Consumer complaint received 2015-06-03
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: NJ
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
SInce XXXX when CitiMortgage suddenly changed their flood and hazard coverage requirements, I have been fighting them over the fact there is no good reason, and they were never able to give me XXXX. Every year we got threatening letters about them force placing the additional insurance. Rather than risking issues with our credit or any other problems we did n't need, we would reluctantly obtain the additional insurance. Each year I would google the topic and hope to find something about the practice and the fact it is suspect. Last year I was thrilled to find that a Lawsuit was filed again them for this exact issue. I researched and then inquired about joining the class action lawsuit. We joined the lawsuit and were given a claim number and submitted the paperwork by the deadline and waited. The next thing I know, we are again getting letters from the bank that not only are they force placing additional flood insurance, but they are also now withholding escrow money to cover the insurance for the following year! Literally, continuing to do EXACTLY what they are being sued for. I could not get any answers through the Citi claims administrator XXXX phone, fax, email all repeatedly ignored ), or the CitiMortgage insurance department, who claim they need to receive their instructions from the administrator, and finally even the attorneys office who was representing the people, could not seem to get me an answer as to why not only were they continuing this practice on our account, but what happened to fulfilling the settlement terms of the lawsuit with the claimants? We were never contacted to say we were not part of the lawsuit and had been waiting to see what was next. We were not seeking monetary compensation for the years in question that we were made to buy additional insurance but we did expect them to fulfill the rest of the terms which included not requiring the GREATER of the XXXX insurance amounts. The Federal regulations dictate that you are required to carry flood/hazard insurance to cover the replacement cost value of your home OR your mortgage balance, whichever is LESS. In 2010 Citi changed those requirements to having to carry it in the amount that was GREATER. I think part of the lawsuit insinuates that they had a financial interest in the insurance provider they were using to obtain these additional policies. I have still not been told why we are not qualified as part of this lawsuit, after receiving a claimant number and everything. More importantly though they have now force placed the additional insurance because I refused to increase it while I was awaiting the settlement to take effect. Had anyone informed us we were not being included, I never would have let them take out the insurance, nor would I have allowed them to start an escrow account, when we never had XXXX before. How could they now be allowing only the customers that got wind of the lawsuit, to be exempt from carrying the additional insurance, and remain able to require the rest of their mortgage customers to abide by the other rules? It hardly seems fair or legal. Especially when we have consistently fought them on it, thought we finally were getting relief from it, and instead have months worth of extra headache and paper, with no real clearcut answer. Yet I imagine the minute we refuse to pay the additional money, we will hear from plenty of people. I am at ropes end now with them. Absolutely unacceptable, especially after they just had to settle a lawsuit basically confirming all this. I do n't know what to do anymore.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation