Consumer complaint received 2019-03-29
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
We had a loan with Ditech ( Loan Number XXXX ). Our previous servicer was XXXX  XXXX XXXX. We endured a hardship beginning in XX/XX/XXXX and started the loan modification process with XXXX XXXX XXXX. We completed all of our paperwork and submitted it to XXXX   XXXX XXXX. During the review process, we received a letter from XXXX   XXXX XXXX stating our new servicer would be Ditech Financial, LLC effective XX/XX/XXXX. I spoke to XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding the modification status and was told that our modification was going to be handed by Ditech. I followed up with Ditech between XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX regarding the loan modification. During this time, I kept being told our application/documents were either old or incomplete. I submitted paperwork 3-4 times to Ditech. On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter stating the modification could not be processed because of incomplete paperwork. I called Ditech to find out what paperwork was incomplete. I was told the REAL reason why the modification is not going though is because we already had more than 1 modification and have reached our limit. This was news to us! If this were true, why were we offered the modification by XXXX XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and continued to go through the modification process through XX/XX/XXXX? In XXXX the following payments were made in an effort to catch up as best as we could : XX/XX/XXXX - {$1900.00} XX/XX/XXXX - {$1900.00} XX/XX/XXXX - {$1900.00} XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX XX/XX/XXXX - {$3800.00} ( via money order ) + an additional {$3800.00} ( via money orders ) In XX/XX/XXXX a check in the amount of {$1900.00} was made to Ditech but {$1900.00} was cashed according to the bank. 

In XX/XX/XXXX we were offered a Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement wherein we were to pay {$2800.00} a month beginning XX/XX/XXXX and continue through XX/XX/XXXX. Once completed, we would be current. Even thought there was an additional $ 900+ above the {$1900.00} we were already paying, we agreed to the repayment plan in an effort to make things current and avoid foreclosure. We received the Supplements Repayment Plan which explained all of the terms, the amounts to be paid with due dates, etc. Ditechs agreement specifically stated that if we make the supplement repayment payments on or before the due date Ditech will not initiate foreclose proceedings or, if foreclosure has already been initiated, we will not proceed to foreclosure sale. We made our first payment in XX/XX/XXXX for {$2800.00} and our second payment in XX/XX/XXXX for {$2800.00}. When we made our payment in XX/XX/XXXX my bank confirmed the check was not cashed. On XXXX XXXX my check sent in XXXX was returned to me. On XX/XX/XXXX I called Ditech at XXXX and spoke to XXXX at XXXX  XXXX regarding my returned check sent in XXXX. She explained our check was returned because we are going through foreclosure. I explained we are under a Repayment Plan Agreement offered by Ditech. When I asked to speak to a Supervisor, I was placed on hold. XXXX came back to the phone and only told me that her Supervisor said the foreclosure status was removed and that I can send in my check in XXXX. I mailed my check for XXXX to Ditech on XX/XX/XXXX. Again, my check was never applied to the account and was returned to me on XX/XX/XXXX. Although I received letters from Ditech stating their moving forward with the foreclosure was in error and to resend the check, they continued the foreclosure process. When we received our XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX statements, they showed an outstanding balance of {$19000.00}, Corporate Advances of {$81000.00}, etc. 

Ditech breached its Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement by not accepting our agreed upon payment of {$2800.00} in exchange for not initiating foreclosure proceedings. As we were adhering to the Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement, Ditech initiated foreclosure proceedings which is dual tracking and in violation of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights. 

A certified Qualified Written Request dated XX/XX/XXXX was sent to Ditech referencing their breach of the Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement, dual tracking, discrepancy in payments made versus monies owed, a request for the breakdown of monies as noted in our XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX statements, a request for forbearance, and a request to come up with an amicably feasible amount between both parties in light of Ditechs unfair and unlawful handling. Ditech was advised that under Section 6 of RESPA they were required to acknowledge my request within 20 business days and resolve the issue within 60 business days. The certified letter was signed by a XXXX representative on XX/XX/XXXX. Ditech NEVER responded to our QWR letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. Instead, we received a NOTICE OF SERVICING TRANSFER dated XX/XX/XXXX advising that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was going to be our new servicer effective XX/XX/XXXX. 

Not only did Ditech breach the Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement and underwent dual tracking which is in violation of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights, Ditech also failed to meet the duties of responding to the Qualified Written Request as defined in the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act by ( 1 ) not providing a written response acknowledging receipt of the correspondence within 5 days ; and ( 2 ) not providing a substantive response/making appropriate corrections in the account of the borrower to include any and all credits/conduct and investigation/provide the borrower with a written explanation or clarification which states the reasons the servicer believes the account is correct within 30 days. 

Our loan is currently with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Loan Number XXXX ). We have requested answers as to the discrepancies regarding the misapplication of monies versus amounts owed as well as an explanation as to why our Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement was breached by Ditech. Even though XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has taken over the handling of our mortgage, they maintain the position that they had nothing to do with Ditechs handling of our loan yet they ( 1 ) denied our request for a new Supplement Repayment Plan, ( 2 ) denied our request for a loan modification based on the fact that we did not have enough income and we have too much equity in the property, and ( 3 ) are moving forward with the foreclosure initiated by Ditech while we were involved in a Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement. 

Due to the inconsistent amounts owed, monies paid and not applied to the account, outstanding interests, late fees, Corporate Advance charges, etc., we are unable to pay the {$80000.00} plus arrear amount. Therefore, XXXX XXXX XXXX has recorded a Notice of Default on XX/XX/XXXX. 

Although we became delinquent due to an unforeseen injuries and death, we attempted to make better the situation by aggreging to a Supplement Repayment Plan Agreement in order to avoid foreclosure and become current. Instead, Ditech unlawfully initiated foreclosure proceedings, made various violations pursuant to the California Homeowner Bill of Rights and RESPA, resulting in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX proceeding to foreclose on our home where we have lived in for 19 years and started a family consisting of XXXX daughters. 

Our goal is and has always been to keep our home and continue making payments. We are seeking your assistance in making right the wrongs and coming up with an amicable solution that will allow us to continue to make payments and keep our home.

Company public response: Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation