-ground experience shows real estate investors are the overwhelming majority of third party purchasers – not everyday citizens looking for a place to live and raise a family. Few potential homeowners qualify to meet today’s tight lending rules and banks consistently prefer the cash offers of investor-developers. Should this language remain intact, thousands of present homeowners’ rights will be extinguished the day of the auction if a third party purchase occurs at foreclosure.
Second, to the credit of its authors, this legislation would require lenders holding legally unfair, predatory loans to test if they lose more money foreclosing on a homeowner than by offering that family a truly affordable modification. Unfortunately, this protection was coupled with an unworkable process to negotiate and receive that loan modification – one that is by mail only, includes unrealistic deadlines, and offers no concrete notification to the borrower of their opportunities or potential loss of protections in this process.
For example, a bank conducts a now-mandated cost analysis; it shows they lose more money by foreclosing than renegotiating loan terms, and the lender must contact the homeowner about a loan modification. The homeowner, however, has only 30 days to prepare all necessary application documents and have them accepted by the bank. Lenders rarely accept an application as complete on the first try; families nationwide submit documents an average of six times to be deemed complete. In short, these processes and deadlines will block most homeowners from accessing the very protections this bill attempts to create.
Third, this bill also creates a task force to draft a measure to grant homeowners the right to rent their homes post-foreclosure during the bank’s ownership, but requires no real action from that committee until 2013. Permitting homeowners to pay fair market rent will dramatically reduce the rising number of empty, foreclosed properties that drive down property values in communities across the Commonwealth – and shrink the number of homeless families as well. You first spoke in support of this law in spring 2007, at the beginning of the crisis, and each year since, some 8,000 more homeowner households have been needlessly evicted. The task force needs to complete its work by the end of 2012, not 2013.
Even the positive changes in the bill will offer protection to an ever-dwindling number of Massachusetts families. The new loss analysis, for instance, covers only subprime loans. Federal Reserve figures show less than 30% of the Commonwealth’s foreclosures were of subprime loans in 2009, and that number has been dropping since. At best, an estimated 500 families would benefit from the new protection each year, compared to thousands who will loose a key right to regain their home due to the last-minute language additions mentioned above.
Governor Patrick, we ask that you prioritize immediate action to save the key right of all Massachusetts homeowners, going forward, to regain their homes. In addition, we hope that you will correct the loan modification process to work for those facing foreclosure due to unfair, subprime loans – and that you call for an end-of-year deadline for writing right-to-rent legislation that will help keep Bay State families in their homes.
Sincerely,
Nadine Cohen
Consumer Rights Unit, Greater Boston Legal Services
Lee Goldstein
Chair of Massachusetts Foreclosure Task Force, National Lawyers Guild
Eloise Lawrence
Harvard Legal Aid Bureau
Grace Ross
Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending
—–
Monday, July 30, 2012
Contact: Grace C Ross, 617-291-5591, maaplinfo@yahoo.com
Additions create major barriers to negotiations through mail-only process, bar homeowners from reclaiming homes illegally seized and sold to third parties.
BEACON HILL – New provisions in the recently-voted Act to Prevent Unlawful and Unnecessary Foreclosures will impose an undue hardship on homeowners and victims of illegal foreclosure, according to legal experts and housing advocates. Analysis of new sections inserted by a conference committee reveals significant flaws. They create major barriers to mortgage negotiations between homeowners and banks as well as newly barring many homeowners from reclaiming their illegally-seized homes. After an effort to remedy these issues failed in the Senate, advocates now turn to Governor Deval Patrick to take action on behalf of Massachusetts homeowners.
“Make no mistake about it, these new provisions will have a very real, very negative impact on numerous homeowners across the commonwealth.” Eloise Lawrence of the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau. “While this bill provides relief for some Massachusetts families, we’re simultaneously reversing significant homeowner protections that have been law for over 150 years in Massachusetts.”
