Consumer complaint received 2016-10-04
Company: CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
State: OH
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
Towards the end of XXXX my financial situation changed drastically because of a medical issue with my spouse. Many bills were paid late or not at all. My mortgage was well past XXXX60 days. The bank sent out an appraiser and the next thing I know I know I received a letter that stated to fix or take down an above ground pool that was empty of any water because it needed a liner. Well my premium increased a couple hundred dollars even after I notified XXXX that the pool was removed and taken down. I had gotten many quotes from other companies online and by phone. Said to say I forgot about this issue. I received a letter from Citizens One stating I needed to provide proof of insurance. This was on my back burner because I was so behind already on my mortgage. It was way past due. Citizens has a department called XXXX insurance that i thought I would use till I was able to get a Home Owners policy.My mortgage was only around {$7000.00}. On the back of my mortgage statement it says I am required to maintain fire and extened coverage for " at least the amount of the outstanding loan or replacement cost value of property ''. Well I thought i was getting coverage for the outstanding loan balance because this balance is in the interest of the bank. Well on or around XXXX XXXX XXXX I sent my copy of my full XXXX XXXX policy via internet. This was sent to Citizens One Hazard Insurance Dept. In XXXX XXXX I received from the US Postal office that was post marked XXXX XXXX XXXX a letter that the first sentence reads " Enclosed is a Hazard insurance policy we have obtained in accordance with your Deed and Trust/Mortgage documents. This was not just a Hazard policy but full coverage of {$530000.00}. with a premium of {$4700.00}. This was after I showed proof. I called and asked how this could happen and this was not what I needed with a loan balance of {$7000.00}. They gave me a credit of {$2700.00} and the rest of the premium was added to my escrow. Which now has a shortfall of {$2700.00}. I have been calling both the bank and the insurance department to no avail about this mislead charge for Hazard coverage. I have asked numerous time to send me the documents that say this coverage is mandated on the mortgage contract. I was told to read my own documents by the last female that spoke with me the week ending XXXX XXXX XXXX. She told me this is the way it is because my insurance lapsed and now I got to pay.I asked her repeatedly to make sure she documents what she said word for word on my account. There own bank statement says about having coverage for at least the amount of the outstanding loan and she said well " thats to bad '' and thats why we took out full coverage on your home " because you did n't pay and your lucky we gave you any credit ''. She also said she will make sure no other credits are given. All I have been asking from the bank is to produce the documents and or charge me a fair resonable charge for Hazard coverage. I have not gotten an answer for none of these request. Again I received a post marked XXXX policy after I showed proof of insurance with a full coverage policy. The letter was also dated on XXXX XXXX is after I showed proof. Does this bank and its employees have the right to mislead and force what ever they want on the consumer. Last week alone on XXXX XXXX or XXXX I spent 2 hours trying to get answers but all I got was " This is how it is and you need to pay ''. This amount added to my escrow increased my payment {$170.00} more. My payment was {$790.00} now its {$960.00}. This added amount to my escrow is unjust, unfair and totally misleading when I thought I was just getting Hazard coverage for fire, hail or rain or other peril or just to cover my loan balance. When is Hazard coverage the same as full home coverage. I asked many on XXXX XXXX XXXX to accept my payment of {$790.00} but no-one would accept it. I was totally mislead

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation