Product: Mortgage

The loan modification application that was ordinally approved on XX/XX/XXXX. The two copies of the approved loan modification agreement I received required my husband and I to have a notarized signature and return copies back to XXXX. I called XXXX to confirm which letters had to be mailed and was told both letters were to be mailed and they would return a copy after it was signed by XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called XXXX to ask when I was going receive one of the notarized letters back and was told there as a problem with Title. XXXX gave me detailed information regarding judgements on the title and was told I needed to reach out to the city and have the title issue resolved myself. The information XXXX provided about the judgements was not me and my husband. Also, XXXX told me the city was responsible for providing me with information that the tilte was clear. Specifically, XXXX stated the city should provide a clearing letter. Once the city provided the letter, I was to send that letter to XXXX. 
I called the City of  XXXX and was told this was not a service they provided. However, the city representative did look to confirm if there were judgements on the title regarding the information, I was given by XXXX. The representative confirmed there wasnt any judgements on the title in name of my husband nor in my name, but she could not give a clearance letter to provide to XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called XXXX to give them the message I received from the City. The representative from XXXX insist the city had to provide a letter. Also, I asked if the modification was still on track and if the first payment was still due on XX/XX/XXXX. The representative confirmed to me that everything was still on track and the 1st payment was due on the XX/XX/XXXX. 
As I was instructed to do, the XX/XX/XXXX payment was submitted. However, the payment was returned which caused me to reach out to XXXX. At this time, I was told the modification was denied because of the title issues. Also, I was told that the city was responsible for validating the title was in the clear. It was at that time I had a 3-way conversation with XXXX and a representative from the City of XXXX. After this conversation, XXXX opened an investigation to be performed by the research department. On XX/XX/XXXX, the research department sent an email stating A Non-Identity Affidavit will be sent to you concern to removing the below listed Lien and Judgment. You need to complete and return. This was the first time XXXX stated something had to be signed and returned to them. On XX/XX/XXXX, I reached back out to XXXX because I had not received the affidavit, yet. During this conversation, I mentioned how frustrated I was because XXXX had not given me accurate instructions on what was required to settle the title issue. At this time, I asked to speak to higher management. 
During this conversation, management stated they were going to see if the medication could be reopened the modification review process to consider the non-identity affidavits. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email stating the process could not be reopened. 
Also, XXXX stated they sent a letter of explanation around the denial ; however, I never received the letter nor was I told about the denial or XXXX during the several phone calls with XXXX.