Consumer complaint received 08-09-2016 about Mortgage (Conventional fixed mortgage) with Ditech Financial LLC (NJ).
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint: Loan Modification XXXX based discrimination. 
Mortgage company was originally Greentree Serving then taken over by Ditech Financial, LLC, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, SD XXXX. 
Due to my XXXX I do not have the financial means to hire an attorney to handle the loan modification process on my mortgage. Green Tree servicing and now Ditech financial is taking advantage of that fact in the belief that I am ignorant to the process due to my XXXX. Also, Greentree and Ditech are fully aware that I am permanently XXXX and are attempting to discriminate against me and take advantage of the fact that I am permanently XXXX. Also, public information regarding the loan modification process has determined that XXXX % of loan modification applications are denied when the homeowner does not have legal representation. This is further proof of the discrimination I am experiencing due to my lack of income to pay an attorney due to my loss of income caused by my XXXX. I have contacted several attorneys and they charge between {$5000.00} and {$10000.00} to represent a homeowner, with no guarantees of success.XXXX The information I have received from the attorneys show they follow the identical process in which I have done over and over again but obviously the title at the end of their name is the difference. 
DETAILS OF MY EXPERIENCE : After working in the insurance field for the last 20 years and consistently been employed since age XXXX, I had become permanently XXXX and have been collecting social security XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX. Due to my financial situation I have applied for the government sponsored loan modification programs. There was a lot of information I have to share for you to get the complete circumstances surrounding what I believe is XXXX based discrimination. I contacted my mortgage servicer in XXXX XXXX and since that time I have applied five times for loan modifications and each time I have been denied for erroneous and fraudulent reasons. With each application I provided all necessary documentation, as well as additional documents which were requested, all within the stated and requested time frame and each time I was denied. A few reasons of denial were : a ) I was current on my mortgage payment needed to be at least 90 days behind to qualify. b ) After the 90 days, I was told I was too far behind to qualify. c ) I was told I was denied for not making trial payments on a modification that was never offered to me. D ) I was sent denial letters for not submitting additional information that was never requested verbally or in writing. e ) I was also told on several occasions that all requested paperwork was not received, which each time was false and I have documented proof of this. I have extensive proof to back up all of my claims and that I have met all of the criteria necessary to qualify for the government loan modification program, which was put in place to specifically help individuals like myself save their homes and provide a affordable payment option. Also, each time I was the denied, I was brushed off and told that I needed to start the process over and submit a new application. The reason I continued to submit the applications was at some point, they would see that I was persistent, and possibly fear retribution for their actions. Since their handling of the process was so sloppy and handled with such ignorance, I requested a document requesting the reason for each denial. After 60 days, ( which is legally required to be provided within 30 days ), I receive these documents. The reasons for denial did not match the reason given on the original denial letters, which were originally provided after each denial. I have additional complaints, including unaccounted for escrow funds and mortgage companies inability to obtain original loan documents, which they are required by law to provide upon request.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation