The Company involved is the new loan servicing agent for the mortgage lender/mortgagee ( a subsidiary of XXXX XXXX ). The former loan service company and loan originator was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The transfer date for the new loan servicing Company, as the new loan servicing agent, was XX/XX/2018. 

The XX/XX/2018 mortgage loan payment was received by the new loan service Company on XX/XX/2018, which the Company acknowledges. However, the Company provided me a mortgage payment statement, dated XX/XX/2018, that shows the XX/XX/2018 payment is past due pending receipt of the payment. The Company acknowledges that the payment was in fact received on XX/XX/XXXX but additional time ( 7 days in this case ) is needed to process received payments. Therefore their statement reporting system ( per phone call to company on XX/XX/2018 ) shows XX/XX/XXXX as the payment received date, instead of actual date of receipt, which they acknowledge to be XX/XX/XXXX. 

In telephone discussion with company, and the Company 's on line status information, they acknowledge that the payment in question was received on XX/XX/2018, but they report that they need an additional 7 days to process loan payments after they are received electronically or by mail. Therefore, even though the payment was received on XX/XX/XXXX, their statement system shows it was received on XX/XX/XXXX, one day after the attached XX/XX/XXXX statement date. 

The Company 's payment received reporting system correctly reported the payment received date ( XX/XX/XXXX ). The company 's statement reporting system shows a later date ( XX/XX/XXXX ). In essence, the company has " two sets of books ''. The discrepancy in reporting dates for payment received is of critical importance to the mortgagor, because it effects total interest paid on the loan, may impact credit reporting and also could impact annual interest paid annual amounts for the IRS and State income tax deduction filings. 

The company may utilize this " two sets of books '' practice to collect accrued interest from the reporting delay between the date the payment was received ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and the date reported for receipt of payment ( XX/XX/XXXX ). 

Although it was confirmed with the mortgagor ( me ) that the payment was received on XX/XX/XXXX, for record purposes and loan statement purposes, the loan service company is able to report to the mortgagee that the payment was received on a later date of XX/XX/XXXX. Using this accrual method, allows the loan service company to earn additional accrual payment amounts on the loan over their regular contractual loan servicing fees. In other words, the loan service company keeps the accrued interest for the difference in the payment received dates, in this case, accrued interest between the dates XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. The Company is reporting to both the mortgagee and mortgagor that the payment was received on XX/XX/XXXX and not the XX/XX/XXXX actual date. On several thousand different loans the Company may be providing loan servicing, the difference in reporting dates for payments received can add up to $ millions in XXXX XXXX  that the company may be able to keep, not the mortgagee. The mortgagor in the party paying for this difference. Over the life of the mortgage, this difference can add up to $ thousands, which is directly the result of incorrect reporting by the loan service Company.