Countrywide: When we said we'd help you out, well, we didn't actually mean it.

This story is painful to read. Nice to see the "our advertisements are 'mere puffery'" defense from the classic Carbolic Smoke Ball case rear its ridiculous head every once in a while. But this part puzzles me:

In their responses to the lawsuit filed with the court, Countrywide’s attorneys deny nearly all the allegations made by the Raymonds — even including the contention that Countrywide was in the mortgage servicing business and had knowledge of the couple’s payment history on their loans. A key defense to the larger issues raised in the suit is that “loan modification was not mentioned nor even contemplated” in the loans the Raymonds signed, according to court documents.

So, given the choice between admit, deny, or lack information sufficient to admit or deny, Countrywide chose to deny that it is even in the business of servicing mortgages? Isn't that sort of what they do? Did the attorney representing them just tell his legal secretary to deny everything in the pleadings?

Moreover, as one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit points out, Countrywide stands to actually lose money by shutting people out of their homes.

“We were paying $3,000 a month for a house that should have been $1,400,” Gary Raymond said, pointing out that the couple never sought a reduction in the amount of money they owed, just a lower interest rate.

Gary Raymond speaks with amazement as he notes that instead of working out a deal with him and his wife to get back the full $233,000 owed on the house, Countrywide has possession of a property that is now probably worth less than half that. The company hasn’t received a payment in over a year. The house sits abandoned, its plumbing frozen in the New England winter, as real estate prices continue to fall with the snow.

How does that make any business sense? Is Countrywide just banking on being able to hold the house until prices recover? Because it seems like they'll be waiting a long, long while.