Despite efforts at all levels of government to stamp out illegal schemes that promise to save the homes of financially strapped owners, the scams "remain at a high level," according to a new federal report.

Not only have the ripoff artists not gone away, their machinations have become more complex, the Government Accountability Office reported late last month. And perhaps worse, they now often involve attorneys, the supposed professionals people tend to trust the most.

It is difficult to get a precise count on the number of victims of these so-called "foreclosure rescue" scams: people who have been separated from their homes or lost a great deal of money. Many people never realize they've been snookered, while others are too embarrassed to report they've been victimized.

But the number of consumer complaints collected by federal agencies indicate that these schemes are on the rise again in 2013, often targeting the most vulnerable homeowners: minorities and seniors.

Any number of federal, state and local governments have programs to stop the charlatans, using tools from prosecution to informative websites. But the main program comes from the Federal Trade Commission, which issued the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services rule in late 2010.

MARS has two primary provisions: a ban on advance fees for foreclosure relief services, and a requirement that consumers be informed that a lender may refuse to modify their loans and that borrowers can reject any terms negotiated on their behalf.

But attorneys are generally exempt from the ban on upfront fees if they meet certain conditions. They must provide relief as part of their law practice. They must be licensed in the state where the house is located. They must place any money received from clients in a trust account. And they must abide by state laws regarding government attorney conduct.

The GAO, which is the investigative arm of Congress, says many of the officials it contacted for its latest report said attorney involvement has become a major concern in recent years. Illinois reported that roughly seven out of 10 complaints involved lawyers or law firms. The number of such cases is on the rise in California, as well.

There are any number of schemes designed to separate people from their money -- and their homes. But the latest have become more complex, and make it difficult for the authorities to prosecute, especially when lawyers are involved. The most recent iterations are:

-- Forensic audits. For a fee, scammers promise to review the borrower's mortgage documents to be sure the lender complied with lending law. If the audit reveals errors, they say, lenders would be forced to modify their loans by lowering their rates or making other concessions.

-- Bankruptcy to avoid foreclosure. The scammer promises to negotiate a loan modification for a fee, but instead files a bankruptcy case in the owner's name without his knowledge. The bankruptcy process temporarily stops all debt collection efforts, including foreclosure proceedings, so the owner believes foreclosure has been averted. And he continues to pay regular fees to the scammer.

-- Mass joinder lawsuits. This is a type of legal action usually put forth by an attorney or law firm. It is legal, but lawyers are usually paid only if the case is successful. Fraudulent schemes require the owner to pay a fee to participate.

The apparent increase in the prevalence of attorney-involved schemes presents new challenges for law enforcement, according to the GAO report.

For one thing, it is difficult to determine whether lawyers are providing legitimate services. For another, an attorney acting for a scammer may be brought in for only a short time, perhaps to file certain documents. And attorneys often cite attorney-client privilege as a way to avoid subpoenas and slow investigations.

Even when no attorney is involved, the authorities are finding it vexing to nab the bad guys. They can start up, shut down, move elsewhere and start up again in what seems like a blink. They operate under different names, making them difficult to track. And the small dollar amounts of individual losses make it less likely agencies will take on their cases.

Still, there have been some notable wins. Under a recent summary judgement, the FTC banned Dinamica Financiera, an outfit targeting Spanish-speaking consumers, from selling mortgage loan modification or foreclosure relief services. The FTC also nailed the Residential Relief Foundation, which charged upfront fees for bogus services and posed as a government assistance program.

But for every scheme that's halted, or every scammer who's nailed, others pop up to take their place. Worse, the market for skullduggery is ripe. According to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association, the number of borrowers who are two or more months past due and facing foreclosure "remains elevated."

To protect yourself from becoming a victim, follow this cardinal rule: Never give anyone any money in advance for services that have yet to be rendered. And check out the person or company, whether an attorney is involved or not.

If you need help, turn to free housing counseling from one of several thousand agencies nationwide that have been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (www.HUD.gov) or call the HOPE Hotline -- 888-995-HOPE -- a resource run by a nonprofit for a coalition of government agencies, financial institutions and other groups.

There is no need to go it alone, and there is no reason to be ripped off.

Millions of would-be homebuyers who do not otherwise have credit scores -- that all-important snapshot of how they use credit -- will soon be able to generate one. They can use the latest version of a highly predictive scoring model that is still trying to find its footing in the mortgage marketplace.

Under the new VantageScore 3.0 model, predictive credit scores will reach as many as 35 million adults not covered by traditional scoring systems. That means so-called "thin file" homebuyers, who always trade in cash or have yet to establish credit, can now have a score, just like everyone else.

That's important because credit scores are the holy grail of the mortgage business. If you don't have a score, or if your score isn't high enough, many lenders don't want to touch you. If they do want to make you a loan, it will be at a somewhat higher rate.

Introduced in 2006, VantageScore was initially developed as a competitor to the better-known FICO scoring model by the nation's three major credit reporting agencies: Equifax, Experian and TransUnion.

Now an independently managed company, it is still looking for acceptance by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi-government companies that purchase mortgages from primary lenders. Because the government-sponsored enterprises buy the lion's share of home loans, what they say pretty much goes. And as yet, they have declined to buy loans originated with a VantageScore.

But the latest version of the scoring program is likely to win the hearts and minds of more and more lenders, and that should put more pressure on Fannie and Freddie to loosen up.

Roughly one out of every three lenders receives applications from otherwise unscorable borrowers. When that happens, the borrower typically ends up in one of two buckets: high-risk or additional cost. Either way, the chances of being approved narrow significantly.

"Tens of millions of consumers are excluded from traditional scoring methodologies," says Barrett Burns, president of VantageScore Solutions. "Many of these consumers are not high-risk, but they are invisible to lenders who are having trouble effectively assessing their risk profiles."

According to research by Experian, typical unscorable consumers fall into prime credit tiers and hold professional or skilled-labor jobs. "This profile surprised us," says Burns. "They are not necessarily unemployed or downtrodden."

Another surprising fact: A significant number of unscorables -- about 41 percent -- own their homes, many free and clear. Typically, they've already paid off their mortgages. A good number are retired.

A significant number of unscorables are folks who always use cash. "Lots of people live on a cash basis," says Burns. "First- and second-generation Hispanics, for example, (are sometimes) distrustful of the banking environment. We didn't realize how many minorities don't use credit. Yet, they are penalized for being independent."

Of all the people who fall into the unscorable category, recent college graduates and young borrowers with thin files -- little or no credit activity -- are the hardest to reach. Nearly all are future homebuyers, and nearly all are difficult to score.

To rate these and other would-be borrowers, VantageScore will build a score for someone as soon as they start using credit. FICO won't report a score until the file contains six months' credit use. But VantageScore will create a score for a divorced person, immigrant or recent college graduate when they make their first car or credit card payment.

In another "analytic breakthrough" for infrequent credit users, VantageScore also now accepts older credit file information, which it says is almost as predictive of how the applicant handles credit as more frequent data. Typically, if there is no activity in someone's credit file within the previous six months, no score is generated. But "we look back 24 months and it's still high predictive," says Burns.

In addition, VantageScore now uses rent, utility and mobile phone payments in building its score -- when they are part of your credit records. These payments aren't reported to the credit bureaus to any significant extent, says Burns, but when they are, they again are highly predictive.

Another big improvement, and one many segments of the mortgage business have been howling for: Paid collections -- payments made through third-party collection agencies -- will not be included when generating a VantageScore.

Many people believe that as long as they are paying, even through a collection agency, it should count in their favor. But every time a payment is made, it becomes a brand-new delinquency in the eyes of the traditional credit score. Under the new VantageScore model, though, as long as you are paying a collection account on a regular basis, it won't count against you.

"We've proven that you get no mathematically predictable lift" with paid collections, says Burns.

Also, if you are behind on your medical bills, it won't count against you as long as the charges are still coming from your medical provider. But if your account is turned over to a collection agency, it falls into the above bucket.

