Consumer complaint received 2016-01-18
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: MD
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Complaint:
My wife and I purchased our home XX/XX/XXXX for {$350000.00}. Since that time we have made timely payments each month and made significant improvements to the home. By XX/XX/XXXX mortgage balance was slightly less than {$290000.00}, while the market value of the house increased to somewhere between {$400000.00} - {$450000.00}. The mortgage has been held by multiple banks since inception, and was held by Ditech Financial XX/XX/XXXX, when we made a written request to cancel the PMI, based on the principal balance to market value ratio. 
In response to the PMI cancellation request, Ditech contracted with local Realtor XXXX XXXX to perform a Broker Price Opinion ( BPO ). XXXX XXXX came to the house to evaluate the property, and orally stated to us that it would " easily value at {$400000.00} or more ''. However, it is apparent that Ditech then communicated with XXXX XXXX about the principal balance left on the mortgage, and which time she returned a BPO with a value of {$380000.00}, several thousand dollars below the amount needed to cancel the PMI. 
Several facts make it clear that the final BPO was manipulated. Firstly, the BPO listed XXXX comparable sales, and in XXXX of the XXXX comparables the " Adjusted Price of Subject '' was significantly above {$380000.00}. The only comparable that set an " Adjusted Price of Subject '' less than {$380000.00} was 'Comparable # XXXX ' ( {$380000.00} XXXX and this property is located in an entirely different county, in less desirable school districts. Looking at the " Adjusted Price of Subject '' of the other XXXX comparables, the average figure is {$400000.00}. Even including Comparable # XXXX, the average figure would still be over {$400000.00}. Additionally, the Realtor selected XXXX comparable as being " Most Similar to Subject ''. These XXXX properties established " Adjusted Price of Subject '' values of {$430000.00} and {$390000.00}, for an average of {$410000.00}. 
Finally, the " Additional Comments '' section of the XXXX undermine the final determination reached by the Realtor. In this section ( page XXXX ) the Realtor notes the extensive upgrades made to the property. She expressly listed the major upgrades made, and notes " Upgrades equal to {$48000.00}. '' Given these upgrades, and the purchase price of {$350000.00}, even if the property did not increase in value since purchase ( which it undoubtedly has, as has every property in our neighborhood ) then fair marker value of the house would still be around {$400000.00}. Please note that all of these values listed above are greater than the {$380000.00} value listed in the BPO, and all of these other figures would have resulted in the cancellation of our PMI. Finally, while it may or may not be relevant the Realtor who conducted the PMI was the exact same Realtor who represented the seller when the purchased the house XX/XX/XXXX. She knew or should have known the value of the house at that time, and undoubtedly is aware that prices have increased in the neighborhood since we bought our home.

Company public response: Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation