Consumer complaint received 2023-03-13
Product: Mortgage — Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)
Issue: Trouble during payment process — 
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. (IL)

For over the past 2+ years I have been paying on my HELOC with Chase an ADDITIONAL amount, every month, of approximately $ XXXX month beyond the minimum monthly payment of approximately $ XXXX, and expecting that that additional $ XXXX beyond the minimum would be AUTOMATICALLY applied to reducing the principal balance. ln doing so, I have been using my bank 's online bill payment service ( this bank account is not a Chase bank account ) for nearly all of these payments. ( A few were made over the last few years directly at a Chase branch bank. ) With the exception of this one, and including 5 other prior months payments during this time, ALL others made this way have ALL posted correctly. In other words, the additional amount of around $ XXXX over and above the minimum payment of around $ XXXX had ALWAYS been fully applied toward the principal balance, thus effectively reducing the amount I owed on the HELOC ( which also reduces the time for paying it back ), and subsequently the interest calculated and charged for the following month. I was under the impression that ANY AMOUNT beyond the minimum payment was AUTOMATICALLY put toward the principal. However, in getting my documentation ready for this years taxes, I reviewed on-line my Chase HELOC records for the past 2+ years. In so doing, I noticed something that I did not expect, nor did I even understand. So today ( XXXX ) I called Chase customer service to find out WHY the EXTRA {$610.00} amount I paid for last month was not applied to the principal for my XX/XX/2023 payment. Why did they apply ONLY {$220.00} of the {$1000.00} I sent toward the principal, AND then " make '' 2 other monthly payments : one for the original minimum due of {$380.00}, AND ANOTHER payment for {$380.00}. The payment was not late! I first spoke with XXXX about this issue. He agreed that the additional {$610.00} for my XX/XX/2023 should have been fully applied to the principal. He advised me that he would, or did, put in a work ticket to correct this processing error for my XX/XX/2023 payment. He said the full amount of the {$610.00} would be applied and credited toward the principal balance. But the only explanation I was given as to why this happened ( and had happened in the past ) is, " that is their computer process. '' So evidentially because I do not SPECIFICALLY designate the additional amount to be applied to the principal, they split it into three payments totaling the {$1000.00}. 
My questions were simple : XXXX. Why is the OBVIOUS extra payment NOT AUTOMATICALLY put toward the principle? ( Why would I NEED to designate it as such? That would be the most logical application of the additional amount. ) XXXX. Where exactly does the second payment of {$380.00} go, and how is it applied? 
XXXX. If it was not a late payment, why are they paying {$380.00} ahead for the next month 's payment? 
XXXX. How can you make me whole with regards to lowering the principle amount, which would lower the interest charged, and the time remaining to pay it off- over these past XXXX years? 
( The point of paying down the principle is to reduce the interest. ) He was simply unable to give me any clear explanation regarding these questions, other than that's how " our system, process, works! '' When I asked for a supervisor, I was transferred to XXXX. When I asked her to " make me whole by correcting the previous 5 or so accounting errors like they could do, or will/did for the one in XXXX, '' she said they CAN'T go back more than 90 days. When I asked why not, she asked me if that was a " bank error '' and that I should have be using their Chase online payment option or go directly to a branch location for payments. I don't find doing it that way from now on to be a problem. I will make sure from this time on to TELL THEM that the additional amount NEEDS to be put toward the principal. I did, however, say that I believe it is a computer set-up processing problem that should be corrected. But she told me FLAT OUT that they WILL NOT go back beyond their 90 days " policy '' to correct the issue for me, or even look into and give my an explanation I can understand. For me it is either a POLICY issue, or just laziness ; neither of which is acceptable, nor should it be, to me. This is just another scenario of how big banks misuse, misinform and/or simply take advantage of average customers with NO ACCOUNTABILITY. That is why I am taking the time right now to share my frustration and submit this claim. The old adage of : " If you can't convince them ... CONFUSE THEM '' is highly appropriate in this instance!