Consumer complaint received 2016-02-23
Company: CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC
State: WA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
We have tried to resolve the issue with Carrington ( CMS ) without success, so we are submitting it for assistance. 

In this email, please find the escalation and borrower authorization forms. The second attachment is a " resolution letter '' from CMS dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, which chronicles a recent escalation made by XXXX XXXX. It is important to note that any references I make to the Handbook is referring to the most current MHA Handbook XXXX, unless otherwise stated. 

The attached response letter from CMS basically concludes that XXXX XXXX was not eligible for any modification options and that the foreclosure sale was going to take place without any intervention. They state that " it is important to note that similar to HAMP guidelines, CMS guidelines also renders a loan ineligible to receive an alternative loan modification after receiving and defaulting under a HAMP Tier II TPP or a permanent HAMP Tier II loan modification under the same circumstances as outlined above. For this reason, CMS has declined the borrower 's subsequent requests for mortgage assistance for consideration under all loan modification programs. CMS continues to respectfully decline the borrower 's request to reconsider the loan for another loan modification. Currently, the loan is in an active foreclosure status with a foreclosure sale scheduled to occur on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. '' It then references MHA Handbook version XXXX as the basis of fact for their denial, even though version XXXX of the Handbook was severely outdated as of the date of their letter ( it was published XXXX XXXX ). XXXX XXXX then filed bankruptcy in a last-ditch effort to save the house. When we called XXXX in XXXX XXXX, they again confirmed that XXXX XXXX was being denied due to " multiple modifications '' and referenced this same letter as the basis for denial. 

Below is a confirmed list of workout options the borrower has had on his loan ( this information is also stated in the letter ) : 1. XXXX XXXX - In-house modification 2. XXXX XXXX - XXXX In-house modification 3. XXXX XXXX - HAMP2 Trial Period ( defaulted on 2nd payment ). 

Section XXXX of the Handbook ( Streamline HAMP Eligibility ) states that " a borrower may not receive more than XXXX permanent modifications or default on more than XXXX TPPs ( or a combination of both ) with respect to the same loan under HAMP. '' XXXX XXXX has not received any permanent loan modifications under HAMP, and only received XXXX TPP under HAMP. He further meets all basic criteria for HAMP eligibility as outlined in section XXXX, so he should have been deemed eligible for review. 

CMS did not follow the guidelines set forth in the current Handbook, nor did they access any of the published supplemental directives that were available from XXXX to present. They further did not comply with any of their other obligations as outlined in their XXXX agreement with the treasury, which states that servicer a should " use reasonable efforts to remove all prohibitions to its authority, and use reasonable efforts to obtain all third party consents and waivers that are required, by contract or law, in order to effectuate any modification of a mortgage loan. '' I have also attached that if it is needed. 

For the reasons outlined above, we are formally requesting to have XXXX XXXX properly reviewed for Streamline HAMP. 


Thank you, we look forward to hearing from you.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation