The government has drawn a line in the sand...banks must mitigate a certain percentage of their loans. It seems logical on the face of it, since it should help desperate homeowners stay in their homes, lessen the number of short sales and foreclosures and all-in-all, be a good thing.
However, the devil is in the details. Did the government say which loans had to be mitigated? Did it say which kind of property owners should be offered this wonderful possibility? When working in such a vacuum, the translations of this requirement can be quite varied.
That is why, in the absence of details, the banks have discovered a solution that is good for them...not so much for the upside-down homeowner. Why not mitigate the loans that are the responsibility of the solid property owner (even investors) - one who has good credit, is making their payments on time, are not upside down and are not asking for a loan mitigation? This is the solution of at least one bank. Shameful, isnt' it?