Residential Mortgage Expert Opines On Loan Servicing Dispute

ByVictoria Negron

|

Updated onFebruary 27, 2018

Residential Mortgage Expert Opines On Loan Servicing Dispute

This case involves investors that purchased mortgage-backed securities (MBS) who demanded repurchase of the MBS. The loans that were represented as solid or safe turned out to be fraudulently reported subprime loans. It is alleged that the mortgage servicing company should have known that these loans were subprime through their due diligence and if they did know, they had a duty to report this to the investors. An expert in residential mortgage servicing was sought to help counsel understand the business practices in the residential mortgage servicing space.

Question(s) For Expert Witness

1. Are you knowledgeable about the standard customs and practices for residential mortgage servicing?

2. Can you speak to how the servicing industry interprets provisions?

3. Are you knowledgeable about the language of pooling and servicing agreements, including how parties would have likely interpreted the language of a contract when negotiating these transactions?

4. Do you have specific experience drafting and/or negotiating pooling and servicing agreements?

Expert Witness Response E-055472

inline imageDuring the 11 years that I've served as an expert witness, I've testified over 30 times in either court, depositions, or arbitrations. For the past 6 or 7 years, 60% of my testimonies have been in the loan servicing area. I find that the three main areas of dispute in loan servicing that require expert testimony are:

inline image1) Issues related to the Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) with respect to alleged dual tracking, lack of a single point of contact (SPOC), and failure to properly reconsider a loan modification request upon a change in circumstance (California only)

inline image2) General issues related to loan modification, but not HBOR related, such as failure to provide a modification, failure to properly consider a modification request under HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) or alleged excessive delay in processing or communicating with borrowers regarding attempted loan modifications

inline image3) Wrongful foreclosure due to (1) and or (2) above, or due to misapplication of payments, etc. What could actually be labeled as a fourth area, although related to all three, would be communication issues between the borrower and servicer, what was told or not told to the borrower, what the borrower relied upon, etc.

About the author

Victoria Negron

Victoria Negron

Victoria Negron has extensive experience in journalism and thought leadership in the legal space, with a background crafting content, whitepapers, webinars, and current event articles pertaining to the role of expert witnesses in complex litigation matters. She is a skilled professional specializing in B2B product marketing and content marketing. Currently, she serves as an Enterprise Product Marketing Manager at Postman, and previously held the position of Technical Product Marketing Manager at Palantir Technologies, where she developed her skills in launch strategies, go-to-market strategy, and competitive analysis.

Her expertise in content marketing was further refined during her tenure at the Expert Institute, where she progressed from a Marketing Writer to Senior Content Marketing Manager, and eventually to Associate Director of Content & Product Marketing. In these roles, she honed her abilities in digital marketing, SEO, content strategy, and thought leadership.

Educationally, Victoria holds a Master of Business Administration from the University of Florida - Warrington College of Business and a Bachelor of Arts in Literature, Art, and Hispanic Studies from Hamilton College. Her diverse educational background and professional experience have equipped her with a robust skill set in product marketing, content development, and strategic marketing initiatives.

Find an expert witness near you

What State is your case in?

What party are you representing?