Consumer complaint received 2025-02-13 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
U.S. Bank artificially projected an escrow account shortage in their analysis and computation based on the unreasonable timing of tax payment which, when paid within XXXX days of the postmark due date, would otherwise project a surplus. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement from U.S. Bank with the analysis date of XX/XX/XXXX. The trial running balance for the escrow account computation year of XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, as provided in the statement, reflects a {$320.00} shortage in XX/XX/XXXX. Based on this analysis, U.S. Bank intends to increase our monthly mortgage payment beginning XX/XX/XXXX, to recover the shortage over a XXXX period. 

Under ORS 305.820, property tax payments are considered timely if they bear a postmark date on or before XX/XX/XXXX, regardless of the date they are received by the tax collector. The trial running balance assumes that the property tax payment will be disbursed in XX/XX/XXXX, more than XXXX  days earlier than required. 

If U.S. Bank instead remitted payment after the recurring monthly escrow deposit on XX/XX/XXXX, but still on or before the XX/XX/XXXX tax payment deadline, the escrow account balance would reflect a surplus of {$120.00} instead of a shortage. 

Under 12 CFR 1024.17 ( c ), U.S. Bank is required to ensure the accuracy and reasonableness of its escrow projections. The practice of disbursing payment so far in advance unnecessarily increases the required monthly escrow deposit amount, creating an undue financial burden. If the escrow account analysis reflected the surplus of {$120.00}, U.S. Bank would be required to refund this surplus no later than XX/XX/XXXX per Regulation X, XXXX days after receiving this statement. 

Adjusting the projected tax date from XXXX to XXXX has a significant financial impact over the course of this and future computation years. Consistently projecting tax payments in XXXX, as reflected in both the prior years and this years analyses, has nearly doubled the net present value of shortage deposits compared to projecting the payment in XXXX. This difference is approximately equivalent to XXXX months escrow deposit for taxes and property insurance, creating an undue burden that exceeds the reasonable limits outlined in Regulation X. This methodology also creates a financial incentive misaligned with U.S. Banks fiduciary duty to manage escrow funds in the best interest of borrowers. 

I mailed certified first class a Notice of Error to U.S. Bank at the address provided for such notices in its Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX  XXXX. XXXX reports this was Delivered to Agent, Picked up at XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX ( tracking # XXXX ). 

In speaking with representative XXXX by phone this XX/XX/XXXX, she confirmed a document was received and scanned on XX/XX/XXXX, and that no correspondence has been remitted in response. U.S. Bank has therefore violated 12 CFR 1024.35 ( d ) by failing to provide written response acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Error.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation