Date Received: 2016-12-19
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My mortgage company NATIONSTAR ruined my credit rating for no reason. I just received my annual credit report from XXXX in which it states, that I have not paid my mortgages for over 5 months and I 'm seriously delinquent. They also state, that I owe Nationtar an amount of {$2100.00} --, which is also untrue. Nationstar in fact owes me approx. {$800.00} in overpaid escrow fees, I owe them no money. And I have also never been late paying my monthly mortgages during the 10 year of my loan.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 922XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-19
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Errors / Dispute 1. Income : The income should not be grossed down. Response to Nationstar response letter, dated XX/XX/XXXX and prior : The resolution response is incorrect, as self employment income may be grossed down if the income is non-recurring. Each of XXXX entities ( on schedule C ) have been existing since XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX. Therefore, they should not be considered non-recurring income. Per guideline, " When calculating gross income for self-employed borrowers, a servicer must include the borrower 's net profit plus any salary or draw amounts that were paid to the borrower in addition to making allowable adjustments used in analyzing the tax returns for the business, if applicable, to decrease gross income ( e.g. nonrecurring income ) or to increase gross income ( e.g. expenses, depreciation and depletion ). If consistent with the Verification Policy ''. Per Resolution Letter : " With regard to XXXX self employment income, the income was calculated per the Making Home Affordable ( MHA ) guidelines 5.1.2. The total profit was grossed down to 80 %, to account for self employment taxes. This is the only part of the income that was grossed down ''. The gross income of {$15000.00} was grossed down to {$12000.00}. This does not comport with mandated income calculations. This is not a GSE loan. Self-employment income has not been required ( MSA, LPA or otherwise ) to be netted down since XXXX. See specific underwriting guidelines below. 2. Nationstar has incorrectly calculated expenses, on three separate reviews. Expenses : Denied for negative disposable income. The previous modification review resulted in incorrect expenses of {$20000.00}. This review resulted with total monthly expenses of {$12000.00}, which is still incorrect, but qualifies. The correct total housing expenses is {$10000.00}. Also, the AMEX is company paid each month and that payment should not be considered. It is not personal debt and the company pays each monthly amount/expenses out of company funds. 3. Erroneous Run Around : My XXXX File Contains 211 Files and 16 Folders. See system summary report pursuant to documents requested and provided ; from initial application. I immediately responded to and provided any and all conditional documentation for verification of all for request. Nationstar failed to review in time causing the documents to expire and/or would condition on the same condition over and over. The initial file was submitted in XX/XX/XXXX yet not cleared and initially underwritten until XXXX, then again in XXXX. Both of which were incorrectly denied. The first dispute review was confirmed incorrect. " A person who, in the ordinary course of business, regularly participates in a credit decision, including setting the terms of the credit. '' 12 C.F.R. 202.2 ( 1 ). " Any assignee of any original creditor who participates in the decision to extend, renew, or continue credit. '' 15 U.S.C. 1691a ( e ). 4. Nationstar 's Denial of loan mods based on claimed investor limitations when PSA indicates no such limitations. The Trust 's Modification History Confirms Eligibility and Qualifications via precedent. LPA and audit attached. 5. FDCPA : Nationstar failed to adjust the payment per the Note / Adjustable Note Rider. The Interest Rate and Payment Changed on XX/XX/XXXX. Reporting and calculated payment based on incorrect rate of 5.75 % w/ I/O. Correct rate is 3.125 %. See below and reference the Rate Change Notice, Adjustable Note Rider and Mortgage Statement. 6. Defects of Chain of Title & Assignments : The loan was originally made to XXXX and was sold and transferred to XXXX. There is no record of Assignments to either the Sponsor or Depositor as required by the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
Company Response:
State: FL
Zip: 339XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-19
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: We had a loan with Nationstar and refinanced this load with the same company. When we did the loan paperwork greenlights name showed up and we were told that it was owned by nationstar and payments etc would go to XXXX. In seeing a loan origination fee, I said is that so they can charge this loan origination fee, the closer laughed and said guess so. When the XXXX came it did not include the payment on XX/XX/XXXX. I have sent them proof of payment of all payments to date. Earlier this year they said my first payment was not due until XX/XX/XXXX and so that payment went to greenlight and they have nothing regarding this. I advised them that I had checked and greenlight acquisition happened before XX/XX/XXXX and further more this payment was a electronic payment directly into NationStar 's banking account and that no XXXX was ever received from greenlight. I have spent three years trying to straighten this out and they have done nothing to resolve this. I really need the government agency to step in as I know believe I am not the only person this has happened to. XXXX and XXXX, CO XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CO
Zip: 801XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-19
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Two of the last three months we have paid additional principal payments which were not recorded. In XXXX I contacted them and the next day I got am email that I was correct and how would I like to handle it.I responded to the email to call me and I would authorize payment. I never received a response. The two months in question are XXXX and XXXX.
Company Response:
State: MD
Zip: 20817
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-18
Issue: Credit decision / Underwriting
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Husband XXXX and I, now XXXX, are in business together. We XXXX. for 30 yrs. and XXXX. Husband gets diagnosed XXXX at age XXXX, wife takes over total running of business to keep our income. Cost of hubbies XXXX XXXX $ XXXX/mo. or $ XXXX/year and going up appx. $ XXXX/mo. or {$3600.00} in annual increase. We have no long term care insurance. Wife rekonizes income shortgage and applies to re-finance XXXX. to get lower fixed interest rate, 4.375 % quoted at time of application to replace 10 year arm mortgage with {$1400.00} to principal and {$980.00} to interest each mo. Loan size is {$400000.00}. I submit documents : Signed application, Power of attorney, trusts, XXXX XXXX account, all insurances, copy of mortgage statement, copy of rental agreements, rents received, other sources of income, 3 months of checkbook activity, they run my credit score, they report XXXX. Building is appraised at {>= $1,000,000} by their appraiser. They are now dragging their feet, telling me they have to study my many documents. They gave me a lock, expiring XX/XX/2017. I now fear they will deny my application due to age XXXX and hubby with XXXX. Do I have any rights at all. Currently I am struggling with high cost of XXXX XXXX. XXXX. I became very sick myself in the 5 years of XXXX prior to putting him in his XXXX. I must however continue working, and keeping the business going. Thank you for allowing me to voice my problem.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 95121
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-16
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE CONTINUES TO LIE TO CUSTOMERS ABOUT OWNERSHIP OF THEIR MORTGAGES. OVER AND OVER THEY CLAIM TO BE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHILE ACTIVELY DEFRAUDING IT THROUGH A COMPLEX BUT EASILY UNRAVELED FORECLOSURE SCAM. NATIONSTAR CONTINUES TO LIE ON THE CFPB RESPONSES, IGNORING NEW EVIDENCE WHILE PENCIL WHIPPING THE SAME, LYING, DISHONEST ANSWERS FROM PRIOR DECEPTIVE ANSWERS. NATIONSTAR TOLD THE CFPB THAT OUR PAYMENT IS {$940.00} THIS MONTH BUT OUR STATEMENT IN THE MAIL IS JUST UNDER {$2500.00} .... INTENTIONALLY DECEPTIVE WITH FEES ADDED AND GROWING FOR NO VALID REASON. NATIONSTAR REFUSES TO MAIL ACCURATE MONTHLY STATEMENTS. NATIONSTAR CONTINUES TO STEAL PRINCIPAL WITHOUT CREDIT. XXXX AND XXXX ARE RUNNING A WELL ORGANIZED, MULTIBILLION DOLLAR, CRIMINAL SCAM. FORTRESS INVESTMENTS AND NATIONSTAR ARE CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS AND XXXX SEEMS TO BE THE SOLE SOURCE OF ALL OF THE VIOLATIONS BELOW HIM. THEFT, DECEPTION AND WRONGDOING ARE STANDARD. COMPLIANCE IS NEAR XXXX
Company Response:
State: FL
Zip: 34293
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: No
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-16
Issue: Credit decision / Underwriting
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: NationStar, the mortgage company that services my mortgage regularly solicits me to refinance my mortgage even though I refinanced about a year and a half ago, and am satisfied with my rate and payment term. I also regularly receive solicitations from them through the mail. I despise the use of phone solicitations and feel it is an invasion of my privacy. It is also a disservice to me as a customer to continue to ask me about refinancing when I have a strong deal already. All refinancing options have thousands of dollars in cost to the borrower financed or otherwise. It is not my best interests you are after and it makes me feel sad for your phone reps reading a terribly awkward script. Congrats on emerging from the mortgage crisis as a major mortgage servicing company. If I had my choice, my mortgage would stay with the company I originated it with and then I could deal with local people I know and who actually care about my financial well-being.
Company Response:
State: GA
Zip: 30606
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-16
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have several complaints against Nationstar Mortgage. First, my loan was dual tracked for foreclosure after I submitted an application for a loan modification. Second, I am being double charged " legal fees '' and " property inspection fees '' by Nationstar Mortgage based on the terms of my final loan modification which was to include all of these fees ( notwithstanding the dual tracking ), and third, Nationstar has refused to credit my bill in a timely manner. As the attached documents show, I submitted a request for loan modification assistance, and received a confirmation on XX/XX/XXXX of the request. My loan was then referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX. I received trial modification approval on XX/XX/XXXX, and on XX/XX/XXXX received a permanent loan modification. The terms of the permanent loan modification under paragraph 1 state that it includes " any legal fees and related foreclosure costs that may have been accrued for work completed ''. Nonetheless, I have continued to receive a fees in the amount of {$340.00} for " legal fees '' and " property inspections '' that should not have been charged in the first place based on the fact that my loan was originally dual tracked, and at any rate would have been included in my XX/XX/XXXX loan modification. I have disputed these fees numerous times, and I have been told various inconsistent things by the customer service representatives. The last official notice brushes the issue aside completely. I am reaching out to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to help resolve this matter, since Nationstar refuses to correct it on their own accord.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 91913
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-12-16
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Nationsar Mortgage is not acting in good faith as I attempt to short sale my home. Property originally listed on auction site and did not disclose the HOA assessments and that they have to be paid in full at closing, even though this was disclosed to the lender on several occasions. By not disclosing the full details of the property, they are misleading potential buyers and thus causing buyers to initiate releases once it is determined the loan can not legally close without additional payments to the HOA. We have submitted documentation to them showing that the HOA assessment is a legal requirement of the development and must be paid in full ; they are refusing to submit the file to the investor for their review and consideration of the new HOA assessment facts. Servicer was speaking to the auction buyer even after they signed a release and was trying to move their offer forward after receipt of a new executed offer in their systems. Once we educated them on contract law, they discontinued their illegal communication with the previous buyer immediately. Manager stated she would submit all of the HOA documentation to the investor for their consideration before we countered the buyer, however, she is no longer honoring her original instruction. All of the delays/negligence is causing direct harm to you as the seller as it is pushing you closer to foreclosure, more harm to your credit scores and increased tax consequences. The negotiator assigned to this file is not only rude and unprofessional but seems to be working against us and not with us to get this file moving forward. We have asked several times to have her removed from this file at no success ; this is a compliance requirement of the lender when a 3rd party asks for reassignment. The counter we just received is inflated as they were going to accept the auction buyers offer of $ XXXX ( without the auction premium ) and now they are countering at $ XXXX to cushion their bottom line in order to offset the HOA costs. This directly harms you as the homeowner, but also forces a buyer to pay an inflated price on the property which then causes further harm to the development and economy as prices inflate to unreasonable and/or unsubstantiated values
Company Response:
State: SC
Zip: 29407
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-12-16
Issue: Settlement process and costs
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XXXX/XXXX/2016 a short sale package was submitted to XXXX and sent to Nationstar who is the servicer for the investor XXXX. They responded with a counter stating that the listing price should be {$500000.00}, The property is in no way worth that amount. I then requested a XXXX review of value expecting the lender to send a 3rd party Appraiser but they did no such thing, instead they used a computer program to determine that there will be no value adjustment. They are using the system called XXXX which does not factor the property conditions or contractors estimate for repairs. This has been on going for well over 1 year and we are getting nowhere. The system they use is tedious and extremely frustrating as i cant even speak with anyone, there is no live person or point of contact but instead agents are forced to use this defective system called XXXX and XXXX.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 91202
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No