H.R.3609 - Emergency Home Ownership and Mortgage Equity Protection Act of 2007

To amend title 11 of the United States Code with respect to modification of certain mortgages on principal residences, and for other purposes. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To amend title 11 of the United States Code with respect to modification of certain mortgages on principal residences, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Emergency Home Ownership and Mortgage Equity Protection Act of 2007 as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 35 total comments.

  • Anonymous 01/26/2008 10:29am

    HR309 will help people to stay in their home. People who have work hard to pay three times more for their mortgage every month while people who have good credit pay a lot less. For example people with bad credit pay 3,000 month for mortgage while people with good credit pay 1,000 or less. This is unfair. The banks of America have taken advantage of the poor and innocent. If people with bad credit have mortgage that cause 1,000 a month I can tell you now that they would not be in foreclosures. They fight for years paying high interest so that they may have home for their family and when they couldn’t do it anymore the bank refuse to lower their interest rate. The bank claim bankruptcy on home loan all the time. It only fair that the people who have pay for a overprice house and overprice mortgage been able to file bankruptcy too. This will not cause mortgage rate to go up that is a lie that banks or telling people because they do not want to do the right thing. Please pass the bill HR3609 and give the homes back to people who have family and not investor. Everyone should pay the same interest rate for their home as long as they can prove that they have the income for it. Mortgage loan should not be base on credit score but if you can afford it. This law needs to change.

    Thank you, Amen.

  • Anonymous 02/04/2008 1:45am

    Have they pass the bill yet

  • Anonymous 02/04/2008 1:49am

    have they pass the bill yet or when do they think is going to pass

  • Anonymous 02/07/2008 8:21am

    help me save my home. i can make payments now, but when the adjustable kicks in i will not be able to make it.

  • Anonymous 02/07/2008 1:46pm

    What is the status of this bill? My mortagage is about ot reset in 4 months. I hope I have the opportunity to support this bill. We must stand against bad loans which were never explained to us. What was posted before us as we signed up for these bad loans was “look at the low payment” This will afford you the right to purchase a home. Now they are in position to forclose without a second look at us. Pass this bill.

  • Anonymous 02/07/2008 5:43pm

    I support the bill, and believe it would not only help home owners like myself, but the housing market from going any further downward. The bill needs to be passed before my house is goes into foreclosure in a couple of months or so.

  • Anonymous 02/08/2008 4:32am

    I am a victim and I support the bill

  • Anonymous 02/08/2008 4:35am


  • Anonymous 02/13/2008 4:55am

    This bill needs to pass. I heard that Chabot was signed on and is proposing amendments which would make this bill absolutely worthless. The last information from some website would limit the starting date for bad loans to be modified to Jan 2007. Come on! The loans are too recent and should not be in recet condition now.
    Myself, I took out a loan in November 2005. The rates reset December 2007. The payment increase was 44% (From 6.875% to 9.875%). All of the other Republican supported rescue programs so far did not help peole in my circumstance. The legislation wothout damaging amendments is worthwhile. The amendments are harmful to effective legislation and should be scrapped.

  • Anonymous 02/13/2008 4:55pm

    I support the bill, I am a victim of subprime lending and have been forced into bankruptcy because my mortgage company Homecomings Financial would not agree to modifying my loan. I was told I could do a repayment plan that was $200 more than the payment I already could not afford, but the investors would not approve modifying the loan because there was too much “equity?” in the home…

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 01/02/2009 3:14am

    I too am a victim of Homecoming Financial. I am new to researching all of this, but I have just recieved notice that I will be losing my job at the end of January. I called Homecoming to see if I could get my interest rate lowered. I got a straight up NO! I am paying a ridiculous 10.33%. Everything I have looked into so far for Modifying my loan will cost me $1,000 or up. Does anyone have any updated suggestions for me concerning this bill.

  • Anonymous 02/14/2008 1:37am

    I recently found out that the Speaker Nancy Pelosi can put this legislation before the full house. Compose your concerns in an email and contact the Speaker at the following address.

  • Anonymous 02/14/2008 1:45am

    It is a good reason for the Lenders not having exemption with 1322(b)(2) because of the situation the Lender put forward to you. The too much Equity to them translates to me the mortgage company feels they win and you lose. Their greed is a good reason. The whole scam that the lender cares has shown its true concerns.

  • Anonymous 02/19/2008 5:17pm

    There is also s.2136 which is being presented in the Senate which is similar to this bill originated by Richard Durbin. It is being co-sponsored by several Senators of well known stature. Hopefully this legislation or HR 3609 get passed soon. In order of the date they co-sponsored the legislation.
    Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] – 10/3/2007
    Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] – 10/16/2007
    Sen Obama, Barack [IL] – 10/23/2007
    Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] – 10/29/2007
    Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] – 11/5/2007
    Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] – 11/8/2007
    Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr. [DE] – 11/14/2007
    Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] – 12/10/2007
    Sen Reed, Jack [RI] – 12/17/2007
    Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] – 1/23/2008
    Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] – 1/31/2008
    Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] – 2/14/2008
    Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] – 2/14/2008

  • Anonymous 02/21/2008 4:31pm

    This legislation might get pushed to the full house soon. The American Banking Association is getting concerned that the bill will pass. Even after the provisions for the bill from an added amendment make the qualifications for modification very limited, they still are barking protests and using the same threat and potential interest rate increases.
    A family will have to be in foreclosure, the family will have to be below the state median income. The family will have to be able to pay the loan after modified terms.
    How these strict provisions would cause problems with interest rates is beyond my comprehension. Anyway without the amendments this legislation would aid more strapped and victimized homeowners. with the amendments it would disadvantage more strapped homeowners but would help those that will soon be exposed to the wave of rate increases. Families with non-predatory loans would not be advantaged with this legislation woth or without the amendments. I hope they can amend or rescind the amendments added to this legislation. It is needed now! ho[hopefully without the exclusionary provisions amended to the bill.

  • Anonymous 02/24/2008 9:20am

    I am so sick of everyone calling themselves a victim. You made a decision to buy a home you thought would appreciate in value and it didn’t. It’s the same thing as speculating in the stock market. Sometimes you win sometimes you loose. Now you want your debt forgiven and have new responsible buyers pay for your writedowns with higher intrest rates and fees. That’s called Socialism. The only thing you folks ar a victim of is a low IQ.

  • Anonymous 02/24/2008 1:34pm

    In reality the industry being unregulated and also protected by title 11 section 1322(b)(2) gave the industry the expectation that they can make unsustainable loans, force foreclosure and then come after the previous homeowner afterward for additional profit. All the time forcing the previous homeowner into a situation where they go underground for economy or fall victim of the lending industry.
    Passing this legislation simply removes undue protection to the lending industry which increases responsibility of the lending industry.
    We are not speculators, we are people buying homes for shelter. This is by far not socialism, it is bringing fairness to the bankruptcy code. This is far from socialism, it is judicial interaction for those put into insolvency by bad lending practices. We have high IQs. We also have low GQs which is for greed quotient.
    If lenders feel that they do not want to offer good loans at fair rates if this legislation is passed I have news for you, high interest rates and predatory terms happened with the exemption, it is up to the lenders to put out fair loans. Regarding responsible lending, HR 3915 covers responsibility on the industry which is irresponsible.

  • Anonymous 02/25/2008 7:19am

    You used the victim word again. Redistribution of wealth is Socialism. Don’t kid yourself, most of the people that bought these overpriced homes expected the prices would rise and that’s speculation. The people that will buy homes in the future will be subsidizing those who made a BAD CHOICE. I will agree the mortgage process can be complicated but the price tags on the homes were clear. How does one not know they cannot afford a 3-4 or $500,000 home? I could see adjusting the rates but to give judges the right to forgive a portion of the loan is insanity. The main reason most people do not go bankrupt is it hurts their ability to buy a home etc. If they go bankrupt and keep their home and the judge writes off $100,000 worth of debt what is the downside of going bankrupt? None. If you think the banks got greedy well go after them. I don’t care if some go belly up if they are partially the blame. What this bill is saying is to charge the new home buyers more interest and costs so those who went bankrupt get a lift. That not how the USA got to where is, or maybe was, before this Socialism took root. BTW, the people selling homes in the future can expect less for them not because of normal market conditions but the higher interest rates and fees used to subsidies the few will impact the sellers. If a new buyer can only pay X amount per month than with the increased interest and fees the sellers will get less. It’s a lose, lose situation. Look at Cuba over the last fifty years. Ninety mils away the US prospered under capitalism while Cuba suffered under Socialism and communism. If that what you want than this bill is a good start.

