Consumer complaint received 2019-11-09
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process

Complaint:
**NOTE : THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE REQUEST. IT CAN NOT BE DUPLICATE BECAUSE IT RELATES TO AN OCC CONSENT ORDER THAT WAS ISSUED IN XXXX RESULTING IN A CHECK THAT WAS ONLY JUST RECEIVED IN THE PAST FEW DAYS. XXXX Citibank recently issued a check with no explanation. My understanding is that this check was issued by Citibank pursuant to OCC Consent Order # XXXX ( the Consent Order ) relating to Citibanks failure to properly administer a relationship discount pricing program. 

I would like to raise the following two concerns for the CFPBs consideration and information : 1. The check issued to me by CitiMortgage provides insufficient compensation for Citis failure to discount the mortgage interest rate to the correct RLP discounted rate ( as required pursuant to the Consent Order. Citi has verbally indicated that the discount that Citi should have extended to me in XXXX would have reduced the interest rate by 25 basis points and that pursuant to its agreement with the OCC that Citi is apparently only required to make an interest rate adjustment for a period of 5 years ( even though my mortgage is a 30 year mortgage ). Citis calculation for its remediation check is limited to interest only and does not reflect the additional amortization that would have occurred if the rate had been adjusted to the rate that they claim should have applied. Nor does it reflect the time value of money. In short, Citibanks interest saved calculation is wrong, Citibank makes no adjustment for the increased amortization that should have occurred, and Citibank makes no adjustment for the smaller overall monthly payment that should have been due every month pursuant to a reduced mortgage rate that would have saved thousands of dollars to date. In paragraph 6 of Article 2 of the Consent Order, the OCC notes  that Citibank has instituted a plan to reimburse all customers who did not receive the appropriate RLP benefit and is taking appropriate remedial actions to fully address and correct the violations of law ( emphasis added ). However, Citibank has not complied with the order to fully compensate and fully address its failure to extend relationship pricing to me.

2. In the Consent Order, OCC noted that Citibank failed to provide adequate training to loan officers regarding how to offer RLP to Bank customers and that because of ineffective risk management and control weaknesses, certain Bank borrowers did not receive the RLP benefit for which they were eligible. I would like to bring to OCCs attention Citibanks remarkably similar failure to properly administer its rate reduction program which was offered to me in XX/XX/XXXX. Under this program, Citibank offered to allow borrowers to benefit from a one-time rate reduction opportunity if certain conditions were met. Our loan officer sent us a flyer about the program and confirmed that our mortgage benefited from this rate reduction feature. However, after the mortgage was issued, when I subsequently contacted Citi to take advantage of the feature, Citi indicated to me that the feature had not been included in my mortgage because the Citi loan officer did not fill out the appropriate paperwork for inclusion of the feature. Despite sharing with Citi written communications from our loan officer, Citi has steadfastly refused to honor the feature, which would have resulted in a reduction in our monthly mortgage for several years to date and the remaining 20-plus years of the life of the mortgage. Citi was not moved by my argument that it would be vicariously liable for any missteps of its loan officer and that Citi would be required by law to honor its loan officers representations. Much like the OCCs findings set forth  in the Consent Order, the loan officers written representations state that Citi provided inadequate training in connection with Citis new product offerings ; that he had no idea that he needed to fill in any paperwork as he believed the feature automatically applied to all loans ; that he represented to me that the feature was included in my mortgage ; and the he believed under the circumstances Citi should honor the feature. Furthermore, I note that Citibank also indicated that, contrary to the information provided by Citis loan officer, my loan apparently did not qualify for the program because ( according to Citi ) only primary residence mortgages qualified for the program. However, even this response seems flawed because ( 1 ) it ignores the verified representations of Citis loan officer and ( 2 ) the terms and conditions of the policy per the flyer offering the program ( see attached ) do not state that the program only applies to primary residences : it states that offer applies to new home mortgage applications which is what my  mortgage was.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation