Consumer complaint received 2016-12-10
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: Ditech Financial LLC (FL)

I closed my mortgage XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage. At that time, my XX/XX/XXXX homeowners insurance was paid full and {$2200.00} deposited into my escrow account. XX/XX/XXXX, I paid the XX/XX/XXXX property taxes from my checking account. Before the first payment was due, my mortgage was sold to Ditech. I called Ditech to set up an online payment account and immediately ran into issues. I was told not to make a payment as Ditech was in the process of changing their system and not to worry. My first statement is dated XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX and shows a past due amount of {$920.00} and an escrow balance of {$1000.00}. My escrow account was short {$1200.00} which I did not realize until after spending hours reviewing my statements. I was confused that there was a past due amount, called Ditech and was told the new system was causing problems and not to worry. On XX/XX/XXXX, I made a payment of {$920.00}. Using the incorrect escrow of {$1000.00}, with this payment my escrow should have now been {$1300.00}. There is no XX/XX/XXXX statement ; however, on XX/XX/XXXX I made a payment of {$920.00}. Still utilizing the incorrect beginning escrow balance, with this payment the escrow balance should be {$1600.00}. Around this time I began receiving foreclosure information. My payments have been made on-time in full each month. Ditech has twice withdrawn funds from escrow account in error, misapplied funds, charged bogus " inspection '' fees that I was n't aware of, and harassed me. I have called numerous times, been disconnected countless times, lied to, told conflicting information, emailed them without response, received messages returning my call when I have n't called, and during this nearly 12 month process, not once has my account been correct. I believe Ditech owes me {$2000.00} in escrow funds. I believe my principal balance is incorrect. Each time I call they are " experiencing a high volume of calls '' and I have been able to speak with a supervisor ONCE. Below is an example of how Ditech conducts their business. 
2016 statements : XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$2700.00} and an escrow balance of {$1500.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$1800.00} and escrow balance of {$1800.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$1800.00} and an escrow balance of {$1800.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX payment made in the amount of {$930.00}. Ditech payment history shows payment of {$1000.00}. This amount never shows up on any of the XX/XX/XXXX statements. This payment would now bring the escrow to {$2000.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$1800.00} and escrow balance {$2200.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$1800.00} and escrow balance {$2200.00}. 
Payments were made on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$460.00}. I began making bi-weekly payments in an effort to reduce interest paid and paid about {$5.00} more per month than required. I had made several phone calls regarding bi-weekly payments and the dates to confirm there would not be an issue. In XX/XX/XXXX I was told that the system did n't understand bi-weekly payments and this is what had been causing the problems. The escrow account should now have been {$2300.00}. 
XX/XX/XXXX and is due XX/XX/XXXX. Amount due {$1800.00} and escrow balance is {$1700.00}. I have a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX indicating Ditech had misapplied funds and once the reallocation was processed, the account will be next due for the XX/XX/XXXX due date in the amount of {$920.00}. Ditech had also withdrew {$820.00} from my escrow for Earthquake insurance. The condo is located in Florida. This letter also indicated that Ditech had proof of insurance on file through XX/XX/XXXX so I question WHY the disbursement of {$820.00} was made from my escrow account for EARTHQUAKE insurance. To date, I have not been fully refunded. The XX/XX/XXXX statement also increased my principal balance by {$280.00}. This then caused what was applied to the principal for the remainder of the year to decrease.