Product: Mortgage

Santander Bank, NA holds a first mortgage on the single family home of my wife and I located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, MA. Loan number XXXX. Santander Bank, NA sent me 2 letters, dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, received by me this week, requesting that I obtain flood insurance or the bank will force place a flood insurance policy which will " likely be more expensive and offer less protection '' than a policy I might privately obtain. In years past my single family house ( locus : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, MA. ) was in a special hazard zone, according to the FEMA map. But on XX/XX/XXXX, Case No. XXXX, FEMA issued a Letter of Map Amendment ( LOMA ) determining that my home ( " the structure '' ) was not in the SFHA, removing the bank 's right to require flood insurance for my home. I notified Santander and provided them with a copy of the LOMA pertaining to my property. Upon information and belief, I also advise that my private flood insurance provider ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) also supplied notice, as required, to my mortgagee bank that it was canceling coverage and rebating a portion of my premium resulting from the application of the LOMA to my property. I did receive a rebate from the flood insurer. More significantly, by letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, and made part hereof by such reference, addressed to my wife, Santander acknowledged that since my property " is no longer located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, it is no longer required that you maintain Flood ( sic ) insurance to cover the property. '' Santander sent two ( 2 ) of this same acknowledgement letter addressed to my wife, and none to me, and each of these letters references a second mortgage which was paid in full and discharged this year. Because of the LOMA, Santander made no flood insurance demand in XX/XX/XXXX. 
Upon review of Santander 's letters of XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, received XX/XX/XXXX, I called the bank and was referred to " customer/ service '' and had a conversation with an individual who would only identify herself as " XXXX '' ( XXXX ). XXXX was very rude and curt and continually spoke over me as I tried to explain that I had no obligation to obtain flood insurance and that I objected to Santander 's threat to force place a flood insurance policy on my home. At first she claimed that my property was in a flood hazard zone, so I was required to obtain flood insurance. I kept trying to explain the LOMA and gave her the case number. She then changed her claim by saying that Santander had been notified by FEMA that the flood map had changed and that the LOMA no longer applied to my property. I asked her to provide me a copy of this alleged documentation from FEMA and she refused. She told me to contact FEMA and obtain this information myself. I said to her that I found it unusual that FEMA would provide the bank with notice of this alleged change, but not provide such notification to me. She then said that FEMA 's notification to Santander was verbal and acknowledged that the bank had not received anything in writing from FEMA to contradict the LOMA in effect. She reiterated that Santander 's position on the flood insurance requirement was firm and that if I had any " problem '' with that, I should take it up with FEMA. 
I did call FEMA ( XXXX ) after speaking with " XXXX '' from Santander. I gave XXXX at FEMA my LOMA case number and he checked and confirmed that there had been no map change since my LOMA was issued on XX/XX/XXXX, and that my LOMA was still in effect. 
Included and made part of this complaint by attachment and reference : ( 1 ) FEMA LOMA ; ( 2 ) Santander acknowledgment dated XX/XX/XXXX ; ( 3 ) Santander letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ; and ( 4 ) Santander letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. 

My complaint is that Santander Bank, NA either : ( 1 ) intentionally misrepresented my mortgage obligations vis a vis flood insurance in order to improperly obtain financial profit or gain for the bank or its agents, officers and/or employees to the economic detriment, emotional distress and physical injury of myself and my wife, or ( 2 )  negligently misrepresented my mortgage obligations vis a vis flood insurance to the economic detriment, emotional distress and physical injury of myself and my wife.