  • Anonymous 02/25/2008 7:17pm

    Redistribution of wealth is not the aim of this legislation. This legislation eliminates the exclusion from primary residence owners from being set in terms which are not sustainable.
    The future rates for homeowners will not be effected. The provision only prevents the home from going into foreclosure and giving less of a return of investment toward the company.
    This is not socialism. It is removing undue protection from loan modification from the bankruptcy rules.
    Big businesses go bankrupt, homeowners go bankrupt. Without the ability for homeowners to get fair representation from the judges in courts, an unfair advantage is received from the banks, even if it effectively prevents their loss. They will not stop their actions to prevent fairness.
    Taking their profits from the top and putting it in a pool for redistribution would be socialism. Preventing unfair advantage to the banking industry is not socialism.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/26/2008 7:53pm

    “This legislation eliminates the exclusion from primary residence owners from being set in terms which are not sustainable.”

    Are you serious? Does that mean if I buy a automobile for $100,000 & lie about my ability to pay that I get to keep the car and only owe $40,000 on it. Hell no.
    I always can tell a Socialist when they use of words like modification. Modification of a someone elses loan always means it’s going to cost me money. Where do you think the banks are going to make up the lost $$$? It’s like the people that think Federal dollars are free $$$$. No such thing. BTW, every company I have ever seen go bankrupt has not kept a thing. Everything is liquidated. . I think you all need a lesson in economics. There is no free lunch unless your a socialist and then it not free, just the receipent doesn’t pay for it. Everyone in forclosure expects strangers to feel the great need to bail others out. Not me. The Lack of preparation on your part does not create a sense of urgency on my part.

  • Anonymous 02/27/2008 2:05am

    The dishonesty was on the lender side. The property taxes and home insurance along with the monthly payments after reset were taken into consideration. HR 3915 and other legislation deals with the fact that lenders did not care that the loans were made with unsustainable conditions.
    AS far as where the banks are going to make up the lost revenue, they will get a more realistic return which is made with conditions that were not set up realistically originally. They knew the loans were flawed so they should not expect protection from the Bankruptcy courts for special treatment. They should be treated with the same expectations.
    Regarding your feeling that people fighting this legislation lay off their workforce and then go on a skiing expedition before they try to fight legislation which actually is favorable to preventing losses due to foreclosure costs.
    I am not of the mindset that bad loans could be made without consequences to the lending institution. Homeowners are more important to me than elite and cheating banks.

  • Anonymous 02/27/2008 7:39am

    That’s like saying shoplifting is OK because you have to eat and the BIG BAD gorocery store is charging too much for food & makes too much money anyway. What does a business do to make up for the lost revenue. Raise prices. Let’s be honest. Everyone who thought their home was going to rise in value raise their hands. If you raise your hand you were speclating. If not you are stupid. I am out of here for good because I don’t want to catch the stupid bug. Everyone knows, there ain’t no cure for stupid.

