I remember two years ago thinking, what are all of these loan officers and real estate agents going to do after the contraction of the industry?  Well i think most of know the answer.  Loan Modifications have become more than just a cottage industry.  As a mortgage attorney and real estate broker, my firm has been involved in these, well i guess since the beginning.  I say the beginning, because despite all the adds from those claiming years and years of experience, i still think loan modifications as they exist today are a more recent phenomenon.  We did our first loan mod in 2007.

Anyways, i'm always interested to hear about experiences by homeowners in this area.  Specifically, did you use an attorney? a broker? or did you do it yourself?  I have heard hundreds of success stories so i know all three options can produce results.  Here's my analysis but i would love to hear others:

Do It Yourself:
This is obviously the lowest cost option.  Aside from the financial advantage, it is unlikely that anyone will care about your home and your mortgage as much as you.  If you are a detailed, organized and persistent person, this may be a good option for you.  I tend to recommend this for people who are current on their mortgage and do not anticipate missing payments due to unaffordability.  In other words if you have a decent loan, but are tired of hearing about your friends and neighbors getting reduced payments and balances and think you should also get something, this may be for you.  Chances are you are not going to have a lot of "legal" issues since you can afford your home and are not likely to fall into foreclosure regardless of the outcome.  The other reality is that lenders are more willing to help those who need help.  For this reason the chance of success for you is lower.  No sense in paying for a service that is not likely to produce results.

Broker:
Broker shops definately understand mortgages.  They often are staffed with processors and underwriters who are efficient and competent when it comes to working with lenders.  The downside is they are unable to counsel you on issues such as bankruptcy, foreclosure defense, tax issues, etc.  Given their limitations, i tend to think they should be considered as a lower cost alternative to an attorney.  I know, I know, there are exceptions and there are some brokers who are far better than some of the attorneys doing this.  remember, these are just my general broad stroke comments.  I have great affinity for brokers.  I have been a licensed broker longer than i have been an attorney.

Attorney:
First, let me clarify that i am speaking of an attorney that has experience with real estate / loan issues.  I don't know the first thing about workers comp so even though i technically can practice in that area, don't hire me for it.  Anyways, hiring an attorney should give you a few advantages.  First, they should be able to provide you competent counsel about your issues, options, consequences, etc.  Am i subject o a deficiency judgment?  What about the fact the title is in my spouse's name?  Will i get a 1099 after a foreclosure?  These are just some of the questions that likely come up when analyzing these issues.  As discussed above though, use an attorney for attorney work.  if you just want to test the waters and see what the lender will say, probably not a good use of money to hire an attorney to do it for you.  Maybe as an alternative, pay for a one hour consultation with an attorney and then do it yourself?  just a thought. 

I'm not really hear to promote my firm, so i'm not going to pepper this post with phone numbers and website addresses.  I'm really just interested in hearing what others think about the options facing homeowners today.