Consumer complaint received 2016-08-26
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: Onity Group Inc. (NY)

ATT : CUSTOMER SERVICE LOAN ID : XXXX CFPB Complaint # XXXX/XXXX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is the Servicer on my mortgage ( XXXX ). One West Bank ( XXXX ) is the Investor on this mortgage. The mortgage originated with IndyMac XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. One West Bank has held homeowner in extended processing for over 5 years. XXXX XXXX is XXXX of the original Servicers along with XXXX. Currently XXXX the servicer is not evaluating documents properly. Homeowner has submitted the RMA requesting modification over three times and the same results : lost paperwork, lost statement of income/ proof if income : then denied without explanation. 

The most recent denial was on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Homeowner has generated a NPV Report, data collection date of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and shows homeowner can possibly qualify for a modification. Homeowner has been in default since XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 

Homeowner is formally appealing the denial based on errors in home value, income and comparable recent sales : recent comp is {$230000.00}, sold in XXXX XXXX, XXXX. The income, DTI and LTV Loan to Values used by the services in the denial of the RMA application are in error. I have provided a recent NPV Report dated XXXX XXXX to show more than 2 errors on the processors side : 1. The estimated homeowners value is overstated ; off by {$290000.00} 2. Current street value of the home is {$230000.00} as of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 
3. Current Street Value base on recent comp sold at {$230000.00} XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 

The servicer has commenced double tracking while homeowner was acting in good faith under the XXXX XXXX Agreement : the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement. Servicer has denied the homeowner a modification when was qualified. 

The servicer ' is discriminating against homeowner claims, in a form of reverse discrimination ; holding the mortgage in extended processing, denying a loan modification while homeowner is qualified, lost documents when homeowner has already provided. 

This homeowner, feels that their case has been unfairly treated for the following reasons : 1. No active single point of contact, constantly changing, when calls made to the single point of contact, routine routed to the collection department, never the same contact person. 
2. A Single point of contact was assigned ; calls were made to the point of contact : the calls were never returned by the contact. Calls returned were from the collection department and never the same so called : " relationship manager ''. 
3. The servicer has held the homeowner in extended process in bad faith, during which the value of property has increased and fallen for 960 days from XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 
4. On the last RMA application : all requested documents were provided as requested. Homeowner has confirmation via fax that documents were received by the service, bank claims that documents lost. 
5. Homeowner has made numerous calls ( XXXX ) inquiring on status of application, as a foreclosure date has been set and reset ; calls were routed to next available collection department agent, comments were : A ) wrongfully advised that documents were not submitted, or B ) documents were submitted, or C ) resubmit documents because documents lost, or D ) the foreclosure date is set and homeowner is responsible for not providing the requested documents : these XXXX points are causing a state of confusion and terror to the homeowner. 
6. Servicer started a double tracking procedure upon the notice of default. The foreclosure agent was aware of the loan modification in process, and moved forward with the double tracking anyway. 
This is a clear violation under the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement ; specifically double tracking while homeowner provided all documents under good faith. 
7. Homeowner has not been updated with date of foreclosure sale.