Consumer complaint received 2017-06-07
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
Citibank    XXXX   XXXX     XXXX   XXXX   XXXX     XXXX   XXXX   XXXX    ,   XXXX   XXXX   XXXX  CA  XXXX  The communications problems with  Citi a re never ending. We attempted to start this short sale on  XXXX . We were told on  XXXX  by  XXXX  in the collections department that our authorization had not been validated and said he would send it in for validation. He also requested we have the borrower, whose personal liability for this lien has been  discharged in a  bankruptcy, call the collections department to verbally authorize us. This is an inappropriate request for a BKd lien. Possibly is a violation of a federal bankruptcy law, as the borrower would not be calling in of his own volition, but rather as a request from the collections department.  <P/>  XX/XX/XXXX we were told there was a proprietary authorization the borrower needed to fill out, and again asked for the borrower to call in to the collections department to verbally authorize us.  <P/> We sent that in on XX/XX/XXXX , and spoke with supervisor  XXXX , who assured me that she corrected the authorization issue, and told me that the file was assigned to   XXXX   XXXX  , and transferred me to the  XXXX  to make an appointment for a call back.   XXXX   XXXX   missed that appointment, and we received no callback.   On  XXXX , we received a letter via fax from  Citi re questing several items be corrected and returned to them. We sent all required docs back on  XXXX .  <P/> On XX/XX/XXXX , I called in for an update. The automated system did not recognize the loan number. Transferred 6 times until finally sent to collections.  Spoke with    XXXX  id  XXXX .  Claimed can  see authorization however has not been applied to file, and therefore will not speak to me. When asked why  XXXX ,  XXXX  and  XXXX  claimed they fixed the problem and noted the account, had no explanation. They are forcing the client to call the collections department to verbally authorize us. Borrower called in  XXXX  to authorize us.  <P/> On  XXXX , I called in for an update, I was told I was still not authorized. Transferred to  manager   XXXX . She explained that it would appear policies changed within the last month or so to disallow CitiMortgage employees from validating authorizations for  CitiBank HELOCS including verbal authorizations from the borrower directly, however these HELOCS are serviced by CitiMortgage. She has her manager and the VP of Operations involved in   correcting the problem, it is a deeper operational issue that needs to be resolved. They KNEW that verbal authorizations were not accepted, yet still insisted on having the borrower call the collections department. This is fishy at best, and illegal at worst. I can only assume that they were attempting to get the borrower to reaffirm the debt  discharged in a  BK in an underhanded way. When I asked them about that, they said that it was fine because the borrower was calling them, however remember that they are FORCING the borrower to call in to authorize professional representation. This would not be a call of his own volition.  <P/> On  XXXX  I was told the hardship letter needed to have the property address on it, we corrected that and sent it back the same day. On that day I set a callback appointment w ith our SPOC,  who again did not keep that appointment.  <P/> On  XXXX , we were told we needed ink signatures on all docs, we returned all that by  XXXX .  <P/> And then, mysteriously, we were not authorized again on  XXXX  please see above for the current issues.  <P/> Why is it so hard to g et Citi to  communicate effectively regarding loss mitigation? Why are they making it nearly impossible for the borrower to have professional representation? Why is the borrower being forced to call the collections department to verbally authorize us, when they ALL KNOW THAT VERBAL AUTHORIZATIONS ARE NOT BEING ALLOWED? Like I said above, I believe that was an illegal attempt at debt reaffirmation. The file was closed out, I believe in retaliation for our persistence and forcin g Citi to acknowledge the issues. All docs were sent back when asked for, no one keeps their callback appointments, and my authorization continues to mysteriously be removed. If this is not deliberate on Citis p art, then it is gross incompetence and negligence and I want them fined to the full extent of the law.  <P/>   Citi outright LIES on EVERY SINGLE PHONE CALL WE HAVE WITH THEM even their Management LIES EVERY TIME by stating that they have now fixed the issue with our authorization not showing in their system. Each time we call back we have to demand to speak to a manager and then go through this process all over again.
<P/>  Called in on  XXXX . Call went to the  XXXX  call center. They refused to acknowledge our authorization. After much yelling and requesting transfers to supervisors I was transferred to customer service in the states, who could not call the loan up, then transferred again but was not informed what department. At that time I was told that   XXXX   XXXX   was the assigned negotiator, and given his contact information. I was also told that   XXXX   XXXX   said they were missing a couple of changes to the HUD. We made those changes and sent them back to the specified email address given on  XXXX . I called attempted to call to get an update on  XXXX  to the number I was given for   XXXX   XXXX  , which did not take incoming calls nor was there a voicemail box to leave a message. I emailed   XXXX   XXXX   on  XXXX  to the email address I was given for him,  XXXX  XXXX  XXXX , asking for confirmation that all docs had been received and to get an update. The email was never answered. I called in to  Citi again   today, after again being told by the  XXXX   call center that I  was not authorized I called the collections department. The representative told me that the short sale was closed on  XXXX  due to documents not being returned. She also told me that   XXXX   XXXX   was not assigned to our short sale. She attempted to get this reopened and corrected for me, as I told her that all docs that were requested were returned on XX/XX/XXXX , and I had never been informed that anything else was still outstanding. She was unable to get this done and said the only thing I can do is to schedule a callback with our single point of contact  XXXX   XXXX . I was then transferred BACK TO THE  XXXX  to make that appointment. It is ridiculous that I have to be transferred so many times in  ONE  CALL to get anything accomplished. The only appointment available to me is 6 days from today. How is that timely and effective communication? It is unacceptable. I should have to wait no  more than 48 hours for a call to be returned. If the SPOCS are overworked then Citi needs to hi re more.

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 non-monetary relief