The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Inside: Report Highlights Over 1.5 Million Homeowner Assistance Actions Taken through Making Home Affordable • More than 1.1 million homeowners have received a permanent modification through the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). These homeowners have reduced their first lien mortgage payments by a median of approximately $546 each month – more than one-third of their median before-modification payment – saving a total estimated $17.9 billion to date in monthly mortgage payments. • Homeowners currently in HAMP permanent modifications with some form of principal reduction have been granted an estimated $9.2 billion in principal reduction. Of all non-GSE loans eligible for principal reduction entering HAMP in January, 69% included a principal reduction feature. • More than 105,000 second lien modifications have been completed through the Second Lien Modification Program (2MP). • More than 114,000 homeowners have exited their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure with assistance from the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA). This Month: Q4 2012 Servicer Assessment Results • For the fourth quarter of 2012, two servicers were found to need only minor improvement on the areas reviewed for program performance, while seven servicers were found to need moderate improvement. All servicers will need to continue to demonstrate progress in areas identified in subsequent program reviews. • Servicers continue to focus attention on areas identified in previous program reviews and, as a result, are demonstrating considerable improvement in program implementation: • Mortgage servicers continue to appropriately calculate homeowner income, which is used to determine a homeowner’s eligibility and modified payment amount under the program. In Q4 2012, the average income calculation error rate for the top servicers was below 2 percent. • Servicers are more effectively evaluating homeowners under program eligibility criteria as evidenced in the “second look disagree” category, which reflects the rate at which Treasury’s program reviews disagree with the servicer’s decision not to assist a homeowner. In Q4 2012, the average second look disagree percentage for the top servicers was less than 2 percent. Note: For information and quarterly updates about the Hardest Hit Fund, please visit the website for the Hardest Hit Fund or the TARP Monthly Report to Congress. SUMMARY RESULTS: 2 Making Home Affordable Program Activity 3 First Lien Modification Activity Activity for HAFA, 2MP, Treasury FHA-HAMP 4 and UP Principal Reduction Activity 5-6 First Lien Modification Characteristics 7 HAMP Activity by State 8 HAMP Activity by MSA 9 SERVICER RESULTS: 10 First Lien Modification Activity 11 First Lien, PRA, 2MP, and HAFA Activity 12 Outreach to 60+ Delinquent Homeowners 13 Average Delinquency at Trial Start 14 Conversion Rate 15 Time to Resolve Escalations/Homeowner Outreach Disposition of Homeowners Not in 16-17 HAMP SERVICER ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Overview Servicer Results Description of Metrics 18-24 25-42 43 APPENDICES: Participants in MHA Programs 44-45 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Making Home Affordable Program Activity The Making Home Affordable Program was launched in March 2009 with the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) which provides assistance to struggling homeowners by lowering monthly first lien mortgage payments to an affordable level. Additional programs were subsequently rolled out to expand the program reach. In total, the MHA program has completed over 1.5 million first and second lien permanent modifications, HAFA transactions, and UP forbearance plans. Program-to-Date Reported Since Prior Period 1,264,711 24,106 2MP Modifications Started 105,437 2,165 HAFA Transactions Completed2 114,417 13,322 UP Forbearance Plans Started (through December 2012) 30,525 811 1,515,090 40,404 1 MHA First Lien Modifications Started Cumulative Activity3 MHA Program Activity Cumulative MHA Activity (000s) Cumulative Transactions Completed 1,600 1,434 1,400 1,200 1,044 1,072 1,106 1,137 1,162 1,191 1,219 1,244 1,277 1,299 1,475 Program MHA First Lien Modifications The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) provides eligible borrowers the opportunity to lower their first lien mortgage payment to affordable and sustainable levels through a uniform loan modification process. Effective June 2012, HAMP's eligibility requirements were expanded to include a "Tier 2" evaluation for non-GSE loans that is modeled after the GSE Standard Modification and includes properties that are currently occupied by a tenant as well as vacant properties the borrower intends to rent. FHA-HAMP and RD-HAMP provide first lien modifications for distressed borrowers in loans guaranteed through the Federal Housing Administration and Rural Housing Service. Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Provides modifications and extinguishments on second liens when there has been a first lien HAMP modification on the same property. Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Provides transition alternatives to foreclosure in the form of a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. Effective November 2012, the GSEs jointly streamlined their short sale and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program. Unemployment Program (UP) Provides temporary forbearance of mortgage principal to enable unemployed borrowers to look for a new job without fear of foreclosure. 1,515 1,324 1,000 800 Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 2011 2012 2013 Source: HAMP system of record for HAMP, 2MP, HAFA, FHA-HAMP, and RD-HAMP. UP participation is reported via servicer survey through December 2012. GSE Standard Modification and GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of January 2013. Purpose 1 Includes (a) 1,151,340 GSE and Non-GSE HAMP permanent modifications, (b) 11,350 FHA-and RD-HAMP modifications, and (c) 102,021 GSE Standard Modifications since October 2011 under the GSEs’ Servicer Alignment Initiative. The GSEs also undertake other foreclosure prevention activities beyond their participation in MHA which is not reflected in this report. Per the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Third Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have completed nearly 1.3 million permanent modifications and over 400,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure actions, which includes their activity under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. 2 Includes the GSE and Non-GSE activity under the MHA program, in addition to the cumulative GSE Standard HAFA transactions completed since November 2012. Does not include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu activity prior to November 2012 outside the GSE Standard HAFA program. 3 This does not include trial modifications that have cancelled or not yet converted to permanent modifications, or HAFA transactions started but not yet completed. 2 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Through January 2013 HAMP (First Lien) Modifications Trial Modifications Tier 1 1,981,004 Tier 2 6,299 Trials Reported Since December 2012 Report1 11,654 Trial Modifications Canceled Since June 1, 20102 64,928 Active Trials 62,170 All Permanent Modifications Started Permanent Modifications HAMP Trials Started 1,987,303 1,151,340 2,050 Cumulative Trial Starts (Left Axis) 2,000 Monthly Trial Starts (Right Axis) 1,900 1,850 1,800 1,750 1,149,505 Tier 2 1,835 1,650 Permanent Modifications Reported Since December 2012 Report 14,858 1,600 Permanent Modifications Canceled (Cumulative)3 295,186 Active Permanent Modifications 856,154 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. 2 773,793 cumulative including 708,865 that had trial start dates prior to June 1, 2010 when Treasury implemented a verified income requirement. 3 A permanent modification is canceled when the borrower has missed three consecutive monthly payments. Includes 10,693 loans paid off. 1,700 1,550 On January 27, 2012, Treasury announced an expansion of the eligibility for HAMP to reduce additional foreclosures and help stabilize neighborhoods. The eligibility was expanded for non-GSE loans to (1) allow for more flexible debt-to-income criteria and (2) include properties that are currently occupied by a tenant, as well as vacant properties which the borrower intends to rent. This expanded HAMP criteria, referred to as HAMP “Tier 2,” became effective on June 1, 2012 (although not all servicers began offering Tier 2 modifications on that date). There is insufficient program data at this time to estimate the number of homeowners who may qualify for HAMP Tier 2. 4 Current unpaid principal balance must be no greater than: $729,750 for a single-unit property, 2 units: $934,200, 3 Units: $1,129,250, 4 Units: $1,403,400. 1,724 Aug Sep 2011 1,741 Oct Nov Dec 1,793 1,810 1,849 1,867 1,900 1,917 1,931 50 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep 2012 Oct Nov Dec Jan 2013 0 HAMP Permanent Modifications Started (Cumulative) 1,200 All Permanent Modifications Started (000s) Homeowners who have HAMP-eligible loans may qualify for Tier 1 if they meet additional criteria including, but not limited to requiring: a debt-to-income ratio greater than 31%, occupancy, employment, and pooling and servicing agreement eligibility. Based on current estimates, of the 3.9 million homeowners who are currently 60+ days delinquent, an estimated 691,091 homeowners are eligible for HAMP Tier 1. 1,702 1,759 1,777 1,831 1,885 1,964 1,987 Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. For example, 11,654 trials have entered the HAMP system of record since the prior report; 10,560 were trials with a first payment recorded in January 2013. Estimated Eligible Loans and Borrowers Under the original HAMP program, launched in March 2009, now referred to as “Tier 1,” eligible loans include conventional loans more than 60 days delinquent (unless the borrower is in imminent default), that originated on or before January 1, 2009 with a current unpaid principal balance below the maximum conforming loan limit4 and were owner-occupied at origination. 