Consumer complaint received 2016-09-26
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: FL
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Settlement process and costs

Complaint:
We sold our home at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and purchased a new one at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Ditech has held our first mortgage for nearly two years. We 've had a second mortgage since XX/XX/XXXX, for the purpose of an in-ground swimming pool. This loan initiated with Greentree, then, through the years, moved to XXXX, then to XXXX XXXX XXXX where it currently remains. XXXX purchased GreenTree in XX/XX/XXXX. When XXXX bought GreenTree they took over the mortgage, paid the loan - for which we have a copy of the receipt - but records do not indicate they ever satisfied the Lien placed on our property. Also through the years, the name of GreenTree was changed to Ditech and again they never released the lien from GreenTree ; they just absorbed the mortgage under the Ditech name. 
XXXX XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX notified us XX/XX/XXXX that she would be processing our file for closing. She initiated a title search at that time and discovered the above-cited non-satisfied liens. Coincidently, Ditech, the holder of our first mortgage ( for our house ) is the company that gobbled up XXXX of our previous holders of our second mortgage ( for our pool. ) XXXX XXXX has been working with Ditech since XX/XX/XXXX to get these old liens released. XXXX XXXX 's underwriting attorney found another mortgage with similar issues where Ditech recorded satisfactions for all the old mortgages. 
XXXX XXXX faxed in XXXX pages of documents requested by Ditech on XX/XX/XXXX. Repeated attempts for updates have been met with Ditech saying either they never received the documents and to please resend or they see documents in the system and will have their supervisor call back with a status update. The latter has happened both to XXXX XXXX and to myself when requesting updates on our file and no return call from Ditech has been received by either one of us. On XX/XX/XXXX, we learned from one of the customer service reps that our file was in the " Lien Satisfaction Department. '' We are unsure why this took a month, but we were heartened to learn there might be some progress. This rep also promised her supervisor would call back, but no call was ever received. Unfortunately, we 've been told that customer service representatives for Ditech are not allowed to forward calls directly to their supervisors or to the Lien Satisfaction Department so we can never just call them and ask questions. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I called Ditech for an update and spoke with a XXXX who said notes of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX were saying a written request by me needed to be faxed to XXXX so the Lien Release Department could initiate their investigation into the lien ( s ). Initiate an investigation into a matter that was now a month old? I asked him how long it would take the department to resolve the search once they received this " written request '' which, by the way, was never mentioned previously, not in any of the calls between XXXX with XXXX XXXX, or with me, XXXX XXXX, the property owner. XXXX said it could take up to 30 days! 
My husband and I have a contract to sell our XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL property. We were scheduled to close XXXX XXXX. We can not close until the old liens are released. The buyer has had to get XXXX extensions from her lender and we recently had to pay for a third extension for her. In addition, we have a contract to buy another property which has been scheduled for some time now to close on XXXX XXXX. I have changed our address with many companies and people. I have scheduled services for the new residence, such as move-in housecleaning, pest control, moving van, etc. But we can not close until the old liens are released on our XXXX XXXX property. Despite advising Ditech of the time-sensitivity of this matter, they are treating us very poorly. We need help!

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation