hamp modifications or, as you are aware primero the payment reduction plan. hamp has three false. first, the gentry team to make the modification is a mortgage servicer rather than originator. second, it only considers the first mortgage payment taxes and insurance. it does not consider the bar were still financial circumstances. a third and most importantly the program does not emphasize the three amplification of the bar were. what can and should be done? here are some imperatives. first there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the modifications. second, moving principal reduction hi year in the hamp modification waterfall will be the most natural way to raise the success of the modification program. what investors support this type of program? absolutely. all for the pleasure is devastating to a more work is also devastating to investors because recovery rates are low. the interest of the first we investor and of our work are totally aligned. third, any principal reduction program requires the had been attrition to address the second week problem head-on. fourth, we endorse th

hamp modifications or, as you are aware primero the payment reduction plan. hamp has three false.first, the gentry team to make the modification is a mortgage servicer rather than originator. second, it only considers the first mortgage payment taxes and insurance. it does not consider the bar were still financial circumstances. a third and most importantly the program does not emphasize the three amplification of the bar were. what can and should be done? here are some imperatives. first there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the modifications. second, moving principal reduction hi year in the hamp modification waterfall will be the most natural way to raise the success of the modification program. what investors support this type of program? absolutely. all for the pleasure is devastating to a more work is also devastating to investors because recovery rates are low. the interest of the first we investor and of our work are totally aligned. third, any principal reduction program requires the had been attrition to address the second week problem head-on. fourth, we endorse thr

in addition, 650,000 hamp in process -- 650,000 government hamp modifications are under way. it was interesting is that today, there are 704 actual foreclosure sales this year. but on the scarier note is the foreclosure starts are escalating in the -- and the pipeline of distressed borrowers is very large. it does not answer was going to have been going forward. history may not repeat itself there. you have heard the data. let me say, wrapping up, i concur with tom and debbie, there's a lot of good work going on on how to make sure that one lone does not go to for closure that has not been reviewed properly for any modification. hamp is a voluntary program, but it is illegal contract for all those people that signed up with the treasury. the requirement is that they have to look at those loans that are eligible for hamp. that is a legal contract. it is normally volunteer once they sign up and recover a great part of the market. i am optimistic we will see more on that. i agree that there are task forces, under way -- a task force is under way. i think we have to focus on unem

program, where if hamp is silent or there is no response or the hamp is somehow mysteriously denied, there is some judicial response to review it to see exactly what is going on. and in that context, which is not the same as the 1106 response, it is something different, which is should there be a judicial back stop which is the purview of this committee. and it would be appropriate. >> the two of you agreed that it would make ms. schwartz' program significantly more effective. >> yes. >> no question. >> and that we would see data that in a relatively short period of time would reflect that. >> there is no question that if a modification was requested and there is silence, and there is a backstop to that whether it's a judicial review, then there will be a heavy incentive to participate in the hope program or the hamp program by the servicers and by the investors. they will exercise that right and it will facilitate a resolution to the process. >> and in addition, mr. chairman, at this point with the voluntary programs, there is no two-way dialogue. there is no balance of power. so wh

program, where if hamp is silent or there is no response or the hamp is somehow mysteriously denied,some judicial response to review it to see exactly what is going on. and in that context, which is not the same as the 1106 response, it is something different, which is should there be a judicial back stop which is the purview of this committee. and it would be appropriate. >> the two of you agreed that it would make ms. schwartz' program significantly more effective. >> yes. >> no question. >> and that we would see data that in a relatively short period of time would reflect that. >> there is no question that if a modification was requested and there is silence, and there is a backstop to that whether it's a judicial review, then there will be a heavy incentive to participate in the hope program or the hamp program by the servicers and by the investors. they will exercise that right and it will facilitate a resolution to the process. >> and in addition, mr. chairman, at this point with the voluntary programs, there is no two-way dialogue. there is no balance of power. so whatever --

hamp modifications or, as you are aware primero the payment reduction plan. hamp has three false. rather than originator. second, it only considers the first mortgage payment taxes and insurance. it does not consider the bar were still financial circumstances. a third and most importantly the program does not emphasize the three amplification of the bar were. what can and should be done? here are some imperatives. first there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the modifications. second, moving principal reduction hi year in the hamp modification waterfall will be the most natural way to raise the success of the modification program. what investors support this type of program? absolutely. all for the pleasure is devastating to a more work is also devastating to investors because recovery rates are low. the interest of the first we investor and of our work are totally aligned. third, any principal reduction program requires the had been attrition to address the second week problem head-on. fourth, we endorse three hamp bouck for homeowners programs. fifth, we need more transparenc

the fda supports hamp as part of the solution.n addition, we continue to remain open to new approaches that may be necessary to respond to the scope and changing character of the mortgage problem. our loss share and agreements for failed banks require either the fdic model program or we have to continue to push for responses. for example, we burst temporary forbearance for borrowers that lose their jobs in recession. we also will provide gloucester in finance to support principle breakdance to the guys that values. the ftse's experience has provided a number of lessons learned that we would like to share with the community. i would like to emphasize one key points. laws that make good business sense and help consumers maximize recovery on troubled mortgages. first, and foremost early communication and modification efforts give the best chance of success. success is much for likely if you contact the borrower earlier, give a mod offer and give them on for an experienced delinquency. effective communication with borrowers acquires a

if someone starts the hamp process and then enters bankruptcy, they get kicked out. when you think about it, it does not make a lot of sense. in bankruptcy, what can you do? you can m limit -- eliminates second mortgages, often a source of problem in terms of the debt that people are caring, and also the dead on the property. and you can reduce people's non- mortgage debt. deccan be an anchor -- that can be an anchor dragging people down. the loan modification in the end is a much -- has a much greater chance of success. we're reaching out to people who have trouble and i hope that as a change the administration will make. a couple of suggestions about things that hamp is not designed to do but we think it's important to bring this crisis to close. , bringing stability back to the housing market into the economy. one is that lost mitigation, the effort of servicers working together with far worse to bring together to find a way to make this affordable. we're borrowers cannot make mortgage payments, they should be able to sit down with their servicer and work out a pa

let's talk about no borrower goes to foreclosure without review for hamp mods. >> they do. >> i hear you, but i don't know the me tricks, it's hard to respond to all of that. i see the metrics of the people getting work out, some in process and those who didn't go into foreclosure because they're in process of review. i'm sure you're right. let's get into more detail and facts and proper controls into place so that doesn't happen. >> i agree with you. but i don't think we have the time. >> go in a room and figure that out. >> i mean that respectfully. >> and i just think that we need that -- i don't want to use the word stick. i want that option available to leverage so that the kind of suggestions or recommendations that you make because i know how slow the decision-making process is whether it's here in the u.s. congress or in any agency or bureaucracy and there is interagency review and all of that other stuff that we're going to find ourselves next september looking like it's 2008 rather than 2010. that's my fear. >> mr. chairman, there is a vast gulf between where mortgages cann