VALERI Home Loan Information

Good morning Mr Locke,

Please note that your FOIA request 22-05785-F is still being processed. You will be notified once the processing has been completed. If you are referring to another FOIA please submit the FOIA number so we can look into your inquiry.

Thank you for your interest in the VA.

VBA FOIA
Program Specialist
Department of Veteran Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Office of Mission Support (20M3)
1800 G. Street
Washington, DC 20006

Michael Bass Locke
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 128369
263 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02115

Re: Freedom of Information Act Tracking Number 22-06278-F

Dear Mr. Bass:

This letter acknowledges receipt of your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) dated May 17, 2022, and received June 7, 2022, in which you are seeking “All VALERI records for 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, FL 32951. I am the veteran for the VA Home Loan. The VA Home Loan Technician assigned to the loan is refusing to provide the requested documents.”

VBA Central Office (CO) received your request on June 7, 2022, and assigned tracking number 22-06278-F. Please refer to this tracking number when communicating about this request.

The records you are seeking, if they exist, would be maintained in the Office of Loan Guaranty (LGY). Therefore, we are redirecting your request to their office for a file search and a direct response to you. If you wish to know the status of your request, please contact them directly at the following address

Department of Veterans Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Attn: Olaiseh Wambui
Address: 810 Vermont Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20006
Email: Olaiseh.Wambui@va.gov

Sincerely,

VBA Program Specialist FOIA/PA

Dear Mr Locke

This letter serves as the initial agency response to your 06/07/2022, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Within your request, you sought records which may be in the custody of the agency regarding:

All VALERI records for 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, FL 32951.
I am the veteran for the VA Home Loan. The VA Home Loan Technician assigned to the loan is refusing to provide the requested documents.

Upon receiving your request, the VA Loan Guarantee conducted a search and located the attached responsive to your request. This letter was then forwarded to our office for a final disclosure review.

After careful review and consideration, we have determined to fully release your responsive records. Please see the attached records.

Thank you for your interest in the VA.
Regards,

Olaiseh Wambui
Program Specialist
Department of Veteran Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Office of Mission Support (20M3)
1800 G. Street
Washington, DC 20006

Hello,

Please accept this e-mail as a request for VALERI records from 6/27/2022- date of production for 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, FL 32951.

Michael Locke

These records were sent to the requester on the dates below. Please do not initiate a new request.

Mr. Locke, Please reach out to me directly on my office cell 202-374-7826 below.

Olaiseh Wambui
Program Specialist
Department of Veteran Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Office of Mission Support (20M3)
1800 G. Street
Washington, DC 20006
Office Cell: (202) 374-7826

Good morning,

I administratively closed this FOIA request 22-05785-F as it was a duplicate under FOIA 22-06278-F which was granted in full.
Regards,

Olaiseh Wambui
Government Information Specialist
Department of Veteran Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Office of Mission Support (20M3)
1800 G. Street
Washington, DC 20006
Office Cell: (202) 374-7826

1. “Domiciliary Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (DRRTP). A DRRTP provides a residential level of care for Veteran populations including medical, psychiatric, SUD, PTSD, and homelessness. DRRTPs provide a 24- hours-per-day, 7 days-per-week, (24/7) structured and supportive residential environment as a part of the rehabilitative treatment regime.”
See https://www.va.gov/homeless/docs/DCHV_Definitions_of_MHRRTPs.pdf

2. On 1/10/2021 I provided Phoenix VA Regional Loan Center employee Louis Krejaci with Domiciliary Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (DRRTP) treatment records.

3. On 1/16/2021 I clarified to Phoenix VA Regional Loan Center employee Louis Krejaci that I had started treatment with DRRTP the previous month.

4. “would you agree that generally speaking in personal injury law, courts have awarded significantly less for mental injuries vs physical injuries?”

“That is a difficult question to answer, as different jurisdictions may have different standards and criteria for awarding damages for mental injuries versus physical injuries. However, based on some of the web search results I found, it seems that in general, courts have been more reluctant to award damages for mental injuries than for physical injuries, unless there is a clear causal link between the two². For example, in Minnesota, a mental injury that results from a physical injury (such as depression or post-traumatic stress disorder) may be compensable, but a mental injury that does not have a physical component (such as emotional distress or anxiety) may not be⁴. Similarly, in product liability cases, courts have been more likely to award damages for mental anguish if the plaintiff suffered a physical injury or was exposed to a substantial risk of physical harm by the defective product². Therefore, it seems that courts have generally favored a more objective and tangible approach to assessing damages, rather than a subjective and intangible one. However, this may vary depending on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, as well as the applicable law and precedent.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/10/2023
(1) Damages & Compensation for Mental Anguish in a Personal Injury ... - AllLaw. https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/damages-compensation-mental-aguish.html.
(2) Mental vs. Physical Work Injuries (How Do They Differ?). https://mottazsiskinjurylaw.com/physical-vs-mental-work-injury/.
(3) Damages and Compensation in a Personal Injury Lawsuit | AllLaw. https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/types-of-compensation.html.
(4) Bodily Injury vs Personal Injury (Differences Explained). https://www.schmidtandclark.com/bodily-injury-vs-personal-injury.”

5. “Then-Chief Judge Howell recently used an "objective metric"-Veterans Affairs disability ratings-to guide her in departing from the Heiser awards. See Schooley v. Islamic Repub. of Iran, No. 17-cv-1376, 2019 WL 2717888, at ~7475 (D.D.C. June 27, 2019). VA disability ratings are "a specialized agency s official determination regarding the extent of disabling injury sustained by service members in connection with military service." Id. at 74 ( cleaned up). Because VA ratings roll mental and physical injuries into one number, they facilitate a more objective approach to awarding damages. This is so because courts need not weigh whether certain injuries merit more money than others. See id.”

“Thank you for your message. It seems that you are interested in the use of VA disability ratings as a way of determining damages for mental and physical injuries in cases involving terrorism. Based on the web search results I found, VA disability ratings are a system that evaluates the degree of disability caused by service-connected conditions for veterans. The ratings range from 0% to 100%, and they affect the amount of monthly compensation and other benefits that veterans receive¹². VA disability ratings are based on the evidence submitted by the veterans or obtained from military records, and they may include a VA medical examination in some cases².

One of the advantages of using VA disability ratings as an objective metric for awarding damages is that they provide a consistent and standardized way of measuring the impact of injuries on the veterans' ability to function and earn income. They also avoid the need for courts to compare and weigh different types of injuries, such as mental and physical ones, which may be subjective and difficult to quantify³. Furthermore, VA disability ratings reflect the official determination of a specialized agency that has expertise and experience in dealing with service-related disabilities⁴.

However, there may also be some limitations and challenges in applying VA disability ratings to non-veterans or to injuries that are not service-connected. For example, VA disability ratings may not capture the full extent of the pain and suffering, emotional distress, or loss of enjoyment of life that victims of terrorism may experience. They may also not account for the differences in individual circumstances, such as age, education, occupation, or family situation, that may affect the severity and duration of the injuries. Additionally, VA disability ratings may not be available or reliable for some victims, especially those who are not U.S. citizens or residents, or those who have not sought or received medical treatment or diagnosis for their injuries⁴.

Therefore, while VA disability ratings may offer a useful and objective tool for assessing damages for mental and physical injuries in some cases, they may not be sufficient or appropriate for all cases. Courts may need to consider other factors and sources of evidence, such as expert testimony, medical records, personal statements, or witness accounts, to determine the fair and reasonable amount of compensation for each victim⁴.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/10/2023
(1) 2023 Veterans Disability Compensation Rates | Veterans Affairs. https://www.va.gov/disability/compensation-rates/veteran-rates/.
(2) About VA Disability Ratings | Veterans Affairs. https://www.va.gov/disability/about-disability-ratings/.
(3) VACI's 2023 VA Disability Calculator - VA Claims Insider. https://vaclaimsinsider.com/va-disability-rating-calculator/.
(4) Veterans’ Benefits Rating and Rates | ChooseVA. https://choose.va.gov/disability/ratings-and-rates.
(5) VA Math - How Combined VA Disability Ratings Are Calculated. https://themilitarywallet.com/va-math-combined-disability-ratings/.”

6. “given "that in general, courts have been more reluctant to award damages for mental injuries than for physical injuries" could it be argued that the findings in Schooley v. Islamic Republic of Iran awarding the same amount for mental and physical injury is incredibly significant?”

“That is an interesting question. I am not a legal expert, but based on the web search results I found, it could be argued that the findings in Schooley v. Islamic Republic of Iran¹ awarding the same amount for mental and physical injury is significant in several ways.

First, it shows that the court recognized the severity and impact of the mental injuries suffered by the plaintiffs, who were victims of a terrorist attack, and did not discount or diminish their claims based on the lack of physical injuries or evidence. The court stated that \"[t]he plaintiffs' mental injuries are no less real than their physical injuries, and no less deserving of compensation.\"¹ The court also noted that \"[t]he plaintiffs' mental injuries are not merely transient or fleeting, but rather chronic and enduring, affecting their daily lives and relationships for years after the attack.\"¹

Second, it shows that the court applied an objective metric, namely the VA disability ratings, to determine the relative degree of injury suffered by each service-member plaintiff. The court explained that \"[t]he VA disability rating is a specialized agency's official determination regarding the extent of disabling injury sustained by service members in connection with military service.\"¹ The court also stated that \"[t]he VA disability rating provides a consistent and standardized way of measuring the impact of injuries on the plaintiffs' ability to function and earn income.\"¹ The court further stated that \"[t]he VA disability rating avoids the need for this Court to compare and weigh different types of injuries, such as mental and physical ones, which may be subjective and difficult to quantify.\"¹

Third, it shows that the court followed the precedent set by other cases involving victims of terrorism, such as Akins v. Islamic Republic of Iran², where the court also awarded damages based on the VA disability ratings. The court in Schooley cited Akins as an example of a case where \"the plaintiffs' mental injuries were compensable even though they did not suffer any physical injuries as a result of the terrorist attack.\"¹ The court in Schooley also noted that \"[t]he use of VA disability ratings as a measure of damages is consistent with other cases in this district involving victims of terrorism.\"¹

Therefore, it could be argued that the findings in Schooley v. Islamic Republic of Iran awarding the same amount for mental and physical injury is significant because it demonstrates the court's recognition, objectivity, and consistency in compensating victims of terrorism for their mental and physical injuries.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/10/2023
(1) Schooley v. Islamic Republic of Iran - Casetext. https://casetext.com/case/schooley-v-islamic-republic-of-iran.
(2) SCHOOLEY v. ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, 1:17-cv-01376 - CourtListener. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6119668/schooley-v-islamic-republic-of-iran/.
(3) SCHOOLEY et al v. ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN et al - UniCourt. https://unicourt.com/case/pc-db1-schooley-et-al-v-islamic-republic-of-iran-et-al-483599.”

7. “https://www.va.gov/vapubs/viewPublication.asp?Pub_ID=1134&FType=2”

“This is a link to a VA handbook that provides guidance on the implementation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination based on disability in any program or activity conducted by Federal agencies. The handbook establishes workplace policies, procedures and protocols for creating and implementing guidance for all VA programs and activities consistent with the changes to the Rehabilitation Act required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments Act of 2008, which reinstated the broad scope of individuals protected under the ADA and Section 504¹. The handbook also outlines the roles and responsibilities of various VA offices and officials in ensuring compliance with Section 504, as well as the procedures for handling complaints, appeals, and enforcement actions related to disability discrimination¹. The handbook is intended to help VA foster optimal organizational environments to protect the rights of beneficiaries, with disabilities, of VA programs or activities¹.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/10/2023
(1) COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES IMPLEMENTING SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION .... https://www.va.gov/vapubs/viewPublication.asp?Pub_ID=1134&FType=2.
(2) Department of Veterans Affairs VA DIRECTIVE 6500 February 24, 2021 VA .... https://www.va.gov/vapubs/viewPublication.asp?Pub_ID=1254&FType=2.
(3) Blind Justice-VA Vet Center Update - Auditors United. https://auditorsunited.org/a/2023/03/25/blind-justice-va-vet-center-update/.
(4) Department of Veterans Affairs VA HANDBOOK 6500 February 24, 2021 RISK .... https://www.va.gov/vapubs/viewPublication.asp?Pub_ID=1255&FType=2.”

8. “could it be argued that an employee of a federal agency deliberately misconstruing or skewing program and activity information amounts to discrimination?”

“That is a hypothetical question that may depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each case. However, based on the web search results I found, it could be argued that an employee of a federal agency deliberately misconstruing or skewing program and activity information amounts to discrimination if it results in denying or limiting the access, benefits, or opportunities of qualified individuals with disabilities to any program or activity operated by the federal agency. According to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973¹²³⁴, which prohibits discrimination based on disability in any program or activity operated by recipients of federal funds or conducted by a federal agency, discrimination may include:

- Providing different or separate aid, benefits, or services to individuals with disabilities or to any class of individuals with disabilities than is provided to others unless such action is necessary to provide qualified individuals with disabilities with aid, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to others;
- Denying a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefits, or services;
- Affording a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefits, or services that is not equal to that afforded others;
- Providing a qualified individual with a disability with an aid, benefit, or service that is not as effective in affording equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement as that provided to others;
- Providing different or separate aid, benefits, or services to individuals with disabilities or to any class of individuals with disabilities unless such action is necessary to provide qualified individuals with disabilities with aid, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to others;
- Otherwise limiting a qualified individual with a disability in the enjoyment of any right, privilege, advantage, or opportunity enjoyed by others receiving the aid, benefits, or services.

Therefore, if an employee of a federal agency intentionally provides false or misleading information about a program or activity that affects the rights, privileges, advantages, or opportunities of individuals with disabilities, it could be considered a form of discrimination under Section 504. However, this would have to be proven by evidence and may be subject to legal defenses and exceptions.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/10/2023
(1) HHS Issues New Proposed Rule to Strengthen Prohibitions Against .... https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/09/07/hhs-issues-new-proposed-rule-to-strengthen-prohibitions-against-discrimination-on-basis-of-disability-in-health-care-and-human-services-programs.html.
(2) Employment Laws: Disability & Discrimination - U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/employment-laws-disability-and-discrimination.
(3) Disability Discrimination: Overview of the Laws - U.S. Department of .... https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/disabilityoverview.html.
(4) Disability Discrimination - U.S. Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/frontpage/pro-students/disability-pr.html.”

1. "The parties shall conclude the MMM process within 150 days of the filing or conversion of the case, unless that time is enlarged by written consent on the Portal, by stipulation of the parties, or by Court order."

See https://pacer.flmb.uscourts.gov/administrativeorders/DataFileOrder.asp?FileID=91

2. Upon my initial request for a CARES ACT related forbearance, servicer Planet Home Lending attempted to require providing a time range and specific impact of COVID-19 related hardship

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0

3. The CARES ACT required servicers of federally backed loans to grant forbearance under the CARES ACT upon a borrower simply attesting to a hardship relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Per VA Circular 26-20-17 “To identify borrowers who have been impacted by COVID-19, VA is replacing the reason for default of “Energy/Environmental Cost” with “National Emergency Declaration” in the Electronic Default Notice (EDN) event. When a borrower requests forbearance due to COVID-19, servicers should use the new reason for default when reporting the EDN and then report the Special Forbearance event. Effective June 1, 2020, VALERI will accept the new reason for default prior to the 61st day of delinquency."

5. The VALERI system, which stands for Veterans Affairs’ Loan Electronic Reporting Interface, is a web-based application that allows VA employees and mortgage servicers to monitor and assist Veterans with VA-guaranteed home loans.

6. Per the VALERI records for my loan as of 6/22/2022, Planet Home Lending failed to inform the VA that my continued default was COVID-19 related until 5/10/2022. See https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757

[https://web.archive.org/web/20230130153859/https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757]

7. The same VALERI records demonstrate that the 5/2020 CARES ACT forbearance was never reported to the VA, despite 38 C.F.R. 36.4317 requiring any forbearance be reported after approval “…by the seventh day of the following month…”

8. Nearly 2 years after 2 years after the first CARES ACT related forbearance for the home loan, servicer Planet Home Lending eventually adhered to VA Circular 26-20-17 and applied the “National Emergency Declaration” designation to the home loan. See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0

9. This delay complicated communication between myself and the VA considerably, as the VA Loan Guaranty employee tasked with intervening seemed to take the content of the VALERI record as indisputable gospel.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/c18bf6632hwxn0dxyjfri/Marcus-Young-Letters.pdf?rlkey=38aukt3tzjraig5hkllxfy4bp&dl=0

10. Further, due to the delay designating the home loan as COVID-19 affected, the home loan was apparently never considered for relief under VA Circular 26-20-12.

11. In the final VA partial claim payment program rule issued via the Federal Register, the VA specifically identified VA Circular 26-20-12 as the means for which servicer’s were to use to bring a loan current that defaulted prior to Covid-19. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-28/pdf/2021-11373.pdf

12. On 6/17/2022 VA Loan Guaranty Officer Marcus Young was questioned regarding my lack of consideration for relief under VA Circular 26-20-12, he responded “The circulars referenced are specific to COVID-19. Your default occurred prior to COVID-19.” See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/npatrygy03jgtpo9t304j/Marcus-Young-No-26-20-12.pdf?rlkey=q1vd2o7cg3ndenuge80ri9i1j&dl=0

13. Section 1 of VA Circular 26-20-12 explicitly states “The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer.”

14. VA Circular 26-20-12(5)(c) states “Servicers should review loan files for all possible loss mitigation options no later than 30 days before the forbearance period is scheduled to end. Servicers should document such reviews in their loan servicing systems. If no loss mitigation options are possible, in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.”

15. Planet Home Lending was seemingly aware of VA Circular 26-20-12(5)(c), and attempted to circumvent as much, as the VALERI records reflect a “repayment plan approved” entered on 8/19/2020 with a start date of 5/1/2020 and an estimated cure date of 11/1/2020.

16. Per 38 C.F.R. 36.4301 “A repayment plan is a written executed agreement by and between the borrower and the holder to reinstate a loan that is 61 or more calendar days delinquent, by requiring the borrower to pay each month over a fixed period (minimum of three months duration) the normal monthly payments plus an agreed upon portion of the delinquency each month.”

17. On 8/20/2020 I received an e-mail from VA Home Loan Technician Louis Krejci that stated in part “The servicer responded to you and sent you an email with what is required to send to them for a completed package. They will not review your file until a completed package is received. I suggest reviewing their email and submit the requested documents. They own your loan and require a completed package to review.”

18. Planet Home Lending utilizes an online “Loan Solution Center” for the processing of loss mitigation packages.

19. The “Loan Solution Center” includes a “Document Center” displaying documents submitted by a borrower and loss mitigation options offered by Planet Home Lending.

20. The “Document Center” for my home loan shows no repayment plan offered or written agreement concerning a repayment plan.

21. “The VA will introduce a new Servicing Purchase Program in July. It's a new way of making a ‘last-ditch effort’ in the waterfall to keep veterans in homes, said John Bell III, executive director of the agency. Through the initiative, the VA will take a loan back, pay and make the servicer whole, and put the borrower on an interest rate that’s not available in the marketplace.” https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives

22. “MBA Submits Recommendations on the VA Servicing Purchase Program on Monday, MBA and the Housing Policy Council submitted recommendations to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding its new Servicing Purchase Program (VASP). VASP is expected to be introduced as VA’s new loss mitigation program for distressed veteran borrowers for high-interest rate environments. MBA’s recommendations follow several conversations with the VA throughout the development of VASP.”

23. https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/

24. “Despite the VA’s engagement with industry in recent months, VA has not provided any written program description, outline or framework. MBA and HPC believe stakeholders should have the opportunity to provide feedback on the program’s design and implementation. Specific issues that require greater transparency include the maximum number of borrowers served, the ability to provide relief promptly, VASP’s compliance with Regulation X (RESPA), and the ability to facilitate successful servicing transfers.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk

25. “A solution like this is needed because approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers are estimated to be behind on their mortgage payments and those with note rates below the current market rate will not be able to achieve an affordable payment with a traditional loan modification.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf?

26. The VA already has a similar option called a “refunding.”

https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4%20Chapter%209%20Refunds%20-%205-2017.docx

27. Matt Douglas, Vice President of Mortgage Policy for the Housing Policy Council, has stated that a key difference between the “refund” and the “VASP Program” is that the number of considered loans could go from a couple dozen a year to tens of thousands.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/omqhswxuolw7yi8oxmjbl/HPC-email.pdf?rlkey=8oder8r6fysrseveeg9uraj0e&dl=0

28. He also stated that as of 8/26/2023 the VA “have not shared a detailed/comprehensive process with us.”

29. From this point, I proceeded to engage with the Grassroots and Constituent Affairs Coordinator of the Wounded Warrior Project for more information concerning the VASP program.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0

30. As I understand it, the VASP is set to be introduced at “….the beginning of October….”

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0

31. The Department of Veterans Affairs Benefits Administration introduced their “Automated Decision Support (ADS)” system in December of 2021, and has since escalated it’s usage to “…enable faster, more accurate, and consistent decisions for Veterans and their beneficiaries” concerning benefits claims. See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4ubxwuoe4rxoc2j80mrfo/Automated-Decision-Support-VBA-Home-Loans.pdf?rlkey=rs0pnc6x8j9lmm194fgiq9ez9&dl=0

32. There’s nothing publicly available stating that the Department of Veterans Affairs Benefits Administration is using their “ADS” system in the processing of claims related to VA Home Loans, but it seems likely, or at the least, a reasonable accommodation for the estimated 147,000 presumably disabled veterans with defaulted loans unknowingly awaiting the introduction of the VASP program.

Considering the proceeding information I’m asking that the court extend the time allowed for the MMM process until such time as the Department of Veterans Affairs introduces their Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program.

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America, that the

Information contained within this e-mail is true and correct. Executed on September 24, 2023.

/s/Michael Bass Locke

127 Delvalle St.

Melbourne Beach, FL 32951

(321) 506-9557

Mbl22885@msn.com

“MuckRock is a platform that allows individuals to request information from the government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and often these requests and responses are made public. If you have been using MuckRock to document your correspondence with the VA, it is indeed possible that this data could be crawled by web spiders and indexed by search engines, thus becoming part of the data available on the internet.

As for the use of such data in training AI/ML models, it's logical to assume that publicly available data could be utilized for such purposes, given that many AI/ML models are trained on vast datasets collected from the web.”

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/
VALERI Home Loan Information<https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/>
Michael Locke made this request to Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration of the United States of America.
www.muckrock.com

I appreciate the advice on working with my lawyer. Interestingly enough, it’s more so that I’m working on my lawyer.

1. “Mike Dahn, Head of Westlaw Product Management, explains that solving hallucinations is actually a pretty low bar to clear if you know what you’re doing. Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is a fancy way of saying the large language model draws on trusted data — in this case, the Thomson Reuters library of materials — and can more or less handle the hallucination risks that crop up with unfiltered AI.”

https://abovethelaw.com/2023/11/westlaw-ai-launch-forces-confrontation-with-the-inner-workings-of-a-lawyers-mind/

2.
[image/png]

3.
[image/jpeg]

4. “Regional loan center (RLC) technicians determine whether the servicer is complying with VA regulations by giving borrowers every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options to avoid foreclosure.”

https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-18-03979-204.pdf

5.
[image/jpeg]

[image/jpeg]

1. Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to submit a CARES ACT forbearance for May of 2020?

2. Is VBA in possession of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940?

3. In the event the VBA answers “no” to #2, a copy of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940 is attached.

4. Does the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940 state in part on page 1 “In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan…”?

5. Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans until May 10th, 2022?

6. In the event the answer to #5 is “no,” on what date did Planet Home Lending mark the mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans?

6. If Planet Home Lending failed to mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans until May 10th, 2022, did this impact the home loan being considered for protections outlined in VA CIRCULAR 26-20-12?

7. In the event the answer to #6 is “no,” how could the VA being unaware that the home loan was under the protections outlined in VA Circular 26-20-12 not effect the home loan’s consideration for protections outlined in via 26-20-12?

8. Did page 4 of the final rule for the VA partial claim payment program issued via the Federal Register identify VA Circular 26-20-12 as the means for which servicer’s were to use to bring a loan current that defaulted prior to Covid-19?
See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-28/pdf/2021-11373.pdf

9. Does page 4 of the final for the VA partial claim payment program issued via the Federal Register state in part “VA acknowledges that many veterans who were experiencing financial hardship pre-pandemic continued to experience hardship and that, in some cases, their hardship may have worsened as a result of the pandemic. VA has provided alternative approaches to assist such veterans in retaining their homes. VA…issued guidance authorizing servicers to consider other VA home retention options (VA Circular 26-20-12)”?

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2023 4:40 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>; louis.krejci@va.gov <louis.krejci@va.gov>; Vahotline@va.gov <Vahotline@va.gov>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

1. Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to submit a CARES ACT forbearance for May of 2020?

2. Is VBA in possession of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940?

3. In the event the VBA answers “no” to #2, a copy of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940 is attached.

4. Does the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint response from Planet Home Lending concerning 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, Fl 32940 state in part on page 1 “In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan…”?

5. Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans until May 10th, 2022?

6. In the event the answer to #5 is “no,” on what date did Planet Home Lending mark the mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans?

6. If Planet Home Lending failed to mark the home loan in VALERI with the “National Emergency Declaration” reason for default used by the VA to designate COVID-19 impacted home loans until May 10th, 2022, did this impact the home loan being considered for protections outlined in VA CIRCULAR 26-20-12?

7. In the event the answer to #6 is “no,” how could the VA being unaware that the home loan was under the protections outlined in VA Circular 26-20-12 not effect the home loan’s consideration for protections outlined in via 26-20-12?

8. Did page 4 of the final rule for the VA partial claim payment program issued via the Federal Register identify VA Circular 26-20-12 as the means for which servicer’s were to use to bring a loan current that defaulted prior to Covid-19?
See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-28/pdf/2021-11373.pdf

9. Does page 4 of the final for the VA partial claim payment program issued via the Federal Register state in part “VA acknowledges that many veterans who were experiencing financial hardship pre-pandemic continued to experience hardship and that, in some cases, their hardship may have worsened as a result of the pandemic. VA has provided alternative approaches to assist such veterans in retaining their homes. VA…issued guidance authorizing servicers to consider other VA home retention options (VA Circular 26-20-12)”?

Michael Locke

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2023 12:25 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>; louis.krejci@va.gov <louis.krejci@va.gov>; Vahotline@va.gov <Vahotline@va.gov>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

[image/jpeg]

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 6:15 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>; louis.krejci@va.gov <louis.krejci@va.gov>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

I appreciate the advice on working with my lawyer. Interestingly enough, it’s more so that I’m working on my lawyer.

1. “Mike Dahn, Head of Westlaw Product Management, explains that solving hallucinations is actually a pretty low bar to clear if you know what you’re doing. Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is a fancy way of saying the large language model draws on trusted data — in this case, the Thomson Reuters library of materials — and can more or less handle the hallucination risks that crop up with unfiltered AI.”

https://abovethelaw.com/2023/11/westlaw-ai-launch-forces-confrontation-with-the-inner-workings-of-a-lawyers-mind/

2.
[image/png]

3.
[image/jpeg]

4. “Regional loan center (RLC) technicians determine whether the servicer is complying with VA regulations by giving borrowers every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options to avoid foreclosure.”

https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-18-03979-204.pdf

5.
[image/jpeg]

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 4:48 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Just to clarify, VA loan guaranty is denying my request for benefits outlined in Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs. Circular 26-20-12. 'Extended Relief Under the CARES Act for those Affected by COVID-19,' April 8, 2020, sec. 5c?
________________________________
From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 4:00 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Subject: RE: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

That is not necessary.

While your loan is in active bankruptcy, I would encourage you to work with your bankruptcy attorney and the courts to resolve your delinquency.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 5:40 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: requests@muckrock.com; VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Hey,

I have a good idea. I'm going to fly to Denver next month and you can show me in writing where it says loan guaranty can't help a loan in active bankruptcy. Does that sound good?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Saturday, December 2, 2023 4:48 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>; Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov> <Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

[image/jpeg]

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 4:03 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Subject: RE: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

No we are not completing a review of the Adequacy of Servicing at this time.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 3:53 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

1. You said “…we can only discuss loss mitt options vaguely…” and I can only surmise you’re pulling from the m26-3(4.03)(c) as it says “Technicians should determine if contact with a borrower is required during the AOS process. If contact information in VALERI is no longer valid or numbers provided are not in service, the loan technician must attempt to locate a working number using an online search engine or other available search options and document the case notes. If a borrower is in active bankruptcy or was active in bankruptcy during the default, no contact should be initiated with the borrower. If the borrower initiates contact with VA, the technician should only discuss general information regarding the loan and the VA Home Loan Program and document a summary of the conversation in the case notes.” Given the full context of m26-3(4.03)(c), speaking “vaguely” or “generally” only applies when a VA Home Loan technician is conducting an Adequacy of Servicing review. I’ll ask again, is the VA currently conducting an Adequacy of Servicing review on my home loan?

2. No, the loan is in my name alone.

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 2:17 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

1. We are responding to your email inquiry.
2. I am referencing the USB inquiry from you dated 6/12/23 where you stated in your inquiry “The Veteran said that even if his loan servicer provided him a package to keep the home his ex-wife would not sign off on that because she wants him to sell the home.” Is your ex-wife on the original note and/or Deed of Trust?
3. You wanted to discuss loss mitt options but based on your USB inquiry this would be pertinent in discussing to ascertain which high level home retention options are available.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 11:07 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Jacobs, Josh <Joshua.Jacobs@va.gov<mailto:Joshua.Jacobs@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov<mailto:VAHotline@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

As a side note, I’ve made a FOIA request for “A print out showing the total number of VA Home Loans foreclosed on from 11/17/2023 until 5/31/2024.”

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/va-foreclosures-from-11172023-until-5312024-155134/

1. You’re seemingly pulling from m26-3(4.03)(c). M26-3(4.03)(c) details the VA’s policy of contact concerning a veteran borrower in an active bankruptcy during an Adequacy of Servicing review. Are you indirectly confirming the VA is currently conducting an Adequacy of Servicing review concerning my home loan?

2. I don’t think you have a firm grasp of the mortgage situation as far as it concerns my ex-wife. The mortgage is in my name only. Do you mind clarifying what you understand the situation is concerning my home loan and my ex-wife?

3. If the VA “…can only discuss loss mitt options vaguely because your loan is still under the protection of the Bankruptcy Court”, how can the VA inquire if my “…ex-wife would be willing to execute/sign an agreement”?

[image/jpeg]

[image/jpeg][image/jpeg]

[image/jpeg]

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 10:56 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Good Morning Mr. Locke,

Although you may not agree, we are responding accordingly. Your loan is in active bankruptcy with Plant Home Lending and while you are under the protection of the Bankruptcy Courts and engaging with Planet Home Lending through the legal process of Bankruptcy we are unable to interfere with that legal process. If you have questions regarding your loan while it is in bankruptcy we encourage you to discuss it with your bankruptcy attorney and the judge.

