Consumer complaint received 2017-02-28
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: WI
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
My mortgage was transferred to Citimortgage in XX/XX/XXXX after I purchased the property in XX/XX/XXXX for {$89000.00} with a down payment of approximately {$20000.00}. I began having financial hardship issues and fell behind on payments in XX/XX/XXXX. Citi assigned the account to a homeowner support specialist. This individual instructed me not to make payments while Citi worked up a loan modification. When the representative finally made contact with me again ( after I left a Voicemail and followed the instruction not to leave multiple messages ), he told me the new payment amount under the loan modification and when the new plan would begin. 

However, I later was told that the modification fell through and the property was going into foreclosure. Citi would not accept payments. 

The property went into foreclosure in XX/XX/XXXX but was apparently removed from foreclosure when Citi set me up on the Making Home Affordable program ( HAMP ). I successfully completed my three trial payments of {$500.00} each. Citi then informed me for the first time that they did not actually own the loan. It was owned by XXXX, which did participate in HAMP. Citi was required to participate in HAMP, but that did not matter, because they only serviced the loan and did not own it. 

It was XX/XX/XXXX when another person assigned to my account set me up on a payment arrangement and stated that there would be a balloon amount at the end, which could then be rolled over into a second payment arrangement. This individual said at that point, I would be almost caught up. This arrangement began in XX/XX/XXXX with payments of {$950.00} each. 

After making numerous payments, I was informed by another representative that Citi actually could not roll over the balloon amount into a second payment arrangement. Now they would not arrange any repayment program at all without extremely large monthly payments to only last approximately six months. 

Citi returned multiple checks of up to {$2400.00} each in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX as I attempted to bring the loan current. Thousands of dollars in payments were returned. The property was not in foreclosure so there was no reason for the organization not to accept money to pay down the arrears. 

In addition, Citi continued to encourage me to apply for a loan modification. I am not sure how many times I applied during those years. For example, I have stacks of letters from XX/XX/XXXX from three different homeowner support representatives repeatedly asking me to send in documentation over and over. 

All the paperwork, including the legal documents, continues to list XXXX as the investor, although XXXX has not actually existed since XX/XX/XXXX. It was bought out by XXXX. The loan modification application I submitted in XX/XX/XXXX would have needed approval from XXXX. 

A Citi representative told me it was essentially too late to obtain a loan modification because the payments would now be too high. She suggested I should have applied for a modification before. 

Citi representatives confirmed to me that Citi, as XXXX, actually bought the loan at the sheriff 's sale. XXXX Bank did not buy the loan with Citi as servicer. Yet the defunct XXXX is listed as the high bidder. 

I am nearly XXXX years old and have lived in this house for almost 20 years. I have tried very hard to work things out with this bank. I do not understand why a gigantic corporation can make these sorts of errors and not be held accountable... because technically, they only serviced the loan and did n't own it. True, the federal government has now fined Citi nearly XXXX, partly because of the way this corporation has treated homeowners. But that does not help me. Citi has issued a deadline of XX/XX/XXXX to leave the property, so it can sit vacant along with the other XXXX bank-owned residential properties in my immediate neighborhood.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation