I took the time to write to the COP with a different perspective.
“Let’s not measure a company’s success based on the number of ‘Trials’ extended to families. I feel you should base the success rate on how many have successfully completed a modification. Based on my own conversations with people enrolled in the trial period, very few have actually completed the process. Many signed papers and have never heard anything from their lenders. The trial periods are lasting longer than the expected 3 months and continue to be plagued with mismanagement, errors, and incompetence.
Your number 1 HAMP provider has an unsatisfactory BBB rating and poor business practices to the point that they have their own watchdog tracking their every move. I’d love to know just what constitutes them as # 1 in your book. I’d rate a company # 1 if they showed compassion and understanding in such an economic crisis; those that were willing to work with families who have seen hard times and help to fight to keep the American dream alive. This is not one of those companies.
By November 2009, the numbers were in and they didn't look too kindly on Saxon. Saxon had 35,565 active HAMP Trial modifications and had permanently modified 42. Yes, that's forty two. What a shame. Saxon had the potential to help 35,565 qualified borrowers who were participating in the HAMP trial and only managed to modify 42. I think the other 35,523 deserve an acceptable reason and not just another excuse.