The present bill creates new restrictions that limit homeowners and lenders to negotiate loan modification terms by mail, along with unrealistic deadlines for documents to be prepared, filed, received and returned. For example, a bank conducts a now-mandated analysis of a mortgage, which shows the lender will lose more money by foreclosing than renegotiating loan terms. The financial institution must then contact a homeowner about a loan modification; however, homeowners will have only 30 days to prepare all the necessary modification application documents and have them accepted by the bank. Lenders rarely accept an application as complete on the first attempt; across the country families have had to submit documents an average of six times to be deemed complete. This bill’s negotiation procedures are unworkable for most homeowners.
An additional section inserted at the eleventh hour would deprive homeowners who prove a foreclosure is illegal the ability to obtain a reversal of a foreclosure if bought by a private party. The new provision asserts that a simple affidavit that the bank has the promissory note is all that is necessary to proceed with a foreclosure – trusting lenders, no matter what their history, to abide by what amounts to an honor system in their foreclosure proceedings. Real estate investors are granted broad immunity for their role in the trafficking of illegally-foreclosed homes, allowing them to hold onto properties proven to be seized through fraud.
Even the most significant changes in the bill will offer an ever-dwindling protection to Bay State homeowners. The above-mentioned loss analysis, for example, affects only subprime loans. Federal Reserve figures show less than 30% of Massachusetts foreclosures were of subprime loans in 2009 – and that number is dropping. At best, an estimated 500 families yearly would benefit from the new protection, compared to thousands who will lose a key right to get their home back due to the last-minute legislative change now in front of Governor Patrick.
“Some of the measures headed to the governor’s desk will have serious, harmful consequences if left unchanged,” said Nadine Cohen, managing attorney of Greater Boston Legal Services’ Consumer Rights Unit. “It is imperative that these anti-homeowner provisions be corrected before the bill is signed.”
—–
Friday, July 27, 2012
Contact:
Grace C. Ross, 617-291-5591, maaplinfo@yahoo.com
Please call the Governor today through Monday, July 30th!
The Foreclosure Bill as passed has almost none of the changes MAAPL and its members have fought for – no mediation, and no other protections for homeowners.
It does make banks test if they would lose more money on a foreclosure than on a loan modification with the homeowner, but this only applies to loans with sub-prime characteristics not yet in default. We think only about 500 loans per year will qualify to receive this bank analysis! But when the bank realizes it will lose money and so offers a loan modification – the homeowner only has 30 days to get their complete modification application mailed to and accepted by the bank. No bank has ever accepted a modification application as complete on the first mailing, and rarely replies with an offer in the next 30 days. The timeline will not work for these homeowners facing foreclosure!
AND the Legislature added a bad, new section to the bill impacting all loans – roughly 10,000 per year facing foreclosure. Frequently the bank does not have the Promissory Note in addition to the mortgage when they foreclose. The new section says the bank must file an affidavit stating they possess the Note before they publish the auction date – but we and the courts have seen the banks lie time and time again on this. If the property is then bought by an investor, even if the homeowner proves the bank did not have the Note, the homeowner cannot sue to get their home back in court! This takes away the fundamental right to get your home back for a legal violation that is rampant in foreclosures.
The bill does set up a legislative task force to study letting homeowners rent from the bank post-foreclosure. But the task force doesn’t have to report on their research until December 31st, 2013 – a year and a half from now. The task force needs to report in December this year, before the next legislative session begins.
What must we tell the Governor? We need the bad section removing homeowner rights taken out of the Foreclosure Bill. We need the task force to report back by December of this year. We need those loans that might benefit from the bank’s required, new test on foreclosure losses NOT to have an impossible loan modification process with the bank.
What to do:
1. Call Governor Patrick at 617-725-4005 or 888-870-7770 (in state)
2. Tell him:
“Please do NOT sign the Foreclosure Bill as is!
• Remove the section that will harm homeowners’ right to sue to get their home back JUST because banks say they had the Note!
• Move the Taskforce on Homeowners Renting Post-Foreclosure to the end of THIS year, 2012
• Fix the loans covered by the “commercially reasonable” cost of foreclosure test, so the time line is realistic and homeowners will be notified of their rights and requirements in this new loan modification process. The process CANNOT penalize the homeowner because the bank refused to accept the application as complete in 30 days.”
