Product: Mortgage

On or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX the borrowers, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX received a call from a law firm in California offering to help them reduce the loan interest rate and monthly payments on the property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, OR XXXX. They paid, up front, {$2000.00} to get help as they were living paycheck to paycheck and a lower mortgage payment would have helped. The people at the law form advised the borrowers to stop making their mortgage payments to assist in the process. After 3 months the borrowers found they were, of course, in default on their loan and ad been scammed. They have been attempting since then to work out, initially, a loan modification and then, when that was denied, a short sale. They initially contacted me for assistance with the short sale on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. I have been attempting to work with Citi Mortgage sine then to get a short sale approved. 

The challenge we have been having is an apparently obstructive situation in Citi Mortgage. We have submitted complete packets of short sale documents on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Every time we have completed the provision of the required documents we do not receive any updates for the next XXXX weeks and then we are, once again, required to provide a " fresh '' set of bank statements, pay stubs and tax return information. The last, and most complete, set of documents submitted occurred on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. When I followed up with a request for an update on those documents on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX after not having received any updates or confirmation of receipt of the documents submitted on XXXX I received an email from XXXX XXXX, the file negotiator, requiring more pay stub documents and then telling me that " the file has been returned to the homeowner support representative for homeowner retention consideration. The homeowners will not qualify for an opt-out ''. After months and months working on a short sale, and having submitted, on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, the Decline from Retention Programs document, it is strangely odd that now, now, we receive the notification that the borrowers were not considered for a retention option according to XXXX XXXX, the File SPOC. BUT there was a loan modification application and denial in the past. The fact that the folks at Citi Mortgage have taken so long to process this file, and have thrown roadblock after roadblock in the homeowner 's way when all the homeowners have done is provide all of the required documents in a reasonable timeframe apparently does not get taken into consideration. 

My complaint against Citi Mortgage has to do with the way that the people handling this file for Citi Mortgage have been working. By not apparently working on this file for prolonged periods of time allowing the expiration of the borrowers pay stubs, bank statements and other documents to occur, and then requiring a " fresh '' set of those documents to be sent in over and over is evidence of a possible violation in both federal and State of Oregon statute. I believe that Citi Mortgage is in violation of the State of Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act by not dealing in good faith with these borrowers. There is another serious concern I have. The way this file is being handled is in an antagonistic, challenging and obstructive manner that indicates a motive possibly other than honestly evaluating the borrowers for a legitimate foreclosure prevention option. 

These good folks have been victimized by others in the past and it feels like they are being victimized by Citi Mortgage now. Please review the attached documents, investigate the way Citi Mortgage is handling this file and respond accordingly. Thank you.