NFCC to HPF: "Let us run the show or else"

Last week Marc Guimond dropped a mind grenade in the comments that I just got around to. Susan Keating, NFCC President, has thrown a temper tantrum about the Homeownership Preservation Foundation, complaining that the "the HPF has been extremely aggressive in their efforts to force agencies to join their NFMCP intermediary." They think the HPF is attempting to gain a monopoly over housing counseling.

If you know anything about the NFCC and the credit counseling industry, this line of argument is hilarious. As Mark put it in his comment:

Susan Keating of the NFCC is complaining about referral services and mandatory membership in an organization????

Don't believe a word of this nonsense from the NFCC. It's pathetic; sour grapes. The NFCC wants to be the only Sheriff in town. This complaint has nothing to do with serving homeowners or consumers; it's about the NFCC wanting total control of the industry. Period. And they're not content to gain the control they so desperately crave by simply being excellent; no, they're threatening to demand government oversight hearings to crush their enemies. This from the same organization that's been fending off those kinds of threats from consumer law groups and anti-bankruptcy reform activists for years.

If they wanted a seat at this table, they should have been way out in front of the housing situation the way the HPF was. The HPF was committed to this work years before the current troubles in the housing market; they didn't just suddenly decide to help homeowners because it would get them good press. If the NFCC truly put the needs of consumers and homeowners first, they would have been more directly involved in homeownership preservation much sooner, before there was government money being thrown at the problem.

The NFCC is pathetic.

Comments

[Counselor]

It's pathetic and so dishonest.

NFCC complain about HPF have extortionist tactics, but NFCC actually refused to seek funds for its own member agencies if they did not agree to work exclusively with NFCC, citing some HUD rules (that did not apply). HPF didn't do that.

So NFCC is not even serving its own members interest now, as this NFCC decision hurt a lot of agencies that could have done deals of got money from more than one source.

The real reason was obvious.. they wanted to make sure they got their cut.(NFCC takes 18% of these grants for well, maybe they can explain). One look at their IRS 990 will give you as good idea of what theses 'consumer advocates' spend their money on.

[Counselor]

I agree with your analysis on NFCC, but think you missed one factor that drives NFCC\'s concern: They go on about HPF\'s extortionist tactics in forcing agencies to seek funding through them.

Pretty boring right? so why are they are outraged?

Answer: Money to NFCC. Under the terms of this grant program NFCC members could apply for grant funding through other groups like HPF as well as NFCC, but this would cut down on NFCC\'s cut of the grant $. This is a big grant program so NFCC is looking for a big pay day.

To try sand hold on to as much as possible, NFCC told its members apply with us only or not at all. HPF did not do this. They implied it was a HUD regulation and NFCC members believed them.

When lots of NFCC members (especially, but not only those in HPF) decided NFCC did not make sense for them and sought funding outside the NFCC, NFCC realized their greedy ultimatum had backfired, so they blamed HPF... but anyone who is involved knows who the real extortionists are.

Knowing this, re-read Susan Keating’s letter and their true motivation become very clear.