Reopend to reafrm mtge now lawyer says it is not his job

[chp7filer]

My mortgage company sent me a re-affirmation agreement that had incorrect loan terms. So, they sent me another re-affirmation with loan modification terms, but it was too late and my BK discharged. I asked my BK lawyer to re-open my case, and he re-opened it, stating the reason above (that mtge co was late in providing reaffirm and that I want to sign). My case was just re-opened but now I got a lettter from my lawyer saying that re-affirmation and loan modification are different and that according to BK laws, there is no way of re-affirming the mtge now and that my mtge company cannot file the reaffirmation agreement with the courts. That the modification is between me and my mtge company. and that his work with me has now concluded. WHAT??? I called the mtge company and told them my case is re-opened, now they will send me another re-affirmation agreement. I asked if there was a way not to include the lawyer and they said that the lawyer has to participate by filing this re-affirmation. Who is right? What do I do? I can't lose my home, I have an 8 mos old infant!

This is what he says: "Any modification would not be subject to a Reaffirmation agreement and bk court approval is not required. under bk law the current mtge is still in place."

The reason why I want the reaffirmation is because the terms are 5% with my late payments tacked to the end, and is a fixed. As supposed to my original mtge which is 9%, ARM (which is probablly 12% now) and very late. My income has been cut SIGNIFICANTLY and I cannot afford the latter.

And my state is PA. Thank you!

[justbroke]

First, I would never have reaffirmed to start with, so I hope you never reaffirmed. Second, if you are just doing a modification, you absolutely do not need to reaffirm the mortgage. Also, if your mortgage company and you came to terms on the so-called "reaffirmation' agreement after your case discharged, you can't file the reaffirmation. It would had to have been signed before the discharge. The only way the court will allow a reaffirmation agreement to be entered post-discharge, is if the reaffirmation agreement was only filed late.

As to who is right? They both are. Since you filed through an attorney, the attorney must file the reaffirmation agreement. The attorney is doing you a huge favor because the re-affirmation is not required in order to do a modification. If the bank is leveraging the modification on you in order to coerce you to sign a reaffirmation, then this is not allowed.

I just did a modification to my loan while in Chapter 7, and the bank specifically told me that I didn't need to reaffirm in order to get the modification. They had this in all their paperwork too. The Courts don't like coerced reaffirmations.

As your attorney wrote... a reaffirmation has nothing to do with a modification, although the terms of a note can be modified by the reaffirmation. I hope that you're ready to walk away and tell your bank as much. Tell them that you'll accept a modification, but you won't be able to reaffirm the debt since the discharge has already been entered.

[chp7filer]

Well, the mortgage company says that if I file for modification, this will only be good for 6 mos, however the re-affirmed modification is good for the life of the loan. So that is why I wanted to re-affirm.
The thing that I don't understand is, if this is all true about the re-affirmation, why did my lawyer re-open my case? He should have acted in my best interest and told me that there is a difference, and that the re-affirmation may not be allowed to be filed, etc. Was it for the money? So crooked.

[justbroke]

Well, the mortgage company says that if I file for modification, this will only be good for 6 mos, however the re-affirmed modification is good for the life of the loan. So that is why I wanted to re-affirm.

A modification for 6 months... that's laughable and is not a modification. Reads more like a forbearance.

The thing that I don't understand is, if this is all true about the re-affirmation, why did my lawyer re-open my case? He should have acted in my best interest and told me that there is a difference, and that the re-affirmation may not be allowed to be filed, etc. Was it for the money? So crooked.

Why? Because you asked him to, but he probably listened to what you said, and what I'm hearing, and wants nothing to do with it. What you are saying reads like a modification, not a traditional reaffirmation. Many of these banks will try to do a "back-door" reaffirmation by telling the debtor that the only way to get the modification is to reaffirm the debt. Go back and ask your attorney why he did that.

I'm not an attorney and certainly not yours, but if I were an attorney, I wouldn't sign a reaffirmation agreement in this circumstance. You see, the attorney must sign your reaffirmation agreement but only if s/he agrees with it. Reads as though your attorney does not agree -- smart attorney. He's basically saying that if you want to file a reaffirmation agreement, do so on your own, and then the Court will review it. I'm thinking the court will probably reject the reaffirmation agreement at a hearing anyhow. However, that's all speculative and you need to decide for yourself.

I would not let my lender pressure me into signing a reaffirmation agreement post-discharge. Something is wrong.

[NoMoreCards]

JB is offering you really good advice on this. A reaffirmation is not required for a modification.

[chp7filer]

I thought I had it all figured out, would end up with a good deal with the reaffirmed modification - now, i'm not all too sure...
Thanks for the replies...

[justbroke]

Sorry to disappoint you, but something is wrong. Go back graciously to your attorney and ask him his thoughts on this. If the attorney is a good attorney, he'll let you know why he wants nothing to do with the reaffirmation agreement. There are some attorneys that won't sign them anyhow.

[chp7filer]

What could go wrong with re-affirmations?

[HHM]

The reason attorney's won't deal with reaffirmations is that it opens up potential liability, if the attorney signs it, he is attesting that the reaffirmation will not be a hardship. Well, whether a particular debt is hardship is really beyond the control of the attorney. That is a very subjective determination.

In any event, I agree with JB, reaffirmations are BAD BAD BAD.

Namely because the debtor just got out of BK-7, most will still be in a precarious financial position and it won't take much to push them over the edge financially such that what they thought they could afford is no longer possible.

[justbroke]

What could go wrong with re-affirmations?

They are usually a hardship to start with. This is why the reaffirmation agreement process was greatly modified in the 2005 BAPCPA amendments to the code!

If your creditor pressured you or ASKED YOU to re-open your case to file a re-affirmation agreement, it may actually be coercive and considered a violation of the discharge injunction.

[chp7filer]

Great. My lawyer did place on the motion to re-open the case that the mortgage did ask me to re-open the case. I re-opened, spent $450 of which could've gone to savings all for nothing.

[justbroke]

You can try to file the reaffirmation on your own, but I don't see the judge signing it.