The Left media has run with the theme of how teh evil Obama Administration is trying to "pressure" NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to accept the deal, and how heroic Schneiderman is for resisting them... But I have seen the media narrative completely ignore what's in the actual proposed deal. That's important because ultimately this is a cost-benefit analysis... The draft deal, at least the mortgage modification portion of was leaked to and released by the AmericanBanker.com website and is available for everyone to read. Everyone, it seems, except for those who in the media world call themselves "journalists." First of all, let's remember that the negotiations are ongoing on this, and the legal immunity provisions are still fluid. but the banks will probably not accept a deal that offers them nothing on that side of the ledger. But here is the part of the deal that is the reason why the Administration (and Housing advocates) are predisposed towards a settlement.
The settlement would establish an affirmative duty for the bank (servicer) to offer loss mitigation option before foreclosing on the property. In addition, banks would be forbidden from pursuing dual-track (or as homeowners understand it, double-cross) process to both work on loss mitigation and foreclosure at the same time. And finally something that housing advocates have been seeking for a long time, since the beginning of the housing crisis:
Servicer shall offer and facilitate loan modifications rather than initiate foreclosure when such loan modification is a greater net present value (NPV) than foreclosure. The NPV formila used by Servicer shall be made available to CFPB upon request.
Haven't we been rightly pointing the finger at the banks for a long time for not working with borrowers to let them stay in their own homes while offering them loan modifications so that their payments would be more affordable? That is exactly what this deal would require... Not only does the deal establish an affirmative duty for the banks to offer a loan modification program, it also protects against abuses. Even if servicing agreements prohibit offering a loan modification - for some weird reason, there is notion out there that investors can expect to get paid more if a home is foreclosed on and a family set out on the street than by offering a loan modification - banks are still required to calculate whether the borrower would be eligible for a loan modification, and if the borrower is, the banks would be required to contact the parties to the service agreements and ask them to modify those agreements so that a loan modification can be offered.
Read more factual analysis from someone who has read the actual draft deal:
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/08/lifeline-for-homeowners-families-and.html