3. Please share this post with your friends and ask them to call the Governor too!
4. If you really want to change this bad bill, call your Representative and Senator at the State House, and ask them to contact the Governor to request he make these needed changes! To find out who your Rep. and Senator are and their phone numbers, go to www.WhereDoIVoteMA.com and follow the instructions on the page.
With your help, we can salvage the Foreclosure Bill and keep MA homeowners and tenants in their homes while protecting them from illegal actions and blatantly unfair practices of mortgage lenders!
Call TODAY and spread the word! Thank you for your support and for taking action to protect MA homeowners!
MAAPL: 11th Hour Provision Sells Out Victims of Illegal Foreclosure
Last-minute addition to ‘compromise bill’ bars homeowners from reclaiming homes illegally-seized and sold to investors or other third parties.
BEACON HILL – An 11th hour addition to the so-called “compromise” Act to Prevent Unlawful and Unnecessary Foreclosures sells out victims of certain illegal foreclosures, housing advocates say – eliminating rights victims may have to reclaim their unlawfully-seized homes. The last-minute language, inserted by the conference committee charged with hammering out differences between House and Senate versions of the foreclosure abatement bill, encourages lenders to dump questionable and illegal foreclosures on investors, who, in-turn, are granted broad immunity from legal action. And in an act many are calling unethical, the Massachusetts House suspended its rules to pass the new bill immediately and without debate – offering members no time to review or object to blatantly anti-consumer measure. The bill’s summary included no mention of the new language.
“That the conference committee would inject such blatantly anti-homeowner language at the eleventh hour and without debate is absolutely unconscionable,” said Martha Assefa of Worcester Anti-Foreclosure Team, an affiliate of the Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending (MAAPL). “They’ve taken a bill designed to keep families in their homes and stabilize the housing market and turned it into yet another giveaway to the banks and foreclosure mills.”
Current law states that a lender or lender’s agent must hold both the mortgage and promissory note to execute a proper foreclosure. As written, the new language allows lenders to file a simple affidavit asserting all paperwork is in order. No actual proof is required; lenders can simply claim their records validate the order – even those under investigation or being sued for previous robo-signing of fraudulent foreclosures. In short, a predatory lender would be able to seize and sell a family’s home, with no evidence outside of their own assertions – though the foreclosure may be found to be blatantly illegal after the fact. As many as one in three Massachusetts foreclosures could be affected by the provision.
In addition to weakened oversight of predatory lenders, the new language proactively grants investors immunity for their role in the trafficking of illegally-foreclosed homes. Now barred from suing the purchasers of these illegal foreclosures, victims would have no way to reclaim their property once it is sold to a third party.
“This provision gives predatory lenders carte blanche to dump illegal and fraudulent foreclosures on investors as quickly as possible,” said MAAPL’s Grace Ross. “The lenders have stated publicly that they sign legal documents without review, have been sued by top law enforcement agencies nationwide, and will now be able to file a fraudulent document and investors are immune. Homeowners in these cases will have no recourse to reclaim their homes.”
“Plain and simple, this irresponsible act sells out Massachusetts homeowners to give a sweetheart deal to big banks and housing speculators,” said Steve Meacham of MAAPL affiliate City Life/Vida Urbana. “We call on the State Senate and Governor to stand up for their constituents and immediately strike this ill-conceived language from the bill.”
The relevant excerpt from the amended Act to Prevent Unlawful and Unnecessary Foreclosures follows.
308 Prior to publishing a notice of a foreclosure sale, as required by section 14, the creditor, or if the
309 creditor is not a natural person, an officer or duly authorized agent of the creditor, shall certify
310 compliance with this subsection in an affidavit based upon a review of the creditor’s business
311 records. The creditor, or an officer or duly authorized agent of the creditor, shall record this
312 affidavit with the registry of deeds for the county or district where the land lies. The affidavit
313 certifying compliance with this subsection shall be conclusive evidence in favor of an arm’s-
314 length third party purchaser for value, at or subsequent to the resulting foreclosure sale, that the
315 creditor has fully complied with this section and the mortgagee is entitled to proceed with
316 foreclosure of the subject mortgage under the power of sale contained in the mortgage and any 1
317 or more of the foreclosure procedures authorized in this chapter; provided that, the arm’s-length
318 third party purchaser for value relying on such affidavit shall not be liable for any failure of the
319 foreclosing party to comply and title to the real property thereby acquired shall not be set aside
320 on account of such failure. The filing of such affidavit shall not relieve the affiant, or other
321 person on whose behalf the affidavit is executed, from liability for failure to comply with this
322 section, including by reason of any statement in the affidavit. For purposes of this subsection, the
323 term “arm’s-length, third party purchaser for value” shall include such purchaser’s heirs,
324 successors and assigns.
—–
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Contacts:
Grace C. Ross, 617-291-5591, maaplinfo@yahoo.com
Jason A. Stephany, 617-286-4430, jason@massuniting.org
Imagine…
No more foreclosures, vacancies, lost homes, destroyed neighborhoods or plummeting property values.
Instead…
——
——
Mandatory Mediation in 23 jurisdictions across the US, including every other New England state:
——
For more information, contact MAAPL at 508-630-1686 or maaplinfo@yahoo.com
Both the Massachusetts Senate and House have passed versions of the Foreclosure Bill (H.4087/S.2298). NOW we need the best of both versions to come out of the negotiations of their conference committee–especially Mandatory Mediation.
WE NEED YOU TO CALL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE TODAY! Just say:
Hi, Representative __________,
I am calling because we need you to please sign on to the Dear Colleague letter that Representative O’Day and 15 additional legislators have sent to your office, and to speak to the conference members for the Foreclosure Bill and to the Speaker of the House.
Specifically, express your strong support for:
There has been a 47% increase in petitions to foreclose in this past month compared to the same month in 2011–We, the people of Massachusetts, cannot wait another two years for this legislation! Please call your Representative today and let your voice be heard! It only takes a few minutes to support these provisions that will affect Massachusetts homeowners for years to come.
If you don’t know who your State Representative is, go to wheredoivotema.com, enter your address, and click the “Find My Election information” button. When the Election Information screen displays, scroll down to find the name of your “Rep in General Court”. Click your Representative’s name to view their office contact information and call them directly, or call the State House Switchboard at 617-722-2000, press 2, then press 0 and ask to be transferred to your Representative’s office.
Thank you for your call! Together, we can make a difference!
Please Call your State Senators on Tuesday, June 5th to support 3 critical amendments to the Foreclosure bill that was just voted out of the Senate Ways & Means Committee today!
Legislation that includes these amendments would really make a positive difference to those facing foreclosure and their communities. The Senate must act NOW if we are likely to see any relief for homeowners in the next two years!
Facts:
Right now, we need calls to your Senator! Ask them to co-sponsor and vote for…
We need people to make calls all day on Tuesday through Wednesday morning! Please help by making your call today and helping us spread the word about this important opportunity to amend the Foreclosure bill!
PLEASE FORWARD THE NEED FOR CALLS
In addition to Calls, the following Actions are planned:
Welcome to the online home of the Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending (MAAPL). Here you will find information about us and our work, including
By following us on Twitter, Liking our Facebook page, and bookmarking or subscribing to this Web site, you can keep up with the latest information on public hearings, protests, press conferences, and other actions related to foreclosures and fraudulent mortgage lending practices throughout Massachusetts. We encourage you to participate in these events and let your voice be heard. Together, we can stem the tide of the foreclosure crisis in Massachusetts!
We need your stories to help us put a human face on the foreclosure crisis and the impact of predatory and fraudulent mortgage lending practices. Please download and print this form to share your story with us or to help a friend or neighbor tell their story.
Would you like to get your organization involved in MAAPL’s work against predatory mortgage lending practices and preventing needless foreclosures and evictions in Massachusetts? It’s easy–just download, complete and return this sign-up form.