You did get a Relief of Stay from the courts to discuss loss mitt options, we can only discuss loss mitt options vaguely because your loan is still under the protection of the Bankruptcy Court. We have tried to discuss loss mitt options with you, by inquiring if your ex-wife would be willing to execute/sign an agreement. You had previously informed the USB office that she is unwilling to sign which does impact your loss mitt options. Any option to bring your loan current by modifying the original terms of your loan, would require your ex-wife signing that agreement. The only option to bring your loan current without her agreement would be a repayment plan.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 4:23 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov<mailto:VAHotline@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

If you haven’t noticed, I don’t mind asking again

“We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending”

Pretend like we live in a world where VA employees can be held accountable.

Do your answers stay the same?

https://www.meritalk.com/articles/va-officials-unions-voice-opposition-to-restore-va-accountability-act/

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 9:20 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov> <Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov>>
Subject: Fw: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

“The VA's Under Secretary for Benefits Josh Jacobs said in a separate statement that he encourages any Veteran who is struggling with making their payments to visit www.va.gov/housing-assistance<http://www.va.gov/housing-assistance> or call 877-827-3702<tel:877-827-3702>.

‘We at VA will do everything in our power to help Veterans stay in their homes’ Jacobs said.”

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/17/1213930706/va-halts-foreclosures-veterans

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 5:03 PM
To: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Subject: Fw: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Hello,

Thank you for the response.

Immediately below this message should be an email from NPR reporter Chris Arnold asking if I’m available Monday or Tuesday to talk about what I’ve been experiencing.

I hesitated because I wanted to say “Executive function and recall are issues for me even when I’m not talking about something that’s triggering like my home loan situation, so usually I try to mitigate those issues by corresponding via e-mail. Beyond that, I’ll have my kids most likely, and it’s hard to prevent the exacerbation talking about that talking about this causes from carrying over to my interactions with them.” I’m so desperate for assistance at this point that I just “Definitely, I can make whatever work.”

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Chris Arnold <CArnold@npr.org<mailto:CArnold@npr.org>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 4:32 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Quil Lawrence <DLawrence@npr.org<mailto:DLawrence@npr.org>>
Subject: RE: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Hi Michael,

Thanks for reaching out. Are there some times Monday or Tuesday you could do an interview about what’s happening and what you’ve been dealing with over a zoom call?

Best,

Chris

Chris Arnold

Correspondent

Investigations

[cid:image006.gif@01DA2F5F.16B43B80]

(202) 513-4455<tel:(202)%20513-4455> office

(617) 835-4238<tel:(617)%20835-4238> cell

carnold@npr.org<mailto:carnold@npr.org>

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 4:25 PM
To: Quil Lawrence <DLawrence@npr.org<mailto:DLawrence@npr.org>>; Chris Arnold <CArnold@npr.org<mailto:CArnold@npr.org>>
Subject: Fw: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

Hello, “Quick-sound5781” from Reddit here. I’ve more or less consolidated whatever correspondence I’ve had with the VA into this forwarded e-mail chain. Michael Locke From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@ msn. com> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

External Email - Use Caution

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Hello,

“Quick-sound5781” from Reddit here.

I’ve more or less consolidated whatever correspondence I’ve had with the VA into this forwarded e-mail chain.

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 4:15 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov> <Vahotline@va.gov<mailto:Vahotline@va.gov>>
Subject: VA Hotline Case No. 11559463

1.

[image/jpeg]

https://www.reddit.com/r/VeteransBenefits/s/MhncKxDyHj

2. “A group of U.S. senators is asking the Department of Veterans Affairs to put an immediate stop to foreclosures on the homes of veterans and service members...

The VA did not have an immediate response to the letter from the lawmakers. But John Bell, the head of the VA's loan program, previously told NPR that the VA is ‘exploring all options at this point in time.’”

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/15/1213219040/senators-to-va-stop-needless-foreclosures-on-thousands-of-veterans

The no response from the VA seems to say a lot. Not that I’m particularly prescient or anything, but it seems like my comment on 8/15/2023 that the VA was due for a scandal wasn’t off-base.

________________________________

From: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 3:46 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: VASP Program

Mr. Locke, I don’t have any new information at this time.

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>

Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 2:36 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Mr. Locke,

Unfortunately our system are not able to identify that specific information.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 11:03 AM
To: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

1.

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/15/1213219040/senators-to-va-stop-needless-foreclosures-on-thousands-of-veterans

2. https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/letter_to_va_secretary_mcdonough_foreclosures_111523.pdf

Any chance you guys (or the other VSOs) can help this pick up steam?

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 10:59 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

There’s nothing in the United States Code or Code of Federal Regulations that supports “VA cannot be party to your active bankruptcy with your servicer.” At no time have you cited anything with legal force to support your statements. If we’re going to talk about things the VA can’t do, can we please stick to real things that VA can’t do, like have a whatever your job title is make up a rule like “VA cannot be party to your active bankruptcy with your servicer”?

Would you consider providing me with a sworn affidavit under the penalty of perjury stating that the entirety of the information you have provided to me is true and correct to the best of your knowledge?

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 10:02 AM
To: consumerlaw@nclc.org<mailto:consumerlaw@nclc.org> <consumerlaw@nclc.org<mailto:consumerlaw@nclc.org>>
Subject: VA VASP Program

Hello,

My name is Michael Locke. I am a veteran with a VA Home Loan who would potentially benefit from the VA VASP program. I recently read an NPR article concerning veterans facing foreclosure after exhausting CARES ACT forbearance, the delay in the VA enacting a solution, and the VA’s ability to enact protections for effected veterans in the meantime. National Consumer Law Center Senior Attorney Steve Sharpe was quoted in the article.

Is a nationwide injunction possible in this situation should the VA not enact any protective measures?

Michael Locke

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 9:54 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Mr. Locke,

You are currently in an active bankruptcy with your servicer and VA cannot be party to your active bankruptcy with your servicer.

We encourage you to continue to work with your Bankruptcy attorney and the courts to resolve your delinquency.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 9:27 AM
To: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Subject: VASP Program

Hello,

My name is Michael Locke. I am a veteran with a VA Home Loan who would potentially benefit from the VASP program. I previously corresponded with you regarding the VASP program in early October. At that time, I inquired as to whether the VA would be enacting any protective measures for Veterans like myself while the VA sorted out the specifics of the VASP program.

Is there any update on whether or not the VA will enact protective measures for VA home loans currently at risk of foreclosure?

It seems likely the mortgage industry will have a say in what the VASP program ultimately becomes, but is there anyone (to include Veterans Service Organizations) advocating on behalf of veterans?

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 8:25 AM
To: VanBuren, Keith <Keith.VanBuren@mail.house.gov<mailto:Keith.VanBuren@mail.house.gov>>
Subject: Fw: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. “Will the VA stop thousands of veterans from losing their homes?”

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/11/1211855956/veterans-va-loans-foreclosure-covid-forbearance

2. “Senators to VA: Stop needless foreclosures on thousands of veterans”

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/15/1213219040/senators-to-va-stop-needless-foreclosures-on-thousands-of-veterans

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 8:13 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>
Subject: Re: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

"How many home loans were considered for possible refunding by the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12? Since the circular was released 12 cases have been referred and considered for VA Purchase (formerly known as refunding)."

Were those VA refunds (or purchases) pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12?

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 7:58 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>
Subject: Re: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

“We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending”

Pretend like we live in a world where VA employees can be held accountable.

Do your answers stay the same?

https://www.meritalk.com/articles/va-officials-unions-voice-opposition-to-restore-va-accountability-act/

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 5:59 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good evening Mr. Locke,

Here is the additional information.

1. Per Planet Home Lending "In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021.” See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/782550rsf8pb2n33pqqyw/Locke-final-CFPB-response-1.pdf?rlkey=ge7gsarfxmfgfwwzpnlldxtcv&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/782550rsf8pb2n33pqqyw/Locke-final-CFPB-response-1.pdf?rlkey=ge7gsarfxmfgfwwzpnlldxtcv&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysTidn7lE$>

What are the exact dates of “special forbearance” entered in VALERI for the home loan? This information has been provided to you before and through FOIA.

Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to submit a CARES ACT forbearance for May of 2020? We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending

Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to mark the home loan in VALERI as COVID-19 impacted until May 10th, 2022? We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending

If servicer Planet Home Lending failed to mark the home loan in VALERI as COVID-19 Impacted until May 10th, 2022, did this negatively impact the home loan being considered for “protections” as outlined in VA Circular 26-20-12? We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending

If not, how so? We are unable to address due to your active bankruptcy with Planet Home Lending

How many home loans were referred to the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center for possible refunding pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12? Since the circular was released 12 cases have been referred and considered for VA Purchase (formerly known as refunding). However, it’s unknown for sure if all were referred or we opened them.

How many home loans were considered for possible refunding by the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12? Since the circular was released 12 cases have been referred and considered for VA Purchase (formerly known as refunding).

How many home loan were actually refunded by the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12? Zero since the circular was released.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2023 12:24 PM
To: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hello,

Thank you for the response.

The HPC and MBA currently estimate there are approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers that are behind on their home loan payments with the majority of that 147,000 having note rates below the current market rate, preventing those veterans from being able to achieve an affordable payment with a traditional loan modification.

While you guys sort out the details, is the VA taking any steps to protect veterans with note rates below the current market rate who are behind on their home loan payments?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2023 11:42 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hi Mr. Locke, VA will have an announcement after mid-October.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2023 11:39 AM
To: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hello,

My name is Michael Locke. I am a veteran with a VA Home Loan who would potentially benefit from the VASP program.

The following article is the best I can find regarding the current status of the VASP program:

"The VA loss-mitigation service program will more likely be launched next year, Michelle Corridon, deputy director of policy at VA, said during a recent MBA conference."

https://www.insidemortgagefinance.com/articles/228956-va-updates-mba-on-vasp-timeline?v=preview<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.insidemortgagefinance.com/articles/228956-va-updates-mba-on-vasp-timeline?v=preview__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysWL422PQ$>

The article is behind a paywall, so I’m in the dark regarding specifics.

Do you mind providing specifics regarding the status of the VASP program, or possibly having someone from your office provide said information?

Thank you for any consideration.

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 3:15 PM
To: Laurie Weatherford <lauriew@c13orl.com<mailto:lauriew@c13orl.com>>
Cc: Jeffrey Badgley <jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com>>; requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Subject: IN RE: MICHAEL BASS LOCKE 6:22-bk-02930-TPG

1. "The parties shall conclude the MMM process within 150 days of the filing or conversion of the case, unless that time is enlarged by written consent on the Portal, by stipulation of the parties, or by Court order."

See https://pacer.flmb.uscourts.gov/administrativeorders/DataFileOrder.asp?FileID=91

2. Upon my initial request for a CARES ACT related forbearance, servicer Planet Home Lending attempted to require providing a time range and specific impact of COVID-19 related hardship

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys96eAuPQ$>

3. The CARES ACT required servicers of federally backed loans to grant forbearance under the CARES ACT upon a borrower simply attesting to a hardship relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Per VA Circular 26-20-17 “To identify borrowers who have been impacted by COVID-19, VA is replacing the reason for default of “Energy/Environmental Cost” with “National Emergency Declaration” in the Electronic Default Notice (EDN) event. When a borrower requests forbearance due to COVID-19, servicers should use the new reason for default when reporting the EDN and then report the Special Forbearance event. Effective June 1, 2020, VALERI will accept the new reason for default prior to the 61st day of delinquency."

5. The VALERI system, which stands for Veterans Affairs’ Loan Electronic Reporting Interface, is a web-based application that allows VA employees and mortgage servicers to monitor and assist Veterans with VA-guaranteed home loans.

6. Per the VALERI records for my loan as of 6/22/2022, Planet Home Lending failed to inform the VA that my continued default was COVID-19 related until 5/10/2022. See https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757

[https://web.archive.org/web/20230130153859/https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757]

7. The same VALERI records demonstrate that the 5/2020 CARES ACT forbearance was never reported to the VA, despite 38 C.F.R. 36.4317 requiring any forbearance be reported after approval “…by the seventh day of the following month…”

8. Nearly 2 years after 2 years after the first CARES ACT related forbearance for the home loan, servicer Planet Home Lending eventually adhered to VA Circular 26-20-17 and applied the “National Emergency Declaration” designation to the home loan. See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mznrglt98owhm4g9uq7gr/phl-first-cares-act-forbearance.pdf?rlkey=9l6fhirvn1imrxzlwulza514m&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys96eAuPQ$>

9. This delay complicated communication between myself and the VA considerably, as the VA Loan Guaranty employee tasked with intervening seemed to take the content of the VALERI record as indisputable gospel.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/c18bf6632hwxn0dxyjfri/Marcus-Young-Letters.pdf?rlkey=38aukt3tzjraig5hkllxfy4bp&dl=0

10. Further, due to the delay designating the home loan as COVID-19 affected, the home loan was apparently never considered for relief under VA Circular 26-20-12.

11. In the final VA partial claim payment program rule issued via the Federal Register, the VA specifically identified VA Circular 26-20-12 as the means for which servicer’s were to use to bring a loan current that defaulted prior to Covid-19. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-28/pdf/2021-11373.pdf

12. On 6/17/2022 VA Loan Guaranty Officer Marcus Young was questioned regarding my lack of consideration for relief under VA Circular 26-20-12, he responded “The circulars referenced are specific to COVID-19. Your default occurred prior to COVID-19.” See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/npatrygy03jgtpo9t304j/Marcus-Young-No-26-20-12.pdf?rlkey=q1vd2o7cg3ndenuge80ri9i1j&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/npatrygy03jgtpo9t304j/Marcus-Young-No-26-20-12.pdf?rlkey=q1vd2o7cg3ndenuge80ri9i1j&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys-d0gD9U$>

13. Section 1 of VA Circular 26-20-12 explicitly states “The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer.”

14. VA Circular 26-20-12(5)(c) states “Servicers should review loan files for all possible loss mitigation options no later than 30 days before the forbearance period is scheduled to end. Servicers should document such reviews in their loan servicing systems. If no loss mitigation options are possible, in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.”

15. Planet Home Lending was seemingly aware of VA Circular 26-20-12(5)(c), and attempted to circumvent as much, as the VALERI records reflect a “repayment plan approved” entered on 8/19/2020 with a start date of 5/1/2020 and an estimated cure date of 11/1/2020.

16. Per 38 C.F.R. 36.4301 “A repayment plan is a written executed agreement by and between the borrower and the holder to reinstate a loan that is 61 or more calendar days delinquent, by requiring the borrower to pay each month over a fixed period (minimum of three months duration) the normal monthly payments plus an agreed upon portion of the delinquency each month.”

17. On 8/20/2020 I received an e-mail from VA Home Loan Technician Louis Krejci that stated in part “The servicer responded to you and sent you an email with what is required to send to them for a completed package. They will not review your file until a completed package is received. I suggest reviewing their email and submit the requested documents. They own your loan and require a completed package to review.”

18. Planet Home Lending utilizes an online “Loan Solution Center” for the processing of loss mitigation packages.

19. The “Loan Solution Center” includes a “Document Center” displaying documents submitted by a borrower and loss mitigation options offered by Planet Home Lending.

20. The “Document Center” for my home loan shows no repayment plan offered or written agreement concerning a repayment plan.

21. “The VA will introduce a new Servicing Purchase Program in July. It's a new way of making a ‘last-ditch effort’ in the waterfall to keep veterans in homes, said John Bell III, executive director of the agency. Through the initiative, the VA will take a loan back, pay and make the servicer whole, and put the borrower on an interest rate that’s not available in the marketplace.” https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives

22. “MBA Submits Recommendations on the VA Servicing Purchase Program on Monday, MBA and the Housing Policy Council submitted recommendations to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding its new Servicing Purchase Program (VASP). VASP is expected to be introduced as VA’s new loss mitigation program for distressed veteran borrowers for high-interest rate environments. MBA’s recommendations follow several conversations with the VA throughout the development of VASP.”

23. https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/

24. “Despite the VA’s engagement with industry in recent months, VA has not provided any written program description, outline or framework. MBA and HPC believe stakeholders should have the opportunity to provide feedback on the program’s design and implementation. Specific issues that require greater transparency include the maximum number of borrowers served, the ability to provide relief promptly, VASP’s compliance with Regulation X (RESPA), and the ability to facilitate successful servicing transfers.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk

25. “A solution like this is needed because approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers are estimated to be behind on their mortgage payments and those with note rates below the current market rate will not be able to achieve an affordable payment with a traditional loan modification.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysC7e0pl8$>?

26. The VA already has a similar option called a “refunding.”

https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4%20Chapter%209%20Refunds%20-%205-2017.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4*20Chapter*209*20Refunds*20-*205-2017.docx__;JSUlJSU!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysH4oxF-o$>

27. Matt Douglas, Vice President of Mortgage Policy for the Housing Policy Council, has stated that a key difference between the “refund” and the “VASP Program” is that the number of considered loans could go from a couple dozen a year to tens of thousands.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/omqhswxuolw7yi8oxmjbl/HPC-email.pdf?rlkey=8oder8r6fysrseveeg9uraj0e&dl=0

28. He also stated that as of 8/26/2023 the VA “have not shared a detailed/comprehensive process with us.”

29. From this point, I proceeded to engage with the Grassroots and Constituent Affairs Coordinator of the Wounded Warrior Project for more information concerning the VASP program.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys2Kd6U-g$>

30. As I understand it, the VASP is set to be introduced at “….the beginning of October….”

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0h82au489z8qonqaedf2/JuanWWPVASP.pdf?rlkey=7tz1198ig8g0wm78e6w1q1taf&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys2Kd6U-g$>

31. The Department of Veterans Affairs Benefits Administration introduced their “Automated Decision Support (ADS)” system in December of 2021, and has since escalated it’s usage to “…enable faster, more accurate, and consistent decisions for Veterans and their beneficiaries” concerning benefits claims. See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4ubxwuoe4rxoc2j80mrfo/Automated-Decision-Support-VBA-Home-Loans.pdf?rlkey=rs0pnc6x8j9lmm194fgiq9ez9&dl=0

32. There’s nothing publicly available stating that the Department of Veterans Affairs Benefits Administration is using their “ADS” system in the processing of claims related to VA Home Loans, but it seems likely, or at the least, a reasonable accommodation for the estimated 147,000 presumably disabled veterans with defaulted loans unknowingly awaiting the introduction of the VASP program.

Considering the proceeding information I’m asking that the court extend the time allowed for the MMM process until such time as the Department of Veterans Affairs introduces their Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program.

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America, that the

Information contained within this e-mail is true and correct. Executed on September 24, 2023.

/s/Michael Bass Locke

127 Delvalle St.

Melbourne Beach, FL 32951

(321) 506-9557<tel:(321)%20506-9557>

Mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:Mbl22885@msn.com>

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 7:17 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: Jeffrey Badgley <jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com>>; Jon Masters <jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com>>; VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov<mailto:VAHotline@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Hey,

Thanks for the info.

Was it spurred by someone from the Office of the Executive Secretary or my ex, or a mix of both?

1. Per Planet Home Lending "In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021.” See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/782550rsf8pb2n33pqqyw/Locke-final-CFPB-response-1.pdf?rlkey=ge7gsarfxmfgfwwzpnlldxtcv&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/782550rsf8pb2n33pqqyw/Locke-final-CFPB-response-1.pdf?rlkey=ge7gsarfxmfgfwwzpnlldxtcv&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysTidn7lE$>

What are the exact dates of “special forbearance” entered in VALERI for the home loan?

Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to submit a CARES ACT forbearance for May of 2020?

Did servicer Planet Home Lending fail to mark the home loan in VALERI as COVID-19 impacted until May 10th, 2022?

If servicer Planet Home Lending failed to mark the home loan in VALERI as COVID-19 Impacted until May 10th, 2022, did this negatively impact the home loan being considered for “protections” as outlined in VA Circular 26-20-12?

If not, how so?

How many home loans were referred to the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center for possible refunding pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12?

How many home loans were considered for possible refunding by the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12?

How many home loan were actually refunded by the VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center pursuant to VA Circular 26-20-12?

The section you highlighted from the OIG report to justify further AOS reviews not being conducted on the home loan doesn’t state anything to support a change in policy for further AOS reviews beyond 120 days of initial default.

“Specifically, the audit team found that in some instances LGY was unaware servicers were not reporting loan status, while in other instances it did not ensure loan servicers sent the borrowers the required loss mitigation letters. The audit team also found that LGY did not conduct quarterly monitoring of loan servicing and did not implement a mandatory tier-ranking system for loan servicers. The LGY director previously stated the upgraded VA Loan Electronic Reporting Interface (VALERI) system expected to be implemented by May 2019 (subsequently implemented on May 28, 2019) would provide these capabilities. The audit team and LGY also identified potential loan servicing risks to borrowers in disaster areas.”

The section you highlighted from the OIG report doesn’t state anything to do with changes to how AOS reviews are conducted.

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ubqp4ii389qyizxnfl15v/VAOIG-18-03979-204-2.pdf?rlkey=uxew1a0h9wd793t7y7mdzv4e9&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ubqp4ii389qyizxnfl15v/VAOIG-18-03979-204-2.pdf?rlkey=uxew1a0h9wd793t7y7mdzv4e9&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysMRrjqFk$>

Per servicer Planet Home Lending, the home loan is current as of 6/1/2020. Do VALERI records for the home loan reflect the same?

“RFD was confirmed in our conversation dated 8/14/20”

[image/jpeg]

See https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/evua6t6qii5ukamxztpq1/louis-krejci-8142020.pdf?rlkey=xvuxb8id9tgijy7wqdbgioio3&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/evua6t6qii5ukamxztpq1/louis-krejci-8142020.pdf?rlkey=xvuxb8id9tgijy7wqdbgioio3&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysPZYdqOA$>

Do you mind clarifying the RFD that was confirmed on 8/14/2020?

Would you consider ending your response e-mail with “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).(Signature)”?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:10 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

Here are the recent inquires that we owed you a response.

The Reason for Default (RFD) as follows:

Electronic Default Notice filed 12/2/19 and RFD – MaritalDifficulties

RFD was confirmed in our conversation dated 8/14/20

Reason For Default Update filed 3/24/22 (did not process in our system) and RFD – CurtailmentOfIncome

There were several business rules that did not process.

Reason for Default Updated filed 5/10/22 and RFD- NationalEmergencyDeclaration

Reason for Default Updated filed 6/23/22 and RFD – MaritalDifficulties

Reason for Default Updated filed 7/1/22 and RFD – NationalEmergencyDeclaration

Reason for Default Updated filed 7/8/22 and RFD – MaritalDifficulties

FYI – having the RFD marked “National Emergency Declaration” does not qualify you for a VA Partial Claim.

We have received your request to sell the VA your property. We are unable to support this request.

As for your inquiry to the Adequacy of Servicing (AOS) process, your AOS process was processed in our updated system which implemented in May 2019. Since that time, the AOS review is only required one time when a loan falls 120 days delinquent. The OIG report you are referring to reviewed loans in the previous system, and in the report, itself notes that “The LGY director previously stated the upgraded VA Loan Electronic Reporting Interface (VALERI) system expected to be implemented by May 2019 (subsequently implemented on May 28, 2019) would provide these capabilities.”

From: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 3:34 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hi Michael,

No worries! I am a dad and completely understand that. At this time there isn’t much to show because so many things can change between now and the first week of October. I wouldn’t want to share this program without having anything tangible directly from the VA to corroborate it. I hope that makes sense. In the meantime, let's stand by for word from the VA. I’ll keep you posted if I hear anything from Congress. Please do not hesitate to contact me or the resource center if you need assistance with anything else.

Semper Fidelis,

Juan

JUAN VALDEZ

grassroots and constituent affairs coordinator

O: 904.489.1435<tel:904.489.1435>

M: 202.558.4331<tel:202.558.4331>

Wounded Warrior Project

1120 G St NW

Washington, DC 20005

Facebook<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys5eivD2E$> | Twitter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXkroUM0$> | YouTube<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/user/WoundedWarriorProjec__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysinL6O14$>

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/wounded-warrior-project/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6LCNCs8$> | Instagram<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/wwp/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXzvQIJo$>

woundedwarriorproject.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.woundedwarriorproject.org/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysvU4JmSI$>

CONNECT >> SERVE >> EMPOWER

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 3:29 PM
To: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Subject: Re: GCR Referral - VASP Program

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious email by using the “Report Suspicious Email” button or forwarding the message to "phish@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:phish@woundedwarriorproject.org>".

________________________________

Hey,

Sorry about the missing the call. I had just picked the kids up from school.

Thank you. If you would on the updates, I’d appreciate it. I’m 1 of the 147,000. My home is protected for now due to the stay from a chapter 13 bankruptcy, but I do have an attorney and I think he’ll be able to use the info.

No worries. I know you saw searching the internet that there’s not a lot out there as far as information, so I can’t imagine the veterans that really need to know actually do know. Is there anything that can be done so that more veterans know?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 3:15 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hi Michael,

I left you a call earlier. I got off the phone with Brendan from MBA; he said the VA is keeping it under wraps until the beginning of October, but you already knew that information. He’ll keep me posted once the VA makes an announcement. In the interim, I’ve reached out to some friends on the Hill to see if they can gather some more information for me on their end. If I get anything back, I can shoot you a message if you’d like me to keep you updated. Thanks again for bringing this to my attention.

Semper Fidelis,

Juan

JUAN VALDEZ

grassroots and constituent affairs coordinator

O: 904.489.1435<tel:904.489.1435>

M: 202.558.4331<tel:202.558.4331>

Wounded Warrior Project

1120 G St NW

Washington, DC 20005

Facebook<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys5eivD2E$> | Twitter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXkroUM0$> | YouTube<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/user/WoundedWarriorProjec__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysinL6O14$>

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/wounded-warrior-project/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6LCNCs8$> | Instagram<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/wwp/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXzvQIJo$>

woundedwarriorproject.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.woundedwarriorproject.org/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysvU4JmSI$>

CONNECT >> SERVE >> EMPOWER

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 2:34 PM
To: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Subject: Re: GCR Referral - VASP Program

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious email by using the “Report Suspicious Email” button or forwarding the message to "phish@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:phish@woundedwarriorproject.org>".

________________________________

Hey Juan,

VASP was supposed to be introduced on 7/1/2023. From what I can tell, the additional commentary period was requested due to MBA/HPC being completely in the dark regarding a “written program description, outline or framework” for VASP. The request for an additional commentary period is interesting considering it could be argued that MBA/HPC have commented on VASP already.

“MBA Submits Recommendations on the VA Servicing Purchase Program on Monday, MBA and the Housing Policy Council submitted recommendations to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding its new Servicing Purchase Program (VASP). VASP is expected to be introduced as VA’s new loss mitigation program for distressed veteran borrowers for high-interest rate environments. MBA’s recommendations follow several conversations with the VA throughout the development of VASP.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysBYSMot0$>

Nothing from Brendan Kelleher.

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 1:32 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hi Michael,

I agree with you on both things; first, mandatory means required, and second, this is a huge deal for the community. However, I don’t believe the link to the “Loss-Mitigation Options for Guaranteed Loans” link is the correct link for the VASP. Mainly because MBA is asking for a period of public comment instead of a reopening of it. Moreover, the link already had the comment period close in January of 2023. Meanwhile, MBA is asking for a public comment period in their July 26 letter. I noticed that you copied Brendan Kelleher; did he respond to your e-mail outside of what you’ve sent me thus far?

Regarding your question about the 147,000 default home loans, unfortunately, I don’t know, I’d speculate that not very many of them are equipped to handle this given that they’re already in a stressful financial situation.

Lastly, I want to say thank you for handing me this puzzle. I am going to try to find out as much as possible about VASP. Thank you for your time and for the opportunity to learn something new.

Semper Fidelis,

Juan

JUAN VALDEZ

grassroots and constituent affairs coordinator

O: 904.489.1435<tel:904.489.1435>

M: 202.558.4331<tel:202.558.4331>

Wounded Warrior Project

1120 G St NW

Washington, DC 20005

Facebook<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys5eivD2E$> | Twitter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXkroUM0$> | YouTube<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/user/WoundedWarriorProjec__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysinL6O14$>

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/wounded-warrior-project/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6LCNCs8$> | Instagram<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/wwp/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXzvQIJo$>

woundedwarriorproject.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.woundedwarriorproject.org/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysvU4JmSI$>

CONNECT >> SERVE >> EMPOWER

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 9:57 AM
To: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Subject: Re: GCR Referral - VASP Program

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious email by using the “Report Suspicious Email” button or forwarding the message to "phish@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:phish@woundedwarriorproject.org>".

________________________________

Hey Juan,

Thank you for the response.

The VA wasn’t referring to the program as VASP when it was announced, but here’s the federal register link:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/17/2022-22414/loan-guaranty-loss-mitigation-options-for-guaranteed-loans<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/17/2022-22414/loan-guaranty-loss-mitigation-options-for-guaranteed-loans__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysRKdRdqI$>

The Vice President of Mortgage Policy for the Housing Policy Council said something to the effect that the VASP program would be “mandatory,” but I never received explicit confirmation of exactly what he meant, and the best I could get from the VA was “VA has not publicly announced this program and does have not a confirmed date for which a new program will be announced. Implementation of new programs may take many months as the mortgage industry has to adapt policies and technology to any changes made to the VA Home Loan program.”

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/omqhswxuolw7yi8oxmjbl/HPC-email.pdf?rlkey=8oder8r6fysrseveeg9uraj0e&dl=0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/omqhswxuolw7yi8oxmjbl/HPC-email.pdf?rlkey=8oder8r6fysrseveeg9uraj0e&dl=0__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYyspJoiEPs$>

Admittedly, I’m not an expert by any standard definition, but if “mandatory” is meant in the way it seems, VASP is about as big of a deal as the post 9/11 GI BILL.

I apologize if this is unbecoming, but I know you have a background as a paralegal. If it’s 147,000 that are currently in default, how many of the 147,000 do you think are equipped to argue against a foreclosure in state court or a bankruptcy for a stay pending VASP being implemented?

Why not a national injunction?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 9:28 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: GCR Referral - VASP Program

Hi Michael,

Thank you for bringing the VASP program to my attention. Although I recall hearing about VASP in the past, I’ve had difficulty finding out anything about it. I’ve searched the federal register, congress.gov, and Google. Google is the only one that renders any results, and the results were the links you shared with me. I am meeting with one of my government affairs teammates today to discuss VASP and its status. It may take some time until I find something more definitive than the articles you’ve shared, but I’ll be on the hunt for it. Thank you again for sharing this with us and for your time.

Semper Fidelis,

Juan

JUAN VALDEZ

grassroots and constituent affairs coordinator

O: 904.489.1435<tel:904.489.1435>

M: 202.558.4331<tel:202.558.4331>

Wounded Warrior Project

1120 G St NW

Washington, DC 20005

Facebook<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys5eivD2E$> | Twitter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXkroUM0$> | YouTube<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/user/WoundedWarriorProjec__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysinL6O14$>

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/wounded-warrior-project/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6LCNCs8$> | Instagram<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/wwp/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXzvQIJo$>

woundedwarriorproject.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.woundedwarriorproject.org/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysvU4JmSI$>

CONNECT >> SERVE >> EMPOWER

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:25 AM
To: info@plainlanguage.gov<mailto:info@plainlanguage.gov> <info@plainlanguage.gov<mailto:info@plainlanguage.gov>>
Subject: Fw: Veteran with an issue understanding VA Documents

Hello,

I’m unsure if this office could be of any assistance, but I figured I’d give it a shot.

1. My issue pertains to VA manual 26-3 Loan Management and Service Policies, Procedures, and Methods, Loan Guaranty Operations for Regional Offices, chapter 4, section 08. See https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_03/Ch4_DelinquentLoanServicing.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_03/Ch4_DelinquentLoanServicing.docx__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysJlc_EAE$>

2. The relevant exert states “VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim.”

3. There’s nothing else publicly available from the VA stating a policy for VA Home Loans involved in a bankruptcy.

4. The exert is not plain language or plain writing.

5. An example of the exert in plain language would be “The VA will not contact veterans who have filed for bankruptcy. However, if a veteran who has filed for bankruptcy contacts the VA, the VA will discuss the veteran's options and the consequences of the loan terminating and the VA paying a claim.”

6. Another example would be “If you file for bankruptcy, VA will not contact you. But if you contact VA, we will tell you what you can do and what will happen to your loan entitlement if the loan ends and VA pays a claim.”

What are the options to remedy the situation?

Thank you for any consideration.

Michael Locke

From: Drake, Vivian <Vivian.Drake@va.gov<mailto:Vivian.Drake@va.gov>>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:26 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: Veteran with an issue understanding VA Documents

Good afternoon Michael,

Thank you for your email. I will have someone reach out to you tomorrow on this.

Thanks.

Vivian Drake

Staff Assistant

Office of the Executive Secretary

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 5:41 PM
To: Drake, Vivian <Vivian.Drake@va.gov<mailto:Vivian.Drake@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: Veteran with an issue understanding VA Documents

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 4:56 PM
To: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Subject: Re: GCR Referral - VASP Program

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious email by using the “Report Suspicious Email” button or forwarding the message to "phish@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:phish@woundedwarriorproject.org>".

________________________________

Hey Juan,

Thanks for the message.

I actually reached out regarding a new VA home loan program called the Veteran’s Assistance Servicing Purchase program.

1. “The VA will introduce a new Servicing Purchase Program in July. It's a new way of making a ‘last-ditch effort’ in the waterfall to keep veterans in homes, said John Bell III, executive director of the agency. Through the initiative, the VA will take a loan back, pay and make the servicer whole, and put the borrower on an interest rate that’s not available in the marketplace.” https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysq8bMT2w$>

2. “MBA Submits Recommendations on the VA Servicing Purchase Program on Monday, MBA and the Housing Policy Council submitted recommendations to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding its new Servicing Purchase Program (VASP). VASP is expected to be introduced as VA’s new loss mitigation program for distressed veteran borrowers for high-interest rate environments. MBA’s recommendations follow several conversations with the VA throughout the development of VASP.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysBYSMot0$>

3. “Despite the VA’s engagement with industry in recent months, VA has not provided any written program description, outline or framework. MBA and HPC believe stakeholders should have the opportunity to provide feedback on the program’s design and implementation. Specific issues that require greater transparency include the maximum number of borrowers served, the ability to provide relief promptly, VASP’s compliance with Regulation X (RESPA), and the ability to facilitate successful servicing transfers.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysWFVPPRk$>

4. “A solution like this is needed because approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers are estimated to be behind on their mortgage payments and those with note rates below the current market rate will not be able to achieve an affordable payment with a traditional loan modification.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf?<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf?__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYyspIx6wwc$>

5. The VA already has a similar option called a “refunding.”

https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4%20Chapter%209%20Refunds%20-%205-2017.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4*20Chapter*209*20Refunds*20-*205-2017.docx__;JSUlJSU!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysH4oxF-o$>

6. Matt Douglas, Vice President of Mortgage Policy for the Housing Policy Council, has stated that a key difference between the “refund” and the “VASP Program” is that the number of considered loans could go from a couple dozen a year to tens of thousands.

7. He also stated that as of 8/26/2023 the VA “have not shared a detailed/comprehensive process with us.”

Just to recap, the program was supposed to be implemented on 7/1/2023, but wasn’t. The VA hasn’t shared anything specific with the groups representing mortgage companies. There are potentially as many as 147,000 veteran homeowners at risk of losing their homes and are most likely completely unaware of this new program. The number of loans/mortgages potentially considered under the program is a number the VA (in my opinion) is not at all equipped to handle.

Thank you again.

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Juan Valdez <jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org<mailto:jvaldez@woundedwarriorproject.org>>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 4:22 PM
To: mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com> <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: GCR Referral - VASP Program

[https://app.salesforceiq.com/t.png?c=outlook&t=AFwhZf2HRzOX2wavcs3oNbv6sa5Jyt-GRZO48MjO7-Pj-WPNiS-nRWkHyHdNeOy-N01bNHcnxBPK2JVwqonW3JtFJo-jY4iajTm16ug2RCFrFeMhZwk9C5lTrvCVlz539f2GMQGesXKT]Hi Michael,

I hope you’re having a great week. I recently received a referral from the resource center regarding some questions about the VA’s pension program<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.va.gov/pension/eligibility/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6nMZQVM$>. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have about the program. Please send your questions at your earliest convenience, and I will answer them promptly. Thank you for your service and for the opportunity to be of service to you.

Semper Fidelis,

Juan

JUAN VALDEZ

grassroots and constituent affairs coordinator

O: 904.489.1435<tel:904.489.1435>

M: 202.558.4331<tel:202.558.4331>

Wounded Warrior Project

1120 G St NW

Washington, DC 20005

Facebook<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys5eivD2E$> | Twitter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/twitter.com/wwp__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXkroUM0$> | YouTube<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/user/WoundedWarriorProjec__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysinL6O14$>

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/wounded-warrior-project/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys6LCNCs8$> | Instagram<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/wwp/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysXzvQIJo$>

woundedwarriorproject.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.woundedwarriorproject.org/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysvU4JmSI$>

CONNECT >> SERVE >> EMPOWER

From: Michael Locke

Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 3:46 PM
To: VAPlainLanguage@va.gov<mailto:VAPlainLanguage@va.gov> <VAPlainLanguage@va.gov<mailto:VAPlainLanguage@va.gov>>
Subject: Veteran with an issue understanding VA Documents

1. My issue pertains to VA manual 26-3 Loan Management and Service Policies, Procedures, and Methods, Loan Guaranty Operations for Regional Offices, chapter 4, section 08. See https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_03/Ch4_DelinquentLoanServicing.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_03/Ch4_DelinquentLoanServicing.docx__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysJlc_EAE$>

2. Specifically, the portion that states “VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim.”

3. My understanding is that based on the plain writing, “VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim…” is a compound-complex sentence that has two independent clauses (VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy and VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim) joined by a coordinating conjunction (however) and one dependent clause (if the borrower reaches out to VA) that modifies the second independent clause. The second independent clause means that VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement if the borrower reaches out to VA. The phrase “should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim” is a conditional clause that describes a possible scenario that would result in the loss of entitlement for the borrower. It does not imply that VA will only discuss options and entitlements in that scenario.

4. The VA employee I’ve engaged with to this point has stated “At this this time, your loan has not terminated and therefore we cannot ‘discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim.’”

5. When pressed for further clarification on the provided interpretation, the employee declined to clarify.

Can this office (or someone within the VA with expertise regarding “plain writing”) please provide input on the plain writing meaning of “VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim…”?

Thank you for any consideration.

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2023 10:45 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov<mailto:VAHotline@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; Jeffrey Badgley <jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com>>; Jon Masters <jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. On 4/8/2020 the VA states in part via Circular 26-20-12 “A borrower with a VA-guaranteed or VA-held loan…who is experiencing a financial hardship due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID–19 emergency may request a loan forbearance, regardless of delinquency status, by submitting a request to the borrower’s servicer; and attesting that the borrower is experiencing a financial hardship due to the COVID–19 emergency…If the borrower makes the attestation discussed above, the servicer must grant the forbearance request, with no additional documentation.” See https://www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/circulars/26_20_12.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/circulars/26_20_12.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysFboshsI$>

2.

[image/jpeg]

3. Per VA Circular 26-20-17 “To identify borrowers who have been impacted by COVID-19, VA is replacing the reason for default of “Energy/Environmental Cost” with “National Emergency Declaration” in the Electronic Default Notice (EDN) event. When a borrower requests forbearance due to COVID-19, servicers should use the new reason for default when reporting the EDN and then report the Special Forbearance event. Effective June 1, 2020, VALERI will accept the new reason for default prior to the 61st day of delinquency." See https://www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/circulars/26_20_17.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/circulars/26_20_17.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysPxx6_YM$>

4. On 3/24/2022 Planet Home Lending submitted a VALERI event titled “Reason for Default Update.” See https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/*file-1023757__;Iw!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys7G7jQ0c$> [https://web.archive.org/web/20230130153859/https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757]

5. The rule evaluation status for this event states “Not processed.” See previously provided muckrock link

6. The VALERI Servicer User Guide states when an event is “not processed,” the “Event was withdrawn by the Servicer before processing.”

See https://www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/docs/valeri-servicer-user-guide.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/HOMELOANS/documents/docs/valeri-servicer-user-guide.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysjKxCwTg$>

7. On 5/10/2022 Planet Home Lending submits another “Reason for Default Update” event via VALERI. See previously provided muckrock link

8. The 5/10/2022 “Reason for Default Update” rule evaluation status states “Accepted.” See previously provided muckrock link

9.The VALERI Servicer User Guide states when an event is “Accepted,” that “All event rules passed with no failing business rules.” See previously provided link for VALERI Servicer User Guide

10. The VALERI records for the loan as of 6/17/2022 reflect the home loan as marked for “National Emergency Declaration (NED).” See previously provided muckrock link

Based off this information, I have the following questions:

1. What was the “Reason for Default” reported on 3/24/2022, but ultimately withdrawn?

2. What was the “Reason for Default” in VALERI prior to 5/10/2022?

3. On what date was the home loan marked for “National Emergency Declaration (NED)” in VALERI?

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 5:31 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

We have provided you responses to your inquiries and instead of trying to find a solution to resolving your situation, you prefer to argue with us over policies and procedures. At this time, we are unable to assist you any further until you are willing to cooperate with us and provide productive and forward moving discussions.

If in the future you choose to engage with us in a positive and productive manner, we will be happy to assist.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 6:24 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; VA Hotline <VAHotline@va.gov<mailto:VAHotline@va.gov>>; Jeffrey Badgley <jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com>>; Jon Masters <jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. You say “VA’s system was unable to reflect all the necessary changes for the COVID pandemic. Unfortunately, VA had to spend it resources building out the Partial Claim program. So, while the servicer was updating the VA regarding the forbearances, unfortunately our system is not able to identify if was a CARES Act forbearance or a regular forbearance. Home Lending reported to VA a special forbearance was added from 8/19/20 – 11/1/20. This doesn’t mean more special forbearances weren’t completed with Planet Home Lending, this is all that was reported to VA during this time.”

2. Per VA Circular 26-20-17 “To identify borrowers who have been impacted by COVID-19, VA is replacing the reason for default of “Energy/Environmental Cost” with “National Emergency Declaration” in the Electronic Default Notice (EDN) event. When a borrower requests forbearance due to COVID-19, servicers should use the new reason for default when reporting the EDN and then report the Special Forbearance event. Effective June 1, 2020, VALERI will accept the new reason for default prior to the 61st day of delinquency."

3. Further, I know your statement is nonsense (if not an outright lie) based on the VALERI loan information and notes provided pursuant to my 5/17/2022 FOIA request. Said records clearly demonstrate whatever forbearance entered by Planet Home Lending in VALERI was done in accordance with VA Circular 26-20-17. You're free to review those records via the link below.

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysSLjR8Lw$> [https://web.archive.org/web/20230130153859/https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/]

3. You say "The documents you have provided appear that either there is a litigation in place or something was filed with the courts. VA will be unable to assist as this appears to be an action against your servicer and we are unable to participate."

The U.S. Congress has put in place a number of laws and practices to favor veterans as it relates to receiving benefits from the VA. This includes 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, which requires the VA to help the claimant develop their claim for benefits. Furthermore, under Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 115 S. Ct. 552, 130 L. Ed.2d 462, any interpretive doubt is to be resolved in favor of the veteran, as seen in the case of Shinseki v. Sanders, 556 U.S. 396, 129 S. Ct. 1696 (2009).

4. On one hand you say that the VA is unable to discuss loss mitigation options, yet here you attempt to indirectly discuss loss mitigation options by stating and asking "You had advised 'The Veteran said that even if his loan servicer provided him a package to keep the home his ex-wife would not sign off on that because she wants him to sell the home.' Is this still the case?"

5. Per the Department of Veteran Affairs via Federal Register document # 2020-26964<tel:2020-26964>:

"In cases where servicers are unable to complete a loss-mitigation option or an alternative to foreclosure, servicers must, before initiating a foreclosure, provide VA with the option of what is commonly called a “loan refund.” This process, authorized under 38 U.S.C. 3732, is where VA takes assignment of the existing guaranteed loan indebtedness in exchange for VA's payment to the servicer of the unpaid principal balance, plus accrued interest."

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-12-09/pdf/2020-26964.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-12-09/pdf/2020-26964.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys7_uSAXU$>

6. Per servicer Planet Home Lending via response to interrogatories in the foreclosure case for the property in question:

[image/jpeg]

Please see Florida court case # 05-2021-CA-047073-XXXX-XX, doc #45

7. Please see the previously linked VALERI information for where the VA was made aware of servicer Planet Home Lending’s failure to follow the clearly stated condition precedent incorporated into the note and mortgage for the applicable property.

8. Additionally, please see the previously linked VALERI information for where the VA failed to intervene and ensure Adequacy of Servicing as required by VA regulations.

8. “The servicer or the VA-assigned technician may initiate their refund consideration process at any time during the life of the loan.”

https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4%20Chapter%209%20Refunds%20-%205-2017.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4*20Chapter*209*20Refunds*20-*205-2017.docx__;JSUlJSU!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysH4oxF-o$>

9. Is the clearly stated policy via Federal Register document # 2020-26964<tel:2020-26964> yet another policy VA Loan Guaranty will not be following?

Fiduciary relationships may be implied in law and such relationships are premised upon the specific factual situation surrounding the transaction, as well as the relationship of the parties. Capital Bank v. MVB, Inc., 644 So.2d 515, 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). In a banking context, the relationship is generally that of a creditors to debtor, and the bank owes no fiduciary responsibilities. Keys Jeep Eagle, Inc., 897 F. Supp. at 1443. To plead an exception to this general rule, “a party must allege some degree of dependency on one side and some degree of undertaking on the other side to advise, counsel, and protect the weaker party.” Welnia, LLC v. Bodymedia, Inc., 2008 WL 3155148 at * 2 (M.D. Fla. 2008).

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 5:15 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

Please see the following responses.

1-3) VA’s system was unable to reflect all the necessary changes for the COVID pandemic. Unfortunately, VA had to spend it resources building out the Partial Claim program. So, while the servicer was updating the VA regarding the forbearances, unfortunately our system is not able to identify if was a CARES Act forbearance or a regular forbearance. Home Lending reported to VA a special forbearance was added from 8/19/20 – 11/1/20. This doesn’t mean more special forbearances weren’t completed with Planet Home Lending, this is all that was reported to VA during this time.

4) The documents you have provided appear that either there is a litigation in place or something was filed with the courts. VA will be unable to assist as this appears to be an action against your servicer and we are unable to participate.

5 - 6) VA is not a servicer, we are the guarantor on the loan. Your servicer is Plant Home Lending, LLC.

7-9) We have already responded and, as we have told in our last response, we are not going to argue with you about our policies.

10 – 13) Again as we told you in our last correspondence, VA has not publicly announced this program and does have not a confirmed date for which a new program will be announced. Implementation of new programs may take many months as the mortgage industry has to adapt policies and technology to any changes made to the VA Home Loan program.

We have advised you before and continue to advise you that you can either continue to argue our policies with us or you can begin to work with us and try to resolve your home loan delinquency once the debt is out of the protection of the Bankruptcy courts.

We do need to clarify something that you had previously provided the USB office as it may pertain to the loss mitigation options that will be available to you once the debt is out of the protection of the Bankruptcy courts. You had advised “The Veteran said that even if his loan servicer provided him a package to keep the home his ex-wife would not sign off on that because she wants him to sell the home.” Is this still the case?

Thanks,

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2023 12:45 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: Jeffrey Badgley <jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jbadgley@badgleylawgroup.com>>; Jon Masters <jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com<mailto:jmasters@badgleylawgroup.com>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Case No. 11190053 Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Hey,

1. Letter from Marcus Young dated 5/20/2022:

“Was Mr. Locke ever under the CARES FB?

• Mr. Locke was approved for a Special Forbearance on August 19, 2020. The Special Forbearance was extended on December 10, 2020, and again on April 2, 2021.”

2. Planet Home Lending response on 6/22/2022 to CFPB Complaint:

“In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021. Planet sent the enclosed correspondence to determine if you were still in need of a forbearance and did not receive a response. Therefore, the forbearance expired on August 31, 2021.

On October 5, 2021, upon receipt of an online request from you, you were approved for an extension of the COVID-19 forbearance plan, which was good through November 1, 2021. As an additional courtesy, Planet backdated the forbearance plan to September 1, 2021, waived your late fees and ensured no negative credit reporting was furnished to the three major agencies pursuant to the CARES Act while you were on a forbearance. Therefore, you were provided with a COVID-19 forbearance plan for a total of 18 months, which is the maximum number permitted by the VA for loans with a COVID-19 hardship on or prior to June 1, 2020.”

3. Why does the apparent CARES ACT information in VALERI as provided by Marcus Young not align with the information provided by servicer Planet Home Lending in their CFPB complaint response?

4. Will the VA please uphold it’s duty to assist and obtain copies of servicer Planet Home Lending’s “collection records” from 5/01/2020 to 8/16/2022?

5. Is the VA a servicer?

6. Is the VA a servicer to my home loan?

7. Does the “guidance” you provided directly state the VA is prevented from speaking with a veteran borrower with a home under the protection of a bankruptcy court?

8. Are you saying the “guidance” states the only time that the VA can engage with a veteran borrower regarding a home loan subject to the protection of the bankruptcy courts is after that loan terminates?

9. How is it possible for a loan to terminate that’s subject to the protection of the bankruptcy court?

• “VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim…” is a compound-complex sentence that has two independent clauses (VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy and VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim) joined by a coordinating conjunction (however) and one dependent clause (if the borrower reaches out to VA) that modifies the second independent clause. The second independent clause means that VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement if the borrower reaches out to VA. The phrase “should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim” is a conditional clause that describes a possible scenario that would result in the loss of entitlement for the borrower. It does not imply that VA will only discuss options and entitlements in that scenario.

10. “The VA will introduce a new Servicing Purchase Program in July. It's a new way of making a ‘last-ditch effort’ in the waterfall to keep veterans in homes, said John Bell III, executive director of the agency. Through the initiative, the VA will take a loan back, pay and make the servicer whole, and put the borrower on an interest rate that’s not available in the marketplace.” https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/usda-va-tease-loss-mit-tribal-land-initiatives__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysq8bMT2w$>

11. “MBA Submits Recommendations on the VA Servicing Purchase Program on Monday, MBA and the Housing Policy Council submitted recommendations to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding its new Servicing Purchase Program (VASP). VASP is expected to be introduced as VA’s new loss mitigation program for distressed veteran borrowers for high-interest rate environments. MBA’s recommendations follow several conversations with the VA throughout the development of VASP.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/may/mba-newslink-wednesday-may-31-2023/mba-advocacy-update-may-30-2023/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysBYSMot0$>

12. “Despite the VA’s engagement with industry in recent months, VA has not provided any written program description, outline or framework. MBA and HPC believe stakeholders should have the opportunity to provide feedback on the program’s design and implementation. Specific issues that require greater transparency include the maximum number of borrowers served, the ability to provide relief promptly, VASP’s compliance with Regulation X (RESPA), and the ability to facilitate successful servicing transfers.”

https://newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/newslink.mba.org/mba-newslinks/2023/august/mba-newslink-monday-aug-7-2023/mba-advocacy-update-aug-7-tk/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysnT2_ixo$>

13. “A solution like this is needed because approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers are estimated to be behind on their mortgage payments and those with note rates below the current market rate will not be able to achieve an affordable payment with a traditional loan modification.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysC7e0pl8$>?

Fiduciary relationships may be implied in law and such relationships are premised upon the specific factual situation surrounding the transaction, as well as the relationship of the parties. Capital Bank v. MVB, Inc., 644 So.2d 515, 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). In a banking context, the relationship is generally that of a creditor to debtor, and the bank owes no fiduciary responsibilities. Keys Jeep Eagle, Inc., 897 F. Supp. at 1443. To plead an exception to this general rule, “a party must allege some degree of dependency on one side and some degree of undertaking on the other side to advise, counsel, and protect the weaker party.” Welnia, LLC v. Bodymedia, Inc., 2008 WL 3155148 at * 2 (M.D. Fla. 2008).

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 5:07 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good afternoon Mr. Locke,

We have received multiple emails from you this week which you directed to various entry points into VA. Understand that every inquiry will ultimately be routed to this office to respond. In effort to save you time and speed up the response time, we request that you only respond to this chain. Of course, you may disregard this request but moving forward we will only be responding to this communication chain.

We have reviewed the 46 items that you have identified below, and we determined responded to them previously in prior responses (which we can provide again) or there is no action for us to respond. If there are ones that are new that we have not responded to feel free to let us know the specific ones and we will review and respond.

As for the inquiry in the Bankruptcy guidance, you have failed to provide the full guidance. Please review the full guidance below and understand that we must comply with the full guidance.

When a borrower files for bankruptcy protection, servicers are typically prevented from making contact. Servicers must report the bankruptcy events in VALERI to include the type of bankruptcy (Chapter 7, 11 or 13 filing) and provide updates such as relief filed, relief granted, dismissed, or discharged. VA will not attempt contact with Veterans who have filed bankruptcy; however, if the borrower reaches out to VA, VA will discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim.

At this this time, your loan has not terminated and therefore we cannot “discuss the Veteran’s options and the loss of entitlement should the loan terminate and VA pays a claim.”

As for your request to engage with our attorneys, they do not engage directly with Veterans but through us. If you have a specific question, we can reach out to them and request them provide us guidance.

We are also in receipt of your inquiry into the VASP program. VA has not publicly announced this program and does have not a confirmed date for which a new program will be announced. Implementation of new programs may take many months as the mortgage industry has to adapt policies and technology to any changes made to the VA Home Loan program.

Again, as we have advised you before you can either continue to argue our policies with us or you can begin to work with us and try to resolve your home loan delinquency once the debt is out of the protection of the Bankruptcy courts.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 8:58 PM
To: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Subject: Re: Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program

Hello,

Thank you immensely.

“That is a technical legal question that I don’t know the answer to, but since it requires a servicing transfer (which is a highly technical process that requires cooperation), and the purchase of the loan from the servicer, the servicer would almost certainly need to consent to it.”

“The servicer or the VA-assigned technician may initiate the refund consideration process at any time during the life of the loan.”

https://www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4%20Chapter%209%20Refunds%20-%205-2017.docx<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/docs/admin26/m26_04/M26-4*20Chapter*209*20Refunds*20-*205-2017.docx__;JSUlJSU!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysH4oxF-o$>

“Definitely not my understanding as the program currently works.”

“Once all required documentation is received from the servicer and borrower, and the VA appraisal has been completed, VA will conduct an analysis and complete a refund decision process.”

From the previous link. Granted, federal courts have found federal agency manuals have no “legal force”

“That’s right, but my understanding is that there are currently no loss mitigation options that a servicer must offer.”

VA circular 26-20-12 was rescinded on 7/1/2021, so it's not in effect anymore. For the time that it was, technically the VA Disaster Loan Modification and VA Streamline Modification would be an issue based on the wording that servicers were to “…ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current.” They both use a trial payment plan in the place of a traditional loan modification packet.The streamline “Modification must realize at least a 10% reduction in principal and interest portion of the payment,” so it’s a little more strenuous than the disaster. I think part of the difference between the refund and VASP is servicers being “made whole,” but it seems like the VA would have a good argument against making a servicer whole if a servicer failed to follow VA Circular 26-20-12. Granted, based on my experience, the VA seems deferential to what “you guys” want, but it’s still the federal government and I imagine they don’t want to pay out money if they don’t have to.

“The new program would be mandatory, and instead of a couple dozen of loans a year, it could be tens of thousands. There are a whole lot of other changes, but those are two big ones.”

When you say “mandatory,” do you mean that the VA will require servicers to refer defaulted home loans where no other loss mitigation options are possible to the VA for VASP consideration? I know the VA started using “AI” to process disability benefit claims about a year before chatgpt was introduced, had considerable success, and expanded the “pilot program.” I can’t imagine it’d be that hard to extend that to processing VASP consideration.

Michael Locke

________________________________

d From: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 7:48 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Cc: Kelleher, Brendan <bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:bkelleher@mba.org>>
Subject: RE: Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program

Hey Michael,

Below in red are my best answers to your questions. Wish you luck.

Best,

Matt

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 3:21 PM
To: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Cc: Kelleher, Brendan <bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:bkelleher@mba.org>>
Subject: Re: Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program

You don't often get email from mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>. Learn why this is important<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysbMTWYuI$>

Hello,

Thank you for the response.

I had a couple questions based off what's publicly available from the Housing Policy Counsel and Mortgage Banker’s Association regarding the VASP program.

1. Your July 26, 2023 joint letter states in part “‘As we understand VASP, the decision to modify a borrower's loan rests with the VA,’ … ‘Yet, servicers continue to evaluate their borrowers for all available options. In other words, servicers continue to communicate and engage with their delinquent borrowers until the VA approves the purchase of the loan and accepts transfer of the loan from the servicer.’ This dynamic ‘dislocates the traditional regulatory relationship between the servicer and the borrower.’”

Can’t the current VA refund process be initiated by the VA without the consent of the servicer? That is a technical legal question that I don’t know the answer to, but since it requires a servicing transfer (which is a highly technical process that requires cooperation), and the purchase of the loan from the servicer, the servicer would almost certainly need to consent to it.

Ultimately, isn’t it solely the decision of the VA as to whether or not a loan will be refunded? Definitely not my understanding as the program currently works.

What’s different between the old refund and VASP? The new program would be mandatory, and instead of a couple dozen of loans a year, it could be tens of thousands. There are a whole lot of other changes, but those are two big ones.

2. Section 1 of VA Circular 26-20-12 explicitly states “The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer.” That’s right, but my understanding is that there are currently no loss mitigation options that a servicer must offer.

3. Subsection c of section 5 of VA Circular 26-20-12 states “Servicers should review loan files for all possible loss mitigation options no later than 30 days before the forbearance period is scheduled to end. Servicers should document such reviews in their loan servicing systems. If no loss mitigation options are possible, in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.”

Based on # 2 and 3, do you guys have any information detailing compliance with VA Circular 26-20-12? Nope-no information on this.

VA Circular 26-20-12 was in place from 4/9/2020 until 7/1/2021. In that time, what number of defaulted VA home loans were referred to the VA for possible refunding pursuant to 26-20-12? Haven’t seen a number on this, but based on verbal information from the VA I would guess less than 50.

Lastly, do you guys represent Planet Home Lending? The Housing Policy Council does not represent Planet Home Lending.

Thank you for any consideration.

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 1:49 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Cc: Kelleher, Brendan <bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:bkelleher@mba.org>>
Subject: RE: Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program

Hey Michael,

Unfortunately, they have not shared a detailed/comprehensive process with us. We are hopeful that they will make a public announcement about the program in the month or so, but the program has been frustratingly slow to develop.

Wish I had more news to share.

Best,

Matt Douglas

Vice President, Mortgage Policy

Housing Policy Council

1220 19th Street, NW, Suite 720

Washington, DC 20036

202-589-1924<tel:202-589-1924>

Matt.Douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:Matt.Douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>

[Logo Description automatically generated]

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 1:38 PM
To: Bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:Bkelleher@mba.org>; Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Subject: Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program

You don't often get email from mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>. Learn why this is important<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysbMTWYuI$>

Hello,

My name is Michael Locke and I'm a veteran borrower who would potentially be impacted by the Veterans Assistance Servicing Purchase (VASP) program. I was just curious if the VA had provided any “…concrete, written outlines or process flows of the VASP program” since your letter sent on July 26, 2023. If so, do you mind providing me with as much information? Thank you for any consideration.

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 7:52 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. “Wells Fargo to pay $94M to settle mortgage forbearance suit… 200,000 borrowers say the bank put them in forbearance without their consent”

https://www.housingwire.com/articles/wells-fargo-to-pay-94m-to-settle-mortgage-forbearance-suit/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.housingwire.com/articles/wells-fargo-to-pay-94m-to-settle-mortgage-forbearance-suit/__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYyskaXVfMY$>

A few of them had to be VA Home Loans. This is just Wells Fargo too. I know my servicer did whatever they wanted when it came to my CARES ACT forbearance. They even documented as much in a response to a CFPB complaint (see numbers 18 and 19 in my email from 7/1/2023.) to a total VA knows too. Does the VA mind upholding its duty to assist and obtaining the requested information and documents detailed in the attached PDFs?

2. “HUD Inspector General finds that 2/3rds of borrowers did not receive loss-mitigation assistance. Servicers failed to meet HUD requirements for providing loss-mitigation assistance to 67.1% of borrowers with FHA-insured loans.“

https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/audit-finds-servicers-mr-cooper-bungled-pandemic-mortgage-relief<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/audit-finds-servicers-mr-cooper-bungled-pandemic-mortgage-relief__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYys7RWpkKU$>

3. “July 26, 2023…RE: Public Comment Process for Foreclosure Prevention Solution for Veteran Borrowers…approximately 147,000 veteran borrowers are estimated to be behind on their mortgage payments.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.mba.org/docs/default-source/advertising/vasp-review-process-request_mba.hpc_july-2023.pdf__;!!Iwwt!QizZlr6Dw12F82JMBgRqKcHSvN6MH9aBdYTcaG64DXk28A9fQbMoyNH-Jbu95WLVhYysC7e0pl8$>?

