Product: Mortgage

Nationstar ' response, XXXX XXXX, XXXX provides no explanation or investigation into facts or requests presented them and confirms Nationstar ' ( NSTR ) incorrect conclusion alleging they performed an NPV test under DOJ when clearly decline is based on a XXXX review, based on the provided chart in the XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Nationstar provided an email communication between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX of NSTR, with no underlying documents other than the letter itself. ( Attached ) The complaint simply requests VERIFICATION that the XXXX/XXXX/XXXX decline letter for DOJ program was is in fact correctly underwritten for the DOJ program and for NSTR to provide conclusive confirmation that this was a DOJ decision and not a XXXX decision that disallows loans with balances greater than XXXX. NSTR ' continuing references to prior letters, have not addressed this specific complaint are non-responsive and assert that the file was declined, by restating the very letter that is in question, thereby engaging in an effectively circular argument. We are requesting validation under DOJ of XXXX performed by NSTR : This complaint is based on XXXX ' letter of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and addressed to XXXX CA XXXX. wherein NSTR claimed that my file was evaluated under the DOJ Program. ( DOJ/XXXX ) & resulted in a negative NPV. This statement is materially false and NSTR ' incorrect justification for decline. ( Attached ) A letter of complaint has been sent to XXXX. of CA XXXX XXXX by XXXX XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX which has not been responded to by XXXX in any fashion. ( Attached ) NSTR confirmed that " NSTR only facilitated documentation creation for DOJ program and an actual calculation of data was run by prior servicer, the previously enclosed DOJ letter of declination, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, provides the inputs used in the review. " This further confirms NSTR ' absent investigation into facts, and apparent negligent reliance on a XXXX review in XXXX XXXX, performed by prior servicer, and only facilitated by NSTR. No comprehensive or analytical research was conducted as required under the XXXX Model XXXX, Supplemental Directive and DOJ guidelines as required under Successor Servicer obligations under Stipulated Judgment when a homeowner provides an Appeal on issues of NPV and erroneous inputs. This is clearly a XXXX underwriting chart that includes only XXXX correction which was the Appraised Value of {$680000.00}, however the chart makes no offsetting provisions for current outstanding loan balance as {$860000.00} ( field # 16 ) thereby rendering this particular run as ineligible since it exceeds the XXXX program limit of {$720000.00}. NSTR is using disqualifying and erroneous inputs without understanding their results or the proper methodology for proper NPV evaluations or the difference between DOJ and XXXX NPV modeling. This declination can not be based on the input fields pertaining to mark to market and principle reduction which are shown on the chart and labeled as " null '' and considered valid. NSTR created a fail for an altogether different program and uses this as justification for the decline. NSTR even fails to understand based on the income in the file from XXXX that under the 42 % debt-to-income guideline, it is impossible to fail the DOJ program which was designed as " retest until pass program '' as outlined in DOJ Stipulated Judgement, Exhibit I, Page XXXX that addresses XXXX XXXX In all cases, the adjustments must be limited so as to provide a positive NPV, with the calculation based on Treasury NPV model outcome. Therefore, we continue to request under " Qualified Written Request '' the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, codified as Section XXXX ( XXXX ) of Title XXXX of the United States Code. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I am requesting : 1 ) All runs-of-record for NPV modeling conducted by both Nationstar and XXXX XXXX XXXX, 2 ) Run Dates 3 ) Code version of runs 4 ) Any error codes results.