24 C.F.R. § 203.501
Loss mitigation
Mortgagees must consider the comparative effects of their elective servicing actions, and must take those appropriate actions which can reasonably be expected to generate the smallest financial loss to the Department. Such actions include, but are not limited to, deeds in lieu of foreclosure under § 203.357, pre-foreclosure sales under § 203.370, partial claims under § 203.414, assumptions under § 203.512, special forbearance under §§ 203.471 and 203.614, and recasting of mortgages under § 203.616. HUD may prescribe conditions and requirements for the appropriate use of these loss mitigation actions, concerning such matters as owner-occupancy, extent of previous defaults, prior use of loss mitigation, and evaluation of the mortgagor's income, credit and property.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2003–2024 · leading case: Bank of Am. v. Arlington West Twilight Hoa, 920 F.3d 620 (9th Cir. 2019).
Bank of Am. v. Arlington West Twilight Hoa, 920 F.3d 620 (9th Cir. 2019). “3d at 906–08; 24 C.F.R. §§ 203.501 , 291.1(a)(2). The Nevada statutory scheme does not conflict with these goals.”
Wells Fargo Home Mortg., Inc. v. Neal, 922 A.2d 538 (Md. 2007). “This is logical in light of the fact that HUD, by guaranteeing the mortgages under the program, has a considerable stake in the administration of the insured mortgages.”
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Lorson, 192 A.3d 439 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018). “The defendants argue that the plaintiff failed to establish compliance with several HUD regulations, including 24 C.F.R. §§ 203.501 , 203.605 (a), 203.614 and 203.”
Campbell v. Bank of Am., N.A., 141 So. 3d 492 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012). “’ 24 C.F.R. § 203.501 . The emphasis on reducing the possible losses to HUD, rather than the mortgagor, demonstrates that the regulations exist primarily to govern the relationship between the government and the mortgagee.”
Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Las Vegas Dev. Grp., LLC, 106 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Nev. 2015). “gov/hudporta]/HUD?src=/ program_offices/administration/hudclips/ letters/mortgagee/2002ml (emphasis added).”
Buis v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 401 F. Supp. 2d 612 (N.D. Tex. 2005). “Wells Fargo removed this action to federal court on March 21, 2005, contending that “[rjemoval is proper based on grounds of federal question jurisdiction” because Buis has “asserted claims pursuant to 24 CFR 203.501 and 24 CFR 203.604-606, which could have been originally filed…”
Flagstar Bank, FSB v. Walker, 37 Misc. 3d 312 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2012). “; see also 24 CFR 203.501 [“Mortgagees must consider the comparative effects of their elective servicing actions, and must take those appropriate actions which can reasonably be expected to generate the smallest financial loss to the Department”].”
PNC Bank, N.A. v. Hoornaar, 44 F. Supp. 3d 846 (E.D. Wis. 2014). “Part 203, specifically 24 C.F.R. § 203.501 , should be declared to apply as a servicing standard for servicing his loan.”
Martinez v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 777 F. Supp. 2d 1039 (W.D. Tex. 2010). “616; See 24 C.F.R. § 203.501 . • Make reasonable efforts to arrange or hold a face-to-face interview with the homeowner before three monthly installments on the mortgage are unpaid; 24 C.”
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Lorson, 341 Conn. 430 (Conn. 2021). “’’ 24 C.F.R. § 203.501 (2011). To ensure uniform advancement of these goals, it is the policy of HUD that lenders participating in the program must use the mortgage and note forms that HUD promulgates, which contain the compliance provisions.”
Principal Residential Mortg. Corp. v. Curtis, 61 Va. Cir. 151 (2003). “1715u(a); also see 24 C.F.R. 203.501. The argument is made, however, in a context that includes the following stipulated facts.”
GMAC Mortg., LLC v. Dyer, 965 N.E.2d 762 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “In addition, 24 C.F.R. § 203.501 (2011) provides that "[m]ortgagees must consider the comparative effects of their elective servicing actions, and must take those appropriate actions which can reasonably be expected to generate the smallest financial loss to the Department.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.