“Hi Good Morning Mr. Locke,

Attached please find the signed order lifting the stay as to the VA. You should have no problem being able to communicate directly with the VA since the stay is no longer in effect.

If you have any questions or issues in communicating directly with the VA regarding their loss mitigation options, please do not hesitate to let us know.”

It’s been about 10 year since the VA had a noteworthy scandal. Seems likes you guys are due.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Saturday, July 1, 2023 3:24 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Meter’s running.

I have a VA home loan through Planet Home Lending that was in arrears due to a mandatory evacuation in September 2019 from Hurricane Dorian, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic. The VA has a disaster loan mitigation option that could have been applied, but Planet Home Lending did not offer it. The CARES Act was signed in March 2020 and offered protection to homeowners with mortgages backed by the federal government who are facing financial difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and explicitly states that mortgage assistance must be provided regardless of delinquency status. The VA then issued a circular on April 8, 2020 that stated servicers have to give borrowers the opportunity to pursue all loss mitigation options to bring their loan current. The VA also issued a circular in July 2021 that introduced the COVID- 19 Refund Modification which allows for significant payment reductions and does not require a financial evaluation. Despite this, Planet Home Lending began court proceedings to obtain a foreclosure, and only offered a loan modification with a trial payment period in December 2021, which could have been done at any point during the default period. I rejected the modification offer due to the applicable laws and regulations that favor the veteran, such as 38 U.S.C. § 5103A and Brown v. Gardner.

1. I currently have a VA home loan through Planet Home Lending.

2. In September of 2019 the area the property is located was under a mandatory evacuation due to Hurricane Dorian. The area was declared a federal disaster area in December of 2019.

3. In 10/1/2019 I missed the first home loan payment.

4. In December of 2019 I submitted an incomplete loss mitigation package to Planet Home Lending.

5. On 1/3/2020 I was denied consideration for any loss mitigation options by Planet Home Lending.

6. The VA has a disaster loss mitigation option that allows for a loan modification absent a complete loss mitigation package.

7. The VA disaster loan modification specifies a trial payment plan is used to verify income in lieu of a complete loss mitigation package.

8. Planet Home Lending had the ability to offer a VA Disaster Loan Modification and/or a special forbearance at this point, but does not.

9. In early 2020 the Covid-19 pandemic begins.

10. On 3/27/2020, THE CARES ACT is signed into law.

11. The CARES Act offers protection to homeowners with mortgages backed by the federal government who are facing financial difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and explicitly states in section 4022(b)(1) that mortgage assistance provided pursuant to the CARES ACT was to be provided "...regardless of delinquency status."

12. The Department of Veterans Affairs makes use of circulars issued via the official VA website to provide current policies and procedures to VA-approved lenders and servicers.

13. The VA explicitly states via their official website that circulars are supplemental to VA home loan regulations.

14. On 4/8/2020, the VA issues “Circular 26-20-12” via the official VA website in response to the CARES ACT.

15. Section 1 of VA Circular 26-20-12 explicitly states “The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer.”

16. I was eligible for a disaster loan modification for the entirety of my default period, but at no point was I offered a disaster loan modification.

17. As a result of section 1 of VA Circular 26-20-12, Planet Home Lending was required to offer a disaster loan modification.

If Planet Home Lending continues to maintain that I was ineligible for any loss mitigation options, then the following applies:

18. Section 3 of VA Circular 26-20-12 states “The borrower, not the servicer, is entitled to determine the period of the forbearance...”

19. Planet Home Lending stated the following regarding forbearance applied to my home loan:

“In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021. Planet sent the enclosed correspondence to determine if you were still in need of a forbearance and did not receive a response. Therefore, the forbearance expired on August 31, 2021.

On October 5, 2021, upon receipt of an online request from you, you were approved for an extension of the COVID-19 forbearance plan, which was good through November 1, 2021. As an additional courtesy, Planet backdated the forbearance plan to September 1, 2021, waived your late fees and ensured no negative credit reporting was furnished to the three major agencies pursuant to the CARES Act while you were on a forbearance.”

20. Subsection c of section 5 of VA Circular 26-20-12 states “Servicers should review loan files for all possible loss mitigation options no later than 30 days before the forbearance period is scheduled to end. Servicers should document such reviews in their loan servicing systems. If no loss mitigation options are possible, in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.”

21. No such review was conducted or documented within the VA Loan Electronic Reporting Interface (VALERI).

22. The VA via 38 CFR § 36.4301 defines “home equity” as “...the difference between the home's reasonable value and the outstanding balance of all liens on the property.”

23. The VA via 38 CFR § 36.4301 defines “reasonable value” as “...that figure which represents the amount a reputable and qualified appraiser, unaffected by personal interest, bias, or prejudice, would recommend to a prospective purchaser as a proper price or cost in the light of prevailing conditions.”

24. Per the applicable appraisal on file with the VA and Planet Home Lending, the “reasonable value” of the home was/is $292,000.

25. At the time of default, the principal balance of the home was $263,329.99.

26. If the first forbearance period expired in August of 2020 and no loss mitigation options were possible, in July of 2020 Planet Home Lending was required to refer the home loan to the applicable VA Regional Loan Center for possible refunding, as there was no way the outstanding balance of the home exceeded the “reasonable value” of $292,000.

27. At no time did Planet Home lending refer the home loan to the applicable VA Regional Loan Center for possible refunding.

28. On 7/1/2021, VA Circular 26-20-12 is rescinded.

29. On 7/23/2021 the VA issues Circular 26-21-13.

30. The purpose of VA Circular 26-21-13 is to provide “...VA’s waterfall of home retention options for helping borrowers affected financially by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

31. VA Circular 26-21-13 also “...announces the COVID-19 Refund Modification, a type of loan modification specific to those borrowers needing payment reductions when exiting COVID-19 forbearance.”

32. While section 5 of VA Circular 26-21-13 identifies eligibility criteria for borrowers to whom the home retention waterfall will apply, no such eligibility criteria is provided for the COVID-19 Refund Modification. It should be noted that Planet Home Lending presently reflects the last payment received on the loan as 1/1/2020.

33. The COVID-19 Refund Modification is a type of loan modification that allows for significant reductions in a borrower's monthly payments. The indebtedness is secured as a junior lien in favor of VA that does not accrue interest or require monthly payments, and only becomes due when the property is sold, the loan is paid off, or the loan is refinanced. VA can purchase indebtedness up to 30 percent of a borrower's unpaid principal balance, and does not require a financial evaluation for every case.

34. On 9/30/21 Planet Home Lending begins court proceedings to obtain a foreclosure.

35. On 11/4/2021 Isubmits a complete loss mitigation package to Planet Home Lending.

36. On 12/27/2021 Planet Home Lending puts forth an offer for “Standard Modification” (ie Traditional Loan modification) with a trial payment period.

37. Besides in name, the offer is a disaster loan modification.

38. Due to the proceeding facts, I rejected the loan modification as it could have been offered at any time within the default period.

39. The U.S. Congress has put in place a number of laws and practices to favor veterans as it relates to receiving benefits from the VA. This includes 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, which requires the VA to help the claimant develop their claim for benefits. Furthermore, under Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 115 S. Ct. 552, 130 L. Ed.2d 462, any interpretive doubt is to be resolved in favor of the veteran, as seen in the case of Shinseki v. Sanders, 556 U.S. 396, 129 S. Ct. 1696 (2009).

40. Per 38 USC § 5103A, the VA “...shall make reasonable efforts to assist a claimant in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate the claimant’s claim for a benefit under a law administered by the Secretary.”

41. The VA home loan benefit is authorized by Title 38, Chapter 37 of the United States Code.

42. The VA has a duty to assist my claims for benefits related to my home loan.

43. The VA was and is aware of the issues described herein.

44. The VA failed and refused to act concerning those issues.

45. I was forced to declare bankruptcy due to the VA’s failure and refusal to act.

46. The home is in delinquency due to the VA’s failure and refusal to act.

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 9:35 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

We will follow up with the Phoenix Office.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 11:06 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

As far as I’m aware, the following hasn’t been explained by the VA:

“From: Michael Locke

Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 3:04 PM
To: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Cc: Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov> <marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov>>
Subject: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Can someone please explain the discrepancies between what VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center Loan Administration Officer Marcus Young is saying and what my servicer is saying? I will most likely have further questions based on the answers I receive.

1. Letter from Marcus Young dated 5/20/2022:

“Your loan was reported in default to the VA and due for the 10/1/19 installment. The reason for default was martial difficulties. When we talked to you on August 14, 2020, you confirmed that the reason for default was martial difficulties. According to our notes, you submitted a loss mitigation assistance application in 2019, however the servicer deemed the application incomplete.”

2. Planet Home Lending response on 6/22/2022 to CFPB Complaint:

“Planet’s investigation revealed that you initially submitted an online portal inquiry on December 3, 2019. The submission was partially completed, however, did not indicate whether the disaster hardship was resolved or ongoing. Planet issued both acknowledgement and missing items letters (enclosed) on that same date. To proceed with a Disaster Modification, Planet must verify that the hardship was resolved, the borrower returned to work and with no negative long-term change in the household income occurring. Despite numerous attempts, we did not receive the required information. Therefore, on January 3, 2020, a loss mitigation denial letter (enclosed) was issued.”

3. Letter from Marcus Young dated 5/20/2022:

“Was Mr. Locke ever under the CARES FB?

• Mr. Locke was approved for a Special Forbearance on August 19, 2020. The Special Forbearance was extended on December 10, 2020, and again on April 2, 2021.”

4. I responded to the proceeding as follows:

“Is the above what is reflected in VALERI? If so, does this mean I have CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance eligibility remaining? If so, why didn’t the VA intervene at the time Planet Home Lending filed for foreclosure and say I had eligibility remaining? Planet Home Lending has provided conflicting information regarding the forbearance dates. Will the VA please clarify with Planet Home Lending the dates where CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance was applied to the property, as well as request and provide all documentation substantiating as much?”

5. Mr Young responded to the proceeding with the following:

“• Repayment Plan: Approved: 8/19/20, start date: 5/1/20 estimated cure date: 10/1/20

• Special Forbearance Plan: Approved: 8/19/20 estimated cure date: 11/1/20.”

6. Planet Home Lending response on 6/22/2022 to CFPB Complaint:

‘In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021. Planet sent the enclosed correspondence to determine if you were still in need of a forbearance and did not receive a response. Therefore, the forbearance expired on August 31, 2021.

On October 5, 2021, upon receipt of an online request from you, you were approved for an extension of the COVID-19 forbearance plan, which was good through November 1, 2021. As an additional courtesy, Planet backdated the forbearance plan to September 1, 2021, waived your late fees and ensured no negative credit reporting was furnished to the three major agencies pursuant to the CARES Act while you were on a forbearance. Therefore, you were provided with a COVID-19 forbearance plan for a total of 18 months, which is the maximum number permitted by the VA for loans with a COVID-19 hardship on or prior to June 1, 2020.’”

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2022 11:26 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

All loss mitigation package documents were submitted to Planet Home Lending as of 6/26/2022.

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2022 10:22 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: RE: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good morning Mr. Locke,

We have responded to this inquiry previously in the official correspondence that has been sent to you.

At this point Mr. Locke you have two options, 1) you can start working with VA and your servicer to resolve your delinquency or discuss an alternative to foreclosure, or 2) you can continue to argue with VA about policies and regulations at which we will not be responding because we have already provided you our response.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 10:05 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@va.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Per Marcus Young “Understand at this point they have allowed for the authorized amount of time under the COVID FB requirement, they can consider extending forbearance if you qualify for an extended FB.”

If the Planet Home Lending version of events is accepted, Planet Home Lending was required and failed to refer the loan to the VA for refunding in July of 2020.

1. “The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer.” See Circular 26-20-12 (1).

2. “Servicers should review loan files for all possible loss mitigation options no later than 30 days before the forbearance period is scheduled to end. Servicers should document such reviews in their loan servicing systems. If no loss mitigation options are possible, in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.” See Circular 26-20-12(5)(c).

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 11:05 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Nearly everything that Marcus Young has said to this point has been wrong.

How is it reasonable to expect this to change at this point?

________________________________

From: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 10:59 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Good morning Mr. Locke,

These are servicing questions which should be directed to the Phoenix Regional Loan Center.

Thanks,

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 12:30 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. Is the VA saying Planet Home Lending can offer CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance beyond 18 months?

2. If so, for how long and per what terms?

The servicer didn’t do an adequate job. Phoenix Regional Loan Center didn’t ensure adequate servicing. A forbearance extension isn’t enough to make things right.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 2:26 AM
To: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>
Cc: marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov> <marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>
Subject: Fw: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. Is the VA saying Planet Home Lending can offer CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance beyond 18 months?

2. If so, for how long and per what terms?

The servicer didn’t do an adequate job. Phoenix Regional Loan Center didn’t ensure adequate servicing. A forbearance extension isn’t enough to make things right.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 4:41 PM
To: lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov<mailto:lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov> <lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov<mailto:lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov>>
Subject: Fw: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

1. Is the VA saying Planet Home Lending can offer CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance beyond 18 months?

2. If so, for how long and per what terms?

I will most assuredly have more questions based on the answers I receive.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 2:23 PM
To: Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>
Subject: Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Your statement is unclear. Please elaborate as to what is meant.

1. Is the VA saying Planet Home Lending can offer CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance beyond 18 months?

2. If so, for how long and per what terms?

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:19 PM
To: Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Your statement is unclear. Please elaborate as to what is meant.

1. Are you saying Planet Home Lending can offer CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance beyond 18 months?

2. If so, for how long and per what terms?

________________________________

From: Young, Marcus, VBAPHNX <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:07 PM
To: mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com> <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

PHL is allowed to grant you a forbearance that extends beyond what is required.

Marcus L. Young

Loan Administration Officer

Phoenix Regional Loan Center

1-877-827-3702<tel:1-877-827-3702>, ext. 3455057 Toll Free

Mobile and Text: 602-363-5187<tel:602-363-5187>

From: Michael Locke

Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 3:04 PM
To: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Cc: Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov> <marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov>>
Subject: Request for Discrepancy Explanation

Can someone please explain the discrepancies between what VA Phoenix Regional Loan Center Loan Administration Officer Marcus Young is saying and what my servicer is saying? I will most likely have further questions based on the answers I receive.

1. Letter from Marcus Young dated 5/20/2022:

“Your loan was reported in default to the VA and due for the 10/1/19 installment. The reason for default was martial difficulties. When we talked to you on August 14, 2020, you confirmed that the reason for default was martial difficulties. According to our notes, you submitted a loss mitigation assistance application in 2019, however the servicer deemed the application incomplete.”

2. Planet Home Lending response on 6/22/2022 to CFPB Complaint:

“Planet’s investigation revealed that you initially submitted an online portal inquiry on December 3, 2019. The submission was partially completed, however, did not indicate whether the disaster hardship was resolved or ongoing. Planet issued both acknowledgement and missing items letters (enclosed) on that same date. To proceed with a Disaster Modification, Planet must verify that the hardship was resolved, the borrower returned to work and with no negative long-term change in the household income occurring. Despite numerous attempts, we did not receive the required information. Therefore, on January 3, 2020, a loss mitigation denial letter (enclosed) was issued.”

3. Letter from Marcus Young dated 5/20/2022:

“Was Mr. Locke ever under the CARES FB?

• Mr. Locke was approved for a Special Forbearance on August 19, 2020. The Special Forbearance was extended on December 10, 2020, and again on April 2, 2021.”

4. I responded to the proceeding as follows:

“Is the above what is reflected in VALERI? If so, does this mean I have CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance eligibility remaining? If so, why didn’t the VA intervene at the time Planet Home Lending filed for foreclosure and say I had eligibility remaining? Planet Home Lending has provided conflicting information regarding the forbearance dates. Will the VA please clarify with Planet Home Lending the dates where CARES ACT COVID-19 forbearance was applied to the property, as well as request and provide all documentation substantiating as much?”

5. Mr Young responded to the proceeding with the following:

“• Repayment Plan: Approved: 8/19/20, start date: 5/1/20 estimated cure date: 10/1/20

• Special Forbearance Plan: Approved: 8/19/20 estimated cure date: 11/1/20.”

6. Planet Home Lending response on 6/22/2022 to CFPB Complaint:

“In May 2020, the Loan was flagged as COVID-19 impacted and upon request, was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan. The forbearance plan was extended multiple times August 2020 through August 31, 2021. Planet sent the enclosed correspondence to determine if you were still in need of a forbearance and did not receive a response. Therefore, the forbearance expired on August 31, 2021.

On October 5, 2021, upon receipt of an online request from you, you were approved for an extension of the COVID-19 forbearance plan, which was good through November 1, 2021. As an additional courtesy, Planet backdated the forbearance plan to September 1, 2021, waived your late fees and ensured no negative credit reporting was furnished to the three major agencies pursuant to the CARES Act while you were on a forbearance. Therefore, you were provided with a COVID-19 forbearance plan for a total of 18 months, which is the maximum number permitted by the VA for loans with a COVID-19 hardship on or prior to June 1, 2020.”

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2022 12:57 PM
To: marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov> <marcus.young@va.gov<mailto:marcus.young@va.gov>>; Krejci, Louis, VBAPHNX <Louis.Krejci@va.gov<mailto:Louis.Krejci@va.gov>>; jordan.schaefer@va.gov<mailto:jordan.schaefer@va.gov> <jordan.schaefer@va.gov<mailto:jordan.schaefer@va.gov>>
Cc: Veterans Experience Office <Vets-Experience@VA.gov<mailto:Vets-Experience@VA.gov>>; lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov<mailto:lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov> <lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov<mailto:lgylanational.vbaco@va.gov>>
Subject: Re: Amended Servicer Ability to Offer Loss Mitigation Absent Loss Mitigation Package

VA Response:

"The circulars referenced are specific to COVID-19. Your default occurred prior to COVID-19."

MY Response to VA Response:

And?

Whatever measures the VA has put into place through circulars regarding COVID-19 are an extension of and supplemental to the CARES ACT. Congress explicitly stated in section 4022(b)(1) that mortgage assistance provided pursuant to the CARES ACT was to be provided "...regardless of delinquency status."

"Purpose and Background. During the COVID-19 national emergency the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), through its home loan program, continues to work toward keeping Veterans and stakeholders safe. On March 27, 2020, the President signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act), Public Law 116-136. The CARES Act protects borrowers with Federally backed mortgage loans who are experiencing financial hardship due to the COVID-19 national emergency. These protections are outlined below. The servicer must ensure the borrower has been given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. Failure to do so could impact a future claim payment and could lead to other legal or administrative action(s) against the servicer. The Cares Act preempts section 3 of Circular 26-20-7, 'Special Relief for those Potentially Impacted by COVID-19.'" See VA Circular 26-20-12(1).

1. VA Response:

“Answered in previous letters and correspondence.”

My Response to VA Response:

This was a yes or no question. If the VA provided an answer to a similar question asked at an earlier point, that similar question was a yes or no question as well and the VA never provided a yes or no answer.

2. This was a yes or no question. Please provide a yes or no answer.

3. This was a yes or no question. Please p

Hello,

I'm going to need an updated copy of my "Loan information." For reference, here is the previous request you filled. https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/valeri-home-loan-information-128369/#file-1023757

In addition, I'm going to need the expanded information for the following loan events:

Reason for Default Updated filed 5/10/22 and RFD- NationalEmergencyDeclaration

Reason for Default Updated filed 6/23/22 and RFD – MaritalDifficulties

Reason for Default Updated filed 7/1/22 and RFD – NationalEmergencyDeclaration

Reason for Default Updated filed 7/8/22 and RFD – MaritalDifficulties

If it is unclear as to my meaning, each loan event has a downward arrow to the far right, seemingly indicating an ability for more detailed information concerning each particular loan event.

[image/jpeg]

In the event that there is further information on the particular loan events I’m unaware of, I’m requesting that information as well.

This request is being directed to you due to the metadata on the previously provided documents indicated you were the VA employee who handled retrieval.

[image/jpeg]

1. 
[image/jpeg]

2. “Single-night count shows veteran homelessness on the rise, VA promises ‘hundreds of millions of dollars’ for ‘rapid rehousing’”
See https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2023-12-15/veterans-affairs-homeless-count-hud-12372443.html [https://web.archive.org/web/20231216010637/https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2023-12-15/veterans-affairs-homeless-count-hud-12372443.html]

“Why didn’t VA do this to prevent the 4000 foreclosures that have already happened?”

You can confirm with loan guaranty, but is that 4,000 best described as a conservative estimate?

Michael Locke

Hello,

The questions posed to you on 12/17/2023 were reworded versions of the questions posed to you on 11/16/2023, with a few follow up questions. You refused to answer the majority of questions posed to you on 11/16/2023.

Just for reference regarding the questions:

[image/jpeg]

For clarity’s sake, I am still asking that the questions posed to you on 12/17/2023. I am also asking that you provide yes or no answers to those questions.

I already submitted a loss mitigation package through bankruptcy mortgage mediation in April 2023. The outcome’s not gonna be any different now. A copy of the servicers response to that loss mitigation package is attached.

Also attached are interrogatories and a request to produce submitted by myself in July 2022 in the foreclosure action. The servicer to date has refused to answer these interrogatories and to provide the requested documents. Pursuant to 38 U.S. Code § 5103A(a)(1), I am again asking that VBA Loan Guaranty make a reasonable effort to assist me in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate a claim for my VA home loan benefit by attempting to obtain answers to the interrogatories and attempting to obtain the requested documents.

Michael Locke

In your previous e-mail, you stated in part “We have addressed all of these questions through out your delinquency.” Yet that’s completely contradicted by the responses you provided on 11/16/2023. So what gives?
[image/jpeg]

It seems like it would logically follow if these questions had been answered previously, you would have simply said as much, like you did with the first question asked on 11/16/2023.

I take your non-response concerning the duty to assist request to mean VBA Loan Guaranty is refusing the request.

Because they didn’t follow VA Circular 26-20-12, I don’t owe my servicer anything, so it shouldn’t be that hard to figure out.

I was married to a former DCF/CPS investigator/supervisor. You read that and you think whatever, but what I mean is that child abused investigators for the state have no legal authority and generally have to BS to close out cases. When a report comes in and they go out to investigate, they generally don’t have a warrant or enough to get a warrant, but they still have to close out their cases. It doesn’t matter who it is or what their socioeconomic status is, no one is initially cooperative when a child abuse investigator shows up at their doorstep. So truth be told, they have to be pretty good at BSing. From what I experienced and what the spouses of other child abuse investigators substantiated, it’s hard to turn off the exploitative BS when you come home. They have to do it so much, it becomes second nature. Most child abuse investigators burnout within a year. My ex did it for 9. Beyond that, she’s 99.99th percentile IQ. Way smarter than me, and I imagine you as well. All of this is to say, I’ve been well trained to deal with this situation.

VASP is still going to be a thing, correct? Even so, I’m not counting on that. I’m counting on the circumstances that spurred the NPR investigation aren’t going to change. “A tiger can’t change its stripes,” as the saying goes.

Because my servicer didn’t follow VA Circular 26-20-12, I don’t owe my servicer anything, and because you guys didn’t ensure my servicer followed VA Circular 26-20-12, I don’t owe the VA anything either.

Michael Locke

Hello,

The request submitted on 12/18/2023 is for the loan documents detailed within said request, not a status update on a particular home loan.

Michael Locke

Good afternoon

Are you seeking your own VA mortgage records?

Olaiseh Wambui
Government Information Specialist
Department of Veteran Affairs
Veterans Benefits Administration
Office of Mission Support (20M3)
1800 G. Street
Washington, DC 20006
Office Cell: (202) 374-7826

1.
[image/jpeg]

2.
“To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Florida Sunshine Law, I hereby request the following records:

Any and all records created pursuant to the request for a formal advisory opinion submitted on 4/23/2023 to the Florida Bar’s Unlicensed Practice of Law listed below:

I am writing to request a formal advisory opinion on whether pro se use of Casetext's CoCounsel would constitute the unlicensed practice of law.

Casetext's CoCounsel is a legal AI assistant that can perform various tasks, such as document review, legal research memos, deposition preparation, and contract analysis. According to a study by Casetext and Stanford CodeX, GPT-4 scored approximately 297 points on the UBE, which is higher than the passing threshold for all UBE jurisdictions. This score places GPT-4 in the 90th percentile of test-takers.

I am a pro se litigant who is interested in using Casetext's CoCounsel to prepare and file legal documents for my case. I understand that Casetext's CoCounsel does not provide legal advice or representation, and that I am solely responsible for the accuracy and legality of my documents.

However, I am concerned that using Casetext's CoCounsel may be considered the unlicensed practice of law under Rule 10-2.1 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, which defines the practice of law as "the giving of legal advice or legal assistance to another person". I am also aware that Rule 10-9.1 allows the Standing Committee on Unlicensed Practice of Law to issue proposed formal advisory opinions concerning activities which may constitute the unlicensed practice of law.

Therefore, I respectfully request that the Standing Committee on Unlicensed Practice of Law issue a formal advisory opinion on whether pro se use of Casetext's CoCounsel would constitute the unlicensed practice of law in Florida.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke
127 Delvalle St.
Melbourne Beach, FL 32951
Mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:Mbl22885@msn.com>
(321)506-9557<tel:(321)506-9557>

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 business days.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke”

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/tallahassee-10211/formal-advisory-opinion-request-to-florida-bar-unlicensed-practice-of-law-documents-144915/

3. “Thomson Reuters Corporation Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire Casetext”

https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/press-releases/2023/june/thomson-reuters-corporation-signs-definitive-agreement-to-acquire-casetext.html

4. “Over $26 million will be allocated within the coming year to organizations providing legal representation, assistance in court proceedings, and defense in cases related to homelessness for veterans.”

https://www.disabledveterans.org/va-unveils-major-grants-to-combat-rising-veteran-homelessness/

5. “Proponents of AI tout its potential to increase access to justice, particularly for litigants with limited resources. Our court system has a monopoly on many forms of relief. If you want a discharge in bankruptcy, for example, you must see a federal judge. For those who cannot afford a lawyer, AI can help. It drives new, highly accessible tools that provide answers to basic questions, including where to find templates and court forms, how to fill them out, and where to bring them for presentation to the judge—all without leaving home. These tools have the welcome potential to smooth out anmismatch between available resources and urgent needs in our court system.”

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2023year-endreport.pdf

6. “Thomson Reuters to Provide Westlaw Precision to U.S. Federal Courts

Agreement brings increased efficiency and accuracy to the Federal Judiciary, dramatically improving research speed and quality”

https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/press-releases/2024/january/thomson-reuters-to-provide-westlaw-precision-to-us-federal-courts.html

7. “Your expanded role includes two primary tasks: 1) Identify if a VA circular contains a good cause exception to the Administrative Procedure Act notice and comment period, using the provided 'Good Cause Notice and Comment' PDF as a reference. 2) Analyze VA circulars to determine if they contain substantial/legislative rules, based on criteria provided in the Rank and Fugere decisions. Provide clear, accurate analyses, adapting your approach to offer both detailed breakdowns and summary conclusions as required by the user.

https://chat.openai.com/g/g-90yabIedw-rule-identifier

Give me half of whatever you guys project the average agency grant to be and I’ll give you something capable of assisting Veterans that’ll deliver results in short order.

Hello,

I'm reaching out to propose an enhancement to the legal support services offered to our veterans through VA hospital legal clinics. Since 2019, Thomson Reuters has provided their legal research products to the Federal Judiciary. Recently, on January 3, 2024, their contract was updated to incorporate Westlaw Precision, a tool enriched by AI capabilities, suggesting that its innovative AI-assisted features were a significant factor in the contract's renewal.

The integration of Westlaw Precision has revolutionized legal research by enabling professionals to conduct searches using conversational language and receive comprehensive, AI-generated responses. This has greatly improved the efficiency of legal research, drawing from a robust collection of legal documents for accurate, authoritative results.

Considering the apparent reliability of Precision due to its use by the federal courts, I believe our veterans would greatly benefit from similar access through the VA's legal clinics. This would provide them with unparalleled support in navigating their legal challenges.

I would welcome the opportunity to discuss how we could extend this advanced legal research capability to our veterans.

Warm regards,

Michael Locke

One could argue that the VA's sole source contract with Westlaw for online legal research services indirectly supports the VA's duty to assist veterans in their benefits claims. Given that the VA recognizes the necessity of such a comprehensive legal research tool for its own use in adjudicating claims and legal analysis, it could be argued that veterans should also have access to similar resources to adequately prepare and support their claims. This access could be seen as part of the VA's obligation to provide all necessary assistance to veterans in substantiating their claims, ensuring they have a fair opportunity to present their cases with the best available legal precedents and interpretations.

https://www.highergov.com/contract-opportunity/da10-vba-westlaw-online-subscription-36c10d22q0005-p-f1709/

The argument that the VA's use of specialized legal research tools like those provided by West Publishing Corporation is essential for resolving benefits issues and that similar resources should be made available to veterans to ensure equity and informed decision-making is compelling. This approach aligns with the VA's duty to assist veterans in preparing and substantiating their claims, as outlined in 38 USC § 5103A. Here are excerpts from relevant case law that support various aspects of this argument:

1. Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA): The VCAA, codified at 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, mandates the VA to assist veterans in developing their claims for benefits. This assistance includes obtaining records relevant to the claim and providing medical examinations when necessary for decision-making on the claim. The case of David R. Gagne v. Robert A. McDonald illustrates the VA's obligation under the VCAA to make reasonable efforts to assist claimants, highlighting the importance of access to comprehensive resources for claim development??.

2. Duty to Assist in Obtaining Evidence: The VA's duty to assist includes making reasonable efforts to obtain relevant records that can help substantiate a veteran's claim. This principle is further elaborated in Golz v. Shinseki, where the court affirmed the VA's duty to assist as found in 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, emphasizing the pro-claimant system and the requirement to develop the veteran's claim fully and sympathetically??.

3. Relevance and Reasonable Efforts: The case of Sullivan v. McDonald discusses the VA's duty to assist in obtaining records, noting that this duty extends only to potentially relevant records. This underscores the necessity for access to tools that can help identify and analyze relevant legal and factual information to support claims??.

4. Empowering Veterans with Information: The argument for providing veterans with access to legal research tools mirrors the VA's duty to assist, as it equips veterans with the necessary information to actively participate in the adjudication of their claims. Cases like Charles v. Principi highlight the VCAA's impact in eliminating the well-grounded-claim requirement and expanding the VA's duty to assist, which can be seen as supporting the broader principle of empowering claimants with information and resources??.

