Product: Mortgage

On XX/XX/XXXX my XXXX XXXX was set to renew, but due to late payment receipt it was canceled and a new policy was written. The new policy was over 4 times greater than the original. I feel that my mortgage lender should be held responsible. They claim they did their due diligence since the check was mailed in time, but my insurance company claims they didn't receive the check in time. This all happened without my knowledge. I pay my escrow in a timely manner, which is to ensure that my mortgage lender takes care of my insurance and tax payments, so I feel that I should not be held responsible. 

On XX/XX/XXXX my insurance agency XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) sent out a Renewal Notice, stating that my coverage was expiring on XX/XX/XXXX, with a grace period expiration date of XX/XX/XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX My mortgage lender ( Truist Financial ) mailed a renewal check via standard XXXX First Class letter to my insurance company XXXX XXXX XXXX ). Truist notified Bankers that the check had been sent. 

On the day of XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX claims they received the check, coincidentally XXXX day past the expiration date, hence voiding my renewal. 

Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX neither XXXX nor Truist had any correspondence with each other or myself. 

It's worth noting again that I had no knowledge of any of this while it was transpiring. Up until this point I had never had an issue with my insurance or taxes getting paid. I had always made my mortgage and escrow payments on time, and my mortgage companies had always taken care of things on their end. This was the first year that Truist had taken over as my mortgage lender. Before Truist I had XXXX other mortgage lenders, both of which ensured that my insurance and taxes were paid and renewed. 

I feel that Truist, knowing that my policy was close to expiring, should have taken more diligent action towards ensuring that the payment was received on time. Either sending the check Certified/Expedited, or followed up to make sure the check was received on time. 

I feel that XXXX should have notified Truist, XXXX XXXX, or myself when they had not received the check in a timely manner. I feel it's worth noting that this was immediately following hurricane XXXX. By not renewing a policy, an insurance company can rewrite a new policy for a much higher rate, and they apparently have the authority to do so without consulting the insured party. 

I also feel that XXXX XXXX XXXX, as my agent, should have also been checking in on things to ensure my policy would be renewed. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from XXXX XXXX stating that my policy had been cancelled and rewritten. This was the first moment I found out that my policy had not been renewed. 

The new policy premium went up over 4 times the amount of the original. 
Old Policy Premium : {$910.00} New Policy Premium : {$3800.00} Flood Insurance rates aren't legally allowed to be raised by more than XXXX XXXX in a given year, unless the policy expires and a new one is written. It just so happened that my insurance company claimed they received payment XXXX day late, 34 days after the check was mailed. Was this just a coincidence? 

During the months of XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX I had many correspondences back and forth with Truist and XXXX. Neither party admitted any fault. Each one placed blame on the other, telling me I needed to sort it out with the other party. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I contacted XXXX XXXX for assistance. They stated that the issues was between Truist, XXXX, and XXXX, and it did not involve their agency. They recommended that I file for an appeal with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I requested an appeal with the XXXX to reinstate my old flood insurance policy. The request was denied, stating that XXXX had correctly followed the procedure, and since Truist didn't mail the letter Certified, they can not use the date that the payment was mailed as the receipt date. Furthermore, there was no proof of delivery date. 

I immediately brought this to the attention of XXXX, and they opened an ongoing investigation throughout the winter months of XXXX. They concluded that they had done their due diligence, and there was nothing else that could be done on their behalf. 

According to the Florida Statutes, Title XXXIII, Chapter XXXX, Section XXXX : ( Paraphrased ) 'If the mortgage lender fails to pay any insurance premium and there are sufficient funds in escrow, and the insurer refuses to reinstate the insurance policy, the lender shall pay the difference between the cost of the previous insurance policy and the new one for a period of 2 years. ' On XX/XX/XXXX I issued a statement to Truist, requesting that they mail me a check for the difference in costs over the past 2 years. Truist responded with a letter denying my request.

Before I file a lawsuit, I wanted to bring this matter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to see if the bureau could bring all parties together to resolve the issue outside of court. 

Thank you for your consideration. 
Please let me know if there is any other information or documents that I could provide to help the process. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Place, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX Defendants : Truist Financial Corporation XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX, XXXX, NC XXXX UNITED STATES XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, WA XXXX UNITED STATES XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX XXXX