Remove the escrow account for loan # XXXX due to insufficient capabilities of Seterus Inc and its contracted vendors in respect to managing the escrow account. In reviewing the escrow analysis history of the escrow account, the following observations have been made : 1 ) In the escrow analysis dated XX/XX/XXXX there was a shortage/deficiency in the amount of {$220.00}. To counter the shortage/deficiency the payment was increased by {$37.00} from {$1500.00} to {$1600.00} over a 12-month period.
2 ) In the escrow analysis dated XX/XX/XXXX there was a shortage/deficiency in the amount of {$170.00}. To correct the shortage/deficiency the payment was decreased by - {$1.00} from {$1600.00} to {$1600.00}. over a 36-month period. How is decreasing the payment for a 36-month period going to correct a shortage/deficiency? 
3 ) In the escrow analysis dated XX/XX/XXXX there was a shortage/deficiency of {$1100.00}. To correct the shortage/deficiency the payment was increased by {$94.00} from {$1600.00} to {$1700.00}. On page one of the escrow analysis it states that the shortage would be spread over a 36-month period ; however, on the acknowledgement letter page ( page3 ) it indicates that the shortage/deficiency would be spread of a 12-month period. If the shortage/deficiency is spread over 12-month period the increased payment amount of {$94.00} calculates to {$1100.00} which means the shortage/deficiency would not be corrected in the 12-month period as indicated. If the shortage/deficiency is spread over a 36-month period the increased payment amount of {$94.00} calculates to {$3400.00}. How was this actually administered? 
4 ) In the escrow analysis dated XX/XX/XXXX there was a shortage/deficiency in the amount of {$1200.00}. To correct the shortage/deficiency the payment was increased by {$21.00} from {$1700.00} to {$1700.00} for a 36-month period. When you calculate the increase of {$21.00} it comes to a total of {$780.00} which means the shortage/deficiency would not be corrected as indicated in your letter. 
5 ) In the escrow analysis dates XXXX/XXXX/XXXX in the Actual Escrow Account History table it states that a payment was made on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to the County of XXXX for {$2300.00}. This is a false statement as no payment was made. The payment was actually made by the borrow/homeowner on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Again in the Actual Escrow Account History table it states that a payment was made on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to the hazard insurance provider for {$840.00}. This is again a false statement as no payment was made. The payment was actually made by the borrower/homeowner on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX 6 ) The county tax bill for the fiscal year XXXX XXXX, XXXX to XXXX XXXX, XXXX indicated that there was a tax default for the XXXX property tax year. In the Actual Escrow Account History table for the analysis dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX it indicates that the shortage in tax payment was made from the escrow account on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX for {$100.00} and th.e penalty was paid from the escrow account on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX for {$100.00}. The penalty is the responsibility of the escrow facilitator, not the borrower. The penalty of {$100.00} needs to be refunded to the homeowner. 
Based on the above observations, the homeowner took over the responsibility of paying the property taxes and hazard insurance beginning in XXXX. The homeowner has since paid the 2nd installment of the property tax for the XXXX fiscal year, the hazard insurance for the fiscal year of XXXX, and the XXXX installment of the XXXX fiscal year property tax. 
Seterus Inc. was notified XXXX XXXX, XXXX to close the escrow account and despite many efforts by the borrow/homeowner and several managers at Seterus Inc,  the escrow account remains open and continues to be funded. In doing so, Seterus Inc. has been misappropriating the monthly payments it has been receiving force the account in to default status. These actions are reckless and need to be immediately corrected.