1,948 1,950 Tier 1 1 100 1,977 New Trials Started (000s) All Trials Started Total All Trials Started (000s) HAMP Activity Through January 2013 1,100 1,000 900 857 883 910 933 951 974 994 1,009 1,026 1,043 1,060 1,107 1,122 1,077 1,091 1,136 1,151 817 800 700 600 Aug Sep 2011 Oct Source: HAMP system of record. Nov Dec Jan Feb 2012 Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 2013 3 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Activity Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) Activity The Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) provides assistance to homeowners in a first lien permanent modification who have an eligible second lien with a participating HAMP servicer. This assistance can result in a modification of the second lien and even full or partial extinguishment of the second lien. Second lien modifications follow a series of steps and may include capitalization, interest rate reduction, term extension and principal forbearance or forgiveness. The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (HAFA) offers incentives and a streamlined process for homeowners looking to exit their homes through a short sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. HAFA has established important homeowner protections and an industry standard for streamlined transactions. Effective November 2012, the GSEs revised their short sale and deed-in-lieu programs. The GSE Standard HAFA program is closely aligned with Treasury’s MHA HAFA program. In HAFA transactions, homeowners: 2MP modifications and partial extinguishments require that the first lien HAMP modification be permanent and active and that the second lien have an unpaid balance of $5,000 or more and a monthly payment of at least $100. All Second Lien Modifications Started (Cumulative)1 105,437 Second Lien Modifications Involving Full Lien Extinguishments 26,569 Second Lien Modifications Disqualified2 9,021 Active Second Lien Modifications3 69,847 Active Second Lien Modifications Involving Partial Lien Extinguishments 6,857 Second Lien Extinguishment Details • Follow a streamlined process for short sales and deed-in-lieu transactions that requires no verification of income (unless as required by investors) and allows for pre-approved short sale terms; • Receive a waiver of deficiency once the transaction is completed that releases the homeowner from remaining mortgage debt; • Receive at least $3,000 in relocation assistance at closing. Short Sale Deed-in-Lieu Median Amount of Full Extinguishment $61,470 Median Amount of Partial Extinguishment for Active Second Lien Modifications $9,467 Includes second lien modifications reported into HAMP system of record through the end of cycle for January 2013 data, though the effective date may occur in February 2013. Number of modifications is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections. 2 Includes 2,753 loans paid off. 3 Includes 5,072 loans in active non-payment status whereby the 1MP has disqualified from HAMP. As a result, the servicer is no longer required to report payment activity on the 2MP modification. 1 Total Transactions Completed Non-GSE Activity GSE Activity1 Total 93,130 18,291 111,421 2,777 219 2,996 95,907 18,510 114,417 1 Includes GSE activity under the MHA program in addition to the GSE Standard HAFA program implemented in November 2012. GSE Standard HAFA data provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as of January 2013. Does not include other GSE short sale and deed-in-lieu activity outside the HAFA program. Per the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Foreclosure Prevention Report for the Third Quarter of 2012, since 4Q 2008 the GSEs have completed over 400,000 short sales and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure actions, which includes their activity under MHA. Please visit www.FHFA.gov for the complete FHFA report. Treasury FHA-HAMP Modification Activity Unemployment Program (UP) Activity The Treasury MHA Unemployment Program (UP) provides a temporary forbearance to homeowners who are unemployed. Under Treasury guidelines, unemployed homeowners must be considered for a minimum of 12 months’ forbearance. The Treasury FHA-HAMP Program provides assistance to eligible homeowners with FHA-insured mortgages. All UP Forbearance Plans Started 30,525 All Treasury FHA-HAMP Trial Modifications Started 22,116 UP Forbearance Plans With Some Payment Required 26,224 All Treasury FHA-HAMP Permanent Modifications Started 11,323 UP Forbearance Plans With No Payment Required 4,301 Note: Data is as reported by servicers via survey for UP participation through December 31, 2012. See Appendix A2 for servicer participants in additional Making Home Affordable programs. 4 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 HAMP Principal Reduction Principal reduction may be offered to any non-GSE HAMP modifications, and servicers are required to evaluate the benefit of principal reduction for non-GSE mortgages with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 115% when evaluating a homeowner for a HAMP first lien modification. While servicers are required to evaluate homeowners for principal reduction, they are not required to reduce principal as part of the modification. The MHA Program allows servicers to provide principal reduction on HAMP modifications in two ways: 1) under HAMP Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA), principal is reduced to lower the LTV, the investor is eligible to receive an incentive on the amount of principal reduced, and the reduction vests over a 3-year period and 2) servicers can also offer principal reduction to homeowners on a HAMP modification outside the requirements of HAMP PRA. If they do, the investor receives no incentive payment for the principal reduction and the principal reduction can be recognized immediately. To encourage investors to consider or expand the use of HAMP PRA, Treasury issued program guidance on February 16, 2012 tripling financial incentives under HAMP PRA for investors who agree to reduce principal for eligible underwater homeowners. The new program guidance applies to all permanent modifications of non-GSE loans under HAMP that include HAMP PRA and have a trial period plan effective date on or after March 1, 2012. HAMP PRA can be a feature of a HAMP trial or permanent modification. HAMP Principal Reduction Activity All Trial Modifications Started Modification Characteristics HAMP Modifications with Earned Principal Reduction Under PRA1 HAMP Modifications with Upfront Principal Reduction Outside of PRA Total HAMP Modifications with Principal Reduction 116,264 38,003 154,267 Trials Reported Since December 2012 Report 2,704 1,037 3,741 Active Trial Modifications 14,366 4,433 18,799 All Permanent Modifications Started 92,664 30,412 123,076 Permanent Modifications Reported Since December 2012 Report 3,447 1,191 4,638 Active Permanent Modifications 80,219 26,549 106,768 Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent Modifications2 $73,106 $55,730 $67,072 Median Principal Amount Reduced for Active Permanent Modifications (%)3 32.0% 18.0% 29.0% $7,401,814,459 $1,763,876,958 $9,165,691,417 Total Outstanding Principal Balance Reduced on Active Permanent Modifications 2 Includes some modifications with additional principal reduction outside of HAMP PRA. Under HAMP PRA, principal reduction vests over a 3-year period. The amounts noted reflect the entire amount that may be forgiven. 3 HAMP PRA amount as a percentage of before-modification UPB, excluding capitalization. While the population of loan modifications with principal reduction is still relatively small, program data indicates that modifications with principal reduction are comprised of more homeowners seriously delinquent at the time of trial start than the overall population of HAMP homeowners. Overall, homeowners receiving permanent loan modifications with principal reduction also have a higher before-modification LTV ratio than those without it. Total HAMP Modifications with Principal All HAMP Modifications4 Reduction Of trials started, delinquency at trial start: - At least 60 days delinquent 80% 84% - Up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default 20% 16% Top three States by Activity5, Percent of Total Activity: - California - Florida - Illinois Top Three States’ Percent of Total 36% 15% 5% 56% Active Permanent Modifications – Median Loan-to-Value (LTV) ratio: - Before Modification 119% - After Modification6 118% 153% 115% Active Permanent Modifications – Median before Modification Debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio: - Front-End DTI 45.5% 46.4% - Back-End DTI 71.0% 61.2% 1 2 26% 12% 5% 43% Includes HAMP first lien modifications with and without principal reduction. Figures reflect active trials and active permanent modifications. 6 Because the first step of the standard HAMP waterfall includes the capitalization of accrued interest, out-ofpocket escrow advances to third parties, any escrow advances made to third parties during the trial period plan, and servicing advances that are made for costs and expenses incurred in performing servicing obligations, this can result in an increase in the principal balance after modification. As a result, the loan-tovalue ratio can increase in the modification process. 4 5 5 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 HAMP Principal Reduction Trials Started with Principal Reduction as a % of Eligible Loans 1 The terms of the $25 billion National Mortgage Settlement regarding mortgage servicing deficiencies between the five largest mortgage servicers, the Federal government, and 49 state attorneys general, have caused servicers to increase the use of non-PRA principal reductions. Of non-GSE loans eligible1 for principal reduction that started a trial in January 2013, 69% included a principal reduction feature. Only 55% offered principal reduction through the HAMP PRA program. The remaining HAMP trial modifications with a principal reduction feature were granted outside the requirements of HAMP PRA, where the investor does not receive a financial incentive for the principal reduction. Principal reductions granted outside of the HAMP PRA program since February 2012 are likely attributable to the National Mortgage Settlement. All Principal Reduction2 PRA 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 56% 60.0% 47% 46% 46% 45% 56% 44% 45% 50.0% 40.0% 37% 62% 61% 59% 60% 60% 72% 54% 54% 56% 53% 55% 81% 77% 78% 78% 71% 69% 58% 63% 62% 62% 61% 53% 55% 46% 46% 46% 45% 36% 30.0% 20.0% 43% 62% 63% 59% 61% 61% 67% 66% 69% 74% 77% 28% 10.0% 0.0% Jan-11 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan-12 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan-13 1 Eligible 2 loans include those receiving evaluation under HAMP PRA guidelines plus loans that did not require an evaluation but received principal reduction on their modification. All Principal Reduction population consists of trials that have any principal