Consumer complaint received 2015-06-19
Company: Residential Credit Opportunities Trust
State: GA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
As of XXXX XXXX, 2015, the Mortgagor was allowed to continue loan modification. XXXX XXXX, 2015 XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), requested additional information ( XXXX verification documents ). As of XXXX XXXX, 2015, Mortgagor was sent, by way of XXXX and Residential Credit Opportunities ' ( RCO ) Attorney, a Notice of Foreclosure Sale. By starting the modification with XXXX on XXXX XXXX and XXXX/RCO initialing foreclosure sale, this is clearly a violation of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Rules adapted by U.S. Congress. The rule states that the server can not initiate a foreclosure sale within XXXX days of the foreclose sale date while negotiating a loan modification. This loan modification negotiation is within XXXX days of the scheduled foreclosure sale date violating the CFPB rule. 
On XXXX XXXX, 2015 the Attorney for XXXX/RCO were notified by certified mail of the aboveviolations. Mortgagor follow through with the loan modification documents as requested by XXXX/RCO in which the documents were received by certified mail and signed foron XXXX XXXX, 2015 by company receptionist, XXXX XXXX. This was XXXX daysbefore the requested due date of XXXX XXXX. The Mortgagor contactedthe company on XXXX XXXX where the male representative said the only item he saw loaded in the system was the original XXXX page hardship letter sent with the package to Loss Mitigation in XXXX. He also stated that XXXX XXXX was the person processing the loan, was not available at the time and should have the documents on her desk. Friday, XXXX XXXX, the Mortgagor spoke with another representative who could not find the certified mailed documents that had been signed for. Finally, on XXXX XXXX the Mortgagor was able to speak with XXXX XXXX of XXXX who was to be processing the loan modification. XXXX XXXX, who was informed that the conversation was beingrecorded, said the documents had not be completely loaded into the system and was still to be completely reviewed. She also stated RCO has the final say as to what XXXX decides to do with the loans because they are a private company, and that a letter had just been mailed denying the Mortgagor 's request for a short sale and payment amount. The Mortgagor asked why did the previous letter from XXXX states that an " application in not required? ". XXXX confirmed there being no need to have an application for modification on file. As well, she stated the Mortgagor 's only other option would be to vacate the house if the modification was not approved. 
On the next day, Tuesday, XXXX XXXX a XXXX package arrived at the residentscontaining XXXX letters. The first letter stated that, " You are not currently eligible for a loanmodification due to failure to provide loan documentation as requested. This is a final denial. '' The XXXX letter stated that " Based on the income documentation you provided, you are not currently eligible for a loan modification due to insufficient income. " Administrator XXXX XXXX of RCO, signed both letters and also stated the incomewas only {$760.00} a month and {$1100.00} was needed for PITI. But XXXX did not count for all of the monthly house whole income that was sent to his office certified. From all evidence, as XXXX stated in a previously recorded conversation that, " They were going to take the house '' which is a predatory attitude and a violation of laws and rules. 
First, the XXXX pays stubs sent only accounted for XXXX weeks ' worth ofincome. The monthly school board pay is actually {$1500.00} per month. Secondly, XXXX did not count the rental incomes of {$900.00} per month, and business income of about {$700.00} a month. Finally, according to modification rule, a trial payment period is also provided after reviewing the income, before denial. XXXX did not try to qualify theMortgagor in good faith. A HUD Counselor had approved the loan mod. docs earlier

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation