Assertion: putty | /r/CapableOf | complain to the extent
Facets:
Source sentences:
text: It posits that, to the extent she alleges the monthly statement amounts were inconsistent, that Fannie Mae's predecessor committed unspecified "accounting mistakes," and that she is entitled to an accounting, mortgage lenders have no general obligation to prepare an accounting before foreclosure can proceed; to the extent Putty alleges that Fannie Mae failed to properly apply payments to the loan following her default, she fails to identify evidence of any specific payments allegedly not properly accounted for; to the extent Putty complains that Fannie Mae wrongfully applied principal reduction payments to the escrow balance and/or past due balances, Putty expressly agreed (in the loan document itself) to payments being applied this way; to the extent Putty complains that the prior servicer held an insurance check in escrow for an extended period of time that was needed for repairs to the Property, there are no factual allegations or evidence establishing that holding insurance proceeds breaches any obligation under the loan, and, in any event, this claim is barred by Putty's prior breach of the loan; and Putty has no evidence that she maintained insurance on the Property or timely provided evidence of coverage to Fannie Mae or its predecessors.
text: It posits that, to the extent she alleges the monthly statement amounts were inconsistent, that Fannie Mae's predecessor committed unspecified "accounting mistakes," and that she is entitled to an accounting, mortgage lenders have no general obligation to prepare an accounting before foreclosure can proceed; to the extent Putty alleges that Fannie Mae failed to properly apply payments to the loan following her default, she fails to identify evidence of any specific payments allegedly not properly accounted for; to the extent Putty complains that Fannie Mae wrongfully applied principal reduction payments to the escrow balance and/or past due balances, Putty expressly agreed (in the loan document itself) to payments being applied this way; to the extent Putty complains that the prior servicer held an insurance check in escrow for an extended period of time that was needed for repairs to the Property, there are no factual allegations or evidence establishing that holding insurance proceeds breaches any obligation under the loan, and, in any event, this claim is barred by Putty's prior breach of the loan; and Putty has no evidence that she maintained insurance on the Property or timely provided evidence of coverage to Fannie Mae or its predecessors.