reduction, including those with HAMP PRA. 6 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Homeowner Benefits and First Lien Modification Characteristics Aggregate payment savings to homeowners who received HAMP first lien permanent modifications are estimated to total approximately $17.9 billion, program to date, compared with unmodified mortgage obligations. The median monthly savings for homeowners in active permanent first lien modifications is $545.72, or 38% of the median monthly payment before modification. Modification Steps of Active Permanent Modifications HAMP modifications follow a series of waterfall steps. The modification steps include interest rate adjustment, term extension and principal forbearance. • Under Tier 1, servicers apply the modification steps in sequence until the homeowner’s after modification front-end debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is 31%. The impact of each modification step can vary to achieve the target of 31%. • Under Tier 2, servicers apply consistent modification terms resulting in the homeowner’s post modification DTI falling within an allowable target range.1 Select Median Characteristics of Active Permanent Modifications Tier 1 Tier 2 Interest Rate Reduction 96.8% 71.2% Term Extension 61.5% 88.1% 32.5% 17.5% Principal Forbearance 1 Subject to investor restrictions. Effective February 1, 2013, Supplemental Directive 12-09 expands the acceptable DTI range for Tier 2 to 10-55%. After Modification Median Decrease Tier 1 45.5% 31.0% -14.9 pct pts Tier 2 41.3% 30.7% -9.0 pct pts Tier 1 71.0% 52.7% -15.2 pct pts Tier 2 55.4% 43.1% -9.2 pct pts Tier 1 $1,422.70 $808.85 ($546.16) Tier 2 $1,270.49 $831.47 ($387.29) Front-End Debt-to-Income Ratio2 Back-End Debt-to-Income Ratio3 Active permanent modifications reflect the following modification steps: Modification Step Before Modification Loan Characteristic Median Monthly Housing Payment4 Ratio of housing expenses (principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowners association and/or condo fees) to monthly gross income. 3 Ratio of total monthly debt payments (including mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance, homeowners association and/or condo fees, plus payments on installment debts, junior liens, alimony, car lease payments and investment property payments) to monthly gross income. Homeowners who have a back-end debt-to-income ratio of greater than 55% are required to seek housing counseling under program guidelines. 4 Principal and interest payment. Before modification payment is homeowner’s current payment at time of evaluation. 2 Homeowner Characteristics • Tier 2 provides another modification opportunity for struggling homeowners who did not qualify for Tier 1 or received a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification but lost good standing. Of the Tier 2 trial modifications started: • 37% were previously in a Tier 1 trial or permanent modification. • 22% were previously evaluated for Tier 1 and did not meet eligibility requirements. • The primary hardship reasons for homeowners in active permanent modifications are: • Of the Tier 2 trial modifications started, 8% were for non owner-occupied properties. • Of all HAMP trial modifications started, 80% of homeowners were at least 60 days delinquent at trial start. The rest were up to 59 days delinquent or current and in imminent default. • The median gross monthly income of homeowners in the program is $3,845.72. • The median credit score of homeowners in the program is 574. • 68.0% experienced loss of income (curtailment of income or unemployment) • 10.7% reported excessive obligation • 3.5% reported an illness of the principal borrower 7 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 HAMP Activity by State State % of U.S. State HAMP Active Permanent Trials Modifications Total1 Activity State Modification Activity by State % of U.S. Active Permanent State HAMP Trials Modifications Total1 Activity AK 49 384 433 0.0% MT 69 987 1,056 0.1% AL 428 4,597 5,025 0.5% NC 1,197 15,079 16,276 1.8% AR 147 1,804 1,951 0.2% ND 9 126 135 0.0% AZ 1,379 33,794 35,173 3.8% NE 100 1,117 1,217 0.1% CA 14,759 221,480 236,239 25.7% NH 273 3,791 4,064 0.4% CO 877 12,058 12,935 1.4% NJ 2,383 27,552 29,935 3.3% CT 953 10,870 11,823 1.3% NM 275 2,806 3,081 0.3% DC 103 1,513 1,616 0.2% NV 1,119 19,015 20,134 2.2% DE 196 2,509 2,705 0.3% NY 4,355 42,731 47,086 5.1% FL 7,659 103,619 111,278 12.1% OH 1,366 17,724 19,090 2.1% GA 2,172 30,561 32,733 3.6% OK HI 265 3,326 3,591 0.4% OR IA 131 2,000 2,131 0.2% PA ID 189 3,231 3,420 0.4% RI IL 3,186 44,305 47,491 5.2% IN 598 7,891 8,489 KS 165 1,968 KY 250 3,065 LA 424 4,679 188 1,936 2,124 0.2% 732 9,571 10,303 1.1% 1,509 17,281 18,790 2.0% 268 4,135 4,403 0.5% SC 600 7,639 8,239 0.9% 0.9% SD 17 296 313 0.0% 2,133 0.2% TN 746 8,398 9,144 1.0% 3,315 0.4% TX 2,060 22,843 24,903 2.7% 5,103 0.6% UT 394 7,705 8,099 0.9% MA 1,716 20,456 22,172 2.4% VA 1,418 20,253 21,671 2.4% MD 1,992 26,993 28,985 3.2% VT 65 727 792 0.1% ME 200 2,342 2,542 0.3% WA 1,410 18,016 19,426 2.1% MI 1,312 25,716 27,028 2.9% WI 635 7,957 8,592 0.9% MN 760 13,488 14,248 1.6% WV 81 1,122 1,203 0.1% MO 638 8,290 8,928 1.0% WY 26 409 435 0.0% MS 230 2,879 3,109 0.3% Other2 97 3,120 3,217 0.4% Total reflects active trials and active permanent modifications. 2 Includes Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 1 HAMP Modifications Note: Includes active trial and permanent modifications from the official HAMP system of record. 5,000 and lower 20,001 – 35,000 5,001 – 10,000 35,001 and higher 10,001 – 20,000 Mortgage Delinquency Rates by State Source: 4th Quarter 2012 National Delinquency Survey, Mortgage Bankers Association. 60+ Day Delinquency Rate 5.0% and lower 5.01% - 10.0% 10.01% - 15.0% 15.01% - 20.0% 20.01% and higher 8 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 15 Metropolitan Areas With Highest HAMP Activity Active Trials Active Permanent Modifications Total MSA HAMP Activity1 % of U.S. HAMP Activity Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 5,312 70,320 75,632 8.2% $877.78 41% New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 5,322 56,941 62,263 6.8% $889.88 43% Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 3,459 45,549 49,008 5.3% $587.40 45% Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 3,047 43,047 46,094 5.0% $573.35 44% Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 2,419 43,071 45,490 5.0% $690.96 40% Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 1,850 28,753 30,603 3.3% $697.44 38% 987 26,941 27,928 3.0% $502.00 41% Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 1,706 24,756 26,462 2.9% $412.54 40% San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,452 19,547 20,999 2.3% $937.68 40% San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,042 16,231 17,273 1.9% $809.75 38% Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 914 15,540 16,454 1.8% $571.35 42% Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 760 15,550 16,310 1.8% $415.65 41% Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 985 15,185 16,170 1.8% $497.14 42% 1,199 14,746 15,945 1.7% $682.65 38% 895 14,468 15,363 1.7% $655.31 39% Metropolitan Statistical Area Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA A complete list of HAMP activity for all metropolitan areas is available at http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/results/MHA-Reports/ 1 Total Median $ Median % Payment Payment Reduction Reduction2 reflects active trials and active permanent modifications. % of the median monthly payment before modification for active permanent modifications. 2 Reflects 9 Making Home Affordable: Summary Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 HAMP Modification Activity by Servicer and Investor Type Total Active Modifications4 Active Trial Modifications2 Active Trial Modifications Lasting 6 Months or Longer3 Active Permanent Modifications2 GSE Private Portfolio Total Trial Plan Offers Extended1 All HAMP Trials Started2 All HAMP Permanent Modifications Started2 Bank of America, N.A. 566,523 339,442 162,481 12,604 4,946 118,528 65,907 54,041 11,184 131,132 CitiMortgage, Inc. 214,047 141,626 67,794 2,912 881 52,787 33,080 5,656 16,963 55,699 GMAC Mortgage, LLC 90,456 77,365 59,095 2,725 32 42,579 25,238 6,503 13,563 45,304 Homeward Residential, Inc. 56,432 51,419 43,571 1,495 228 31,775 5,473 27,797 0 33,270 419,870 332,510 189,629 9,262 717 143,378 66,988 57,844 27,808 152,640 115,038 167,656 104,056 7,914 1,235 72,091 13,240 65,417 1,348 80,005 OneWest Bank 97,809 65,991 44,168 1,325 115 35,377 15,469 18,228 3,005 36,702 Select Portfolio Servicing 76,463 65,461 37,528 1,863 415 25,193 502 23,359 3,195 27,056 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 252,409 286,479 157,495 12,067 1,730 122,332 56,338 22,462 55,599 134,399 Other Servicers 306,282 459,354 285,523 10,003 1,404 212,114 174,805 28,984 18,328 222,117 2,195,329 1,987,303 1,151,340 62,170 11,703 856,154 457,040 310,291 150,993 918,324 Servicer JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Total 1 2 As reported in the monthly servicer survey of large SPA servicers through January 31, 2013. As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHA-HAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing transfers. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. 3 4 These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications or cancelled by the servicer, but not reported as such to the HAMP system of record. Total active modifications reflects active trial and active permanent HAMP modifications. See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 10 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Making Home Affordable Programs by Servicer1 HAMP First Lien Modifications Second Lien Modification (2MP) Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA)5 Trials Started3 Permanent Modifications Started3 Trials Started3 Permanent Modifications Started3 Second Lien Modifications Started4 Transactions Completed Bank of America, N.A. 339,442 162,481 13,505 11,202 33,821 31,832 CitiMortgage, Inc. 141,626 67,794 2,449 2,002 13,145 733 GMAC Mortgage, LLC 77,365 59,095 3,517 2,494 4,636 3,875 Homeward Residential, Inc. 51,419 43,571 11 0 N/A 1,398 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 332,510 189,629 28,830 23,817 30,012 29,292 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 167,656 104,056 31,409 23,500 N/A 2,753 OneWest Bank 65,991 44,168 6,323 5,590 3,523 3,249 Select Portfolio Servicing 65,461 37,528 2,774 2,464 N/A 2,864 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 286,479 157,495 23,178 17,936 15,488 14,756 Other Servicers 459,354 285,523 4,268 3,659 4,812 5,155 1,987,303 1,151,340 116,264 92,664 105,437 95,907 Servicer Total 1 Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA)2 MHA Program Effective Dates: HAMP First Lien: April 6, 2009 PRA: October 1, 2010 2MP: August 13, 2009 HAFA: April 5, 2010 2 While both GSE and non-GSE loans are eligible for HAMP, at the present time due to GSE policy, servicers can only offer PRA on non-GSE modifications under HAMP. Servicer volume can vary based on the investor composition of the servicer’s portfolio and respective policy with regards to PRA. 3 As reported into the HAMP system of record by servicers. Excludes FHA-HAMP modifications. Subject to adjustment based on servicer reconciliation of historic loan files. Totals reflect impact of servicing transfers. Servicers may enter new trial modifications into the HAMP system of record at any time. 4 Number of second lien modifications started is net of cancellations, which are primarily due to servicer data corrections. 5 Servicer agreement with homeowner for terms of potential short sale, which lasts at least 120 days; or agreement for a deed-in-lieu transaction. A short sale requires a thirdparty purchaser and cooperation of junior lienholders and mortgage insurers to complete the transaction. Includes Non-GSE activity under the MHA program only. Servicer GSE program data not available. N/A – Servicer does not participate in the program. See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 11 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Servicer Outreach to 60+ Day Delinquent Homeowners: Cumulative Servicer Results, January 2012 – December 2012 Per program guidance, servicers are directed to establish Right Party Contact (RPC) with homeowners of delinquent HAMP eligible loans1 and then evaluate the homeowners' eligibility for HAMP. There is a range of performance results across top program servicers with respect to making RPC and completing the evaluations. 100% 97% 93% 90% 90% 93% 92% 88% 82% 80% 68% 70% 60% 55% 50% 40% 77% 84% 90% 89% 73% 71% 30% 66% 61% 20% 38% 10% 0% Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential Right Party Contact Ratio2 JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo HAMP Evaluations Complete Ratio3 1 Homeowners with HAMP eligible loans, which include conventional loans that were originated on or before Jan. 1, 2009; excludes loans with current unpaid principal balances greater than current conforming loan limits, FHA and VA loans, loans where investor pooling and servicing agreements preclude modification, and manufactured housing loans with title/chattel issues that exclude them from HAMP. Treasury has expanded HAMP's eligibility criteria to include a "Tier 2" evaluation designed to provide help for borrowers with a financial hardship whose debt-to-income ratio is below 31 percent, who have properties occupied by a tenant or who have vacant properties that the borrower intends to rent. Servicers began accepting HAMP Tier 2 modification requests as of 6/1/2012 and are including HAMP Tier 2 eligible loans in the outreach survey data shown here. 2 Right Party Contact (RPC) is achieved when a servicer has successfully communicated directly with the homeowner obligated under the mortgage about resolution of their delinquency in accordance with program guidelines. The RPC ratio reflects the share of homeowners with which the servicer has established RPC as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed. 3 HAMP evaluations complete ratio reflects the share of homeowners who have been evaluated for HAMP as a percent of HAMP eligible loans, excluding homeowners where RPC or HAMP evaluation is no longer needed. Evaluated homeowners include those offered a trial plan, those that are denied or did not accept a trial plan and homeowners that failed to submit a complete HAMP evaluation package by program-specified timelines. 12 Source: Survey of 9 largest participating servicers as of December 31, 2012. Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Average Homeowner Delinquency at Trial Start1 Servicers are instructed to follow a series of steps in order to evaluate homeowners for HAMP, including: • Identifying and soliciting the homeowners in the early stages of delinquency; • Making reasonable efforts to establish right party contact with the homeowners; • Gathering required documentation once contact is established in order to evaluate the homeowners for a HAMP trial; and, • Communicating decisions to the homeowners. Effective 10/1/11, a new servicer compensation structure exists to encourage servicers to work with struggling homeowners in the early stages of delinquency with the highest incentives paid for permanent modifications completed when the homeowner is 120 days delinquent or less at the trial start. 300 Maximum servicer incentive is paid for converting a permanent modification that was 120 days delinquent or less at trial start. 250 Days 200 150 100 50 0 Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo For all permanent modifications started, the average number of days delinquent as of the trial plan start date. Delinquency is calculated as the number of days between the homeowner's last paid installment before the trial plan and the first payment due date of the trial plan. 1 13 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Conversion Rate1 Per program guidelines, effective June 1, 2010, all trials must be started using verified income documentation. Of eligible trials started on or after June 1, 2010, 87% have converted to permanent modification with an average trial length of 3.5 months. Prior to June 1, 2010, some servicers initiated trials using stated income information. Of trials started prior to June 1, 2010, 44% have converted to permanent modification. Average Of Eligible Trials Started On/After 6/1/10 87% Converted to Permanent Modification 4% Pending Processing or Decision 100% 85% 87% 86% 90% 82% 80% Conversion Rate 91% 89% 88% 81% 60% 40% 20% 0% Bank of America CitiMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential JPMorgan Chase Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Chart depicts conversion rates as measured against trials eligible to convert – those three months in trial, or four months if the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. Trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current servicer’s population. 1 14 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Select Measures of Homeowners’ Experience with MHA Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline Volume1 Program to Date January Total Number of Calls Taken at 1-888-995-HOPE 3,621,105 61,475 Borrowers Referred for Free Housing Counseling Assistance Through the Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline 1,747,503 29,878 Selected Homeowner Outreach Measures Program to Date Homeowner Outreach Events Hosted Nationally by Treasury and Partners (cumulative) Homeowners Attending Treasury-Sponsored Events (cumulative) 1 Source: Homeowner’s HOPETM Hotline. Numbers reflect calls that resulted in customer records. Source: Survey data provided by SPA servicers. Servicers are encouraged by HAMP to solicit information from borrowers 60+ days delinquent, regardless of eligibility for a HAMP modification. 2 81 71,521 Servicer Solicitation of Borrowers (cumulative)2 9,047,090 Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (January 2013) 2,518,462 Page views on MakingHomeAffordable.gov (cumulative) 165,500,471 Servicer Time to Resolve Non-GSE Escalations: Average Resolution Time by Quarter in Which Escalations were Resolved1 Servicers are required to resolve borrower inquiries and disputes that are escalated by the MHA Support Centers. Escalated cases include allegations that the servicer did not properly assess the homeowner according to program guidelines, inappropriately denied the homeowner for applicable MHA program(s), or initiated or continued inappropriate foreclosure actions. Effective February 1, 2011, the servicers are directed to review and resolve non-GSE escalated cases within 30 calendar days from receipt of the case by the escalating party. Over the last three quarters, all of the nine largest servicers’ non-GSE resolved cases have an average resolution time at or below the 30 day target. Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Current QTD Target: 30 Calendar Days2 35 30 Days 25 20 15 10 5 0 Bank of America GSE Cases Resolved Cases3 Non-GSE Cases Total Active Cases Total CitiMortgage Bank of America 6,893 8,504 15,397 183 GMAC Homeward Residential CitiMortgage GMAC 1,046 761 1,807 8 424 661 1,085 10 JPMorgan Chase Homeward Residential 53 1,219 1,272 14 JPMorgan Chase 2,270 3,551 5,821 41 Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo Ocwen OneWest SPS Wells Fargo 254 2,004 2,258 10 556 764 1,320 8 9 323 332 8 1,806 3,692 5,498 54 1 Non-GSE escalations only; excludes cases escalated to the MHA Support Centers but not yet escalated to servicers. Average resolution time calculation excludes cases referred to servicers prior to February 1, 2011, 'Investor denial' cases referred to servicers between February 1, 2011 and November 1, 2011, cases involving bankruptcy, and cases that did not require servicer actions. 2 Target of 30 calendar days includes an estimated 5 days of processing by MHA Support Centers. 3 Resolved cases include all escalations resolved on or after February 1, 2011 through January 31, 2013 and exclude those that did not require servicer actions. Source: MHA Support Centers. 15 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Disposition Path Homeowners in Canceled HAMP Trial Modifications Survey Data Through December 2012 (Largest Servicers) Status of Homeowners Whose HAMP Trial Modification Was Canceled: Action Pending1 Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process Borrower Current Alternative Modification Payment Plan2 Loan Payoff Short Sale/ Deed-in-Lieu Foreclosure Starts Foreclosure Completions Total Bank of America, N.A. 5,246 4,019 13,357 55,854 1,109 7,697 22,151 11,334 37,384 158,151 CitiMortgage Inc. 1,683 6,435 6,759 26,421 1,831 3,848 6,308 3,594 11,866 68,745 GMAC Mortgage, LLC 331 281 990 7,124 19 804 1,529 1,362 2,593 15,033 Homeward Residential, Inc. 154 117 805 2,819 96 833 425 702 85 6,036 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 4,223 3,405 21,286 40,799 1,618 2,547 15,512 11,287 15,429 116,106 Ocwen Loan Services, LLC 2,499 2,080 2,763 25,336 2,787 841 1,538 6,400 5,122 49,366 844 648 607 6,273 539 142 2,196 3,242 5,855 20,346 Select Portfolio Servicing 3,183 539 1,930 7,184 249 369 2,280 2,212 4,793 22,739 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 1,072 4,616 8,936 39,586 672 9,552 8,785 14,488 27,763 115,470 19,235 22,140 57,433 211,396 8,920 26,633 60,724 54,621 110,890 571,992 3.4% 3.9% 10.0% 37.0% 1.6% 4.7% 10.6% 9.5% 19.4% 100% Servicer OneWest Bank TOTAL (These Largest Servicers) Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through December 31, 2012. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Trial loans that have been canceled, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. Note: Excludes cancellations pending data corrections and loans otherwise removed from servicing portfolios. See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 16 Making Home Affordable: Servicer Results Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Disposition Path Homeowners Not Accepted for HAMP Trial Modifications Survey Data Through December 2012 (Largest Servicers) Status of Homeowners Not Accepted for a HAMP Trial Modification: Action Pending1 Action Not Allowed – Bankruptcy in Process Borrower Current Alternative Modification Payment Plan2 Loan Payoff Short Sale/ Deed-in-Lieu Foreclosure Starts Foreclosure Completions Total Bank of America, N.A. 13,702 11,793 74,951 119,288 4,612 28,345 47,642 30,470 70,998 401,801 CitiMortgage Inc. 8,350 17,462 26,785 62,246 8,232 7,810 21,759 12,060 26,136 190,840 GMAC Mortgage, LLC 7,096 4,313 37,429 54,964 1,020 13,746 16,033 13,185 20,453 168,239 Homeward Residential, Inc. 2,198 2,093 18,996 48,738 1,548 8,194 4,213 9,769 1,201 96,950 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 20,402 16,557 135,591 151,503 9,885 69,777 73,146 45,923 42,185 564,969 Ocwen Loan Services, LLC 8,110 6,172 25,174 115,996 9,387 6,145 7,129 17,829 16,026 211,968 OneWest Bank 6,168 3,350 35,364 28,684 4,059 5,322 9,586 11,727 16,892 121,152 Select Portfolio Servicing 4,654 566 4,812 4,446 275 582 3,007 1,842 3,257 23,441 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 15,011 10,899 57,920 49,503 1,451 23,212 35,938 29,463 36,998 260,395 85,691 73,205 417,022 635,368 40,469 163,133 218,453 172,268 234,146 2,039,755 4.2% 3.6% 20.4% 31.1% 2.0% 8.0% 10.7% 8.4% 11.5% 100.0% Servicer TOTAL (These Largest Servicers) Note: Data is as reported by servicers for actions completed through December 31, 2012. Survey data is not subject to the same data quality checks as data uploaded into the HAMP system of record. 1 Homeowners who were not approved for a HAMP trial modification, but no further action has yet been taken. 2 An arrangement with the borrower and servicer that does not involve a formal loan modification. Note: Excludes loans removed from servicing portfolios. See Appendix A1 and A2 for additional information on servicer participants in Making Home Affordable programs. 17 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview Background Since the Making Home Affordable Program’s (MHA) inception in the spring of 2009, Treasury has monitored the performance of participating mortgage servicers. Treasury has been publicly reporting information about servicer performance through two types of data: compliance data, which reflects servicer compliance with specific MHA guidelines; and program results data, which reflects how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible homeowners and report program activity. When MHA began, most servicers did not have the staff, procedures, or systems in place to respond to the volume of homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages, or to respond to the housing crisis generally. Very few mortgage modifications were even occurring. Treasury sought to get servicers to join MHA and to improve their operations quickly, so as to implement a national mortgage modification program. Through ongoing compliance reviews, Treasury has required participating servicers to take specific actions to improve their servicing processes. While the servicers have improved their performance, they still have more progress to make. Toward that end, Treasury is publishing servicer assessments for the largest servicers participating in MHA. Not only do the assessments provide more transparency to the public about servicer performance in the program, but the assessments are also intended to encourage servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance. Servicer participation in MHA is voluntary, based on a contract with Fannie Mae as financial agent on behalf of Treasury. Although Treasury does not regulate these institutions and does not have the authority to impose fines or penalties, Treasury can, pursuant to the contract, take certain remedial actions against servicers not in compliance with MHA guidelines. Such remedial actions include requiring servicers to correct identified instances of non-compliance, as noted above. In addition, Treasury can implement financial remedies such as withholding incentive payments owed to servicers. Such incentive payments, which are the only payments Treasury makes for the benefit of servicers under the program, include payments for every successful permanent modification under the Home Affordable Modification Program, and payments for completed short sale/deed-in-lieu transactions pursuant to the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative Program. It is important to note that Treasury’s compliance work related to MHA applies only to those servicers that have agreed to participate in MHA for mortgage loans that are not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (Government Sponsored Enterprises, or GSEs). Treasury cannot and does not perform compliance reviews of (1) mortgage loans or activities that fall outside of MHA, (2) GSE loans or (3) those loans insured through the Federal Housing Administration. For each servicer, the loans that are eligible for MHA represent only a portion of that servicer’s overall mortgage servicing operation. Treasury’s foremost goal is to assist struggling homeowners who may be eligible for MHA. These servicer assessments set a new benchmark for providing detailed information about how mortgage servicers are performing against key metrics. But, in addition to this direct effect, MHA has had an important indirect effect on the market as well. MHA has established standards that have improved mortgage modifications across the industry, and has led to important changes in the way mortgage servicers assist struggling homeowners generally. These changes include standards for how mortgage modifications should be designed so that they are sustainable, standards for communications with homeowners so that the process is as efficient and as understandable as possible, and a variety of standards for protecting homeowners, such as prohibitions on “dual tracking” – simultaneously evaluating a homeowner for a modification while proceeding to foreclose. Going forward, Treasury hopes these assessments will also set the standard for transparency about mortgage servicer efforts to assist homeowners. Below are general descriptions of the data, the evaluation process, and the consequences for servicers needing improvement. (Continued on next page) 18 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview The Performance Data: Compliance and Program Results Freddie Mac, acting as Treasury’s compliance agent for MHA, has created a separate division known as Making Home Affordable–Compliance (MHA-C) to evaluate servicer performance through reviews of program compliance. MHAC tests and evaluates a range of servicer activities for compliance with MHA guidelines. Once MHA-C’s reviews are complete, MHA-C shares its results with the servicers and identifies areas that need remediation. Each compliance activity tested falls into one of three overall compliance categories – Identifying and Contacting Homeowners, Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance, and Program Management, Reporting and Governance. The compliance results shared with the servicers are then used to generate the servicer assessments. The assessments highlight particular compliance activities tested by MHA-C that had significant impact on homeowners and include for those highlighted activities a one-star, two-star, or three-star rating for the most recent evaluations. One star means the servicer did not meet Treasury’s benchmark required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs substantial improvement in its performance of that activity. Two stars mean the servicer did not meet Treasury’s benchmark required for that particular activity, and the servicer needs moderate improvement in its performance of that activity. Three stars mean the servicer met Treasury’s benchmark required for that particular activity, but the servicer may nonetheless need minor improvement in its performance of that activity. Although the compliance reviews emphasize objective measurements and observed facts, compliance reviews still involve a certain level of judgment. Compliance reviews are also retrospective in nature – looking backward, not forward, which means that activities identified as needing improvement in a given quarter may already be under remediation by the servicer. In addition, not every compliance activity is evaluated every quarter, which means that a rating from one quarter might carry forward to the subsequent quarter’s assessment if that activity was not retested in that subsequent quarter. Finally, the compliance reviews use “sampling” as a testing methodology. Sampling, an industry-accepted auditing technique, looks at a subset of a particular population of activity transactions, rather than the entirety of the population of activity transactions, to extrapolate a servicer’s overall performance in that particular activity. In addition to the ratings for compliance data, the assessments also include program results metrics. Fannie Mae, acting as Treasury’s program administrator for MHA, collects servicer data used to measure program results. These metrics are key indicators of how timely and effectively servicers assist eligible homeowners under MHA guidelines and report program data. Although the servicers are not given an overall rating for this data, the results metrics nonetheless compare a servicer’s performance for a given quarter against the “best” and “worst” performing servicer of the largest servicers participating in the program. The results metrics provide a snapshot of how each of those servicers compares in specific areas under MHA. The Determination Process: Results of the Data Treasury reviews the compliance data and ratings, the program results metrics, and other relevant factors affecting servicer performance (including, but not limited to, a servicer’s progress in implementing previously identified improvements) in determining whether a servicer needs substantial improvement, moderate improvement, or minor improvement to its performance under MHA guidelines. The assessments summarize the significant factors impacting those decisions. Based on those assessments, Treasury may take remedial action against servicers. Page 20 summarizes the overall level of improvement needed for each servicer. Consequences for Servicers For servicers in need of substantial improvement, Treasury will, absent extenuating circumstances, withhold financial incentives owed to those servicers until they make certain identified improvements. In certain cases, particularly where there is a failure to correct identified problems within a reasonable time, Treasury may also permanently reduce the financial incentives. Servicers in need of moderate improvement may be subject to withholding in the future if they fail to make certain identified improvements. All withholdings apply only to incentives owed to servicers for their participation in MHA; these withholdings do not apply to incentives paid to servicers for the benefit of homeowners or investors. Additional Information See the “Metrics Description” on page 43 for a description of each of the compliance and results metrics presented in the assessments. For more information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov. 19 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview 4th Quarter 2012 Servicer Assessment Results The following table details the results of the Servicer Assessments, based on compliance and program results: Improvement Needed Servicer Name Substantial Moderate Minor Bank of America, N.A. CitiMortgage, Inc. Homeward Residential, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Select Portfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. GMAC Mortgage, LLC OneWest Bank For the fourth quarter of 2012, GMAC Mortgage and OneWest Bank were determined to need minor improvement in their performance under MHA guidelines. Select Portfolio Servicing was determined to need moderate improvement and their compliance results for the fourth quarter approached the level required for a determination of minor improvement. Bank of America, N.A., Homeward Residential, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. were also found to need moderate improvement. Please refer to the following MHA Servicer Assessment pages for further detail on the Fourth Quarter 2012 servicer assessment results. 20 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Disagree, 4th Quarter 20101-4th Quarter 2012 Second Look % Disagree: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer’s MHA determination. Treasury’s benchmark is that the second look % disagree must be less than 4%. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment. Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% Benchmark: 4% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 *Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 21 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Second Look % Unable to Determine, 4th Quarter 2010-4th Quarter 2012 Second Look % Unable to Determine: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer’s MHA determination. Treasury’s benchmark is that the second look % unable to determine must be less than 10%. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment. Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average 30% 25% 20% Benchmark: 10% 15% 10% 5% 0% 4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 *Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. 2Q 2012 3Q 2012 4Q 2012 22 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: Income Calculation Error %, 4th Quarter 2010-4th Quarter 2012 Income Calculation Error %: Percentage of loans for which MHA-C’s income calculation differs from the servicer’s by more than 5%. Treasury’s benchmark is that the income calculation error % must be less than 5%. Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an accurate modification payment. The first servicer assessment results published by Treasury covered the first quarter of 2011. The chart shows the change in performance from the quarter preceding the first published assessments (fourth quarter of 2010) through the most recent assessment. Bank of America CitMortgage GMAC Homeward Residential JPMorgan Chase Litton* Ocwen One West Select Porfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Average 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% Benchmark: 5% 10% 5% 0% 4Q10 1Q11 2Q11 3Q11 4Q11 1Q12 *Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 23 MHA Servicer Assessment Overview MHA Compliance Results, Loan File Review: 4th Quarter 2010–4th Quarter 2012 Second Look % Disagree1 Second Look % Unable to Determine2 Q4 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q4 2010 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Q4 2010 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Bank of America, N.A. 2.4% 1.5% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 1.2% 1.3% 19.6% 18.8% 8.2% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 22.0% 22.0% 13.2% 6.0% 6.0% 5.0% 2.0% 3.0% 1.0% CitiMortgage, Inc. 4.0% 2.0% 0.5% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.0% 6.7% 12.3% 13.3% 5.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 3.8% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 6.0% 3.0% 4.0% 1.0% 3.1% 0.0% GMAC Mortgage, LLC 4.0% 4.7% 1.7% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.3% 2.0% 22.7% 8.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 29.0% 6.0% 4.2% 4.2% 6.5% 4.0% 6.0% 10.0% 4.0% Homeward Residential, Inc. 5.3% 1.0% 0.7% 0.0% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 29.3% 5.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.5% 1.3% 1.3% 30.0% 14.0% 5.3% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 4.0% 7.0% JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3.9% 1.6% 1.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 16.0% 11.3% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.4% 3.8% 31.0% 31.0% 20.6% 6.0% 10.0% 9.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% Litton Loan Servicing, LP4 6.0% 3.7% 3.3% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.7% 2.7% 2.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.0% 2.0% 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 6.3% 6.7% 2.7% 0.0% 0.7% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 24.7% 10.3% 3.0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 18.0% 33.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% OneWest Bank 4.7% 6.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.3% 3.7% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 11.0% 11.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.0% Select Portfolio Servicing 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2.0% 17.0% 2.3% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.7% 22.0% 15.0% 10.0% 3.2% 1.0% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.8 1.7% 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 1.0% 1.3% 3.0% 6.8% 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 1.0% 0.5% 27.0% 27.0% 4.4% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 1.5% Servicer Q1 2011 Income Calculation Error Rate3 6.3% 6.0% Q1 2011 6.0% Q2 2011 5.5% 1 Second Look % Disagree: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer’s MHA determination. Unable to Determine: Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer’s MHA determination. 3 Income Calculation Error %: Percentage of loans for which MHA-C’s income calculation differs from the servicer’s by more than 5%. 4 Effective November 1, 2011 Litton Loan Servicing, LP transferred its loan portfolio to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. 2 Second Look % 24 MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, N.A. Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 1.3% < 10% 0.0% - < 5% 1.0% - < 5% 0.2% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed Bank of America, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, Bank of America, N.A. servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 25 MHA Servicer Assessment: Bank of America, N.A. Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance Bank of America, N.A. 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Bank of America, N.A. Worst Servicer Performance 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases 7 6 7 Best Servicer Performance 26 24 24 20 30 83.7% 83.0% 84.5% 75% Sep. 2012 Dec. 2012 80% 85% 90% 95% Missing Modification Status Reports (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 1.2% 2.2% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Bank of America, N.A. 33 32 31 Worst Servicer Performance 10 70% Best Servicer Performance Bank of America, N.A. 0 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 26 MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc. Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 6.7% < 10% 6.0% - < 5% 0.0% - < 5% 0.5% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed CitiMortgage, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, CitiMortgage, Inc. servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 27 MHA Servicer Assessment: CitiMortgage, Inc. Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 29.4% 26.6% 25.5% CitiMortgage, Inc. 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 24 24 23 33 32 31 10 20 75% 30 80% 85% 90% 95% 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 Dec. 2012 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CitiMortgage, Inc. Worst Servicer Performance Sep. 2012 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Best Servicer Performance CitiMortgage, Inc. 0 70% June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance 85.1% 86.5% 86.8% CitiMortgage, Inc. 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 28 MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 2.0% < 10% 0.0% - < 5% 4.0% - < 5% 1.4% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results GMAC Mortgage, LLC has areas requiring minor improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated 29 MHA Servicer Assessment: GMAC Mortgage, LLC Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: Best Servicer Performance 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance GMAC Mortgage, LLC 2.9% 2.1% 1.0% GMAC Mortgage, LLC 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 33 32 31 0 10 20 30 75% Dec. 2012 80% 85% 90% 95% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 Sep. 2012 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) GMAC Mortgage, LLC Worst Servicer Performance June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% 70% Best Servicer Performance 12 13 13 GMAC Mortgage, LLC 83.7% 85.5% 85.1% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 30 MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, Inc. Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 0.0% < 10% 1.3% - < 5% 7.0% - < 5% 1.3% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed Homeward Residential, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, Homeward Residential, Inc. servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 31 MHA Servicer Assessment: Homeward Residential, Inc. Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 6.2% 10.1% 12.2% Homeward Residential, Inc. 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 31 29 29 Homeward Residential, Inc. 33 32 31 Worst Servicer Performance 10 20 30 75% Dec. 2012 80% 85% 90% 95% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.4% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 Sep. 2012 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Best Servicer Performance Homeward Residential, Inc. 0 70% June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance 89.3% 89.4% 89.2% Homeward Residential, Inc. Worst Servicer Performance 0% 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 32 MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 0.2% < 10% 3.8% - < 5% 0.0% - < 5% 1.8% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 33 MHA Servicer Assessment: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 10.4% 5.2% 6.3% JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 70% Best Servicer Performance 33 32 31 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Worst Servicer Performance 33 32 31 Worst Servicer Performance 10 20 30 40 Sep. 2012 Dec. 2012 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% Missing Modification Status Reports (%) JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 0 June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance 86.9% 87.7% 88.6% JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Worst Servicer Performance 0% 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.6% 11.2% 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 34 MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 0.0% < 10% 0.0% - < 5% 0.0% - < 5% 0.0% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 35 MHA Servicer Assessment: Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 14.0% 12.3% 11.9% Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases 7 6 7 Best Servicer Performance 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% 70% 33 32 31 10 75% 20 30 85% Sep. 2012 Dec. 2012 90% 95% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.2% 1.0% 1.0% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 80% June 20121 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Worst Servicer Performance 0 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC Best Servicer Performance 9 9 10 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the June 2012 reporting period increased as the result of approximately 6,550 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials. 36 MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed 0.0% < 10% 1.3% - < 5% 1.0% - < 5% 0.1% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results OneWest Bank has areas requiring minor improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated 37 MHA Servicer Assessment: OneWest Bank Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 3.0% 6.7% 9.3% OneWest Bank 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 15 14 14 OneWest Bank 33 32 31 Worst Servicer Performance 0 10 20 30 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% OneWest Bank 88.7% 90.3% 91.5% 70% 75% Sep. 2012 Dec. 2012 80% 85% 90% 95% Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Best Servicer Performance 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% OneWest Bank 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 38 MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 2.0% < 10% 0.7% - < 5% 2.0% - < 5% 0.5% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. servicer incentives Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 39 MHA Servicer Assessment: Select Portfolio Servicing Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance Best Servicer Performance 2.3% Select Portfolio Servicing 16.1% Select Portfolio Servicing 27.4% 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% Worst Servicer Performance 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 70% 7 6 7 Best Servicer Performance Select Portfolio Servicing 7 6 7 Select Portfolio Servicing 0 10 20 30 75% Dec. 2012 80% 85% 90% 95% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 22.8% 1.9% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 89.4% Sep. 20121 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Best Servicer Performance 33 32 31 June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Worst Servicer Performance 82.9% 82.2% 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 1Select Portfolio Servicing received transferred loans that impacted its program results. The percent of missing modification status reports for the September 2012 reporting period increased as the result of approximately 5,540 transferred loans. In addition, the transfer of loans resulted in a decrease in the conversion rate and an increase in the aged trials as a percentage of active trials. 40 MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Compliance Results Overview These metrics reflect the results of compliance reviews of the servicer's adherence to MHA Program Requirements. Quantitative results reflect percentages of tests that did not have a desired outcome. Servicers are rated qualitatively on the effectiveness of their internal control in the three Performance Categories as well as for each quantitative result. Fourth Quarter 2012 Performance Category Identifying and Contacting Homeowners Metric Second Look % Disagree Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C did not concur with the servicer's MHA determination Assesses whether the servicer identifies and communicates appropriately with potentially eligible MHA homeowners. Second Look % Unable to Determine Percentage of loans reviewed where MHA-C was not able to conclude on the servicer's MHA determination Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance Assesses whether servicer correctly evaluates homeowners' eligibility for MHA programs, communicates decisions in a timely manner, and accurately executes appropriate MHA activities. Program Management, Reporting, and Governance Assesses whether the servicer has effective program management, governance processes, and timely and correct submission of program reports and program information. Internal Controls for Program Management, Reporting, and Governance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Legend 3.0% < 10% 0.5% - < 5% 1.5% - < 5% 0.4% - Incentive Payment Data Errors Average percentage of difference in calculated incentives resulting from data discrepancies between servicer files and the MHA system of record < 4% Internal Controls for Homeowner Evaluation and Assistance MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Rating Income Calculation Error % Percentage of loans for which MHA-C's income calculation differs from the servicer's by more than 5% Servicer Result Internal Controls for Identifying and Contacting Homeowners MHA-C assesses whether servicer business processes are conducted effectively and in accordance with MHA guidelines Benchmark Q4 Results Did not meet benchmark; substantial improvement needed Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has areas requiring moderate improvement. Did not meet benchmark; moderate improvement needed After considering all relevant factors, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. servicer incentives will Met benchmark; minor improvement may be indicated not be withheld at this time. 41 MHA Servicer Assessment: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Program Results Conversion Rate for Trials Started On or After 6/1/2010 Aged Trials as a Percentage of Active Trials Results as of: 2.3% 2.1% 1.0% Best Servicer Performance 8.0% 11.0% 13.8% Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 39.7% 35.7% 40.5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 7 6 7 24 25 25 10 20 30 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 0.1% 0.1% 2.7% 11.2% Worst Servicer Performance 40 Dec. 2012 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 33 32 31 Worst Servicer Performance Sep. 2012 Missing Modification Status Reports (%) Best Servicer Performance Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 0 70% June 2012 79.6% 79.9% 82.0% Worst Servicer Performance Average Calendar Days to Resolve Escalated Cases Best Servicer Performance 89.7% 89.3% 88.7% Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Worst Servicer Performance 0% 89.7% 90.3% 91.5% Best Servicer Performance 22.8% 2.7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: The best and worst performance reflect the best and worst result of the largest servicers for the period. See appendix for descriptions of the metrics. 42 MHA Servicer Assessment Metrics Descriptions Appendix Incentive Payment Data Errors: Treasury pays incentives to servicers, investors, and homeowners for permanent modifications completed under MHA. Although Compliance Metrics (quantitative) intended for different recipients, all incentives are paid Second Look % Disagree: Second Look is a process in through the servicer. Data that servicers upload to the which MHA-C reviews loans not in a permanent program system of record is used to calculate the modification, to assess the accuracy of the servicer’s incentives paid to servicers, investors, and homeowners. determination of whether the homeowner is eligible for This metric measures how data anomalies between a modification. This metric measures the percentage of servicer loan files and the reported information affect loans reviewed in Second Look with which MHA-C incentive payments. For Incentive Payment Data Error disagrees with a servicer’s determination. results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: correcting the Second Look % Unable to Determine: This metric identified errors and correcting system and operational measures the percentage of loans reviewed in Second processes such that accurate data is mapped to its Look for which MHA-C is not able to determine, based appropriate places in the program system of record. on the documentation provided, how the servicer reached its loan-modification decision. Compliance Metrics (qualitative) For both Second Look Disagree and Unable to Determine Servicers establish processes and internal controls to results, remedial actions Treasury requires servicers to help ensure their compliance with Program guidance. take include, but are not limited to: reevaluating loans For each of the performance categories, Treasury not offered HAMP modifications, submitting additional performs a qualitative assessment of those internal documentation to support the initial reason for denial of controls based on MHA-C’s compliance reviews. That the modification, clarifying loan status, and engaging in assessment evaluates the nature, scope, and potential or systemic process remediation. For such results, servicers actual impact on homeowners resulting from instances are also reminded of their obligation to suspend of servicer non-compliance with its own internal foreclosure of the loan until the unresolved items are controls. For ineffective internal controls, remedial remediated. actions Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not limited to: identifying and reevaluating any Income Calculation Errors: Correctly calculating homeowner monthly income is a critical component of affected loans, enhancing the effectiveness of internal evaluating eligibility for MHA, as well as establishing an controls, and conducting staff training on servicer procedures. accurate modification payment. This metric measures how often MHA-C disagrees with a servicer’s calculation of a borrower’s Monthly Gross Income, allowing for up Program Metrics to a 5% differential from MHA-C’s calculations. For Conversion Rate: This cumulative metric looks at the rate Income Calculation Error results, remedial actions of conversion to permanent modification for trials Treasury requires servicers to take include, but are not started on or after June 1, 2010, when all servicers were limited to: correcting income errors exceeding the 5% required to verify income documentation at trial start. differential, requiring the servicer to review their own Conversion rate is measured against all trials eligible to income calculation accuracy, enhancing policies and convert – those three months in trial, or four months if procedures, and conducting staff training on income the borrower was at risk of imminent default at trial calculation. modification start. Permanent modifications transferred among servicers are credited to the originating servicer. However, trial modifications transferred are reflected in the current servicer's population. A servicer's conversion rate can be negatively impacted by the transfer of trial modifications. Aged Trials as % of Active Trials: This monthly metric measures trials lasting six months or longer as a share of all active trials. These figures include trial modifications that have been converted to permanent modifications by the servicer and are pending reporting to the program system of record, plus some portion which may be canceled. Days to Resolve Escalated Cases: This cumulative metric measures servicer response time for homeowner inquiries escalated to MHA Support Centers. Effective Feb. 1, 2011, a target of 30 calendar days was established for non-GSE escalation cases, including an estimated 5 days processing by the MHA Support Centers. The methodology for calculating average days to respond to escalated cases was updated to only include non-GSE cases escalated on or after 2/1/2011. The figures exclude investor denial cases escalated prior to 11/1/2011. Cases involving bankruptcy and those that did not require servicer actions are not included in the calculation of servicer time to resolve escalations. % of Missing Modification Status Reports: This monthly metric measures the servicer’s ability to promptly report on modification status. Inconsistent and untimely reporting of modification status reports may impact incentive compensation and loan performance analysis. Treasury revised its Federally Declared Disaster (FDD) guidance, allowing servicers to suspend OMR reporting for loans where the homeowner was impacted by Hurricane Sandy or any other FDD. This guidance may impact missing OMR reporting. For more information on the assessments, please visit: www.FinancialStability.gov. 43 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Appendix A1: Non-GSE Participants in HAMP Servicers participating in the HAMP First Lien Modification Program may also offer additional support for homeowners, including Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA), a forbearance for unemployed borrowers through the Unemployment Program (UP), and Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA). Effective October 3, 2010, the ability to make new financial commitments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) terminated, and consequently no new Servicer Participation Agreements may be executed. In addition, effective June 25, 2010, no new housing programs may be created under TARP. Allstate Mortgage Loans & Investments, Inc. AMS Servicing, LLC Aurora Loan Services, LLC Bank of America, N.A.1 Bank United Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC CCO Mortgage Central Florida Educators Federal Credit Union CitiMortgage, Inc. Citizens 1st National Bank Community Bank & Trust Company CUC Mortgage Corporation DuPage Credit Union Fay Servicing, LLC Fidelity Homestead Savings Bank First Bank First Financial Bank, N.A. Franklin Credit Management Corporation Franklin Savings Glass City Federal Credit Union GMAC Mortgage, LLC Great Lakes Credit Union Greater Nevada Mortgage Services Green Tree Servicing LLC Hartford Savings Bank Hillsdale County National Bank HomEq Servicing Homeward Residential, Inc.2 Horicon Bank IC Federal Credit Union Idaho Housing and Finance Association iServe Residential Lending LLC iServe Servicing Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.3 Lake City Bank Liberty Bank and Trust Co. Los Alamos National Bank Magna Bank Marix Servicing, LLC Midland Mortgage Company Midwest Community Bank Mission Federal Credit Union Mortgage Center, LLC Nationstar Mortgage, LLC Navy Federal Credit Union Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC4 Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 Formerly American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. 3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 4 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP. 5 Formerly National City Bank. 6 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage, FSB. OneWest Bank ORNL Federal Credit Union Pathfinder Bank PennyMac Loan Services, LLC PNC Bank, National Association PNC Mortgage5 Purdue Employees Federal Credit Union QLending, Inc. Quantum Servicing Corporation Residential Credit Solutions RG Mortgage Corporation RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing Corporation Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. Schools Financial Credit Union Select Portfolio Servicing Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc. ShoreBank Silver State Schools Credit Union Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC Sterling Savings Bank Technology Credit Union The Golden 1 Credit Union U.S. Bank National Association United Bank United Bank Mortgage Corporation Vantium Capital, Inc. Vist Financial Corp. Wealthbridge Mortgage Corp. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.6 Yadkin Valley Bank 1 44 Making Home Affordable Program Performance Report Through January 2013 Appendix A2: Participants in Additional Making Home Affordable Programs Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) Bank of America, N.A.1 Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC CitiMortgage, Inc. GMAC Mortgage, LLC Green Tree Servicing LLC iServe Residential Lending, LLC iServe Servicing, Inc. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2 Nationstar Mortgage LLC OneWest Bank PennyMac Loan Services, LLC PNC Bank, National Association PNC Mortgage 3 Residential Credit Solutions Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4 FHA First Lien Program (Treasury FHA-HAMP) Amarillo National Bank American Financial Resources Inc. Aurora Financial Group, Inc. Aurora Loan Services, LLC Banco Popular de Puerto Rico Bank of America, N.A.1 Capital International Financial, Inc. CitiMortgage, Inc. CU Mortgage Services, Inc. First Federal Bank of Florida First Mortgage Corporation Franklin Savings Gateway Mortgage Group, LLC GMAC Mortgage, LLC. Green Tree Servicing, LLC Guaranty Bank iServe Residential Lending, LLC iServe Servicing, Inc. James B. Nutter & Company JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2 M&T Bank Marix Servicing, LLC Marsh Associates, Inc. Midland Mortgage Company Nationstar Mortgage ,LLC Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC 5 PennyMac Loan Services, LLC PNC Mortgage 3 RBC Bank (USA) Residential Credit Solutions Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. Schmidt Mortgage Company Select Portfolio Servicing Servis One Inc., dba BSI Financial Services, Inc. Stockman Bank of Montana Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.4 Weststar Mortgage, Inc. GMAC Mortgage, LLC Green Tree Servicing, LLC JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2 Nationstar Mortgage LLC PNC Bank, National Association PNC Mortgage 3 Residential Credit Solutions Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. Select Portfolio Servicing Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 4 Rural Housing Service Modification Program (RD-HAMP) Banco Popular de Puerto Rico Bank of America, N.A.1 Horicon Bank JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.2 Magna Bank Marix Servicing, LLC Midland Mortgage Company Nationstar Mortgage LLC Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.4 FHA Second Lien Program (FHA 2LP) Bank of America, N.A.1 Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC CitiMortgage, Inc. Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation Bank of America, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, Home Loan Services and Wilshire Credit Corporation. 2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under EMC Mortgage Corporation. 3 Formerly National City Bank. 4 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. includes all loans previously reported under Wachovia Mortgage FSB. 5 Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC includes Litton Loan Servicing LP 1 45
@FedFRASER