Product: Mortgage

I have been with Bank of Texas for over 20 years. My dispute is with the Bank of Oklahoma dba Bank of Texas, through whom I have had a home improvement loan since XXXX. I was on tract to pay that loan off in 3 years. In XXXX they offered me an approval for twice the amount of my original loan for another home project. I have been very pleased with the service of both banks through the years, as they were always honest brokers and very helpful. I have raved to others about the outstanding service that they provided. Because of this, I chose to initially give them the benefit of the doubt concerning this complaint I'm reporting. Though I often vascillated, revisiting my decision to choose to work directly with them through this dispute, as good faith discussions seemed to deteriorate into an unpleasant escalation causing me to lose hope. As my trust in the process eroded, I began to make several inquiries and tried to gather as much information on my own from different areas of the bank to alleviate my concerns with the actions they were taking, but to no avail, so I decided to take this route. I have included the names of the agents and supervisor I spoke with because CFPB requests that information. I'm not faulting any individual I spoke with per se and preferred not to name them.I choose to believe they did the best they could under the circumstances. The resolution for this issue appeared to be beyond their scope.I am contending with the process afforded me from this bank and the handling of this specific case. 

Monies Involved : I am providing this information as a reference : The forbearance amount was {$1200.00} ( {$420.00} x 3 months-for XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) ( see Forbearance doc ) The amount deferred was {$1400.00}, listed as principal and interest on the deferral agreement ( See the XXXX deferral doc. ) There were discussions concerning the discrepancy between the deferred amount versus the forbearance amount, because the deferred amount was reflecting more than the sum of my monthly principle and interest payments. I mentioned in at least one conservation that that deferred amount on the deferral agreement document, by the numbers, was also including my monthly Protection Plus Plan payments as part of the principle amount, so those payments for the forbearance months were also showing deferred, a welcomed application for me. It is a plan I chose to add to my loan through the bank for self protection in the event of certain adverse circumstances, so it was included in my payments at the signing of the loan. I realize they were feverishly trying to process the many requests they had, however, they never said that that conclusion was incorrect and the deferred amount remained the same throughout this process ( as written on the XXXX document, as verbal for the XXXX document ) .I found that Bank of Texas allocates the Protection Plus Plan ( PPP ) amount 2 different ways ; on my mortgage statement as fees and charges, and as principle on other documents.On the XXXX deferral agreement, it was recorded as the latter. The XXXX document had no numbers of any kind on it. I have attached both agreement documents for viewing. When talking to agent XXXX at a later time about the PPP portion, I had forgotten about the PPP payments being included already in the deferred amount in the document I had signed XX/XX/XXXX, and misspoke. Out of concern that it would affect the understanding we had, I immediately called her back but had to leave a voicemail reminding her that the PPP payments were already included in the deferred amount, that I had misspoke. I recorded myself leaving the voicemail. That was XX/XX/XXXX. I never heard anything back from them again regarding that particular conversation. 

The history : I contacted the Bank of Oklahoma in XXXX to inquire about any ( inquire if they were providing any forbearance offers to assist their customers who were impacted by Covid-19 ) forbearance offers they may have to assist those impacted by Covid-19. They said they were assisting such customers and offered me a 3 month forbearance beginning with the XXXX payment, ( per XXXX ) stating my plan allowed for the missed payments to be attached to the end of my loan following the forbearance period, that I would be able to resume my regular payments after the 3 month period without an adverse affect on my credit or otherwise. I accepted the offer and a letter was sent explaining the forbearance. Because the forbearance period covered the XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX payments, I called in XXXX to discuss again the options offered after forbearance, since I would be resuming regular payments in XXXX. I was offered an additional 3 months forbearance if needed or other offers related to coming out of forbearance. I chose to come out of forbearance with the deferred plan and received a letter stating that I was approved for the deferred plan they offered, that I needed to send it back signed to accept the offer by a certain date. I did that and made copies of the letter prior to mailing it. I resumed regular payments as agreed in XXXX. 

In XXXX I was sent another deferral plan to sign. That confused me because I had been out of forbearance for 3 months. so I called to ask why I was sent that agreement since I already had one effective from XXXX. The agent XXXX said that the wording needed to be adjusted in order to better comply with Texas law but that everything was the same as the agreement I signed in XXXX, reiterating only the wording was different. Well I asked " specifics '', if the deferred amount was the same, maturity date the same, and " no interest charged on total amounts to be deferred ''. The agent said " yes, everything is the same ''. However, everything was not the same. That was not true. The XXXX agreement extended the maturity date and accrued interest on the amounts deferred. I choose to give the agent the benefit of the doubt, as she was a very pleasant person, and assumed she was only saying what she was told to say. It just felt like an attempt by the bank to get their customers to sign off on these new agreement terms, now that interest accrued on the deferred amount. Texas law does not regulate the types of deferred to be offered but the amount deferred and cost to the customer and date the deferral agreement began should be written in the document. This information was not on the XXXX document and was dated for a deferral beginning in XXXX, not the month my deferral began, which was XXXX. Never-the-less, their request began to appear disingenuous to me. When I told the agent that while I agreed to the terms of the agreement I already had, I did not agree to these new terms so I would not be signing the XXXX one, she said in effect that not signing it would cause my loan to go into default. When I said but I have a plan that I signed in XXXX to protect me from default, I got no response to that. 

I then went to my local bank for them to review the documents with me and the banker called them on my behalf to inquire about my concerns. The banker was told by an agent XXXX, in response to his question about the additional interest charges, that " no '' additional interest will be charged on the deferred amounts in the XXXX agreement, though the document stated otherwise. He offered to be a witness to the agent 's answer to his question for me and said his calls were recorded. 

A supervisor XXXX then called and explained in a few disjointed fragments " ... .for this specific type of product that you have ... never supposed to have mailed this at first ... type of loan you have, not going to have a balloon, you are deferring ''. It sounded like " word salad '' to me and the last statement was totally nonsensical. Deferred payments can be attached as a balloon or by extending the loan by the number of payments deferred. Both methods are legal in Texas. The explanation when I inquired of what would happen to my current agreement, was " it ( the XXXX agreement ) was not valid, that it wasn't their form '', though Bank of Oklahoma dba Bank of Texas was printed on that form as well. I thought it humorous and was light-hearted about it at the time but per legal counsel, that statement made no sense and I agreed. 

The complaint : The reasons given to make the agreement change, throughout my conversations with them, were incoherent and were not plausible. I vascillated back and forth in my response to them in an effort to trust what I was being told while struggling to believe them, because it seemed the explanations continued to evolve each time I inquired of the reason. This caused me to feel I was no longer dealing with honest brokers as I have in the past and that this was an attempt to absolve themselves of legal liability to the first agreement done in XXXX that doesn't accrue interests on the deferred amount by urging me to sign off on this new agreement in XXXX that does accrue interests. Besides the extension of the maturity date of the loan, this was the only significant difference I saw between the 2 agreements. However, a change in how the payments are deferred are not my main concern, but having to pay interests I did not have to pay with my original XXXX agreement is not acceptable. That change appeared cleverly disguised in my many conversations with them about the XXXX agreement and was never fully addressed when I asked on different occasions about that specific difference. 

I signed the XXXX agreement under duress as inferred in the statement I wrote and signed on that agreement. The document stated " if you fail to return the fully signed agreement by XX/XX/XXXX then your original loan terms will remain in force and you will be past due for the payments that were missed. '' I was quite distressed by that threatening statement as I already had an XXXX agreement I was abiding by that was supposed to protect me from default.I faxed the agreement from my local bank so I could have a witness to the agreement being signed with a statement at the time it was faxed. 

The Resolution Request : I went back to review recordings of a few conversations I had with them, though I recorded all of them, in an attempt to be accurate. Anything I wrote that may appear as skewed to the other party is not intentional. Iam not asking for special favors because I have been a long-time patron of the bank. I am thankful for their willingness to assist their customers who were adversely affected by the pandemic, but I feel it is unfair to me regardless of my tenure with the bank to attempt to change my agreement from one in which no interests accrued on deferred amounts to one that does accrue interests. I have never had an altercation with Bank of Texas before now. This issue, as it currently appears, was too disturbing for me to ignore. 

To resolve this I am asking for the Bank of Oklahoma dba Bank of Texas to honor the terms of the initial agreement : " Interest will not be charged on the total past-due amounts to be deferred. The 'total past-due amounts to be deferred ' will not change between now and the maturity date of your loan unless you pay some or all of the 'total past-due amounts to be deferred ' sooner than maturity. The payment deferral will not change any other terms of your mortgage '' as stated in the XXXX agreement that per legal counsel was a legally binding contract. I understand that financial institutions are afforded a lot of leeway where forbearances and deferral agreements are concerned, so if this does not meet the criteria of legality as advised me per legal counsel, these actions as displayed so far are still unethical. The XXXX agreement was analogous to the one suggested in the CARE 's act that lenders provide as a deferral plan post forbearance for Covid Impacted borrowers with mortgage or mortgage type loans. It was required for federal loans, and, though not legally enforced, was strongly suggested to private lenders such as banks, as financial entities such as banks were given financial support from the federal government to assist them with the affects of the Covid pandemic on them. Notably, the CARE 's Act also states that those impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic are not to be subjected to negative reporting, adversely affecting their credit.