To make it easier for borrowers to figure out why they didn't score higher, VantageScore has reduced the number of explanatory "reason codes" to 80 and rewritten them in plain English.

Finally, in a nod to FICO -- and to make its score more user-friendly -- the new VantageScore model rates people on a numerical scale from 300 to 850, the same as the competition.

You'd think that applying for a mortgage would be the same whether you are buying a newly built house or an existing one. But it's not, so buyers of brand-new homes need to understand the differences.

For one thing, the timeline can be far longer -- as much as six months, or sometimes even more. And the lender usually likes to see a little more earnest money on the table.

Typically with an existing home, the period from the application to closing is well-defined: usually 30 to 60 days. But when a new house is involved, the timeline is less clear-cut. It can be as quick as 15 days if you are buying an already finished inventory house -- and you have all your paperwork in order -- to as long as 180 days if you are starting from scratch.

That means that you might have to keep your financial nose clean for far longer than if you were buying an existing home. No big purchases that could cause your all-important credit score to drop, no moving big chunks of money around for whatever reason, no co-signing a loan for Junior's new car.

It's the seller who dictates how much of a deposit is required when the sales contract is signed. In the existing home market, the more money upfront, the more likely you are to catch the seller's eye as a serious buyer. But as little as $500 can sometimes hold the deal.

Builders, on the other hand, want more than the typical $1,000. Often, they require buyers to put up 5 percent of the contract price. And some builders want as much as 10 percent down before they will start construction.

Lenders want to see similarly large deposits on new houses, says Josh Moffitt, president of Silverton Mortgage in Atlanta.

When new construction is involved, Moffitt explains, lenders usually have to go through a "full-blown pre-approval" process. That means more work on their part.

A pre-approval also tends to remove as much as the risk as possible from the builder's shoulders – and the lender's -- and places it on yours. Since you have a larger down payment at risk, you are less likely to walk away from a house built to your order.

Pre-approval aside, the main concern of serious new homebuyers is rising interest rates. To protect themselves, the smart ones look for what's called "rate locks."

"Rate locks are important, especially when volatility is the norm," says the Silverton executive. "Up or down, we don't know. Going into a contract which doesn't close for four months creates a lot of exposure."

A rate lock guarantees that the interest rate you will end up paying will not be any higher than on the day you applied for your mortgage. Typically, a lender will hold the rate for 30 or 60 days. But after that, you are going to have to pay for what's known as an "extended lock."

How long and how much depends on your lender. But Moffitt says if the lender is quoting 4.5 percent today, you might have to pay an extra half-point to hold that rate for 180 days. Or the lender might agree not to go any higher than 5 percent if the hold is six months.

Whatever the cost, a rate lock is good protection. "You don't want to go to closing and find out your monthly payment is $300 more than you expected," Moffitt says.

It's also smart to make sure your rate lock contains a float-down rider. That way, if rates should recede during the time your new home is being built, the rate you eventually pay for financing will be lower. Again, good insurance.

Another difference between new and existing home processes is the appraisal. With an existing home, the appraiser looks over the property, finds comparable sales and comes up with a valuation. But with new construction, there is no house to appraise, perhaps not even a model.

Here, the appraiser makes his determination using the plans and specifications supplied by you and your builder, and comes up with a value based on what the house will look like when it is completed. Then, when construction is finished, he makes a final inspection to confirm the place is worth what he thought it was in the first place.

But the real challenge is finding acceptable comparables. In a major subdivision, where all the houses are pretty much alike, it's generally not difficult to find sales of similar houses. But nowadays, according to Moffitt, lenders don't want to see sales of properties that resemble the subject property as much as they do those of a more recent vintage. Or those that are close by.  

Consequently, neighborhoods, streets and even blocks can make a big difference in the appraiser's ultimate valuation. Or, if the lender says the most recent comps are more important than those that are equivalent to your house, sales from other school districts, on busy streets or lots not nearly as desirable as yours could come into play.