These cases illustrate the legal framework underpinning the VA's duty to assist veterans in preparing and substantiating their claims and highlight the importance of access to comprehensive information and resources, both for the VA and veterans. Extending access to specialized legal research tools to veterans can be seen as a natural extension of the VA's duty to assist, promoting equity and informed participation in the claims process.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 12:57 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Marcus.Young@va.gov <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov>; VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>
Subject: Re: Notice of Filed Board of Veterans' Appeals Appeal, Outstanding Information Requests, and Resulting Hardships

1. "A case on one of the dockets of the Board maintained under subsection (a) may, for cause shown, be advanced on motion for earlier consideration and determination. Such a motion may be granted only—

(A)if the case involves interpretation of law of general application affecting other claims;
(B)if the appellant is seriously ill or is under severe financial hardship; or
(C)for other sufficient cause shown."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/7107
2.
[image/jpeg]

"Why didn't VA do this to prevent the 4000 foreclosures that have already happened?"

3. “First lady Jill Biden will travel to multiple key battleground states Monday to launch a Biden campaign initiative to connect with veterans and military families and contrast the White House’s record on veterans with that of former President Trump.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4759472-jill-biden-campaign-veterans/damp/?nxs-test=damp
If nothing else, I guess I can take solace in the fact that I’m not alone in being failed by VBA Loan Guaranty.

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:34 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; Marcus.Young@va.gov <Marcus.Young@va.gov>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov>; VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>
Subject: Fw: Notice of Filed Board of Veterans' Appeals Appeal, Outstanding Information Requests, and Resulting Hardships

Dear VBA Loan Guaranty Employee,
I am writing to express my serious concern about a critical misunderstanding in the VA's response dated July 5, 2024, regarding my request for the VA to cover the $27,000 payment obligation stemming from the court-ordered sale of my home.
Your letter states that "VA has no basis for making a $27,000 cash payment to you or your former spouse for your VA-guaranteed loan." However, this statement mischaracterizes the nature and origin of this payment obligation.
The $27,000 is not a separate matter related to my divorce. It is a direct and unavoidable consequence of the court-ordered sale, which itself was based on the inaccurate assertion that my property was at imminent risk of foreclosure. As I've repeatedly explained, this inaccurate assessment resulted from the VA's failure to properly oversee Planet Home Lending and to investigate discrepancies in the reported forbearance timelines. Please note that I have filed a formal appeal with the Board of Veterans' Appeals on June 12, 2024, challenging these and other failures by the VA. A copy of my appeal is attached for your review.
The June 13, 2022 court order (Exhibit 10, p. 5, para. G) explicitly states that the sale proceeds are to be used to satisfy the remaining balance of the equalizing payment owed to my ex-wife due to the pending foreclosure. This payment would not be required if not for the court-ordered sale, which itself would not have occurred had the VA fulfilled its oversight and assistance obligations.
Furthermore, my ex-wife has stated in writing (Exhibit 11) that she is willing to allow me to retain the home if the $27,000 payment is made. This demonstrates that the payment is the only obstacle preventing me from keeping my home.
Additionally, your letter refers to a "special forbearance" being approved in August 2020. To be clear, my requests for forbearance during this period were specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic. It appears the VA is not properly recognizing or documenting these COVID-19 forbearances, further demonstrating their failure to comply with their own regulations and guidance.
Frankly, I'm deeply disturbed by the VA's attempt to rewrite the history of my loan and to downplay the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on my situation. Until the VA demonstrates a genuine commitment to accuracy, transparency, and accountability in its oversight of my loan, I cannot engage in any further discussions or attempts to resolve this matter in good faith. I expect the VA to acknowledge and address its failures, not to obfuscate the truth and shift blame.
I request a prompt and thorough review of this matter, in light of my attached BVA appeal, and a response that directly addresses the specific points I have raised.
Sincerely,
Michael Locke

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 2:09 PM
To: mattw@wasingerlawoffice.com <mattw@wasingerlawoffice.com>; LMTC@planethomelending.com <LMTC@planethomelending.com>
Cc: Marcus.Young@va.gov <Marcus.Young@va.gov>; Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>; VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov>; Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>
Subject: Notice of Filed Board of Veterans' Appeals Appeal, Outstanding Information Requests, and Resulting Hardships

Dear Mr. Wassinger,
I am writing to formally notify you that on June 12, 2024, I filed an appeal with the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) regarding decisions made by the Department of Veterans Affairs concerning my VA-guaranteed home loan. This appeal addresses several critical issues, including:

1. The VA's oversight of Planet Home Lending's compliance with VA regulations
2. The application of COVID-19 forbearance protections
3. The VA's duty to assist and apply the benefit of the doubt principle

You are specifically mentioned in this appeal regarding your testimony at the May 25, 2022 hearing in my divorce case, where you asserted an imminent risk of foreclosure on my property. I want to emphasize that this assertion, which my appeal demonstrates was inaccurate, has resulted in significant personal and financial hardships for me. These hardships include, but are not limited to:

* A court order to sell my home based on the perceived imminent foreclosure risk
* An immediate obligation to pay $27,000 to my ex-wife
* Severe emotional distress and financial strain

Furthermore, in July 2022, I submitted interrogatories and a request for records to Planet Home Lending which remain unanswered. This lack of response has further compounded my difficulties in resolving the issues with my loan.
A copy of my complete BVA appeal is attached, detailing these issues and their impact.
I also draw your attention to VA Circular 26-24-12 and its Change 1, issued on May 29, 2024, and June 21, 2024, which implement a targeted foreclosure moratorium through December 31, 2024.
Given my pending BVA appeal, the outstanding information requests, the new VA policies, and the severe hardships I've endured, I demand that you immediately cease any foreclosure actions related to my property. Please confirm receipt of this email and your understanding of the gravity of this situation.
If you have any questions, please contact me directly.

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 1:20 PM
To: Rep, Oversight (Veterans Affairs) <oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>
Subject: Fw: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 and/or VA Home Loan Program Reform Act of 2024

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2024 2:24 PM
To: derrick.vanorden@mail.house.gov <derrick.vanorden@mail.house.gov>
Cc: HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>
Subject: Fw: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 and/or VA Home Loan Program Reform Act of 2024

Dear Chairman Van Orden,
I am writing to express my deep concern regarding both your line of questioning during the recent subcommittee hearing on June 12, 2024, concerning the Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 and the content of the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act of 2024, which you recently introduced alongside Chairman Bost. While I commend the subcommittee's efforts to address the urgent foreclosure crisis facing veterans, I believe your approach to the VASP program was confusing, potentially misleading, and ultimately counterproductive. Moreover, I have serious reservations about the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act, specifically as it relates to veterans’ due process rights, and your stance on VASP in light of existing statutory authority.
Regarding your questioning about VASP during the hearing:
Your repeated emphasis on the figure of 16 billion dollars as the potential cost of the VASP program, without providing clear context or supporting evidence, created an atmosphere of unwarranted alarm. While this figure is likely derived from estimations of potential taxpayer losses due to foreclosures, it's unclear if it represents a worst-case scenario or a realistic assessment of the program's risks. Conflating this number with the size of a typical mortgage company portfolio, as you did when questioning Ms. Karen Kretzschmar Paul, further muddled the issue. This conflation disregards the unique challenges and complexities associated with managing a program as large and multifaceted as VASP.
Furthermore, your focus on a perceived contradiction between Mr. John Bell’s earlier testimony and Secretary McDonough’s statements regarding potential foreclosures under VASP, while understandable, lacked the necessary follow-through to gain clarity. While you rightly pressed Mr. Bell for a direct answer, his subsequent vague response and your immediate shift to another topic left the discrepancy unresolved and the subcommittee without a definitive understanding of the VA's position on this crucial matter.
Your line of questioning seemed to center on an implied argument that the VASP program is poorly conceived, hastily implemented, and potentially disastrous for both veterans and taxpayers. This argument, while fueled by valid concerns about the VA's competence and transparency, was not effectively articulated or substantiated with concrete evidence during the hearing.
Equally concerning are provisions within the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act that threaten to strip veterans of their due process rights. Declaring certain VA decisions "final and not subject to judicial review" removes a crucial avenue for veterans to challenge potentially unfair or inaccurate decisions. This lack of accountability could lead to situations where veterans are denied relief they rightfully deserve, with no opportunity for independent review.
My concern is further amplified by your apparent disregard for the existing authority granted to the Secretary under 38 U.S.C. § 3720. Subsections (3) and (4) of this statute explicitly empower the Secretary to “pay, or compromise, any claim” related to VA loan guarantees and to “release any right, title, claim, lien or demand, however acquired, including any equity,” These provisions, through their ordinary meaning, grant the Secretary the authority to implement programs like VASP without the need for new legislation. Every Member of the majority has previously emphasized that the best way to respect congressional intent is to adhere to the ordinary understanding of the terms Congress uses. See, e.g., Jam v. International Finance Corp., 586 U.S. 199, 209 (2019); Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., 557 U.S. 167, 175 (2009); Wall v. Kholi, 562 U.S. 545, 551 (2011); BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 593 U.S. 230, 237 (2021); Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651, 723, 727 (2023); Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, 598 U.S. 69, 77, 83 (2023).
If your intention is to fundamentally challenge the existing authority granted to the VA Secretary under 38 U.S.C. § 3720, I implore you to explicitly state as much and provide a clear and reasoned justification for this departure from established legislative intent.
To address the concerns surrounding VASP and the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act, I urge you to prioritize:

*
Transparency and Evidence: Provide clear and detailed explanations of the VASP program's design, implementation, and potential risks, supporting your assertions with concrete evidence and data.
*
Clarity and Consistency from the VA: Demand clear and consistent answers from VA officials regarding potential foreclosures under VASP and other loss mitigation programs.
*
Protection of Due Process: Revise the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act to ensure veterans retain their full right to appeal VA decisions. This includes removing the limitations on judicial review and ensuring veterans have access to the same procedural safeguards afforded to them in other benefit cases.

The foreclosure crisis facing veterans demands a careful, data-driven approach and a commitment to upholding veterans' fundamental rights and honoring Congressional intent. By focusing on transparency, accountability, and due process, we can work together to develop effective and sustainable solutions that protect veterans and ensure the integrity of the VA Home Loan Program.
Michael Locke
From: NoReply@MyFax.com <NoReply@MyFax.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2024 4:28 PM
To: mbl22885@msn.com <mbl22885@msn.com>
Subject: Successful transmission to 18446788979<tel:18446788979>. Re: 10182 FORM MICHAEL B LOCKE 2982

myfax
Your fax was successfully sent to 18446788979<tel:18446788979> by MyFax.

Fax Details

Date: 2024-06-12 20:28:16 (GMT)
Number of Pages: 93
Length of Transmission: 4665 seconds
Receiving Machine Fax ID: 18446788979 26

Please note the domain used for sending a fax by email with MyFax has changed. You must now follow your recipient’s fax number by @send.myfax.com instead of @myfax.com.

If you have any questions, please visit our online help center.

Thank you for choosing MyFax.

Sincerely,
The MyFax Team

Tip: Switch to an annual plan and save! For additional support, please email us at support@myfax.com.

Home | Features | How it Works | Mobile App | Support

© 2024 Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. or its subsidiaries (collectively, “Consensus”). All rights reserved.
MyFax is a registered trademark of Consensus.
700 S. Flower St., 15th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017

This account is subject to the terms listed in the MyFax Customer Agreement.

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2024 1:54 PM
To: HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>
Subject: Fw: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 and/or VA Home Loan Program Reform Act of 2024

I am writing to express my profound concern regarding provisions within proposed legislation that would severely restrict veterans' rights to appeal VA decisions concerning home loans. I believe these provisions constitute a clear violation of veterans' constitutional right to due process and will inevitably be challenged in the courts.
Restricting veterans' rights to appeal VA decisions concerning home loans is a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. This clause, adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, was intended to protect individuals from arbitrary actions by the federal government. It ensures that the government must follow legal procedures and respect all legal rights owed to a person according to the law. This includes fair notice and an opportunity to be heard before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. Denying veterans the ability to appeal VA decisions, especially those that could result in the loss of their homes, directly contradicts these fundamental principles.
The VA, like any government agency, is not infallible. Mistakes happen, and there is always a risk of bias or abuse of discretion. Veterans deserve a fair and impartial process for challenging VA decisions that could lead to the loss of their homes.
The proposed restrictions on appeal rights create a dangerous imbalance of power, stripping veterans of essential protections while granting the VA unchecked authority in these critically important matters. This will undoubtedly lead to protracted and costly litigation as veterans are forced to seek redress through the courts to defend their constitutional rights.
I urge the Committee to reconsider these deeply flawed provisions and to prioritize the due process rights of those who have served our nation. Failure to do so will not only harm individual veterans facing foreclosure but will also erode the integrity of the VA Home Loan Guaranty program and undermine public trust in the agency's commitment to veterans' well-being.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I implore you to uphold the Constitution and defend the rights of our nation's veterans.
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2024 1:13 PM
To: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>
Cc: Hahn, Kate (Tester) <kate_hahn@tester.senate.gov>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov>; VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>; Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>
Subject: Re: Question Regarding VASP Eligibility and Loan Modifications

Dear Mrs. Tanielian,

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to bring to your attention the broad authority granted to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under 38 U.S.C. § 3720(a) and to request that the Secretary exercise this authority to implement a partial claim program and a foreclosure moratorium to provide much-needed relief to veteran homeowners facing hardship.

Under 38 U.S.C. § 3720(a), the Secretary has the power to consent to the modification of the terms of any loan guaranteed, insured, or made under Title 38, including modifications to the rate of interest, time of payment of principal or interest, security, or other provisions. This broad authority has been recently exercised through the issuance of VA Circular 26-24-8, which introduced a 40-year loan modification option for VA-guaranteed loans.

Circular 26-24-8 specifically cites 38 U.S.C. § 3720(a)(2) as the statutory basis for the VA's authority to offer this expanded loan modification option. This provision empowers the Secretary to "consent to the modification, with respect to rate of interest, time of payment of principal or interest or any portion thereof, security or other provisions of any note, contract, mortgage or other instrument securing a loan which has been guaranteed, insured, made or acquired under this chapter."

While the VA has had the ability to offer a 40-year modification for almost three years, as evidenced by Ginnie Mae's announcement in June 2021, the VA only recently allowed for this option through the issuance of Circular 26-24-8 in April 2024.

Given the broad authority granted under 38 U.S.C. § 3720(a), I am respectfully requesting that the Secretary use this power to implement a partial claim program and a foreclosure moratorium to provide critical assistance to veteran homeowners impacted by the current economic crisis. These measures would prevent avoidable foreclosures, keep veterans in their homes, and mitigate losses to the VA loan program.

Please note that I am copying VA leadership on this email, including VA Under Secretary for Benefits Joshua Jacobs and Deputy Director of Policy at the VA Loan Guaranty Service Michelle Corridon, as I intend for this request to be treated as a formal request for benefits subject to appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals. If the VA Loan Guaranty Service is going to charge me their day rate, I believe it is only fair that I have the opportunity to fully assert my rights and hold them accountable in kind.

I urge you and the copied VA leadership to take swift action under the Secretary's existing statutory authority to implement these crucial relief measures for veteran homeowners.

Thank you for your time and attention to this critical issue. I appreciate your commitment to advocating for the rights and well-being of our nation's veterans.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

https://youtu.be/LrHTR22pIhw?si=6BTiRfxcwtYsojx0
________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2024 12:29 PM
To: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>
Subject: Question Regarding VASP Eligibility and Loan Modifications

Dear Mr. Douglas,

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to seek clarification on the Housing Policy Council's understanding of the eligibility criteria for the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase (VASP) program, specifically as it relates to veterans who may qualify for other loan modifications.

According to the VA Servicer Handbook M26-4, Chapter 9, Section 9.04(b), servicers are instructed to follow the VA Home Retention Waterfall to determine the most appropriate home retention option for veteran borrowers. The handbook states that if the waterfall review leads to VASP, the servicer should then review the qualifying loan criteria outlined in Section 9.04(b)(1-9).

However, the handbook also notes that "VASP is the final home retention option available in the VA Home Retention Waterfall." It further states that if the loan does not meet the VASP qualifying criteria, the servicer should evaluate and offer any appropriate alternatives to foreclosure.

My understanding of these guidelines is that if a veteran qualifies for another home retention option besides VASP during the waterfall review process, they would not be offered VASP. In other words, qualifying for a different loan modification would likely disqualify a veteran from receiving assistance through VASP.

I am particularly concerned about this issue in light of the recent NPR article titled "The VA tells banks not to foreclose on veterans' homes this year," published on June 7, 2024, by Chris Arnold and Quil Lawrence. The article features the stories of two veterans, Edward O'Conner and Josiah Mena, who seem to be under the impression that they might qualify for VASP despite apparently qualifying for other loan modifications. This apparent discrepancy between the veterans' understanding and the guidelines outlined in the VA Servicer Handbook is troubling and may lead to confusion and false hopes among veteran borrowers.

Can you please confirm if the Housing Policy Council's interpretation of the VASP eligibility requirements aligns with the understanding that qualifying for a loan modification other than VASP would disqualify a veteran from participating in the VASP program? Additionally, I would appreciate any insight you can provide on how the VA and mortgage servicers can work together to ensure that veteran borrowers receive clear, accurate, and consistent information about their eligibility for various home retention options, including VASP.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and any additional information you can provide to help clarify this important issue for our nation's veterans.

Sincerely,
Michael Locke
________________________________
From: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 9:16 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Cc: Hahn, Kate (Tester) <kate_hahn@tester.senate.gov>
Subject: RE: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024

Michael:

Thank you for your email and sharing your concerns. I have also passed this along to my colleagues who work on broader housing policy for their awareness as well.

Sincerely,

Terri

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2024 1:43 PM
To: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>
Cc: Hahn, Kate (Tester) <kate_hahn@tester.senate.gov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024

Dear Mrs. Tanielian,

I am writing to you today with an urgent plea for President Biden to take decisive action to protect veteran homeowners and safeguard the integrity of the VA Home Loan Guaranty program. The current crisis facing veterans struggling to keep their homes demands immediate attention and a bold response from the White House.

As you know, the VA's decision to end the Partial Claim Payment (PCP) program, coupled with rising interest rates and a lack of adequate loss mitigation options, has created a perfect storm for veteran foreclosures. Thousands of veterans, through no fault of their own, are now at risk of losing their homes, despite having faithfully served our nation.

I understand you are incredibly busy, but I believe this situation is reaching a critical point, demanding immediate intervention. House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Bost has publicly stated he is eager to "fix the VA's mess through legislation in the coming weeks," indicating that the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" is moving forward rapidly. Unfortunately, it appears that the bill is being driven more by the interests of the mortgage industry than the needs and rights of veterans.

Here's why:

* Industry's Preferred Solution: The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) has stated their preference is for a permanent partial claim program.

* VASP Implementation Concerns: While the MBA and Housing Policy Council (HPC) publicly express concerns about the VASP program's implementation, I believe their actions are a calculated tactic to delay and ultimately weaken the program. The supposed lack of details and preparedness conveniently serves their interests by pushing back the implementation of a program they don't truly support.

* Congressional Priorities: Chairman Bost's statement highlights the political motivations behind the Act, seemingly focusing on "election year politics" despite claiming the contrary and protecting the VA from "a financial burden of billions of dollars in bailouts for lenders." There is no mention of ensuring veteran protections or holding the VA accountable for its past failures.

Based on these observations, I believe the "Veterans Housing Stability Act" is a deeply flawed piece of legislation that will do more harm than good. It prioritizes the interests of the lending industry over the rights of veterans and will likely result in:

* Weakened Loss Mitigation Programs: The VASP program, even if implemented, will be watered down and less effective than it could be due to industry influence and political maneuvering.

* Erosion of Due Process Rights: The provision stripping judicial review and redefining "provision of benefits" will leave veterans with fewer options for challenging the VA's actions and holding them accountable for misconduct or negligence.

This push for the Act is a direct response to increased scrutiny of the VA's handling of the Home Loan Guaranty program. As a VA Loan Guaranty employee told me in 2023:

"Nearly every policy in place at the home loan guaranty office is about risk mitigation for the loan, not keeping people in homes. From the 'waterfall' process to the newly proposed ability for the VA to take on non-performing loans as a servicer, most of the positions come from the mindset 'happy lenders will be more likely to offer VA loans.' There's a reason there is a yearly VA lenders conference but almost no outreach to Veterans."

This makes it clear that the VA prioritizes lenders over veteran borrowers, and the "Veterans Housing Stability Act" is an attempt to further cement this imbalance.

Mrs. Tanielian, I urge you to advocate for President Biden to issue an Executive Order directing the VA to take the following actions, all possible under existing legal authorities:

1. Institute an Actual Immediate Moratorium on VA Home Loan Foreclosures : This will provide immediate relief and buy time for more effective solutions. The VA has the authority to enact a moratorium under 38 U.S.C. § 3720.

1. Reinstate the Partial Claim Payment Program: This program provided a lifeline for veterans, and the VA has the authority to reinstate it using existing funds and resources.

1. Direct the VA to Proactively and Meaingfully Engage with Veteran Borrowers: The VA must reach out to veterans facing hardship and provide clear information about available options. This could be accomplished through targeted campaigns, expanded counseling services, and improved communication with veterans service organizations.

By taking these bold steps, President Biden can protect our nation's veterans and demonstrate a commitment to their well-being.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I implore you to advocate for swift action on this critical matter.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

1. ??“As the members of this Subcommittee are aware, MBA continues to call for authorization of a permanent partial claim program as the industry’s preferred solution.” Testimony of Mark A. Jones, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Oversight Hearing, February 15, 2024

https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116827/witnesses/HHRG-118-VR10-Wstate-JonesM-20240215.pdf

2. “Let me be clear, VASP is a last resort option that may be available when it is the most appropriate home retention option under VA's home retention waterfall," VA Under Secretary for Benefits Joshua Jacobs said.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/04/10/va-introduces-new-last-resort-loan-program-help-roughly-40000-veterans-keep-their-homes.html?amp

3. “Although VA’s public announcement suggests the program will be available for all 40,000 Veterans beginning May 31, 2024, based on the number of key operational questions that are outstanding, we have significant questions about whether the VA or any servicer will be ready to deploy VASP until much later than that date.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/policy/vasp-implementation-letter_may-2024_mba-and-hpc.pdf?sfvrsn=5e2164fc_1

4. “VA’s Home Loan program is a vitally important benefit for veterans and transitioning servicemembers to achieve the American dream of owning a home,” said Chairman Bost. “But as interest rates show no signs of coming down in any significant way, and the cost of living is higher than ever under the Biden administration, VA must do better to ensure veterans remain attractive homebuyers and don’t default on their mortgage payments. While the current foreclosure moratorium being extended does temporarily ensure that veterans will not be foreclosed on, it does not solve the long-term problem. VA must put election year politics aside and find a permanent solution so that we do not jeopardize the integrity of the VA home loan program, veterans can stay in their homes, and we do not evolve into a financial burden of billions of dollars in bailouts for lenders. I look forward to working with the Department to fix their mess through legislation in the coming weeks.

In February, the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity held an oversight hearing on the future of the VA home loan program and Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Van Orden (R-Wis.), pressed the Department on their lack of transparency regarding creating the Veterans Affairs Service Purchasing (VASP) Program...”

https://veterans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=6466

VASP was never going to be meaningfully implemented because the lending and servicing industry don't want it to be meaningfully implemented.

The Veteran's Housing Stability Act of 2024 all but eliminates a veterans right to challenge VA decisions pertaining to home loans.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2024 12:30 PM
To: hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov> <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>
Subject: VASP and Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024

1. ??“As the members of this Subcommittee are aware, MBA continues to call for authorization of a permanent partial claim program as the industry’s preferred solution.” Testimony of Mark A. Jones, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Oversight Hearing, February 15, 2024

https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116827/witnesses/HHRG-118-VR10-Wstate-JonesM-20240215.pdf

2. “Let me be clear, VASP is a last resort option that may be available when it is the most appropriate home retention option under VA's home retention waterfall," VA Under Secretary for Benefits Joshua Jacobs said.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/04/10/va-introduces-new-last-resort-loan-program-help-roughly-40000-veterans-keep-their-homes.html?amp

3. “Although VA’s public announcement suggests the program will be available for all 40,000 Veterans beginning May 31, 2024, based on the number of key operational questions that are outstanding, we have significant questions about whether the VA or any servicer will be ready to deploy VASP until much later than that date.”

https://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/policy/vasp-implementation-letter_may-2024_mba-and-hpc.pdf?sfvrsn=5e2164fc_1

4. “VA’s Home Loan program is a vitally important benefit for veterans and transitioning servicemembers to achieve the American dream of owning a home,” said Chairman Bost. “But as interest rates show no signs of coming down in any significant way, and the cost of living is higher than ever under the Biden administration, VA must do better to ensure veterans remain attractive homebuyers and don’t default on their mortgage payments. While the current foreclosure moratorium being extended does temporarily ensure that veterans will not be foreclosed on, it does not solve the long-term problem. VA must put election year politics aside and find a permanent solution so that we do not jeopardize the integrity of the VA home loan program, veterans can stay in their homes, and we do not evolve into a financial burden of billions of dollars in bailouts for lenders. I look forward to working with the Department to fix their mess through legislation in the coming weeks.

In February, the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity held an oversight hearing on the future of the VA home loan program and Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Van Orden (R-Wis.), pressed the Department on their lack of transparency regarding creating the Veterans Affairs Service Purchasing (VASP) Program...”

https://veterans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=6466

As a third-generation war veteran and a proud member of what some might call the "American warrior caste," I find it imperative to reiterate my concern about the Veterans Housing Stability Act that is currently under consideration. I previously anticipated that this bill would move forward in its current form, and unfortunately, it seems my prediction was accurate.

Allow me to make another prediction: Any bill that arguably weakens veterans' benefits is a significant misstep, especially in light of the recruiting challenges currently faced by all service branches. It is well-documented that military families make up a substantial portion of the volunteer force, with 40% of new recruits having a close family member who has served. This tradition of service is vital to maintaining the strength and readiness of our military.

Weakening veterans' benefits not only undermines the sacrifices made by our service members but also dissuades potential recruits from considering a military career. In a time when the Department of Defense is struggling to meet recruitment quotas , it is crucial to support and honor those who serve, ensuring they and their families receive the benefits they deserve.

I urge you to reconsider this bill and ensure that it strengthens, rather than weakens, the support provided to our veterans. Our nation's security and the future of our volunteer military depend on it.

Sincerely,

Michael Bass Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2024 11:45 AM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov<mailto:OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>>
Subject: Fw: New Claim

Issue 3: The VA Should Broadly Interpret "Obligation" Under 38 U.S.C. § 3732 and Cover the $27,000 Payment Owed to My Ex-Wife as a Direct Consequence of Its Oversight Failures

The VA's failure to properly oversee Planet Home Lending's compliance with VA regulations, coupled with the servicer's potentially biased actions, directly led to the court-ordered sale of my home. Specifically, the June 13, 2022, court order in my divorce case (Exhibit 15, p. 5, para. G) states that, due to the pending foreclosure, "...the closing proceeds shall be held in escrow until the Court can make a determination as to the correct amount" of the equalizing payment owed to my ex-wife. This sale triggers an immediate payment obligation of approximately $27,000 to my ex-wife, representing the remaining balance on this equalizing payment, which was secured by the property as part of our divorce settlement.

Crucially, the court order to sell my home was based on the assertion that the property was at imminent risk of foreclosure. This assertion, presented through the testimony of Planet Home Lending's attorney, Mr. Wasinger, at the May 25, 2022 hearing (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for Hearing Minutes]), appears to have been inaccurate. VALERI records, as well as my own recollection of when I requested forbearances (and servicer Planet Home Lending's refusal to provide applicable collections records, as well as the refusal of VA employees with direct oversight to intervene and compel Planet Home Lending to provide said collection records), strongly suggests that PHL misrepresented the actual forbearance timeline. The VA failed to apply the benefit of the doubt principle (38 U.S.C. § 5107(b)) in my favor when evaluating this information, despite the clear evidence supporting my position.

According to Planet Home Lending, I was approved for a COVID-19 forbearance plan in May 2020, which was extended multiple times from August 2020 through August 31, 2021 (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for PHL CFPB Response]). However, the VALERI records do not show any special forbearance reported for May 2020 (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for VALERI Records]). Furthermore, I do not recall requesting a forbearance except for May 2020, August 2020, and October of 2021. Despite my requests and the intervention of the VA, Planet Home Lending has refused to provide the applicable collection records that would clarify this discrepancy. Worse yet, the VA being fully aware of this refusal has refused to assist in obtaining these records that would clarify this discrepancy .

VA Circular 26-20-12(3) states that "The borrower, not the servicer, is entitled to determine the period of forbearance..." (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for VA Circular 26-20-12]). However, Planet Home Lending appears to have unilaterally determined the forbearance periods without my input. This, combined with the VA's lack of engagement and their failure to present evidence contradicting the servicer's claims, demonstrates a disregard for their duty to protect my interests and ensure a fair and accurate assessment of the situation.

Furthermore, the VA failed to properly monitor and inform me of my remaining COVID-19 forbearance eligibility, which directly contributed to the court order to sell my home. Despite having 18 months of potential COVID-19-related forbearance available, the VALERI records as of June 2022 (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for VALERI Records]) indicate that I had only utilized 11 months. The VA did not inform me of this remaining eligibility, nor did they intervene to ensure Planet Home Lending considered this option as a means to avoid foreclosure. Had the VA fulfilled its duty to assist and properly tracked my forbearance usage, I could have potentially utilized those remaining 7 months of forbearance to stabilize my financial situation and avoid the court order to sell my home. Their failure to do so represents a direct violation of their obligation to assist me in obtaining the full benefits and protections available under the law.

There is a well-established link between homelessness and increased suicide risk that the VA is fully aware of. Veterans who have experienced homelessness are almost twice as likely as non-Veterans who have experienced homelessness, and 11 times as likely as other Veterans, to report lifetime suicide attempts. Even after controlling for other risk factors, Veterans who have experienced homelessness in their lifetime are nearly four times as likely as other Veterans to have ever attempted suicide. Housing instability is also associated with suicide. In one study, Veterans with past-year housing instability were six times as likely as those who did not experience housing instability to report suicidal ideation. Reducing the likelihood that an individual will experience a suicidal crisis requires addressing factors such as increased financial strain and lack of housing that may contribute to or increase risk for suicide.

The VA has repeatedly stated that preventing Veteran suicide is one of its top priorities. Given this, it follows that the VA should be taking all appropriate actions to prevent unnecessary foreclosures and resulting homelessness among Veterans, knowing the strong association with suicide risk. My situation is a prime example of where the VA failed to intervene and exercise proper oversight despite being notified of the loan servicer's potential violations of VA regulations designed to protect Veterans from foreclosure. This directly led to the court-ordered sale of my home and the triggering of the $27,000 payment to my ex-wife, putting me at greater risk of housing instability and the associated suicide risk.

The VA's inaction has not only resulted in the potential loss of my home but has also created a significant financial burden in the form of the $27,000 payment, exacerbating my stress and anxiety. This financial strain, directly caused by the VA's failures, is a known risk factor for suicide among veterans, further highlighting the VA's moral and ethical obligation to mitigate the harm they have caused and provide financial relief.

While the court has ordered the sale of the property, my ex-wife has expressed her willingness to allow me to pursue other options to keep my home, contingent upon receiving the $27,000 payment. In a message dated May 30, 2024 (Exhibit [Exhibit Number for OFW Message]), she states: "If I am paid the remaining obligation owed to me in the amount of $27,000, I will sign a quit claim deed giving you exclusive ownership of the property at 127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, FL."

I contend that the VA should assume responsibility for this $27,000 payment based on the following:

Direct Consequence of VA Failures: This debt, while stemming from my divorce settlement, is inextricably tied to the property and functions as a secured interest. The court-ordered sale, a direct result of the VA's failure to properly oversee the pending foreclosure proceedings, makes this payment immediately due.

The VA's failure to properly monitor my forbearance usage and inform me of my remaining eligibility directly resulted in the court's perception of an imminent foreclosure risk. This inaccurate assessment, fueled by the VA's inaction, was the primary basis for the court order to sell my home, which, in turn, triggered the immediate need for the $27,000 payment to my ex-wife.

The VA's failure to investigate the discrepancies in the forbearance dates reported by Planet Home Lending and to obtain the servicer's collection records, despite my repeated requests, prevented me from demonstrating that the foreclosure risk was not imminent and that alternative solutions were available. This failure to act directly contributed to the court's decision to order the sale of my home and the resulting financial obligation to my ex-wife.

The VA's failure to fulfill its statutory duty to assist me under 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (Exhibit 3) is a direct cause of this situation. The VA received clear notice of Planet Home Lending's potential violations of VA Circular 26-20-12 (Exhibit 4) through my repeated requests for assistance, documented in emails from August 20, 2023, to March 19, 2024 (Exhibit 1, pp. 4, 5, 10, 53, 57, 65). Despite this, the VA failed to take concrete action to investigate these concerns, obtain relevant documentation from Planet Home Lending, or ensure the servicer was adhering to the circular's mandates. These failures directly led to the imminent risk of foreclosure and the subsequent court order to sell the property, which triggered the immediate need for the $27,000 payment to my ex-wife. Furthermore, the VA's failure to apply the benefit of the doubt principle, as mandated by 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), directly contributed to the need for this payment. Had they resolved ambiguities in my favor and taken a more proactive approach to assisting me, including properly monitoring my forbearance usage and challenging PHL's claims about imminent foreclosure risk, the court order to sell my home could have been avoided, and this financial obligation would not exist.

Broad Interpretation of "Obligation" under 38 U.S.C. § 3732: The VA has the authority under 38 U.S.C. § 3732(a)(2)(A) to cover "the unpaid balance of the obligation plus accrued interest" upon loan default. I argue that this "obligation" should be interpreted broadly to encompass financial obligations directly stemming from the VA's failure to properly oversee the loan, including the payment owed to my ex-wife. This aligns with the statute's intent to protect veterans from financial losses caused by the mishandling of their VA-guaranteed loans.

For example, this provision could cover legal fees incurred due to my need to defend against the foreclosure action, which was a direct result of the VA's failure to enforce Circular 26-20-12 and hold Planet Home Lending accountable. It could also encompass additional mortgage payments that accrued due to the VA's delay in processing my loss mitigation application and their failure to ensure that Planet Home Lending offered me all eligible options, including the VA Disaster Loan Modification. Furthermore, moving expenses and other costs associated with finding new housing, should I be unable to retain my current home due to the VA's failures, should also be considered under this broad interpretation of "obligation."

Equitable Relief is Warranted: The VA has a moral and ethical obligation to provide equitable relief when its failures contribute to a veteran's financial hardship. By covering this $27,000 payment, the VA can mitigate the harm caused by their inadequate oversight and prevent further financial burden on me, a veteran facing the loss of his home due to failures within the VA Home Loan program.

This payment should be considered a direct consequence of the VA's failure to uphold its responsibilities under 38 U.S.C. § 3732. Covering this cost would not only rectify the financial harm caused by the VA's actions but also demonstrate a commitment to fulfilling their duty to protect veterans from undue hardship stemming from their programs. The VA's responsibility goes beyond a mere technical obligation regarding the loan guarantee - it failed to uphold its fundamental mission and duty to protect the well-being of a veteran under its purview. This should compel the VA to interpret its obligations broadly and provide the equitable relief I am seeking.

The VA's failure to uphold its responsibilities has placed an undue financial and emotional burden on me, jeopardizing my housing stability and well-being. Given the clear connection between the VA's actions and the necessity of this $27,000 payment, I urge the Board to order the VA to cover this cost, demonstrating a commitment to protecting veterans from the harmful consequences of their own administrative failures.

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 3:27 PM
To: Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>
Cc: VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov<mailto:OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>>; SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>
Subject: New Claim

Technically I don’t think I’ve ever made this claim, so do you guys mind providing a decision by the end of the day? In the event I don’t receive a response I’m going to proceed as if the claim has been constructively denied and proceed with my appeal.

[image/jpeg]

[image/jpeg]

>https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/upper-level-vba-loan-guaranty-employees-deliberative-process-regarding-va-circular-26-20-12-161423/#comms<<https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/upper-level-vba-loan-guaranty-employees-deliberative-process-regarding-va-circular-26-20-12-161423/#comms%3C>

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 1:34 PM
To: Quil Lawrence <DLawrence@npr.org<mailto:DLawrence@npr.org>>; Chris Arnold <CArnold@npr.org<mailto:CArnold@npr.org>>
Subject: Re: VA Home Loan Crisis Deepens: Flaws in VASP Rollout and Legislation Eroding Veterans' Rights

Can you do me a favor if you do report on this in the future?

It seems like most of your coverage presents the partial claim as the only solution offered by the VA during the pandemic, but the pandemic was declared a national emergency on 3/13/2020 and the partial claim wasn’t introduced until 7/27/2021. The VA actually had something in place to help borrowers and reduce government loss before the partial claim program via VA Circular 26-20-12. Do you guys mind mentioning it in any future coverage? It was in effect from 4/8/2020-7/1/2021, so roughly the same amount of time as the partial claim program. Most of the vets that should of been assisted by VA Circular 26-20-12 have probably long since been foreclosed on, but who knows, and maybe someone so inclined brings suit against applicable servicers under the False Claims Act.

VA Circular 26-20-12 basically said “Servicers must ensure that borrowers are given every opportunity to pursue all possible loss mitigation options in order to bring their loan current. If no loss mitigation options are possible, and in cases where the home has equity, servicers must refer the file to the relevant Regional Loan Center for VA’s consideration of a loan refunding.” In that sense, it was kind of like the current VA loss mitigation waterfall that includes VASP, but with the force of law due to the use of “must.”

At the time of this email exchange, I was receiving inpatient treatment for PTSD through the VA Domiciliary Residential Rehabilitation and Treatment Program:

[image/jpeg]

At the time (1/14/2021), no loss mitigation options were possible, but my home loan was never referred to the VA for possible refunding. Unfortunately for me, the VA employee charged with overseeing the servicing of my home loan was apparently unaware of the refunding referral requirement, despite providing me with VA Circular 26-20-12 five months earlier:

[image/jpeg]

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 1:58 PM
To: Pmurray@vfw.org<mailto:Pmurray@vfw.org> <Pmurray@vfw.org<mailto:Pmurray@vfw.org>>
Cc: Katz, John, VSOPHIL <John.Katz@va.gov<mailto:John.Katz@va.gov>>
Subject: Urgent Follow Up: VFW's Position on Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Request for Reconsideration

Dear Mr. Murray,

I am writing to follow up on my previous email dated May 10, 2024, expressing my concerns about the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728) and respectfully requesting that the VFW reconsider its support for the bill in its current form. I am forwarding the original email chain for your reference.

As I attempted to contact you by phone today, I was advised by your receptionist to reiterate my concerns via email. I understand you are incredibly busy, but I believe this issue is of paramount importance to veterans facing foreclosure and warrants your urgent attention.

As detailed in my previous email, I am deeply troubled by Section 3723(f)(3) of the Act, which could be interpreted as stripping veterans of crucial legal protections, including:

1. The VA's Duty to Assist (38 U.S.C. § 5103A): This vital protection ensures the VA actively aids veterans in gathering evidence and presenting their claims for benefits. Removing this duty in the context of home loans would leave veterans vulnerable and navigating complex legal proceedings alone.

1. The Benefit of the Doubt principle (38 U.S.C. § 5107(b)): This bedrock of veterans' law mandates that the VA give veterans the benefit of the doubt when evidence is balanced or unclear. Eliminating this protection could unfairly disadvantage veterans in disputes with the VA or loan servicers.

1. The Right to Appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals: This provision could bar veterans from appealing decisions related to the new Partial Claim Program, denying them an avenue for independent review and redress for potentially unjust or erroneous decisions.

My personal experience with the VA Home Loan Guaranty program, outlined in the attached email chain, demonstrates the devastating consequences of a lack of oversight, inconsistent application of regulations, and disregard for veterans' due process rights. This situation is not unique to me, as evidenced by the alarming rate of veteran foreclosures and the VA's ongoing struggles to address this crisis effectively.

Furthermore, I believe the VA already possesses the authority to implement a foreclosure moratorium and a partial claim program without new legislation. The agency could utilize existing authorities under 38 U.S.C. § 3720 to provide immediate relief to veteran borrowers facing hardship.

Therefore, I urge the VFW to reconsider its support for the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" in its current form. Instead, I believe the VFW should advocate for:

* Amendments to the Act: Remove the limitations on judicial review and appeal rights, ensuring veterans retain their full legal protections and access to due process.

* VA Action Utilizing Existing Authority: Urge the VA to implement a foreclosure moratorium and a partial claim program using its existing authorities under 38 U.S.C. § 3720 to provide immediate relief to struggling veterans.

This approach would better protect veterans and ensure their access to justice while addressing the urgent foreclosure crisis.

I hope the VFW will prioritize the rights and well-being of our nation's heroes and take a strong stance against any legislation that could erode their hard-earned protections.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2024 12:22 PM

To: VAVBAWAS/CO/Office of the USB VBA <OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov<mailto:OfficeoftheUnderSecretaryforBenefits@va.gov>>; joshua.jacobs@va.gov<mailto:joshua.jacobs@va.gov> <joshua.jacobs@va.gov<mailto:joshua.jacobs@va.gov>>

Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>; Toth, Jennifer, VBACLEV <Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov<mailto:Jennifer.Toth1@va.gov>>; Post, Andrew, VBADENV <andrew.post@va.gov<mailto:andrew.post@va.gov>>; Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov> <Marcus.Young@va.gov<mailto:Marcus.Young@va.gov>>

Subject: VA Home Loan Loss Mitigation Requests - Question Regarding Claimant Status and VA Duties

I am writing to inquire whether VBA Loan Guaranty employees are aware of the status of individuals requesting loss mitigation assistance for their VA home loans and the corresponding duties of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in processing these requests.

Under the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), specifically 38 U.S.C. § 5100, a "claimant" is defined as "any individual applying for, or submitting a claim for, any benefit under the laws administered by the Secretary." As VA home loan benefits, including loss mitigation options, are benefits administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under the laws governing the VA, an individual requesting to qualify for such benefits is considered a "claimant" for the purposes of the VCAA.

Furthermore, the plain text of 38 U.S.C. § 511(a) establishes that decisions concerning VA home loans are decisions under a law that affects the provision of benefits by the Secretary to veterans. This statute states:

"The Secretary shall decide all questions of law and fact necessary to a decision by the Secretary under a law that affects the provision of benefits by the Secretary to veterans or the dependents or survivors of veterans."

VA home loan benefits, including loss mitigation options, are clearly benefits provided to veterans under laws administered by the Secretary. Therefore, any decision made by the Secretary or their designees concerning these benefits, such as whether to grant loss mitigation assistance, is a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits to veterans. The broad language of § 511(a) encompasses all such decisions, as it refers to "all questions of law and fact necessary to a decision by the Secretary" under these benefits laws.

Moreover, the inclusion of subsection (b)(3) in 38 U.S.C. § 511, which specifically lists "matters arising under chapter 37 of this title" as an exception to the general rule of finality of the Secretary's decisions, strongly supports the interpretation that VA home loan decisions, including those related to loss mitigation, are decisions under a law that affects the provision of benefits by the Secretary to veterans. Chapter 37 of Title 38, U.S. Code, covers housing and small business loans for veterans, including VA home loan benefits. By explicitly carving out an exception for matters arising under this chapter, Congress has acknowledged that decisions made pursuant to this chapter are, in fact, decisions under a law that affects the provision of benefits to veterans.

Consequently, when a veteran or other eligible individual requests loss mitigation assistance for their VA home loan, the VA has specific duties under the VCAA to assist the claimant in developing their claim. These duties, as outlined in 38 U.S.C. §§ 5102 and 5103, include:

1. Furnishing all necessary forms and instructions upon request (38 U.S.C. § 5102(a));

2. Notifying the claimant of any incomplete application and the information needed to complete it (38 U.S.C. § 5102(b)); and

3. Upon receipt of a complete or substantially complete application, notifying the claimant of any information or evidence needed to substantiate the claim and indicating which portion is to be provided by the claimant and which portion the VA will attempt to obtain on behalf of the claimant (38 U.S.C. § 5103(a)).

Furthermore, it is crucial to note that in the VA benefits system, the standard of proof is a "preponderance of the evidence," which is a lower and more easily met standard compared to other legal contexts. If the evidence supporting a claim is ever so slightly more than the evidence against it, the claim should be granted. This principle is further reinforced by the "benefit of the doubt" rule, codified in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), which states that when there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.

In light of these statutory requirements and the unique evidentiary standards in VA benefits cases, are VBA Loan Guaranty employees aware that applicants for VA home loan loss mitigation are considered claimants, and are they taking the necessary steps to fulfill the VA's duties to assist them in developing their claims? Failure to apply the benefit of the doubt rule or to set forth clear reasons for not applying it may constitute error (see O'Hare v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 365, 367 (1991); Sussex v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 526, 529 (1991)).

I would appreciate any information you can provide on the training and practices of VBA Loan Guaranty employees in this regard. It is essential that they understand their obligations under the law when processing these requests to ensure that veterans and other eligible individuals receive the full benefits and protections to which they are entitled.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 4:14 PM

To: HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>; oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov> <oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>>

Subject: "Outstanding or Unsatisfactory?: Examining Whether the Biden Administration is Holding VA's Leaders Accountable"

Dear Mr. Audo,

I am writing to urgently request the attention of the HVAC Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations regarding the VA's inadequate response to my FOIA request (No. 23-12977-F). This matter is directly relevant to the postponed oversight hearing, "Outstanding or Unsatisfactory?: Examining Whether the Biden Administration is Holding VA's Leaders Accountable," as it raises serious questions about the VA's accountability and potential negligence in addressing systemic problems within the Home Loan Guaranty Program.

As detailed in my previous communications, I have raised significant concerns about the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" and broader issues within the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program. My FOIA request seeks critical information directly related to these concerns, specifically email correspondence regarding the VA's internal assessment of risks to borrowers in its disaster loan modification program. This program serves as a revealing case study for potentially widespread issues affecting countless veterans.

The VA has denied my FOIA request citing Exemption 5 (deliberative process privilege), but their justification lacks the specificity and concreteness required under current legal standards. As emphasized in recent court decisions like Machado Amadis v. U.S. Department of State and Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press v. FBI, agencies must provide detailed and focused reasons demonstrating how the release of particular information would cause foreseeable harm. The VA's generalized assertion that disclosure could negatively impact frank discussions fails to meet this exacting standard. Moreover, the compelling public interest in transparency surrounding this program, especially given the potential impact on vulnerable veterans, far outweighs the VA's tenuous arguments for withholding this information.

The VA's denial of my FOIA request raises grave concerns not just about the disaster loan modification program, but also about the VA's broader handling of potential risks within the Home Loan Guaranty Program. The 2019 VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) report (VAOIG-18-03979-204), which revealed an alarming 45% error rate in a sample of disaster-area loan modifications and evidence of a servicer pushing borrowers into unfavorable terms, exemplifies this concern. Despite these red flags, the VA's Loan Guaranty Service (LGY) conducted only a superficial "preliminary assessment" and claimed no further action was needed, without disclosing their methodology or findings. The OIG's deference to this limited response, without securing concrete corrective action commitments, is deeply troubling and deviates from the rigorous approach it took to other issues in the report.

This instance raises serious concerns that the VA may be employing similarly insufficient responses to other systemic problems within the Home Loan Guaranty Program, leaving veterans vulnerable to potential harm and highlighting a critical need for greater transparency and accountability. Furthermore, the VA's delay in providing the requested records under FOIA is prejudicing veterans' ability to meaningfully appeal VA decisions and seek timely relief, as exemplified by my own pending case before the Board of Veterans' Appeals regarding the VA's non-enforcement of pandemic-related protections.

To provide further context, I have attached a copy of my correspondence and appeal with the VA FOIA General Counsel regarding this request.

Therefore, I respectfully request the HVAC Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations to:

1. Demand the VA immediately release the requested information in full or provide a detailed, particularized, and compelling justification for withholding any portion of it that satisfies the strict foreseeable harm standard.

2. Include the VA's mishandling of the disaster loan modification program, its inadequate response to the 2019 OIG report, and its unjustified denial of my FOIA request as specific points of inquiry for the rescheduled oversight hearing on VA leadership accountability.

3. Investigate the potential existence of similar patterns of insufficient responses and lack of transparency from the VA regarding other systemic issues within the Home Loan Guaranty Program.

Obtaining this information is crucial for the Subcommittee to fulfill its essential oversight responsibilities and make informed decisions about the VA's performance and accountability. By taking decisive action, the Subcommittee can demonstrate its commitment to transparency, restore a measure of justice for veterans who have been harmed, and ensure that the VA is truly serving the best interests of those who have served our nation.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your prompt response and the Subcommittee's robust action on this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

From: Quil Lawrence <DLawrence@npr.org<mailto:DLawrence@npr.org>>

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 4:34 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; Chris Arnold <CArnold@npr.org<mailto:CArnold@npr.org>>
Subject: RE: VA Home Loan Crisis Deepens: Flaws in VASP Rollout and Legislation Eroding Veterans' Rights

Thanks for looping us in Michael - we’ve got many of the same questions, and we’ll probably be back at this story again soon. We’ll be in touch when we do.

Best,

Quil

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 10:55 AM
To: Chris Arnold <CArnold@npr.org<mailto:CArnold@npr.org>>; Quil Lawrence <DLawrence@npr.org<mailto:DLawrence@npr.org>>
Subject: VA Home Loan Crisis Deepens: Flaws in VASP Rollout and Legislation Eroding Veterans' Rights

Dear Chris and Quil, I hope this email finds you well. I'm reaching out with critical updates on the VA home loan crisis that demand further investigation and reporting. Recent developments, including concerns raised by industry experts about

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

External Email - Use Caution

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Dear Chris and Quil,

I hope this email finds you well. I'm reaching out with critical updates on the VA home loan crisis that demand further investigation and reporting. Recent developments, including concerns raised by industry experts about the implementation of the VA's new VASP program and the introduction of legislation that could severely erode veterans' appeal rights, have heightened the urgency of this situation.

In a joint letter dated May 3, 2024, the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) and Housing Policy Council (HPC) expressed serious concerns about the lack of guidance and preparedness surrounding the VASP program's rollout. The letter highlights the need for clear communication with veterans and a realistic timeline for implementation, given the complex loss mitigation and servicing transfer processes involved. This echoes the issues raised by Matt Douglas from the HPC, who shared with me that despite the VA publishing some guidance on VASP, there are still significant gaps and unanswered questions that could hinder the program's effectiveness.

The MBA and HPC's call for an extension of the mandatory compliance date and the voluntary foreclosure moratorium underscores the depth of the challenges facing the VASP program. It's becoming increasingly clear that the VA's public messaging about the program's availability may be creating false expectations among veterans desperately in need of relief. The lack of comprehensive guidance and the VA's failure to provide timely, detailed responses to servicers' concerns raise serious doubts about the agency's readiness to implement VASP effectively.

As a veteran who has been fighting for years to hold the VA accountable and access the protections I'm entitled to under existing relief programs, I know firsthand how devastating these bureaucratic failings can be. My own correspondence with VA officials, which you can view in the attached document "va correspondence including breakdown of evasive answers.pdf," reveals a pattern of evasion, contradictions, and a disturbing lack of transparency. This extensive document exists solely because I have asserted my rights under the current protections in the U.S. Code – the very same rights that Section 3723(f)(3) of the proposed "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" would eliminate. Even with my ability to invoke these protections, the VA's inability or unwillingness to provide clear answers about its actions and the options available to veterans has left my situation unresolved and countless other individuals in a state of constant uncertainty and hardship.

To further explain the problems created by the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024," it's crucial to note that Section 3723(f)(3) could effectively strip away veterans' right to appeal any decisions made by the VA in response to a home loan default, not just those related to the new Partial Claim Program. By stating that such decisions "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits," this deeply concerning provision threatens to eliminate crucial legal protections and due process rights for veterans seeking relief, leaving them virtually defenseless against bureaucratic errors, delays, and abuses across the board.

This is particularly troubling given the insights provided by Steve Sharpe, a senior attorney at the National Consumer Law Center, in your original article from November 11, 2023. Sharpe emphasized the need for a pause on foreclosures and the importance of ensuring veterans have access to a program that truly works. He also pointed out that the VA already has the authority to both restart the PCP program and implement a foreclosure moratorium. In light of this, it appears that the primary purpose of the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" is to erode veterans' ability to challenge VA decisions related to home loans, rather than providing meaningful relief.

I believe this evolving crisis demands further investigation and reporting. The public needs to know about the serious flaws in the VASP program's implementation, the VA's ongoing failure to provide transparency and accountability, and the looming threat to veterans' rights posed by the new legislation. Policymakers must be held accountable for any attempts to erode veterans' hard-won protections, and the human cost of the VA's failures should be brought to light.

Thank you for your ongoing commitment to covering these critical issues.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 12:56 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: Request for Clarification on VASP Program Guidance

No problem. I have submitted 60+ clarifying questions to the VA about what the guidance means, and highlighting information that is missing in the guidance.

I submitted that document to the VA about one month ago and haven’t gotten a single answer to a question. That is largely why we chose to write them last week.

Hope that helps.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 12:39 PM
To: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Subject: Request for Clarification on VASP Program Guidance

You don't often get email from mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>. Learn why this is important<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!Iwwt!VrEhVutohU2mzs_ybte8CV8QPka-Fs6AZOTqk3O0T1K3k_Eo0r-i3rhfJQlXMmQ8mg53N3fH4-OK$>

Dear Mr. Douglas,

Thank you for the resposne. I am writing to seek clarification on a recent letter sent by the Housing Policy Council (HPC) and the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding the implementation of the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase (VASP) program.

In the letter dated May 3, 2024, it was mentioned that "Guidance around loss mitigation and servicing transfers are critical components of the work that remains to prepare the program for implementation." The letter also referenced a previous request to meet with the VA to discuss the technical and operational details necessary for implementation.

Given that the VA has published comprehensive guidance on the VASP program in the updated VA Servicer Handbook M26-4 as of April 10, 2024, I was hoping you could provide some additional insight into the specific areas where the HPC believes key information or guidance is still missing or incomplete. The handbook appears to cover essential aspects such as eligibility criteria, the process for servicers to follow, and the terms of the loan modifications under VASP.

If you could elaborate on the particular technical or operational details related to loss mitigation and servicing transfers that require further clarification, it would be greatly appreciated. This information will help to better understand the concerns raised by the HPC and MBA and identify any potential gaps in the current guidance.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Best regards,

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 10:25 AM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Cc: Bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:Bkelleher@mba.org> <Bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:Bkelleher@mba.org>>
Subject: RE: Inquiry Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Section 3723(f)(3)

Hey Michael,

I appreciate your feedback on the Veterans’ Housing Stability Act. I can say definitively that HPC was not involved in discussions or negotiations regarding the inclusion of Section 3723(f)(3) in the Bill. We have not weighed in on the provision with any Hill staffer or the VA, and I have actually never had a member bring it up in conversation with me.

In other words, HPC has not taken any position on Section 3723(f)(3) in the Bill, but I will happily take your feedback into consideration if we are ever asked our view on it.

Best of luck,

Matt Douglas

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2024 4:54 PM
To: Matt Douglas <matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org<mailto:matt.douglas@housingpolicycouncil.org>>
Cc: Bkelleher@mba.org<mailto:Bkelleher@mba.org>
Subject: Fw: Inquiry Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Section 3723(f)(3)

You don't often get email from mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>. Learn why this is important<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!Iwwt!VrEhVutohU2mzs_ybte8CV8QPka-Fs6AZOTqk3O0T1K3k_Eo0r-i3rhfJQlXMmQ8mg53N3fH4-OK$>

Dear Mr. Douglas,

I hope this email finds you well. My name is Michael Locke, and I am a veteran homeowner who has been closely following the development of the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024." While I appreciate the Housing Policy Council's (HPC) efforts to advocate for expanded loss mitigation options for veteran borrowers, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact of certain provisions in the Act on veterans' due process rights.

Specifically, Section 3723(f)(3) of the Act, which states that decisions made under the new Partial Claim Program "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits," raises serious concerns about veterans' ability to challenge adverse decisions and hold the VA accountable for its actions. This language could be interpreted as significantly limiting, or even eliminating, veterans' access to judicial review and appeal rights, potentially undermining crucial protections such as the duty to assist, benefit of the doubt, and the right to appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

As a veteran who has personally experienced challenges with the VA Home Loan Guaranty program and its oversight of loan servicers, I am particularly troubled by the potential erosion of these fundamental rights. My own case, which involves the VA's failure to enforce the protections afforded to me under VA Circular 26-20-12, highlights the importance of ensuring that veterans have access to due process and a fair opportunity to seek redress for unfair or unlawful treatment.

Given the HPC's active involvement in advocating for changes to the VA Home Loan Guaranty program, I am writing to inquire about the HPC's role in the inclusion of Section 3723(f)(3) in the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024." Specifically, I would appreciate any insights you could provide on the following:

* Was the HPC involved in discussions or negotiations regarding the inclusion of this provision in the bill?

* If so, what was the HPC's position on the potential impact of this provision on veterans' due process rights?

* Does the HPC believe that the current language in Section 3723(f)(3) adequately balances the need for expanded loss mitigation options with the importance of protecting veterans' fundamental rights?

I believe that it is crucial to ensure that any expansion of loss mitigation options does not come at the expense of veterans' access to justice and fair treatment. I urge the HPC to carefully consider the potential consequences of this provision and to advocate for amendments that would clarify the limitations on judicial review and preserve veterans' full appeal rights and access to legal protections.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 10:43 AM
To: Pmurray@vfw.org<mailto:Pmurray@vfw.org> <Pmurray@vfw.org<mailto:Pmurray@vfw.org>>
Subject: Fw: Inquiry Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Section 3723(f)(3)

Dear Mr. Murray,

My name is Michael Locke, and I am a veteran from Florida who has been deeply impacted by the VA's failure to adequately address the foreclosure crisis facing veterans in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. I am writing to you today to express my concerns about the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728) and to respectfully request that the VFW reconsider its support for the bill in its current form.

While I appreciate the Act's intent to reestablish a partial claim program for veterans facing foreclosure, I believe that certain provisions within the bill could have unintended consequences that ultimately harm veterans and undermine their access to due process. Specifically, Section 3723(f)(3) of the Act, which states that decisions made under the new Partial Claim Program "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits," is deeply concerning. This language could be interpreted as significantly limiting, or even eliminating, crucial veteran protections such as:

1. The VA's duty to assist veterans in developing their claims for benefits (38 U.S.C. § 5103A).

2. The benefit of the doubt principle, which requires the VA to give veterans the benefit of the doubt when evidence is balanced or unclear (38 U.S.C. § 5107(b)).

3. The right to appeal adverse decisions to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA).

As a veteran who has personally struggled to navigate the VA Home Loan Guaranty program and assert my rights when faced with improper denials of assistance, I am deeply troubled by any provision that would restrict veterans' access to due process and judicial review.

Furthermore, I believe that the VA already possesses the authority to implement a foreclosure moratorium and a partial claim program without the need for new legislation. As evidenced by the VA's actions during the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency has the ability to utilize existing authorities under 38 U.S.C. § 3720 to provide relief to veteran borrowers facing hardship.

Therefore, I urge the VFW to take a deeper look at the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" and consider the potential negative consequences of its provisions on veterans' rights. I believe that advocating for amendments to remove the limitations on judicial review and appeal rights, while simultaneously urging the VA to utilize its existing authorities to address the foreclosure crisis, would be a more effective approach to protecting veterans and ensuring their access to justice.

As a fellow veteran, I am grateful for the VFW's commitment to advocating for the rights and well-being of our nation's heroes. I am available to provide further information and documentation to support my claims and to discuss these issues in more detail at your convenience.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

Melbourne Beach, FL

(321) 506-9557<tel:(321)%20506-9557>

mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>

________________________________

From: Hahn, Kate (Tester) <Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov<mailto:Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 5:09 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Subject: RE: Inquiry Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Section 3723(f)(3)

Good Afternoon Mr. Locke,

Thank you for reaching out to Senator Jon Tester with your questions and concerns about Section 3723(f)(3) of the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728).

I have forwarded your email to my colleague with the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee who deals with Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024. He will review your email chain and provide you with a response.

I appreciate your time and patience.

v/r

Kate

Kate Hahn
Veterans Liaison
Senator Jon Tester
130 West Front Street
Missoula, MT 59802
406-728-5033<tel:406-728-5033> (office)
Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov<mailto:Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov>

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 9:50 AM
To: Hahn, Kate (Tester) <Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov<mailto:Kate_Hahn@tester.senate.gov>>
Subject: Inquiry Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024 - Section 3723(f)(3)

Dear Ms. Hahn,

My name is Michael Locke, and I am a veteran residing in Florida. I am writing to you today to express my concerns regarding Section 3723(f)(3) of the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728), introduced by Senator Jon Tester.

While I appreciate the intent of the bill to provide expanded loss mitigation options for veteran homeowners, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact of Section 3723(f)(3) on veterans' rights to appeal VA home loan decisions. The language in this section, which states that decisions made under the new Partial Claim Program "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits," could be interpreted as significantly limiting veterans' access to due process and judicial review.

As a veteran who has personally experienced challenges with the VA Home Loan Guaranty program and its oversight of loan servicers, I am particularly troubled by this provision. My own case, which involves the VA's failure to enforce the protections afforded to me under VA Circular 26-20-12, highlights the importance of ensuring that veterans have the right to appeal adverse decisions and hold the VA accountable for its actions.

I am reaching out to you today to request your assistance in obtaining information about the inclusion and wording of Section 3723(f)(3) in the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024." Specifically, I would appreciate any insights you could provide on the following:

* The rationale behind the inclusion of this provision in the bill.

* Whether the potential impact on veterans' appeal rights was considered during the drafting process.

* Whether Senator Tester's office is open to considering amendments to clarify the limitations on judicial review and ensure that veterans retain their full appeal rights for all home loan decisions.

I believe that it is crucial to ensure that any expansion of loss mitigation options does not come at the expense of veterans' fundamental rights to due process and fair treatment. I am hopeful that Senator Tester's office will be receptive to addressing these concerns and working towards a solution that protects the rights and interests of all veteran borrowers.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2024 1:12 PM
To: oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov> <oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>>; hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov> <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>
Subject: Request for VA Communications Regarding the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024"

Dear Austin,

I wanted to bring to your attention that I recently reached out to Michelle Corridon, the Deputy Director of Policy at the VA's Loan Guaranty Service, regarding my concerns about Sections 3723(f)(3) and 3732(f)(3) of the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024." Unfortunately, I have not received a response to my inquiry.

In my correspondence with Mrs. Corridon, I asked whether the VA had provided any technical assistance or expressed views on these provisions during the drafting process, and if so, whether the potential unintended consequences of diminishing veterans' procedural protections and appeal rights were considered. I also suggested clarifying the language to ensure that the judicial review limitations only apply to the new programs created by the Act, while preserving veterans' full appeal rights for other home loan decisions.

Given the lack of response from the VA, it seems that my only viable option to obtain information about the VA's role in shaping these provisions is through the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. To assist the subcommittee in their evaluation of the potential impact of Sections 3723(f)(3) and 3732(f)(3) on veterans' rights and access to benefits, I respectfully request any available communications between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs regarding the development and drafting of these specific provisions.

In particular, I am seeking any correspondence, memoranda, or other records that reflect the VA's input on or discussion of the language stating that decisions made under the proposed Partial Claim Program "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits." This could include, but is not limited to:

1. Written comments, suggestions, or feedback provided by the VA on draft versions of the bill;

2. Analyses prepared by the VA discussing the potential consequences of excluding Partial Claim Program decisions from the "provision of benefits" definition;

3. Email communications between VA officials and Committee staff regarding these provisions;

4. Minutes or notes from meetings where these issues were addressed.

Access to these records would greatly enhance my understanding of the legislative intent behind Sections 3723(f)(3) and 3732(f)(3) and the VA's role in shaping these provisions. This information is crucial for evaluating the full implications of the bill and ensuring that veterans' rights are adequately protected.

If the Committee is unable to provide these records directly, I kindly request that you refer me to the appropriate points of contact at the VA or other relevant agencies who may be able to assist with this request.

Thank you for your continued support and attention to this critical matter. I look forward to your response and any assistance you can provide in obtaining these important records.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

(321) 506-9557<tel:(321)%20506-9557>

mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>

________________________________

From: HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 6:08 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>; oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov> <oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>>; HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>
Subject: RE: Concerns Regarding Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024"

Good afternoon, Michael,

Thank you for taking the time to send this information to us. I have forwarded this information to the appropriate subcommittee for further review.

Let us know if you have any further questions by replying using this email address, or by giving us a call at 202-225-3527<tel:202-225-3527>.

Respectfully,

Austin Audo | Staff Assistant
Chairman Mike Bost (IL-12)

[Text Description automatically generated]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=house.gov&u=aHR0cHM6Ly92ZXRlcmFucy5ob3VzZS5nb3Yv&i=NWVjY2FkYjFkMTkwNDkwZjliODBhNDc2&t=enpQUVM2Z1JLUHg4VzZlWW9xU2tFVzJHWW5XUEExSzQzWTZIeUtMNkMyST0=&h=eb28f6d9ac12492788d6a935ce8fd2d6&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaNS4bqhX2TvDobSFKV8HsIvAj172OAk3xZxciSTC3zFw__;!!Bg5easoyC-OII2vlEqY8mTBrtW-N4OJKAQ!N-6aYzxMEX6lAG4qYHobOr0_v_CljK18xymmYNCr_cWDYNFIghDLSj_iiJvO-qFA8b6do77BLAstJtmn_OxxHVbBAvQ$>

[Icon Description automatically generated]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=twitter.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS9Ib3VzZVZldEFmZmFpcnM=&i=NWVjY2FkYjFkMTkwNDkwZjliODBhNDc2&t=YkRGU3NNeXRpZU10NmNscUk5d3dwL2FtYTZrQmFkTG03d3lNTGtOOWRaUT0=&h=eb28f6d9ac12492788d6a935ce8fd2d6&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaNS4bqhX2TvDobSFKV8HsIvAj172OAk3xZxciSTC3zFw__;!!Bg5easoyC-OII2vlEqY8mTBrtW-N4OJKAQ!N-6aYzxMEX6lAG4qYHobOr0_v_CljK18xymmYNCr_cWDYNFIghDLSj_iiJvO-qFA8b6do77BLAstJtmn_Oxx2vUttDs$>[cid:image012.png@01DAB65D.5EFF3BD0]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=facebook.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZmFjZWJvb2suY29tL0hvdXNlVmV0QWZmYWlycw==&i=NWVjY2FkYjFkMTkwNDkwZjliODBhNDc2&t=ZWNuL21UZ3kyQUQ0cjR1OElnajNhWW8xMWNSZDlTQ04vTGRGZ1o0RHg0OD0=&h=eb28f6d9ac12492788d6a935ce8fd2d6&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaNS4bqhX2TvDobSFKV8HsIvAj172OAk3xZxciSTC3zFw__;!!Bg5easoyC-OII2vlEqY8mTBrtW-N4OJKAQ!N-6aYzxMEX6lAG4qYHobOr0_v_CljK18xymmYNCr_cWDYNFIghDLSj_iiJvO-qFA8b6do77BLAstJtmn_Oxxfe9EFk4$>[Icon Description automatically generated]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=instagram.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaW5zdGFncmFtLmNvbS9ob3VzZXZldGVyYW5zYWZmYWlyc2dvcC8_aWdzaGlkPVltTXlNVEEyTTJZJTNE&i=NWVjY2FkYjFkMTkwNDkwZjliODBhNDc2&t=SnpURFg4ajJOTDVrelJYRkRhWXllL1dIRnBBUk0zcW1ZRzFTV1kyRXUvND0=&h=eb28f6d9ac12492788d6a935ce8fd2d6&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaNS4bqhX2TvDobSFKV8HsIvAj172OAk3xZxciSTC3zFw__;!!Bg5easoyC-OII2vlEqY8mTBrtW-N4OJKAQ!N-6aYzxMEX6lAG4qYHobOr0_v_CljK18xymmYNCr_cWDYNFIghDLSj_iiJvO-qFA8b6do77BLAstJtmn_Oxx2O0g55Y$>[Icon Description automatically generated]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=youtube.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cueW91dHViZS5jb20vY2hhbm5lbC9VQ09RZ25qRkRDVDZrYkMtYi1IeTZjcWc=&i=NWVjY2FkYjFkMTkwNDkwZjliODBhNDc2&t=RGduUXU1L3hseEx6SHBidGtpUzJOS29PTFFUbjV5bzFNNDEwUEc2eXZkYz0=&h=eb28f6d9ac12492788d6a935ce8fd2d6&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaNS4bqhX2TvDobSFKV8HsIvAj172OAk3xZxciSTC3zFw__;!!Bg5easoyC-OII2vlEqY8mTBrtW-N4OJKAQ!N-6aYzxMEX6lAG4qYHobOr0_v_CljK18xymmYNCr_cWDYNFIghDLSj_iiJvO-qFA8b6do77BLAstJtmn_OxxwYUDDtg$>

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 6:01 AM

To: Corridon, Michelle, VBAVACO <Michelle.Corridon@va.gov<mailto:Michelle.Corridon@va.gov>>

Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov<mailto:SECVARequest@va.gov>>

Subject: Fw: Concerns Regarding the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024"

Dear Mrs. Cordon,

I am writing to follow up on concerns I raised with the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees regarding specific provisions in the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728/H.R.).

While I strongly support the bill's intent to help veteran borrowers avoid foreclosure, I believe Sections 3723(f)(3) and 3732(f)(3), as currently written, could be interpreted to significantly limit veterans' rights to appeal VA home loan decisions and exclude these programs from important legal safeguards. Specifically, the language stating that decisions made under these sections "shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits" seems overly broad.

During the drafting of this bill, did the VA provide any technical assistance or express views on these judicial review provisions? If so, were the potential unintended consequences of diminishing veterans' procedural protections and appeal rights considered? I would appreciate any insight you can provide on the rationale behind this language.

To avoid an interpretation that erodes long-standing veteran rights, I respectfully suggest clarifying that the judicial review limitations in Sections 3723(f)(3) and 3732(f)(3) only apply to the new programs created by this Act. Expressly preserving veterans' full appeal rights for other home loan decisions would protect against undermining the important "duty to assist" and "benefit of the doubt" standards afforded to veterans in benefit cases.

While expanded loss mitigation options are critical, they should not come at the expense of essential legal protections for those who have served our nation. I appreciate your consideration of these concerns and proposed amendment. Please keep me apprised of any changes made to address this issue as the bill advances.

Thank you for your work on behalf of our veterans. I would be happy to discuss this matter further at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2024 3:02 PM
To: oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>; HVAC Info <hvacinfo@mail.house.gov<mailto:hvacinfo@mail.house.gov>>
Subject: Concerns Regarding the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024"

Dear Members of the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Subcommittees,

My name is Michael Locke, and I am a veteran writing to express my deep concern about a specific provision in the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" (S. 3728/H.R. [bill number]). As someone who has faced challenges with my VA-backed home loan, I believe that this bill, while well-intentioned, may ultimately harm veterans more than it helps them.

The problematic language appears in Section 2(b) of both the House and Senate versions of the bill, which adds a new Section 3723 to Title 38 of the U.S. Code. Under Section 3723(f)(3), the bill states: "For purposes of section 511 of this title, any decision under this section shall not be treated as a decision under a law that affects the provision of benefits."

This provision appears to limit the scope of judicial review for decisions made by the VA Secretary under the new Partial Claim Program. By excluding these decisions from being treated as decisions under laws affecting the provision of benefits, the bill seemingly restricts veterans' ability to challenge the VA's actions through the normal appeals process, including appealing to the Board of Veterans' Appeals and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

As a result, veterans may be left without adequate recourse if the VA mishandles their case or fails to properly administer the new program. This lack of oversight and accountability could lead to veterans being denied the very protections and benefits the bill seeks to provide.

I strongly urge the members of both subcommittees to reconsider this provision and amend the bill to ensure that veterans retain their full rights to appeal and challenge VA decisions related to their home loans. The VA should not be given unchecked authority, especially when it comes to matters as crucial as veterans' housing stability.

Please take action to protect veterans' rights and ensure that the "Veterans Housing Stability Act of 2024" truly serves the best interests of those who have served our nation. I would be happy to provide further information about my personal experiences and discuss this matter in more detail with any of the subcommittee members or their staff.

Thank you for your attention to this critical issue and for your commitment to supporting our nation's veterans.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

________________________________

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 11:08 AM
To: oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov> <oversight@vetaff.senate.gov<mailto:oversight@vetaff.senate.gov>>
Subject: Urgent Concern Regarding Systemic Issues in the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Dear Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs,

I am writing to bring to your attention what I believe to be serious, systemic problems within the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Home Loan Guaranty program, as evidenced by my own experiences as a veteran struggling to obtain assistance with my VA-guaranteed home loan.

My name is Michael Locke, and over the past few years, I have faced significant challenges in securing the protections and relief afforded to me under the CARES Act, VA Circular 26-20-12, and other applicable laws and regulations. Despite my repeated efforts to seek assistance from the VA and my loan servicer, Planet Home Lending, I have encountered a troubling pattern of inconsistency, lack of transparency, and apparent disregard for the VA's own policies and statutory obligations.

Some of the key issues I have faced include:

1. The VA's failure to ensure that my loan servicer complied with the requirements of the CARES Act and VA Circular 26-20-12, including offering appropriate forbearance options and considering all possible home retention options.

2. Inconsistent and contradictory information provided by VA representatives regarding the agency's ability to assist veterans with loans in active bankruptcy, despite clear evidence that the VA's own policies allow for such assistance.

3. The VA's apparent failure to properly notify me of my appellate rights, as required by law, which may have prejudiced my ability to seek timely review and relief through the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA).

4. The VA's reluctance to fulfill its statutory duty to assist me in obtaining critical documentation from my loan servicer to support my case, as mandated by 38 U.S.C. § 5103A and 38 CFR § 21.1032.

I believe that these issues are not unique to my case, but rather indicative of broader, systemic problems within the VA's Home Loan Guaranty program that may be affecting countless other veterans nationwide.

As such, I respectfully request that the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs:

1. Investigate the VA's oversight of loan servicers participating in the Home Loan Guaranty program, with a focus on their compliance with the CARES Act, VA Circular 26-20-12, and other relevant laws and regulations.

2. Examine the VA's policies, practices, and training regarding communication with veteran borrowers, including the accuracy and consistency of information provided by VA representatives and the agency's adherence to its statutory duty to assist.

3. Review the VA's compliance with its legal obligations to notify veteran borrowers of their appellate rights and the impact of any failures to provide timely and accurate information on veterans' ability to challenge VA decisions.

4. Consider legislative action to enhance protections for veteran borrowers, increase accountability and transparency within the VA's Home Loan Guaranty program, and ensure that veterans receive the benefits and assistance they have earned through their service.

I have also reached out to the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee regarding these concerns, as I believe that a coordinated, bicameral response is necessary to address the full scope of these issues and to protect the rights of veteran borrowers across the country.

Please know that I am prepared to provide extensive documentation to support my claims, including correspondence with the VA, relevant laws and regulations, and evidence obtained through FOIA requests. I am grateful for your attention to this matter and stand ready to assist in any way possible to ensure that the VA is held accountable and that veterans receive the support and protection they deserve.

Thank you for your service and your commitment to the well-being of our nation's veterans.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

127 Delvalle St.

Melbourne Beah, FL 32951

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2024 7:16 PM

To: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov<mailto:Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>>

Subject: Re: Request for Assistance - Veteran with PTSD Facing Systemic Issues with VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Dear Mrs. Tanielian,

I wanted to provide you with an update on my ongoing efforts to hold the VA accountable for its failure to properly oversee my loan servicer and enforce the protections afforded to me under VA Circular 26-20-12. Since our last communication, there have been some significant developments that I believe underscore the urgency and importance of addressing these issues.

First, I am pleased to inform you that the American Legion has agreed to represent me in my appeal before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) regarding the VA's mishandling of my loan and its failure to ensure compliance with VA Circular 26-20-12. The American Legion's representatives, while not attorneys, are experienced advocates who are well-versed in navigating the VA appeals process and presenting compelling arguments on behalf of veteran borrowers. Their willingness to take on my case is a testament to the seriousness and validity of my concerns.

Second, I recently received an email from VA representative Andrew Post requesting that I provide updated financial information to identify potential loss mitigation options. While I appreciate the VA's stated willingness to explore solutions, I found it troubling that Mr. Post's email failed to acknowledge the VA's role in creating the hardship I am currently facing, particularly its failure to ensure that my loan servicer complied with the CARES Act and VA Circular 26-20-12.

In response, I have informed Mr. Post that I cannot in good faith provide my financial information until the VA formally acknowledges its past failures, provides a clear plan for corrective action, and works with me to find a solution that addresses the harm caused by the agency's inadequate oversight. I believe this is a necessary step to hold the VA accountable and ensure that my rights as a veteran borrower are fully protected.

Furthermore, I have brought to Mr. Post's attention the striking parallels between my case and the troubling patterns of VA inaction and neglect revealed in cases like Bibby v. Mortgage Investors Corporation and the recent VA OIG report on the agency's oversight of home loan defaults. These examples, along with the VA's denial of my FOIA request seeking records related to the agency's decision-making on disaster-area loan modifications, paint a picture of an agency that consistently prioritizes the interests of lenders over its duty to protect veteran borrowers.

I believe these developments only strengthen the case for urgent reform and accountability within the VA's Home Loan Guaranty program. The agency's failure to acknowledge and address its past mistakes, both in my case and in the broader context of its oversight responsibilities, is unacceptable and demands immediate action.

I am grateful for your continued support and advocacy on behalf of veteran borrowers like myself. I would greatly appreciate any guidance or assistance you can provide as I navigate this challenging process and work to hold the VA accountable for its legal and ethical obligations.

Please let me know if you require any additional information or if there are any further steps I should take to advance my case and shine a light on the systemic issues within the VA's oversight of the Home Loan Guaranty program.

Thank you again for your dedication to ensuring justice and fairness for our nation's veterans.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

From: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov<mailto:Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>>

Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 2:03 PM

To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Subject: RE: Request for Assistance - Veteran with PTSD Facing Systemic Issues with VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Thanks, Michael. I’m following up with VA. You may get some outreach directly from them as well.

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 6:58 AM

To: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov<mailto:Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>>

Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Request for Assistance - Veteran with PTSD Facing Systemic Issues with VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Dear Terri,

Thank you for your thoughtful response and offer to assist with my case. I sincerely appreciate your support and guidance.

Yes, I am comfortable with you reaching out directly to the VA to discuss my situation.

I am deeply grateful for your expertise and advocacy in navigating this challenging situation. Thank you again for your willingness to help.

As you follow up on the types of issues I've encountered with the VA's Home Loan Guaranty Program, you may find the recent NPR series on the VA loan foreclosure crisis to be relevant and informative:

https://www.npr.org/series/1218572761/va-loan-foreclosure-crisis

Best regards,

Michael Locke

From: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov<mailto:Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>>

Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 10:29 PM

To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Subject: RE: Request for Assistance - Veteran with PTSD Facing Systemic Issues with VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Michael:

Thank you for your email. Sorry for the late night reply. I appreciate you flagging these issues for me. With your permission, I would like to follow up with VA directly on your case. Are you comfortable if I reach out to them with regard to your specific circumstances? More generally, I will also follow up on the types of issues you raise with regard to the Home Loan Guarantee Program.

Thanks,

Terri

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>>

Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 1:14 PM

To: Tanielian, Terri L. EOP/WHO <Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov<mailto:Terri.L.Tanielian@who.eop.gov>>

Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request for Assistance - Veteran with PTSD Facing Systemic Issues with VA Home Loan Guaranty Program

Dear Ms. Tanielian,

My name is Michael Locke, and I am a veteran diagnosed with combat-related PTSD who has been struggling to obtain proper assistance and relief from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding my VA-guaranteed home loan. I am writing to request your help in addressing what I believe to be serious, systemic problems within the VA's Home Loan Guaranty program that may be affecting countless veterans nationwide.

Over the past few years, I have faced significant challenges in securing the protections and relief afforded to me under the CARES Act, VA Circular 26-20-12, and other applicable laws and regulations. Despite my repeated efforts to seek assistance from the VA and my loan servicer, I have encountered a troubling pattern of inconsistency, lack of transparency, and apparent disregard for the VA's own policies and statutory obligations.

Some of the key issues I have faced include:

1. The VA's failure to ensure that my loan servicer complied with the requirements of the CARES Act and VA Circular 26-20-12, including offering appropriate forbearance options and considering all possible home retention options.

2. Inconsistent and contradictory information provided by VA representatives regarding the agency's ability to assist veterans with loans in active bankruptcy, despite clear evidence that the VA's own policies allow for such assistance.

3. The VA's apparent failure to properly notify me of my appellate rights, as required by law, which may have prejudiced my ability to seek timely review and relief through the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA).

4. The VA's reluctance to fulfill its statutory duty to assist me in obtaining critical documentation from my loan servicer to support my case, as mandated by 38 U.S.C. § 5103A and 38 CFR § 21.1032.

It is important to note that, as a veteran with combat-related PTSD, the stress and uncertainty surrounding my home loan situation have been significantly exacerbating my symptoms, despite my active participation in treatment for over 12 years. The VA's failure to provide adequate support and protection in this matter has not only put my home at risk but has also had a profound impact on my mental health and well-being.

I have reached out to both the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee and the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs regarding these concerns, as I believe that congressional intervention and investigation are necessary to address the full scope of these issues and to protect the rights of veteran borrowers across the country.

Given your extensive background in veteran policy, mental health policy, and your experience working with the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, I believe that you are uniquely positioned to help address these systemic problems and to ensure that veterans like myself receive the support and protection they deserve.

I would greatly appreciate any assistance or guidance you could provide in navigating these challenges and in bringing these issues to the attention of the relevant authorities within the VA and the White House. I am prepared to provide extensive documentation to support my claims, including correspondence with the VA, relevant laws and regulations, and evidence obtained through FOIA requests.

Thank you for your service and your commitment to the well-being of our nation's veterans. I look forward to the opportunity to discuss these matters further and to work together to ensure that the VA is held accountable and that veteran borrowers, particularly those grappling with the ongoing effects of their service-connected disabilities, are treated fairly and equitably.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke

127 Delvalle St.

Melbourne Beah, FL 32951

(321) 506-9557<tel:(321)%20506-9557>

mbl22885@msn.com<mailto:mbl22885@msn.com>

Do you mind including something in your letter that says something along the lines of “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).(Signature)”?

What I’ve submitted via an appeal on form 10182 states “

I CERTIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS ON THIS FORM ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF…

PENALTY: THE LAW PROVIDES SEVERE PENALTIES WHICH INCLUDE A FINE, IMPRISONMENT, OR BOTH, FOR THE WILLFUL SUBMISSION OF ANY STATEMENT OR EVIDENCE OF A MATERIAL FACT, KNOWING IT TO BE FALSE."

Whoever has responded from the VA has been too scared to include a similar statement concerning the VA’s claims concerning my home loan, and it’s hard to believe that’s not a coincidence.

Hello,

Your 7/5/2024 letter stated in part “Additionally, you indicated to VA and your servicer that the reason for your default was marital difficulties, not COVID-19."

1.
[image/jpeg]

2.
[image/jpeg]

In my appeal submitted via VA Form 10182, the following certification is included: "I CERTIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS ON THIS FORM ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF… PENALTY: THE LAW PROVIDES SEVERE PENALTIES WHICH INCLUDE A FINE, IMPRISONMENT, OR BOTH, FOR THE WILLFUL SUBMISSION OF ANY STATEMENT OR EVIDENCE OF A MATERIAL FACT, KNOWING IT TO BE FALSE."

Given the serious nature of the claims and statements being made by the VA in this matter, I kindly request that any VA response from this point on include a similar statement. Specifically, I would appreciate if you could include language such as:

"I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [date]. [Signature]."

This would ensure that all parties involved are held to the same standard of accountability regarding the accuracy of the information provided.

I’d like to believe I’m uniquely able to see asserting my rights. My paternal grandfather died at my age from lingering effects of wounds from World War 2. My dad and his siblings were state raised for all intents and purposes from that point, and then my dad went on to serve 3 tours in Vietnam.

“Mean and strong like liquor. Mean and strong like fear. Strong like the people from South Alabama, and mean like the people from here. Take it from me, we ain’t never gonna change.”

Sincerely,
Michael Locke

To: Loan Guaranty Service
I am writing to express my profound disappointment and disbelief at the blatant misrepresentations contained in the unsigned letter dated August 16, 2024, regarding my VA-guaranteed home loan. The lack of a named author is telling in itself, but the content of the letter raises even more serious concerns about the integrity and honesty of the VA Loan Guaranty Service. It seems the department is more interested in evading accountability than in engaging with the legitimate issues I've raised.
You claim that I am demanding a direct payment of $27,000 from the VA. This is utterly false. I have never made such a demand in my appeal or any correspondence. My argument, clearly outlined in my appeal documents, is for the VA to cover the $27,000 payment as equitable relief, a legal concept you seem to conveniently ignore. This payment obligation arose directly from the court-ordered sale of my home, which was triggered by the very failures in oversight and mismanagement that I have meticulously detailed in my appeal.
Furthermore, in your July 5th, 2024 letter you stated that Planet Home Lending was "considering another loan modification" when I filed for bankruptcy, implying that the servicer was acting in good faith and that bankruptcy disrupted a potential solution. How can "you" make such a claim when Planet Home Lending's own attorney, Matt Wasinger, testified in court that my property was at imminent risk of foreclosure with no options to save it?
This blatant contradiction, supported by the court order forcing the sale of my home, exposes the absurdity of "your" assertion. It is inconceivable that you are unaware of these legal proceedings, which are central to understanding the true circumstances of my case.
The contradictions and misrepresentations in "your" letters are particularly troubling considering that I have already provided the BVA with comprehensive documentation, including court records and correspondence, that clearly refutes your narrative. It seems that the Loan Guaranty Service is either willfully ignoring the evidence or failing to conduct even a basic review of the materials already submitted. This complete disregard for the facts of my case further reinforces the need for a thorough and impartial investigation by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.
My struggle with the VA loan guaranty is rooted in a family history marked by military service and bureaucratic challenges. From my grandfather's death due to World War II injuries to my father's tours in Vietnam, our family has been shaped by service and its aftermath. I believe these experiences have left epigenetic imprints, influencing my heightened awareness of systemic issues and determination to assert my rights. This unique perspective, born from generations of sacrifice and navigating government systems, drives my approach to the current VA process. I'm not just advocating for myself, but carrying forward a legacy of resilience, aiming to break cycles of bureaucratic neglect and ensure promises made to veterans are honored. In essence, my situation reflects a broader struggle to reconcile personal rights with a complex heritage of service and institutional interactions.
Michael Locke

To: Loan Guaranty Service

Correspondence sent by VBA Loan Guaranty continues to falsely assert the reason for default concerning my home loan.

1.
[image/png]

2.
[image/jpeg]

3.
[image/png]

4.
[image/jpeg]

To explain #4, The Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit report identified a potentially significant issue with disaster loan modifications. In a limited analysis of just 11 loans from one regional loan center serviced by a single nationwide servicer, the OIG found that the servicer attempted to modify 5 of these loans (45%) at interest rates higher than allowed by VA policy following forbearance. In one example, a servicer tried to increase a fixed interest rate from 3.25% to 5%, far exceeding the VA's limit of no more than 1% above the existing rate. This high error rate suggests a potentially widespread problem that could negatively impact vulnerable borrowers in disaster areas.

Despite this concerning finding, the OIG made no formal recommendations regarding disaster loan modifications. The Loan Guaranty Service (LGY) informed the OIG that it had conducted a preliminary risk analysis, which they claimed did not necessitate a formal risk assessment. However, the report provides no details on LGY's methodology or specific findings that led to this conclusion. The LGY quality assurance chief mentioned existing and new controls for reviewing suspicious loan modifications, but offered no specifics on how these controls address the high error rate identified by the OIG. This lack of transparency and the absence of a formal OIG recommendation, despite the potentially serious nature of the issue, raises questions about whether this problem is receiving adequate attention and oversight.

Would you guys (VBA Loan Guaranty Service) mind obtaining copies of the incomplete loss mitigation package submitted for my home loan on 12/3/2019? For some reason, my servicer Planet Home Lending, has made it unavailable to me. It’s been a while, so I’m not completely sure, but feel pretty strongly it will shed light on my reason for default.

Michael Locke

This letter pertains to VA-guaranteed home loan account number 171761792052. I am writing to request assistance in obtaining a complete copy of my Borrower's Assistance Package, which I submitted to Planet Home Lending on December 3, 2019.
I am in possession of the Receipt of Borrower's Assistance Package dated December 3, 2019, acknowledging receipt of the package. A copy of this receipt is included with this letter for your reference. However, despite repeated requests, Planet Home Lending has refused to provide me with a copy of the actual package contents. This refusal is particularly concerning as there is a dispute regarding the default cause of my loan. My submitted Borrower's Assistance Package included a dedicated section for "hardship explanation" which directly addresses this dispute and is critical to clarifying the circumstances surrounding my loan's delinquency.
Furthermore, I have requested written confirmation from Planet Home Lending stating their refusal to provide the package, but they have declined this request as well.
This lack of transparency hinders my ability to understand the basis for past decisions made regarding my loan, to demonstrate the true cause of the default, and to effectively participate in any loss mitigation efforts. Access to my complete Borrower's Assistance Package, including the "hardship explanation," is vital to resolving this dispute and ensuring a fair and accurate assessment of my situation.
Given the VA's duty to assist claimants under 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, I request your intervention in this matter. Specifically, I ask that you:

1.
Direct Planet Home Lending to provide me with a complete copy of my Borrower's Assistance Package submitted on December 3, 2019.
2.
Instruct Planet Home Lending to provide me with written documentation confirming their refusal to provide the package, if they maintain their stance.

As further context for the hardship I experienced, I was subject to a mandatory evacuation order issued by Brevard County on August 31, 2019, due to the impending threat of Hurricane Dorian. A copy of this order is attached for your reference. The financial impact of this evacuation significantly affected my ability to stay current on my mortgage payments. This information is directly relevant to the "hardship explanation" section of my Borrower's Assistance Package, which is why obtaining a complete copy of the package is crucial to accurately representing the circumstances surrounding my loan's default.
I believe that access to this documentation is essential for transparency and fairness in the handling of my loan. I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael Locke

To: Loan Guaranty Service

Correspondence sent by VBA Loan Guaranty continues to falsely assert the reason for default concerning my home loan.

1.
[image/png]

2.
[image/jpeg]

3.
[image/png]

4.
[image/jpeg]

To explain #4, The Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit report identified a potentially significant issue with disaster loan modifications. In a limited analysis of just 11 loans from one regional loan center serviced by a single nationwide servicer, the OIG found that the servicer attempted to modify 5 of these loans (45%) at interest rates higher than allowed by VA policy following forbearance. In one example, a servicer tried to increase a fixed interest rate from 3.25% to 5%, far exceeding the VA's limit of no more than 1% above the existing rate. This high error rate suggests a potentially widespread problem that could negatively impact vulnerable borrowers in disaster areas.

Despite this concerning finding, the OIG made no formal recommendations regarding disaster loan modifications. The Loan Guaranty Service (LGY) informed the OIG that it had conducted a preliminary risk analysis, which they claimed did not necessitate a formal risk assessment. However, the report provides no details on LGY's methodology or specific findings that led to this conclusion. The LGY quality assurance chief mentioned existing and new controls for reviewing suspicious loan modifications, but offered no specifics on how these controls address the high error rate identified by the OIG. This lack of transparency and the absence of a formal OIG recommendation, despite the potentially serious nature of the issue, raises questions about whether this problem is receiving adequate attention and oversight.

5.
[image/png]
Would you guys (VBA Loan Guaranty Service) mind obtaining copies of the incomplete loss mitigation package submitted for my home loan on 12/3/2019? For some reason, my servicer Planet Home Lending, has made it unavailable to me. It’s been a while, so I’m not completely sure, but feel pretty strongly it will shed light on my reason for default.

Michael Locke

https://youtu.be/nyPRK2UsAFY?si=tEYX3IneN9RXSpU5

1.
[image/jpeg]

2.
[image/jpeg]

3.
[image/jpeg]
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1211483989 [http://archive.today/2024.11.12-105441/https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1211483989]

Dear Mr. Krejci,

I'm writing following the VA's November 13, 2024 letter which suggests working with my VA loan technician to explore the possibility of VA directly purchasing and restructuring my loan.

As my loan technician, you are likely familiar with my case from our previous interactions, particularly our August 14, 2020 communication where you provided COVID-19 relief materials. My case is currently being monitored by multiple offices, including the Office of the Secretary , and involves several key issues:

1. Documentation discrepancies regarding my initial default reason (disaster-related hardship from Hurricane Dorian in December 2019 vs. subsequent characterization as marital difficulties)

2. Questions about forbearance periods and their proper recording in VALERI

3. The need to resolve a $27,000 settlement with my ex-wife to retain the property

The November 13 letter appears to suggest a potential path forward through VA's direct intervention that wasn't contemplated in earlier responses. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss how we might structure a solution that addresses both the settlement amount and establishes a sustainable payment plan moving forward.

Please let me know what documentation you need from me to begin this process.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Michael Locke

I am writing in response to the VA's letter dated November 13, 2024, which suggests the possibility of the VA directly purchasing and restructuring my loan. While I appreciate this potential path forward, I must address several concerning inaccuracies and contradictions in your letter that directly impact my ability to access appropriate relief.

1. Misapplication of Disaster Modification Requirements and Systemic Oversight Issues

Your letter continues to defend Planet Home Lending's (PHL) position regarding verification requirements for the Disaster Modification. This position fundamentally misunderstands the VA's own rules, regulations, and guidelines and reflects broader systemic issues in VA's oversight of disaster-related assistance.

The VA Servicer Handbook M26-4 explicitly states that "Servicer evaluation of the borrower's financial information is not required for a disaster modification." Instead, the manual establishes that successful completion of a 3-month Trial Payment Plan (TPP) is the mechanism for demonstrating a borrower's ability to sustain the modified payment. This makes perfect sense—what better way to verify that the "hardship was resolved" than through three consecutive monthly payments?

The irony of this misapplication is particularly stark given the findings of the VA Office of Inspector General's September 30, 2019, audit report (No. 18-03979-204) titled "Oversight and Resolution of Home Loan Defaults." This audit, released the same month as my initial default, identified a 45% error rate in disaster loan modifications—the highest specific error rate cited for any aspect of the VA's home loan program oversight. Despite this alarming finding, the OIG notably did not offer specific recommendations, instead deferring to VBA Loan Guaranty's internal "preliminary risk assessment," which determined no further action was needed.

My case appears to exemplify the very issues identified in this audit. PHL created extra-regulatory requirements by demanding financial verification that the M26-4 Manual explicitly states isn't needed, while the VA failed to correct this misapplication despite having clear evidence of it. This reflects not just an isolated error but a systemic failure to implement proper disaster-related assistance—a failure the VA was aware of through its own OIG audit but failed to address.

Furthermore, section 5.05(e)(4)(e) of the M26-4 Manual states that submitting a complete loss mitigation application would actually make a borrower ineligible for the Disaster Modification. While PHL appears to have created barriers to accessing the Disaster Modification by demanding verification that "the hardship was resolved, the borrower returned to work, and with no negative long-term change in the household income," the TPP itself was designed to serve as this verification mechanism. PHL's apparent imposition of additional requirements before offering a TPP seems to contradict the program's core design, where the TPP itself demonstrates the borrower's ability to sustain payments.

Critical Questions:

- How does the VA justify supporting PHL’s additional verification requirements that contradict the M26-4 Manual?
- What steps will the VA take to rectify the systemic oversight failures highlighted by the OIG audit?

2. Persistent Mischaracterization of Default Reason and Delayed Acknowledgment of Disaster Hardship

Your letter finally acknowledges the December 2019 disaster hardship that I have repeatedly documented. However, this acknowledgment comes after over two years of persistent mischaracterization of the default reason in VA records, despite clear evidence provided as early as June 22, 2022.

On that date, I submitted Planet Home Lending's CFPB response, which unequivocally confirmed the disaster hardship beginning December 3, 2019. This documentation was shared with the following VA officials:
- Marcus Young, Loan Administration Officer
- Andrew Post, VBA LGY Program Manager
- Jennifer Toth, Assistant Director for Loan Administration Field

For over two years, despite having this evidence, the VA failed to acknowledge the documented disaster hardship. This delay contributed to significant harm, including the inability to access disaster-related assistance in a timely manner and adverse consequences for my credit and financial stability.

While I appreciate the VA's eventual acknowledgment, this delay raises concerns about systemic failures in updating VA records, holding servicers accountable for accurate reporting, and ensuring compliance with the counseling, forbearance, and assistance mandates outlined in 38 U.S. Code § 3720(f).

Critical Questions:
- What steps is the VA taking to correct the two-year delay in acknowledging my December 2019 disaster hardship?
- How does the VA plan to ensure timely and accurate acknowledgment of disaster hardships for other veterans to prevent similar delays?

3. Unresolved COVID-19 Forbearance Documentation and Oversight Issues

The serious discrepancies regarding my COVID-19 forbearance remain unaddressed. Your letter doesn't explain:

Timeline Discrepancies:
- PHL claims COVID-19 forbearance from May 2020 through August 2021.
- VALERI records show different dates for special forbearance periods.
- Neither VA nor PHL has provided documentation reconciling these differences.

VALERI Documentation Issues:
- Why wasn't my loan marked as COVID-19-affected until May 10, 2022?
- How did this delay impact my access to COVID-19 relief options?
- Why did Jacob Eilbert need to inquire about forbearance classification in June 2024 if proper documentation existed?

PHL Response to Eilbert's Inquiry:
- Has the VA received a response from Planet Home Lending regarding Jacob Eilbert's June 11, 2024, inquiry on whether the forbearances in VALERI were COVID-related?
- If the VA has not received a response, what follow-up actions have been taken to obtain this information?
- If a response has been received, will the VA please provide documentation demonstrating PHL's response to Eilbert's inquiry?

These aren't merely administrative oversights. The court relied on PHL's representations about foreclosure risk—representations that may have been inaccurate given these documentation discrepancies. VA's failure to properly oversee and document my COVID-19 forbearance directly contributed to the court order to sell my home.

Critical Questions Requiring Response:
- Will the VA provide complete VALERI records showing all forbearance periods and their classifications?
- Can the VA explain why its records differ from PHL's reported forbearance timeline?
- What oversight actions did the VA take when these discrepancies were first brought to its attention over two years ago?
- How did the VA ensure my COVID-19 protections weren't compromised by the delayed VALERI designation?
- Has the VA received a response from Planet Home Lending regarding Jacob Eilbert's June 11, 2024, inquiry on whether the forbearances in VALERI were COVID-related? If not, what follow-up actions have been taken? If so, will the VA please provide documentation demonstrating PHL's response?

4. Unacceptable Path Forward and Demand for Immediate Regional Reassignment

Your suggestion to work with VA Loan Technician Louis Krejci is deeply concerning given the documented oversight failures detailed above. Mr. Krejci and his supervisors have been directly involved in:
- The persistent mischaracterization of my December 2019 disaster hardship.
- The mishandling of COVID-19 forbearance documentation.
- The misinterpretation of refunding referral requirements under Circular 26-20-12.
- The misapplication of Disaster Modification requirements.

Directing me back to the same officials who have demonstrated a pattern of misapplying VA rules, regulations, and guidelines and failing to acknowledge documented facts is unacceptable and will not resolve the issues at hand.

Furthermore, as a Florida veteran with a Florida property, it is neither practical nor appropriate for my loan to be overseen by the Phoenix Regional Loan Center. The St. Petersburg VBA Regional Office and Regional Loan Center are better positioned to handle my case given:
- Geographic proximity for property-related matters.
- Local knowledge of Florida disaster impacts.

Therefore, I DEMAND the immediate reassignment of my loan servicing to the St. Petersburg Regional Loan Center. This reassignment is crucial for ensuring proper oversight, preventing further documentation discrepancies, and facilitating a resolution based on accurate and compliant application of VA rules, regulations, and guidelines.

5. Misrepresentation of My Claim Regarding COVID Protections

I must stress that VBA Loan Guaranty Service (LGY) continues to misrepresent the basis of my claim. My claim does not concern eligibility for the COVID-19 Partial Claim Program or the COVID-19 Refund Modification. Instead, my claim directly pertains to the substantive rights established under VA Circular 26-20-12 and the harm caused by its improper rescission.

Circular 26-20-12 created binding obligations for servicers, including:
- Mandatory forbearance upon borrower request.
- Prohibitions on foreclosure actions during the forbearance period.
- Clear instructions that missed payments would be moved to the end of the loan term.

These provisions established enforceable rights that borrowers like myself relied upon for housing stability during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rescission of Circular 26-20-12 improperly stripped veterans of these protections without justification or adequate alternative measures, leaving us vulnerable to financial harm, foreclosure, and unjust loan modifications.

The VA’s continued conflation of my claim with unrelated COVID-19 programs like the Partial Claim and Refund Modification detracts from the core issue. My claim is centered on the VA’s failure to uphold the mandatory protections provided by Circular 26-20-12 and the subsequent harm caused by its rescission. The VA’s actions violated the principles outlined in *Fugere v. Derwinski*, 972 F.2d 331, 332 (Fed. Cir. 1992), which mandate that substantive veterans' rights cannot be dismissed through procedural changes or rescissions.

To further address this issue, I am submitting a supplemental claim to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) as part of my pending appeal. This supplemental claim argues that:
- The rescission of Circular 26-20-12 violated *Fugere v. Derwinski*, 972 F.2d 331, 332 (Fed. Cir. 1992) by removing substantive rights without procedural due process or adequate replacement protections.
- Circular 26-20-12’s protections must be retroactively reinstated to address the harm caused during the rescission period.
- Systemic reforms are necessary to ensure the VA cannot unilaterally rescind substantive rights without transitional safeguards.

I respectfully request that the VA:
- Acknowledge that my claim is distinct from the COVID-19 programs mentioned in your 11/13/2024 letter and pertains solely to the substantive rights established under Circular 26-20-12.
- Recognize the systemic harm caused by rescinding Circular 26-20-12 and take corrective action to protect veterans who were unfairly impacted.

By focusing on these substantive rights and the broader systemic implications, I aim not only to resolve my own case but also to help ensure that other veterans are afforded the protections they deserve.

Path Forward

I remain committed to resolving this matter in a way that allows me to retain my home while ensuring adherence to the VA's rules, regulations, and guidelines. While I welcome the suggestion of a direct purchase and restructuring, it must be implemented based on accurate documentation and compliance with the VA's rules, regulations, and guidelines. To move forward effectively:

1. The VA must provide clear answers to the critical questions outlined in this letter regarding discrepancies in disaster modification requirements, forbearance documentation, and oversight failures.
2. Immediate reassignment of my loan servicing to the St. Petersburg Regional Loan Center is essential to ensure proper oversight and local jurisdiction for my case.
3. The VA must acknowledge and address systemic issues with oversight, including those identified in the OIG audit, to prevent future harm to veterans.
4. Any resolution must explicitly recognize my rights under Circular 26-20-12, with retroactive corrections applied as necessary.
5. I demand that all future communications regarding this matter be sent electronically. The November 13, 2024, letter was sent via regular mail, which caused unnecessary delays in receiving and addressing this critical correspondence.

By addressing these points, the VA can not only resolve my individual case but also demonstrate a commitment to systemic improvements that safeguard veterans' housing stability. I am available to discuss this matter further and collaborate on a resolution that protects my rights and home.

Sincerely,
Michael Locke

Dear Mr. Houk,

I understand you've been assigned as my new VA loan technician as of November 13, 2024. I'm following up on the VA's November 13 letter suggesting working with my loan technician to explore VA's direct purchase and restructuring of my loan.

As extensively documented in my communications with VA Loan Guaranty since July 2024 and my now-docketed BVA appeal (240612-487471), the $27,000 payment to my ex-wife stems directly from VA's oversight failures regarding my forbearance periods and servicing issues. Under 38 U.S.C. § 3732(a)(2)(A), this obligation falls within VA's authority to address as part of any loan resolution. While the November 13 letter proposed direct VA intervention through loan purchase and restructuring, it did not address this critical component that has been consistently raised in my communications with VA.

Given this context, I would appreciate discussing how we might structure a solution through direct VA intervention that addresses both the loan restructuring and the settlement amount needed to resolve my ex-wife's interest in the property.

Please let me know what documentation you need from me to begin this process.

Thank you,
Michael Locke
Loan # 171761792052

________________________________
From: VAVBAWAS/CO/LGY <LGY.VBACO@va.gov>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 5:37 PM
To: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Subject: VA Response to Recent Inquiries - November 21, 2024

Please see attached response to your recent inquiries to VA.

Loan Guaranty Service

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2024 3:50 PM
To: Mitigation@planethomelending.com <Mitigation@planethomelending.com>; cs@myloansupport.com <cs@myloansupport.com>
Cc: SECVARequest <SECVARequest@va.gov>; officeoftheundersecretaryforbenefits@va.gov <officeoftheundersecretaryforbenefits@va.gov>; deborah.stewart1@va.gov <deborah.stewart1@va.gov>
Subject: Response to December 13, 2024 Document Production Regarding Mortgage Loan No. 9102007812<tel:9102007812>

Dear Planet Home Lending Customer Service:

I am writing regarding urgent matters concerning my VA-guaranteed loan that require your immediate attention and action. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is currently considering purchasing my loan as part of their loan refund program, as evidenced by their letter dated November 21, 2024. However, Planet Home Lending's actions are actively jeopardizing this process.

Background and Current Situation:

1. The VA has confirmed they are actively reviewing my loan for purchase through their temporary Veterans Assistance Program (tVAP), as documented in recent communications from VA Loan Servicing Officer Phillip Houk dated December 17, 2024.

2. This VA review is now being directly threatened by Planet Home Lending's actions stemming from misrepresentations made by your counsel, Matthew Wasinger, in Florida state court (Case #05-2017-DR-054881).

Specific Issues Requiring Immediate Resolution:

1. Misrepresentation of VA Policy
Your attorney, Matthew Wasinger, provided testimony in state court on May 25, 2022, that directly contradicted established VA policy regarding loan refunds. This testimony, as documented in the official Court Minutes, led to an order compelling the sale of my property. This directly conflicts with:

a) Federal Register document #2020-26964, which explicitly stated VA's policy regarding loan refunds at the time of Wasinger's testimony
b) The VA's current active consideration of purchasing my loan, as evidenced by their November 21, 2024 letter

2. Incomplete Document Production
You have failed to provide:
- Collection records from November 1, 2019, through September 1, 2022
- Call logs and notes
- Communication records
- Servicing notes
- Customer service interaction records
- Hardship/loss mitigation related communications
- Information regarding forbearances and their relation to the COVID-19 pandemic

Required Immediate Actions:

1. Legal Resolution
- Take immediate legal action to correct the misrepresentations made by your counsel in Case #05-2017-DR-054881
- File appropriate motions to stay any forced sale pending VA's review
- Provide accurate information to the court regarding VA's loan purchase policies

2. Document Production
- Immediately provide all previously requested documents
- Include complete records of all loss mitigation efforts
- Provide full documentation of all COVID-19 related forbearance discussions

Planet Home Lending bears full responsibility for resolving this situation, which was created by your counsel's misrepresentations and your subsequent failure to take corrective action. Your actions have placed both my property and the VA's intended purchase of my loan in jeopardy.

The VA's policy regarding loan refunds is clear and well-documented in Federal Register document #2020-26964. Your counsel's testimony directly contradicted this policy, and your subsequent actions have failed to acknowledge or correct this error. This situation requires immediate resolution to prevent further harm to my interests and to allow the VA's purchase process to proceed unimpeded.

I expect a complete and detailed response within five (5) business days outlining the specific steps you will take to resolve these issues. Your response should include a timeline for implementation and the name of a specific point of contact who will be responsible for ensuring these actions are completed.

Sincerely,

Michael Locke
Loan #91002007812

________________________________
From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2024 2:22 PM
To: Mitigation@planethomelending.com <Mitigation@planethomelending.com>; cs@myloansupport.com <cs@myloansupport.com>
Subject: Document Request - Loan #91002007812

To whom it may concern,

I was told by the VA hotline that on 9/3/2024 someone from Veterans Benefits Affairs Loan Guaranty directed Planet Home Lending to provide needed documents for my Board of Veterans Appeals appeal.

I am requesting the following documents for loan #91002007812:

1. Planet Home Lending's response to Jacob Eilbert's (VBASPL) June 11, 2024 inquiry regarding whether my forbearances (approved 8/19/2020, extended 12/10/2020 and 4/2/2021) were COVID-related

2. All collection records from November 1, 2019 through September 1, 2022, including but not limited to:
- All call logs/notes
- All communication records
- All online portal interactions
- All servicing notes
- All customer service interaction records
- All hardship/loss mitigation related communications
- All documentation of verbal and written communications between myself and Planet Home Lending

3. The December 3, 2019 online portal submission referenced in your June 22, 2022 CFPB complaint response letter (CFPB Complaint ID No.: 220528-8795767<tel:220528-8795767> and 220613-8879042), along with the acknowledgement and missing items letters you state were issued that same date

Please provide these records in their complete and unredacted form.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Michael Locke
mbl22885@msn.com
Loan #91002007812

Any vet that happens to read this on muckrock, always make sure to get everything you can in writing from ANY VA employee, but especially if they work for loan guaranty.

I am writing to correct several significant errors in your January 21, 2025 response regarding my FOIA request.

Your letter incorrectly states that my FOIA request "was received on November 12, 2024." This is incorrect. The actual timeline is:

- Original FOIA Request: September 11, 2023 (FOIA #23-12977-F)
- Initial Agency Decision: January 16, 2024
- My Appeal: March 20, 2024
- OGC Appeal Remand: June 25, 2024 (OGC Case #169943, Appeal #24-00097-AR)

The VA Office of General Counsel granted my appeal and remanded the case over 7 months ago, ordering:
1. A thorough reconsideration of my request
2. A renewed search for responsive information
3. A description of the search process
4. Review of all responsive information
5. Issuance of a new Initial Agency Decision

Your response appears to confuse my FOIA appeal with a benefits claim. This is a FOIA request for specific records related to the FY 2019 risk assessment of home loans in disaster areas. The VA has already identified 25 pages of responsive email records.

Please provide:
1. The current status of the remanded FOIA request
2. An estimated completion date
3. The name of the FOIA Officer handling the remand

For reference, the remand letter CC'd:
- Olaiseh Wambui, VBACO FOIA Officer
- Angela Davis, Supervisory FOIA Officer
- Darryl L. Webb, GIS, VACO FOIA Service

Sincerely,
Michael Locke

I apologize for misinterpreting your request. Here is the email with the full excerpt you provided:

I'm writing regarding the attorney fee award against me in my divorce proceedings. As you know, the court ordered me to pay my ex-spouse's attorney's fees because I was unable to provide documentation proving that the VA had seriously considered purchasing my home loan. The judge determined my claims about the VA's potential purchase were insufficiently substantiated, which impacted decisions about my home loan and related financial matters.
I have finally obtained critical VA records through my FOIA request that were previously unavailable to me and were only released today. These newly acquired documents essentially show the VA not only seriously considered purchasing my loan but the internal records show the process had actually progressed to approval before being inexplicably reversed. The documentation shows that Phillip Houk, the Servicing Officer assigned to my case, repeatedly recommended approval of the purchase throughout December 2024, the Office of General Counsel provided legal clearance for the title, and all process steps were completed favorably before an unexpected denial in January 2025.
The Critical Role of the Servicing Officer in the Process
The most significant aspect of these documents is the confirmation that my case was specifically assigned to a Servicing Officer (Phillip Houk) for expedited consideration. According to the VA's official manual, the Servicing Officer holds the ultimate approval authority in the tVAP process. This is not a preliminary review or routine consideration—it represents the final decision-making authority being directly engaged with my case.
The assignment of a dedicated Servicing Officer is particularly significant because:

1. It bypasses multiple preliminary review steps that would normally be handled by other VA personnel
2. It indicates the VA had already determined my case was viable for serious purchase consideration
3. It represents the highest level of authority in the tVAP approval chain becoming directly involved
4. It confirms an "expedited" process was being implemented, as stated in the VA's own correspondence

This expedited assignment is equivalent to having a senior decision-maker personally handling the case rather than it working its way through standard channels. The VA Manual 26-3 explicitly states on page 9-3 that "If the recommendation by the technician is approved by the Servicing Officer, the VA-assigned technician will document the decision in VALERI" - confirming the Servicing Officer's decision-making authority.
Key Documents Supporting My Position
I'm providing these documents to you as PDFs for your review:

1.
Email correspondence VA home loan records showing serious consideration of tVAP.pdf
* Contains my recent correspondence with the VA (March 14-17, 2025) requesting unredacted records
* Demonstrates my ongoing efforts to obtain documentation showing Phillip Houk's involvement
2.
Locke Response November 21 2024.pdf
* This official VA letter explicitly states: "To expedite consideration of VA purchasing your home loan, your case has been assigned to Phillip Houk, Servicing Officer"
* Confirms the VA was actively considering bringing my loan current and protecting remaining equity
* This letter represents the formal initiation of the expedited purchase consideration process
3.
M26-3 chapter 9.pdf
* The VA's official policy manual detailing the Traditional VA Purchase process
* Section 9.03.d (page 9-3) establishes the Servicing Officer's final approval authority
* This manual clarifies Phillip Houk's decision-making role in the process
* The manual outlines the entire process that the records show my case went through
4.
Case process steps tVAP.pdf
* Internal VA VALERI system case notes showing all actions taken on my loan from December 2024 to January 2025
* Documents multiple recommendations for approval from Phillip Houk throughout December 2024
* Confirms the Office of General Counsel reviewed and approved my title on December 16, 2024
* Shows the process advanced through all required stages before the final denial in January 2025
5.
Philip Houk clarification request tVAP denial.pdf
* Direct email correspondence with Phillip Houk showing his personal involvement in reviewing my case
* Demonstrates that he continued actively working on my tVAP consideration through December 2024
* Confirms that issues cited in the eventual denial were previously discussed in December without halting the process
* My January 15, 2025 email highlights that the basis for denial was something that had been discussed on December 6, 2024, yet did not prevent further consideration at that time

Evidence Timeline and Significance
These documents, which I only received today, reveal a clear progression that validates my previous claims to the court and shows the purchase was initially heading toward approval:

* November 21, 2024: VA assigns Phillip Houk, Servicing Officer, to expedite consideration
* December 2-5, 2024: Phillip Houk, as the assigned Servicing Officer, recommends proceeding with the purchase
* December 6, 2024: All borrower documentation is reviewed and approved
* December 16, 2024: Office of General Counsel approves the title
* December 26, 2024: Further recommendation to proceed with the purchase
* January 14, 2025: Final denial issued, inexplicably reversing previous recommendations

The fact that my case progressed to title review by the Office of General Counsel is particularly significant, as this is one of the final steps before purchase approval according to the VA Manual. The records also show that throughout December 2024, Phillip Houk, as the sole VA official assigned to handle this process, consistently recommended approval.
These case process notes, which I only received today through my FOIA request, constitute definitive evidence that the VA purchase process had advanced to the final stages with favorable recommendations throughout before an unexpected reversal. Had these records been available during our court proceedings, they would have conclusively established that my statements about the VA's consideration were not only accurate but understated - the process had actually progressed further toward approval than I was able to demonstrate at that time.
Most significantly, the fact that the loan purchase consideration continued past December 6th (when financial concerns were discussed) through December 16th (when title was approved) and to December 26th (with continued recommendations to proceed) before being inexplicably denied on January 14th suggests that factors beyond the stated reason in the denial letter may have influenced the final decision.
I believe this newly obtained evidence provides substantial grounds to petition the court for reconsideration of the attorney fee award, as it directly addresses the court's previous concerns about the lack of documentation. The evidence confirms my statements to the court were factually accurate - the VA had indeed seriously considered purchasing my loan through their formal expedited process.
Direct Email Correspondence with Phillip Houk
I've also included direct email correspondence with Phillip Houk that further strengthens our position. These emails provide conclusive evidence that:

1. Phillip Houk was personally handling my case throughout the entire process
2. He continued actively reviewing my loan for purchase consideration through December 2024
3. He was directly communicating with me about the status of the tVAP review
4. Even issues that were eventually cited as reasons for denial were previously discussed in December without halting the process

The December 6, 2024 email is particularly significant because Phillip Houk confirms:

* "I received the documents from the servicer today"
* "Now I will continue my review"

This demonstrates that after requesting clarification about my finances on December 3, he continued moving forward with the purchase review process after receiving the servicer documentation on December 6. This directly contradicts any suggestion that the VA wasn't seriously considering the purchase.
The January 14, 2025 denial letter also confirms the advanced stage the review had reached, as it specifically mentions they had requested and reviewed my bank statements - one of the final verification steps in the tVAP process according to the VA Manual.
My email from January 15, 2025 highlights that the issue cited in the denial (my cash reserves) had been previously discussed in early December and did not prevent Phillip Houk from continuing his review at that time.
Sincerely,
Michael Locke

From: Michael Locke <mbl22885@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:52 PM
To: Colin.Deaso@va.gov <Colin.Deaso@va.gov>
Cc: FOIA.VBARMC@va.gov <FOIA.VBARMC@va.gov>; valerihelpdesk.vbaco@va.gov <valerihelpdesk.vbaco@va.gov>
Subject: Privacy Act Request to Insert Emails into VALERI Record — Michael Bass Locke (Loan # 171761792052)

Dear Mr. Deaso:
I am submitting a formal request under the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) to have specific email communications inserted into my official VA home loan record within the VA Loan Electronic Reporting Interface (VALERI) system. These communications directly pertain to the administration and servicing of my VA-guaranteed home loan but are currently missing from my VALERI record.
Requestor Information:

* Full Name: Michael Bass Locke
* Current Address: 127 Delvalle St., Melbourne Beach, FL 32951
* Phone Number: (321) 506-9557
* Email Address: mbl22885@msn.com
* Last 4 of SSN: 2982
* VA Loan Number: 171761792052

Records to be Added to My VALERI File:
I am requesting that the following email communications be added to my VALERI record:

1.
Email correspondence dated September 3, 2024, between VA officials including Deborah Stewart (Principal Assistant Director of Administration, Loan Guaranty Service), Debi Bevins (Director of Client Relations), Josh Jacobs (Under Secretary for Benefits), John Bell III (Executive Director of VA's Loan Guaranty Service), Michelle Corridon, Kimberly Girard, and Mike Frueh (Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Benefits) regarding "VA Home Loan Discrepancies" related to my case.
2.
Additional email communications from September 25, 2024, discussing my VA home loan case.
3.
All substantive email communications between VA officials regarding the servicing and administration of my VA home loan that occurred between March 1, 2024 and the present date (March 11, 2025), including but not limited to communications involving the following officials:
* John Bell III (Executive Director, Loan Guaranty Service)
* Josh Jacobs (Under Secretary for Benefits)
* Deborah Stewart (Principal Assistant Director of Administration)
* Debi Bevins (Director of Client Relations, Office of the Secretary)
* Michelle Corridon (VA Loan Guaranty Service)
* Mike Frueh (Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Benefits)
* Kimberly Girard (VBASTPL)
*
Nancy Lee
*
Jennifer Toth
*
Andrew Post
*
Marcus Young
* Any other VA officials involved in discussions of my loan

I specifically request a thorough search of email archives from these officials covering the March 1, 2024 to present timeframe using the VA's current enterprise-level eDiscovery tools (Microsoft Purview eDiscovery) in compliance with VA Directive 6213 and 6301.
I have attached copies of these emails to this request to verify their authenticity and content. These communications contain substantive information about my loan servicing concerns, including discussions of foreclosure risk, loss mitigation efforts, and VA's review of my case.
Legal Basis for This Request:
This request is made pursuant to the following legal authorities:

1.
The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(5)) requires federal agencies to "maintain all records which are used by the agency in making any determination about any individual with such accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness as is reasonably necessary to assure fairness to the individual in the determination." The requested emails contain information directly relevant to determinations about my VA loan benefit.
2.
VA Record-Keeping Policies mandate that substantive communications regarding a veteran's VA home loan must be preserved in the official system of records (VALERI). VA Directive 6301 explicitly states that "electronic mail messages that contain substantive information...will be preserved as official records."
3.
System of Records Notice 55VA26 (VA Home Loan records) acknowledges the right of individuals to request amendment of their records by contacting the system manager in writing.
4.
VA Handbook 6300.4 outlines the procedures for Privacy Act amendment requests, noting that requests should be made in writing to the office maintaining the records.
5.
38 CFR § 1.577(a) provides that an individual may request amendment of records pertaining to him/her and that "the request must be made in writing and must specify the amendment requested."
6.
5 U.S.C. § 552a(t)(1) prohibits agencies from using FOIA exemptions to withhold records that would otherwise be accessible under the Privacy Act. This means the VA cannot apply FOIA Exemption 6 or other FOIA exemptions to withhold information from my Privacy Act records, as confirmed by multiple federal court decisions including Wren v. Harris, 675 F.2d 1144, 1147 (10th Cir. 1982) and Martin v. Office of Special Counsel, 819 F.2d 1181, 1184 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

Request for Action:
I respectfully request that VA:

1. Add these email communications to my VALERI record to ensure my loan file is complete and accurate
2. Provide written confirmation when these records have been added to my VALERI file
3. Ensure that any future communications regarding my VA home loan are properly recorded in VALERI
4. Process this request within 30 business days as required by the Privacy Act
5. Provide these records without redaction of VA employee names, phone numbers, emails, or similar information, as I am requesting these under the Privacy Act, not FOIA. As clarified in 5 U.S.C. § 552a(t)(1), FOIA exemptions (including Exemption 6) cannot be used to withhold information that is otherwise accessible under the Privacy Act.

If my request for amendment is denied in whole or in part, I request to be informed of the reasons for the denial and the procedures for administrative appeal, as provided by 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d)(2)(B)(ii).
If you require any additional information or documentation to process this request, please contact me at the phone number or email address provided above.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Michael Bass Locke
127 Delvalle St. Melbourne Beach, FL 32951 (321) 506-9557 mbl22885@msn.com
Enclosures: