Product: Mortgage

Newrez DBA : Shellpoint Mortgage is engaged in RESPA violations and predatory practices against consumers. I am a minority woman and feel this is discriminatory practices on multiple levels. 

I have owned a condo in AL that has a current mortgage of $ XXXX. The original loan was serviced with a different lender and sold to XXXX XXXX then eventually ended up with Shellpoint/NewRez. I have always maintained adequate coverage on this property and also work in insurance for XXXX. The payment is automatic and has never been late or delayed. 

Beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, I was notified I didn't have adequate coverage for this property. I sent in the XXXX XXXX master policy that shows all adequate coverage including wind for exterior - with coverage at around $ XXXX. I also provided walls-in coverage from XXXX. The tenants are responsible for their own coverage on personal property. I pay my own insurance and taxes on this property. 

1. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stated I didn't have adequate coverage. I called on XX/XX/XXXX after I received this letter and spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX @ XXXX CST. She advised that she did have all documents and I was clear on coverage and did not need additional documents sent. 
2. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX showed an Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement Account History and showed a lender placed insurance bill of approximately {$1200.00}. I was showing a shortage in the escrow account. I called on XX/XX/XXXX and spoke with XXXX ext XXXX - her supervisor 's name is XXXX. She reviewed my account and said it was an error. She would have it removed in 5-7 business days. 
3. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stated 'the lender-placed insurance we purchased for your property is cancelled effective XX/XX/XXXX because I provided adequate coverage ' 4. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stated 'because wind condo unit owners ( XXXX ) insurance is required on your property, we plan to buy insurance for your property '. I called XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX CST ( once I received this letter ) and spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX - she placed me on a long hold and were on the phone for close to an hour. I explained the master policy coverage and personal coverage. She said, " Oh, i see your personal wall-ins policy doesn't have wind - you must have this ''. I argued that a condo can not have double-pay outs and there was also wind coverage in place for the master - which there is evidence to support. She said that the Shellpoint requires additional coverage. I called XXXX ( my employer and purchased a policy on XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX. Because of AL underwriting laws the policy took effect XX/XX/XXXX. Shellpoint created a lot of problems between XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX on receiving this documentation and I even has a rep from XXXX to help 5. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stated " the lender-placed insurance we purchased for your property is cancelled effective XX/XX/XXXX for ... adequate insurance coverage was provided. '' 6. The letter dated XX/XX/XXXX states " We received the insurance information you provided, but we are unable to verify coverage from XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Please provide us with the insurance information immediately - we will charge {$650.00} ... '' This company has on multiple occasion received two policies from XXXX to show adequate coverage. They did not say my 2nd policy needed wind until I called on XX/XX/XXXX. I provided this on XX/XX/XXXX. They are now trying to unlawfully charge me back 'insurance ' due to their employee negligence and predatory lending practices. They can not ask me to force a backdate or previous policies on something that was already covered. 

I have always made auto-payments, never been late, and called every time to clarify. They are trying to force yet another policy on a property that is only valued at around $ XXXX XXXX. 

I request immediate help and am referencing this class action lawsuit against their illegal practices : Gregg T. Cardin v. Newrez LLC d/b/a/ Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing XXXX Case No. 1:21-cv-03350. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and against Shellpoint citing a breach of contract in violations of FDCPA, 15 USC, and ICFA, 815 ILCS 505/1. The AG should investigate the undue burden this company places on their consumers in trying to recoup expenses. ( Case : 1:21-cv-03350 Document # : 1 Filed : 06/22/21 Page 1 of 21 PageID # :1 ). 

In the above referenced case : Shellpoint knowingly placed unlawful assessment of charges to the Plantiff 's mortgage loan.. Specifically, Shellpoint unilaterally purchased and charged Plantiff for a property insurance policy despite having actual knowledge that Plaintiff maintained his own property insurance policy.