Product: Mortgage

We started a loss mitigation application Last XX/XX/XXXX with PNC. PNC has represented itself as the servicer for our mortgage. We own a home at XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX Virginia. We obtained an appraised which showed a value of XXXX. PNC requested their own appraisal and PNCs came back at XXXX. The loan balance on our loan is XXXX. So, whether the appraisal is XXXX or XXXX, we are upside down roughly XXXX and we can not continue the mortgage with our current financial situation. We were seeking approval of a short sale from PNC. We are not in foreclosure. We received a contract offer in XX/XX/XXXX for XXXX on the home. It is now vacant and has been burglarized. After months of closing and reopening our file, being told they were heavily regulated and having us jump through hurdles our file was finally complete on XX/XX/XXXX. We received notice from PNC that our loan application was complete as of XX/XX/XXXX. They did not respond to us with any options. PNC never told us that it needed more information. We were finally advised of an offer by a PNC representative XX/XX/XXXX, that PNC would accept XXXX. They didnt say how that would be handled, or how it would work. We were told however, that we would need to make a counter offer to the prospective buyers who offered the XXXX for XXXX. We were also told that we would need to list the property on the real estate marked for a limited time. We countered at XXXX to the potential buyers as we were told to do. As expected, the buyers came back with a XXXX counter to our counter along with a letter detailing how they came up with the figure. The property is in poor shape so this was no surprise. We were told that we had a three day deadline to get PNC an answer back from the potential buyers. In addition, we asked what the tax implications were going to be and if we would be released from the loan and we were told we would have to make the offer first before anyone could tell us that. This was a difficult situation because we were talking hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial and taxable consequence. 
Based on our understanding of what PNC told us to do, we submitted the buyers counter-counter offer of XXXX to PNC within the three day deadline they demanded. It is now my belief that they should have given us at least 14 days, or through XX/XX/XXXX. The PNC rep told us that she didnt know whether PNC would accept the XXXX offer. We were not advised of any other options available to us so we waited for their answer. 
PNC came back to us on XX/XX/XXXX, after hours, stating the counter-counter offer of XXXX was denied. We asked the PNC rep if we could add additional money to the deal that same night to create a total of XXXX, their whole figure. She told us we could. 
Two days later, they informed us that we could not and that our file was closed. All of this was before XX/XX/XXXX. We then received a letter from PNC dated XX/XX/XXXX stating that they needed additional information for a third party related to value of the property. This was just a lie. Their appraisal was completed on XX/XX/XXXX before the initial offer was ever made by PNC. They also sent us a second letter at the same time, also dated XX/XX/XXXX stating that our request was denied. The only reason stated was that the minimum net proceeds required for a short sale on your property were not met. We DID offer the full amount. 
I then sent letters to the master servicer, XXXX XXXX and out of the blue about 3 weeks ago their attorney contacted our attorney. 
Our attorney cited many regulations that were not complied with in our case and we again told the attorney for PNC that we would like to resubmit the XXXX offer they had given us in hopes they would be compliant of the federal regulations. 
The response back from the PNC attorney was that the regulations didnt apply in this case because the property in question was not our primary residence. This was amazing to us. PNC knew this from the beginning. Our application specifically says that were looking to a short sale which is not our primary residence. 
So, we have PNC representatives telling us on one hand that they are trying to comply with the loss mitigation regulations and making us jump through all of these hoops, and we have their lawyer telling us that the regs dons apply. To a consumer, this is very confusing and disturbing. Two people at the same institution are telling us two very different things. The entire year we have been dealing with this situation, working with our buyer to get the short sale complete and were always told our case was heavily regulated. Our attorney cited the regs and how procedure was not properly followed, which would have given us an additional 10 days to have negotiated with PNC on the make whole value ; meaning we would have been able to submit another offer. 
However, PNCs attorney came back after we cited the regulations saying that our file was not regulated because it was not our primary residence ( their loss mitigation application, on the first page, says if the property in question is not the primary residence to list all residences ). The issue of our home being primary residence was never mentioned this entire year until now. In fact they made us an offer knowing the property was not our primary residence. 
After the attorney gave us this information, our attorney responded by saying that if, in fact, that was not the case than our should still be open, or easily reopened, and a contract to make the XXXX offer could be accepted. He told our attorney that the only thing we could do was to submit yet another loss mitigation application and try again. FOR WHAT? If the regs dont apply per their attorney, why is PNC telling us and acting as if they are? If they do apply, theyre not following them. This is a tremendous loss for our family and any consumer would be overwhelming frustrated and confused by PNCs process. 
The original buyers are still around and we can still make an offer to PNC for XXXX, the EXACT figure they said they needed. We understand that you cant make PNC accept our offer, but you can investigate our case and make sure they complied in all respects.