Consumer complaint received 2017-05-23
Company: EVERBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: NJ
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process

Complaint:
Early  XXXX   XXXX ,  2016, I rec eived a letter from my mortgage company, Everbank, stating that our condominium association 's flood insurance was deficient and that I needed to increase it by {$28000.00} in order to be in compliance. After a few hours worth of phone conversations with the bank later, I was able to find out that although FEMA only requires flood insurance coverage for 80 % of the valuation of the building, and even though my current coverage was/is at 100 % of the valuation that our current flood insurance company is placing on the building, {$860000.00}, they are demanding 100 % based on a higher valuation, {$980000.00}, from a different type of insurance ( i.e., hazard insurance ) that we currently own. On  X/X/2016   , I sent a letter  (  attached ) requesting from the mortgage company documentation ( statuary or contractual ) that justifies their demand but all I have received is documentation that states that per FEMA, we need to have flood insurance ( which, as stated earlier, we already do ... at 100 % coverage ) and some calculation worksheet ( neither addressed the request for justification in demanding a valuation different from the flood insurance carrier 's ). This was followed by a force-placement of flood insurance of their choosing covering the alleged gap.   In parallel to this, I have been trying to get a quote from various insurance companies but have not been able to.  One of t hose insurance companies is our current building flood insurance carrier. The challenge there has been that  our current carrier is requirin g justification for the increased valuation as well. As I stated earlier, I have requested this justification from the mo rtgage carrier but in lieu  of that, I have been force-placed a flood insurance of their choosing. On  X/XX/2016   , one day after receiving notice of the bank 's disappointing decision to force-place coverage above and beyond 100 % without even acknowledging my request for justification, I have followed up with another call to request the justification required by my flood insurance carrier. They have advised me to call back in 15 days with no promise that they will have the required documentation then.     This is a very difficult situation because : a ) I do n't see the justification for this increased coverage when the *flood* insurance company is actually valuing our home at the amount that we currently have 100 % coverage.    b ) Said ju stification is actually required by our flood insurance company to even provide a quote much less coverage for the alleged deficiency.   c ) I live on the   XXXX   floor of a  XXXX  -story bui lding. Even if the flood waters reached the top of my building, the 80 % that FEMA requires would more that suffice for replacement costs. However, we are above and beyond that at 100 % of the current valuation. But the mortgage company is not satisfied with that and have effectively put a very tough, unexpected ( at the time of loan-signing ) financial burden on me.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation