Ocwen Federal Bank - Delta Funding ripoff stole my equity robbed me of 46,000 Orlando Florida

How do I contact the people in Forum for help to guide me through the help process as stated in your complaint. Iam in New York.

I am an ex employee of Delta Funding. It does not suprise me that they are engaging in a shady practice with people's mortgages. In addition, I can't believe this company can be defended. This company was the worst place anyone in the world could ever work for. This job resulted in my mental anguish and thus I had to leave. These problems with your loans don't suprise me since they treat their employees like dirt. Also, ocwen and delta do business together all the time. Do yourself a favor give your business to a company that will not cheat the customer.

Daniel,

Don't want to come down on you too hard here, but why is a former Delta employee posting apologist crap on RipoffReport.com anyway?

And such delusions that you suffer from, at that! You claim to have left Delta in order to further your education. So you must know there can be no slander or libel when the truth is told. And they still teach basic research techniques in college, don't they? And did you pass your courses, because you seem to be lacking in some very basic skills here?

Delta was/is known as major predatory lender and aligned itself with Ocwen in order to get out of a major predatory lending mess. Ocwen needs companies that knows how to set up "faulty" loans for its own future use.

Delta is touted on Ocwen's own REO website as "Ocwen's lending partner"....meaning "Fund through Delta and wind up with Ocwen". Ocwen and Delta sleep with each other when they can find the time away from colluding to defraud borrowers.

As for the "BBB" listing, ha, ha,ha...uh, companies buy their own memberships in the BBB. The BBB is not a true regulatory watchdog at all; it is a club you pay dues to join.

The BBB has been caught hiding a lot of negative info in the past concerning its member companies. After all, is it going to rat out those that feed it? It usually takes some sort of investigation by a Federal agency to get a negative rating from the BBB. The BBB is a bigger joke than your post!

Oh, Delta is "traded". Well, so is Ocwen. So was Enron and WorldCom. Being traded is not a recommendation these days. Ask Ebbers, who will be seeing the inside of a prison cell for possibly up to eighty years(CNN Breaking News Alert just now).

Being "traded" is hardly a deterrent to fraud as many Americans are learning the hard way.

Below are easy to find reports and news items that any Google search can bring up. Just type "Delta Ocwen" into the engine (without the quotes)

FTC/DOJ Press Release: Old, but blows away your "Delta was OK" claim...Delta was in a heap of trouble.

For Release: March 30, 2000

FTC, DOJ and HUD Announce Action to Combat Abusive Lending Practices

Delta Funding Corporation, a consumer finance company headquartered in Woodbury, New York, today agreed to settle charges brought by the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The lawsuit, filed today in federal court together with a proposed settlement, alleges that Delta -- a national subprime mortgage lender -- violated consumer protection and fair lending laws by approving and funding loans without regard to the borrower's ability to repay; approving and funding home mortgage loans to African American females with higher mortgage broker fees than similarly situated white males; and paying kickbacks and unearned fees to brokers to induce them to refer loan applicants to Delta. According to the federal agencies, Delta's actions have burdened borrowers with thousands of dollars of debt and exposed them to unwarranted risk of default or foreclosure. This is the first suit brought by the federal government that combines allegations of consumer protection and fair lending violations by the same lender.

According to the FTC, Delta engaged in a pattern or practice of asset-based lending, in violation of the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 ("HOEPA"). Specifically, Delta extended loans to borrowers based on the borrower's collateral rather than considering the borrower's current and expected income, current obligations, and employment status to determine whether the borrower is able to make the scheduled payments to repay the obligation. In these instances, prudent underwriting criteria, such as debt-to-income ratios, residual income, and repayment history, would have indicated that the borrower likely would have difficulty repaying the loan. Delta's practice of approving loans without regard to borrowers' ability to repay exposed borrowers to unwarranted risk of default and foreclosure. In addition, the complaint alleges that Delta's high-cost loans also contain prepayment penalty provisions, and a prohibited "increased interest rate after default" provision, in violation of HOEPA.

"Delta targeted these low income homeowners for high monthly payments, turning the American dream of home ownership into a nightmare," said Jodie Bernstein, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "That's a dangerous policy for borrowers because it could lead to the loss of thousands of dollars and even their home."

Bernstein noted that the FTC's action against Delta is part of the Commission's ongoing enforcement effort to curb abusive practices in the subprime mortgage lending industry. In 1998, the FTC filed suit against Capital City Mortgage Corporation, a Washington, D.C.-area mortgage lender, and in July 1999, as part of "Operation Home Inequity," settled allegations against seven subprime mortgage lenders across the country.

Loretta Lynch, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York stated, "Home ownership is an integral part of the American Dream. Lending decisions should be based on the qualifications of the borrower and not in any way on race or gender."

"Today's suit sends a clear message that the United States government will not tolerate discriminatory or illegal lending practices," said DOJ's Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Bill Lann Lee. "Federal enforcement agencies are committed to working side by side to fight lending discrimination and consumer fraud across the nation. Residents of minority neighborhoods should no longer be denied the opportunity to obtain credit on fair terms at fair prices."

The Department of Justice and the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York focused their investigation on Delta's loans in Brooklyn and Queens where the company makes about a quarter of its annual total of loans, primarily concentrated in minority neighborhoods. The complaint alleges that from January 1996 though December 1999, Delta violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) by intentionally charging African American females higher loan prices than similarly situated white

males. The complaint alleges that Delta underwrote and funded home mortgages -- mostly refinancing loans -- for which the broker fees were substantially higher for African American

females than for similarly situated white males. The complaint charges that Delta offered a variety of inducements to brokers to do business with Delta. These inducements seldom benefit consumers, but resulted in higher fees and points to Delta, the complaint alleges.

The complaint also includes claims brought on behalf of the Secretary of HUD alleging that Delta knew that the fees charged by its brokers did not bear a reasonable relation to the services provided by the broker. The complaint alleges that Delta aided its brokers in obtaining unearned fees by performing many of the services for them in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).

"The dream of homeownership should not be encumbered by unfair and excessive mortgage loan costs, said Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo. "Lenders and mortgage brokers are put on notice by this settlement agreement that HUD and the Federal government are prepared to fight for borrowers who are being victimized by predatory mortgage lending practices."

Under the terms of the proposed settlement, Delta would be prohibited from engaging in any lending practice that discriminates on the basis of sex, race, or color in the pricing of mortgage loans as prohibited by the FHA and ECOA or that violates RESPA or HOEPA.

Consumers harmed by Delta's fair lending, RESPA and HOEPA violations may be eligible to receive compensation from funds provided in an agreement Delta entered into with the New York State Banking Department's (NYSBD) Remediation Agreement of September 17, 1999, which resolved the NYSBD's fair lending and consumer protection allegations. The agreement includes a $7,250,000 "Remediation Fund" and an "Amelioration Fund" valued at approximately $5 million. The funds shall be used to compensate borrowers identified by NYSBD and the federal agencies.

Delta also has agreed to compliance policies and procedures concerning its business dealings with mortgage brokers, including:

* rejecting a broker's proposal when Delta believes a broker's proposal is not permitted under fair lending law;

* only funding loans where the company reasonably believes the broker compensation is made for services actually performed;

* providing each borrower with a Broker Information Disclosure form; and

* maintaining loan underwriting standards to ensure that loans are based on the borrower's ability to pay.

The agreement is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court. The Commission vote to file the complaint and proposed settlement was 5-0.

The FTC has available a number of brochures to advise consumers as they shop for a home loan: "Home Equity Scams: Borrowers Beware!" and a Consumer Alert: "Need a Loan? Think Twice About Using Your Home as Collateral." Copies may be obtained from the address below.

Copies of the complaint and settlement, the consumer brochures, and information regarding previous FTC enforcement actions, are available from the FTC's web site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC's Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580; toll-free: 877-FTC-HELP (877-382-4357); TDD for the hearing impaired 1-866-653-4261. To find out the latest news as it is announced, call the FTC NewsPhone recording at 202-326-2710.

MEDIA CONTACT:
Howard Shapiro
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2176

STAFF CONTACT:
Michelle Chua
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3248

(FTC Matter No.: 992 3290)
(Civil Action No. Not Available at Press Time)

(deltafunding)

Fast forward to 2001, when Delta sold its soul to the devil:

Tuesday, May 22, 2001

Delta takes $49MM loss, but execs optimistic about its future
by Amilda Dymi
Woodbury, NY

Delta Financial Corp. here reported a net loss of $36.5 million (or $2.29 per share) for the fourth quarter of 2000 and a full year net loss of $49.4 million.

This is compared with net income of $2.8 million (or $0.18 per share) in the fourth quarter of 1999 and with net income of $4.7 million for the full year.

Last year was a bad year for the company, as it took a financial and public relations hit from predatory lending allegations levied by regulators and consumers.

Still, executives at the subprime lender expect the company to reach its goal of returning to profitability in 2001.

The loss for the quarter was primarily a result of non-recurring charges associated with the complete write-off of the company's mortgage servicing rights (Delta has agreed to transfer servicing to Ocwen Financial Corp.) and other service fees. The net charge for non- recurring items for the quarter totaled $37.6 million on an after-tax basis, or $2.36 per share, and reflects primarily an after-tax $32.8 million non-cash charge. By transferring servicing and with it the responsibility to make advances, Delta expects to save approximately $5.5 million in annual capital charges.

The loss also reflects costs associated with Delta's Net Interest Margin securitization in the fourth quarter 2000 and the write-down of the company's goodwill relating to its 1997 purchase of Fidelity Mortgage Inc.

Delta's net loss per share in 2000 was $3.10 compared to a net income of $0.30 per share the previous year. Its 1999 results included an after-tax, one-time, non-tax charge of $0.47 per share that resulted from the company's global settlement with some state regulatory agencies in September 1999 and various federal agencies in March 2000.