  • Anonymous 02/27/2008 4:10pm

    You take a person that makes a limited amount of money. You disregard what property taxes and insurance will take from the person’s funds so the conditions for the loan were not based on realistic factors. The total amount of spending should have been taken into account first. Also the loan was qualified at the introductory or teaser rate. Later, if not earlier because of having to pay property taxes and home insurance the person falls behind. The loans should have been made with an escrow account, many of these types of loans were not. Therefore the circumstances that the loans were made under were not of sound judgment. Since the lending industry deals with financial conditions they should of offered a better termed loan which the buyer could actually afford or have denied the loan so the perspective home buyer could have moved on and found more affordable housing.
    Regarding the prices for food, fortunately we do have provisions for providing food to those that are of limited financial means. This deters the possibility that shoplifting and robbery are not as prevalent. People do need to eat regardless of affordable or not. This is however unrelated to the bad lending practices that the lending industry is guilty of. The lending industry has proven their irresponsibility and have proven that 1322(b)(2) does not help keep liquidity into the industry, it promoted irresponsible lending. Therefore it will be stricken so people are on equal terms with the lending institute and they must bargain with people before they go into bankruptcy to ensure the loan is equitable.

  • Anonymous 02/28/2008 4:40pm

    Of coarse, GWB will veto this legislation. A man of all treasons.

  • Anonymous 02/29/2008 10:10am

    69 co-sponsors for this bill as of 2/28/2007. Hopefully we can get this issue passed soon.

  • Anonymous 03/07/2008 8:43am

    This bill now has 72 co-sponsors. It is important that you vote for a representative in your area who will or does support this legislation. Our current representative does not or is waiting for this legislation to be brought up by the full house. A note: This legislation seems partisan in support with more Democratic representatives supporting this measure. Is should not be partisan but it seems to be that way for both the Senate versions and house versions.

  • Anonymous 03/14/2008 5:21am

    There are now 79 co-sponsors for this bill. No forward momentum yet on getting this legislation to a vote.

  • Anonymous 03/18/2008 3:49pm

    81 co-sponsors now. Of course they are on break again!

  • Anonymous 03/19/2008 1:08pm

    the comparisons with shopping for food is trite.
    more accurate would be if say i go shopping and pick out 99.00 worth of food according to the shelf price,and when i get rung up it comes to 203.00,and now under duress,and with a line of shoppers behind me,i pay.
    then come back with my receipt ,and am told…“sorry,you knew it was 203.00 when you payed!”
    this is more like the change ups,and preditory lending that happens during R E closings these days. huh

  • Anonymous 03/21/2008 6:47pm

    I was 27 yrs old when I first bought my home and it was a trying time to remember all the papers that I had to sign. But I made it my business to understand the process as it materialized. Three months after learning and applying the process of protecting my family’s investment by my constant vigilance, calling my attorney, RE agent, my banker, even family members when a question aroused, the bank responsible for my loan was brought up on charges by then our Attorney General, Elliot Spitzer. The loan, at the underwriter at the time, can to a screeching halt. The bank had to transfer all my documents to another bank which I never heard of before. It took another (3) months just for the new bank’s underwriter to see my papers. It was a stressful time in our household with (3) children in a (1) bedroom apt, not because of the bankers legal matters affecting my loan but because it’s always going to be stressful with (3) children in a (1) bedroom apt. The point is we made our business to understand every step of the loan process. We haven’t forgotten those lessons to this day. We stressed it to all our friends when it is their turn to purchase a home. Before you start blaming the banks for the troubles that you, uncoerced, signed your name to, you should have researched the home buying and the RE loan process extensively. To put it another way, would you purchase the Brooklyn Bridge if I told you that you are able to make the monthly payments from the daily commuter tolls collected? Those of you not in the know, NYC doesn’t collect tolls on the Brooklyn Bridge. But you get the point.
    The other sad part about this debacle that we are in now is that some homeowners used there homes as personal bank accounts. Some of you bought that car you always wanted, took that expensive trip to Europe or Space for that matter, cashed out to remodel your home, even cosmetic surgery to fix the process of aging. Now you’re crying foul? How about my personal favorite, the inexperienced RE investor? In an age where knowledge is at the tip of your fingertips, you all should have done your due diligence before investing your family’s life savings. I studied the RE and the RE loan process by visiting my local library and calling the people handling my family’s future.
    Good luck to us all. I don’t think people are stupid just lazy.

Vote on This Bill

67% Users Support Bill

4 in favor / 2 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments