Product: Mortgage

Background We purchased our home at the beginning of XXXX, XXXX. We used an assistance program ( XXXX ) because we did not have the funds to purchase with 20 % down payment. Therefore, we were required to have an escrow account. 

Part of the closing credits from the seller included unpaid taxes ( due to the bill not being created yet-XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX taxes in arrears ) for the time they lived in the unit ( late XXXX bill and early XXXX property tax bill ). In late XXXX, we received a notice from the county that we had delinquent property taxes for XXXX that were about to be sold. We contacted Bank of America and asked why they hadn't paid our XXXX property taxes. They resolved the issue by paying the " delinquent '' taxes. However, they paid late fees ( presumably interest? ) on those unpaid taxes. As I understand it, Banks are required to pay property taxes on time, which is why we are required to have an escrow account to begin with. 

Issue On XX/XX/XXXX, we received our second escrow analysis. Our monthly mortgage payment was going up from {$2100.00} to {$3200.00}, a steep increase of 53 % we were certainly never expecting to pay. 

I called Bank of America to understand the statement and why this was happening. They said they paid out much more from escrow than was accounted for in the XXXX escrow analysis, and that we were in escrow deficit about approximately - {$7200.00}, and that in addition to paying that amount back, the taxes were expected to go up for the coming year ( in this case, XXXX taxes to-be-paid in XXXX ). I asked them to look into the accuracy of this deficit. They said they would. 

That did not seem correct to me, so I looked it up on the XXXX XXXX 's website and saw that there was a overpayment made for XXXX ( in addition to the late fee paid ) that was eligible for a refund from the county. 

I called back 2-3 days later to check whether BoA had investigated this, and to report they had made an overpayment, such that the escrow deficit should be {$3000.00} less, and that they should be accountable to A ) why they overpaid and B ) ensuring we were not paying for the late fees. Their response : 1 ) they had not, in fact, looked into it and no action was taken from my first call and 2 ) they would ask the escrow analyists on the " back end '' to look into the overpayment and late fee. 

I called back 2-3 days later again for a status update and once again, there was no update. When I threatened to bring a lawyer into it and told them the overpayment was public record, they " escalated '' the issue to have someone investigate it with the tax office. 

When I called another 3 days later, they did acknowledge the over-payment and said they had requested from the XXXX XXXX that refund to be returned, but that our escrow analysis couldn't be updated until they received the refund in-hand.They said they saw email correspondence between their escrow department and the XXXX XXXX that the refund was being processed. On the same call, I asked who " XXXX '' was ( as this was the name present on XXXX XXXX for who paid our property taxes ), they first told me they had never heard of such a name and when I asked for them to ask a manager, they acknowledged it was a company they work with to make property tax payments. I asked why they do not pay themselves. They did not have an answer. 

I called 2 days later to inquire about the status of the refund. They said they were still waiting. When I said most news outlets and friends reported not getting payments back for in some cases, years, they said they were certain the money would come back in the next month, at least. I escalated this by talking to a manager and having someone explain why our escrow analysis could not be updated if the overpayment was a ) their mistake and b ) the refund was as good as cash in hand. The manager said their system doesn't allow the escrow analysis to be recalculated until the refund payment is in their account. He provided no clear answer except " the system won't allow it '' but offered to " escalate '' the issue with someone who would follow-up in a few days. 

I requested that our still-incorrect escrow shortage be divided into 24 payments instead of 12, so that we would not have to pay as much while I fought to get this problem correct. 

Three days later, there was in fact an update on our new mortgage payment, reflecting the 24-month spread of the escrow deficit. There was also email correspondence from an escrow analyst conflating that the escrow issue was addressed by our 24month payment spread. It was not. Two days later, an escrow representative called to ask if our escalted issue was resolved. I told her it was not, that our new mortgage payment was just spread out 24 months, as I requested, but that this was not the issue, just a temporary measure to help us pay less while the county tax refund issue and escrow reanalysis was fixed. She said she would contact the county 's office to check the status of the refund and that it should come through in the next month, but reiterated that the escrow re-analysis could not be done until the refund was received. 

To my surprise, two days later on XX/XX/XXXX, we received a new escrow re-analysis. It was not, in fact, accounting for the refund that would reduce the escrow deficit but instead a ) reflected the same deficit across 24 months and b ) increased the estimate of our XXXX property taxes by approximately {$1000.00}. Technically, they increased our regular escrow payment amount by {$50.00} while also not addressing the refund and decrease in escrow deficit that should be reflected. So, apparently, they can make some changes in escrow re-analysis, when it is in their favor, but not when it means us, as consumers, getting our money back for a mistake they made.