Delta executives had anticipated that the year 2000 results would be "disappointing," regardless of the company's strategic measures "to reduce expenses and increase gross margins" which included reductions in the work force and management salaries. President and chief executive Hugh Miller stated that during 2000 one of the major challenges for Delta has been finding ways on how to improve the company's cash flow.

"Our operational expenses declined by $2.7 million from the fourth quarter of 1999 to the fourth quarter 2000," Mr. Miller said. "Although we anticipate net losses for the first six months of 2001 as we continue to implement our corporate restructuring plan.the steps taken in 2000 and early 2001, lay the groundwork for our goal of returning to profitability in the second half of 2001."

Mr. Miller explained that Delta's restructuring plan includes additional expenses Delta expects to incur in connection with the transfer of servicing to Ocwen, a previously announced restructuring of Delta's Secured Senior notes due in 2004 and a forward commitment to sell residual certificates in the second quarter of 2001.

In the fourth quarter, Delta completed its fourth securitization during year 2000 at $115 million, utilizing "a senior subordinate structure which included a surety wrap credit enhancement on the AAA rates securities." The company sold $47 million of mortgage loans on a servicing-released basis for an aggregate cash premium of 4.7%. In total, the company received net cash proceeds from its fourth quarter securitization and whole loan sales of $6.3 million. Also, loan originations for the quarter were $185 million compared to $292 million reported in the fourth quarter of 1999. (05/22)

Then, in 2002, it is still going on...the Delta Ocwen connection is in full swing!

Suit Alleges Predatory Home Lending in D.C.

Washington Post
July 11, 2002

The first of what District activists said would be a series of suits alleging predatory practices by mortgage lenders and brokers was filed yesterday.

The advocacy group ACORN Housing Corp. also pressed Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) and city regulators to do more to protect residents from being tricked into high-cost refinance loans and advocated pulling business licenses from those who engage in such practices.

Williams signed a law in March to curb predatory lending, but ACORN spokesman Devonne Collins said yesterday that the measure was weak and that little has been done to implement it. The mayor had supported an earlier law that was suspended by the D.C. Council last year after lenders said it was driving them out of the city.

"We are now taking our campaign to the court, to bring the weight of the law down on those who rob our communities," Collins said.

The first suit prompted by ACORN was filed in U.S. District Court against EZ Home Mortgage Corp. of Lanham and employee Robert Tolbert; Delta Financial Corp. and Delta Funding Corp., both of Woodbury, N.Y.; and Ocwen Federal Bank and Ocwen Financial Corp. in West Palm Beach, Fla.

The suit alleges that the defendants committed fraud and that they violated federal truth in lending and fair trade laws and the earlier city law in the terms of a refinance loan to Nellie Green and her brother, Linwood Creek. She is an ACORN member.

At EZ Home Mortgage, a recording yesterday said its phone number was "temporarily disconnected." Delta and Ocwen officials declined to comment, saying they had not seen the suit.

Without admitting guilt, Delta has settled several class-action suits accusing it of predatory lending. But Delta spokesman Drew Biondi said of this case: "It was a perfectly legal loan that prevented [Green] from being foreclosed on. . . . She and her brother signed the papers."

According to Green's attorney, Ronald Simon, Green fell behind on payments for a 5.5-percent, $75,000 loan on her house in Northeast Washington when she lost her job last year.

She went to EZ Home Mortgage, Simon said, and ended up with a 15.5 percent, $92,950 loan, financed by Delta and then sold to Ocwen. The suit says that the companies knew she could not afford the $1,080 monthly payment and that she was not told that she was locked in by a three-year prepayment penalty. Green is fighting to keep her home.

District regulators said yesterday that the new law will not be in full effect until at least November, because of requirements for public comment on new regulations.

S. Kathryn Allen, the District's commissioner for banking and financial institutions, said yesterday that her agency is investigating another complaint against EZ Home Mortgage, whose District license expired Dec. 31.

Allen said, "We are very serious and very vigilant about investigating any complaints."

Hope this "completes" your education and you will be able to refrain from playing devil's advocate when you do not seem to know what you are talking about.

As a former employee of Delta Funding/Fidelity Mortage I have to just clarify one thing.....

OCWEN is the bank/payment processor that Delta uses or used to use (not there any more to know), to handle payment info but Delta is actually one of the few banks that handles and retains it's own loans (with the exception of either high risk loans or 2nd mortgages which were sold off to Wachovia.) While there were issues with OCWEN, Delta actually is a fair company. They are traded on the NASDAQ under DFC and are members of the BBB (not an organization scam artist genreally flock too or are accepted at). As I am saying, I did not work for OCWEN nor does Delta own them, but I while every company has some warts and issues that quite obviously get out of control, Delta in of itself was/is not all that bad. Me, I left to continue to persue my education, so I can no longer be accused of being on payroll etc., just wish that the record could be set straight without all name calling and slander of anybody who would dare to disagree with certain indiduals (you know who you are). People who discourage others from speaking out or back are just as guilty of terrorism by trying to quash or belittle others 1st Amendment rights.