Consumer complaint received 2020-01-01
Company: M&T BANK CORPORATION
State: NJ
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
I began communication with M & T Banks Assistance Center Department in XX/XX/XXXX, in order to prevent foreclosure from occurring on the property that both my Mother, XXXX and I occupy. We fell behind with payments and bills due to my Mothers boss cutting her hours in XXXX and ultimately laying her off in XX/XX/XXXX. The woman I spoke to, who was incredibly friendly, suggested going into a forbearance plan, she said it was a new plan that they were offering for loss mitigation. She said she did not have the details regarding it though, but that it would lower payments so we would be able to catch up. Initially she said that wed be paying {$25.00} a month instead of our regular monthly payment. She processed the paperwork, which we were approved for. Payments then began of {$1200.00} a month until XX/XX/XXXX when we would have to reapply for an extension of the forbearance plan. At the time, my Mother was laid off XX/XX/XXXX, but was receiving unemployment. The extension was granted, the same amount for the forbearance, and the extension ran until XX/XX/XXXX. We also received notification that we had also been approved for a modification in XXXX of XXXX. 

We received notice in XX/XX/XXXX to submit another application to Loss Mitigation in order to see if we would be approved for either another extension or a modification. The information was submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. My Mother had started a new job in the beginning of the month so her paystubs were then submitted to support any payment plan that would be approve. 

I then received a call XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX from the Assistance Center , the gentleman on the other end said that we were denied a modification because the modification amount would be greater than the actual mortgage payment. When I asked what he meant, he stated that he didnt know, there was no clarification from the underwriter and that I should call back to find out. 

I called on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX to see if I could get further clarification and also to make the forbearance payment. I was in formed on this hour long phone call, that the forbearance plan was terminated due to my Mother now having a job, and that they still could not give me an answer as to why the underwriters said the modification payment would be more than the regular payment. 

I stated that the termination due to employment of the forbearance plan was NEVER disclosed to me. I asked to speak to a supervisor, and it took some time to get him on the phone. I believe his name was XXXX. He said that the termination of the forbearance was due to it being a forbearance of unemployment. If this is the case, this should have been disclosed prior to application, the original forbearance was never disclosed as unemployment as my Mother had still been employed when we were approved. He did not clarify the denial letter as the information was not provided. He told me he would have to research it, and would call me by XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to let me know what exactly it meant. He said that I had a right to appeal the denial, but I never received a phone call on XX/XX/XXXX. 
I did appeal the denial but was sent a letter that it was incomplete. 
I finally reached out to HUD, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development where I was matched over to XXXX XXXX XXXX. The woman I was partnered with, XXXX, offered to do a conference call with not only myself, but with M & T Bank as well. That call took place on XX/XX/XXXX. 

We still did not receive clarification on the denial still but did have a new packet for the application sent to myself and my Mother. The letter stating that we had until XX/XX/XXXX to send in all the documents that were requested. 

I e-mailed the documents on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. Everything that was requested was there. 

Yesterday, XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from M & T Bank XXXX XXXX. The letter was dated XX/XX/XXXX. The letter stated that due to not sending in my application and the application being incomplete, they would be closing the case that was open. 

I immediately called the Assistance Center to find out what was going on, because I knew for a fact that I e-mailed it in on time. The gentleman that I spoke to, XXXX XXXX, stated that it was considered as late because it wasnt uploaded to my profile within the 24 to 48 hour time frame. I asked him to explain as I e-mailed it in on XX/XX/XXXX, the deadline for the application. He said because they have to download it, scan it in and upload it to the profile, its considered late. This was the first time I was hearing this as nothing was ever disclosed about a specific time frame that is based on who is there in their office to do this. 

Mr. XXXX said that I would have to submit a new application despite the fact that he said that the application I e-mailed in was uploaded to my profile on XX/XX/XXXX. I asked him why I would need to submit a brand-new application after I e-mailed XXXX XXXXn XX/XX/XXXX, it had just been 4 days prior to the phone call. 

He recanted and said that the application would open up a new case. 

There has been nothing but confusion, and little to no information being provided. Clarification for the original denial has never been provided, they keep having us submit applications, the terminate a forbearance, which that rule was never disclosed. 

We moved our mortgage to M & T Bank f.k.a. Hudson City Savings Bank because that is the bank that my family has been with for years. We have never gone through such headaches, heartache, and confusion. My Mother has a bad XXXX to begin with, so I have been dealing with all the phone calls so she doesnt get upset over what is taking place, shes aware of it, very aware of it but I dont need anything happening to her, and this has been an ongoing frustration with Loss Mitigation. The lack of information, sudden rules, no clarification has been a complete headache for both of us.

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