Consumer complaint received 2026-04-08 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is a continuation of CFPB Case # XXXX and concerns U.S. Banks failure to refund the full escrow balance on a now-closed mortgage account ( Account XXXX, property at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. I. U.S. BANK ISSUED AN INCOMPLETE ESCROW REFUND On XX/XX/XXXX, U.S. Bank issued an escrow refund check ( Check # XXXX ) in the amount of {$2200.00}, payable to XXXX XXXX. This amount corresponds exactly to the real estate taxes paid from escrow in XXXX, as documented on the XXXX IRS Form 1098 for this account ( Box XXXX : Real Estate Taxes Paid {$2200.00} ). However, XXXX Banks own XXXX Annual Tax & Interest Statement for this account shows an escrow ending balance of {$2200.00} that remains unrefunded. This balance represents insurance premiums that were collected from the previously confirmed Successor in Interest and previous owner of the property, XXXX XXXX, through monthly escrow deposits throughout XXXX but were never disbursed by U.S. Bank. The XXXX escrow reconciliation on U.S. Banks own statement reads as follows : Beginning Balance : ( {$1200.00} ) Deposits : {$5900.00} Insurance Paid : {$120.00} Taxes Paid : {$2200.00} Additional Assessments Paid : {$0.00} Escrow Disbursement : {$100.00} Ending Balance : {$2200.00} II. THE MISSING FUNDS ARE IDENTIFIABLE AND DOCUMENTED A comparison of insurance disbursements across the three most recent tax years makes the shortfall unmistakable : XXXX : Insurance paid from escrow {$2000.00} XXXX : Insurance paid from escrow {$2200.00} XXXX : Insurance paid from escrow {$120.00} U.S. Bank collected escrow deposits throughout XXXX at a rate of {$440.00} per month a rate calculated to cover both taxes and insurance. The taxes were paid ( {$2200.00} ) and subsequently refunded via the XX/XX/XXXX check. The insurance premium was never disbursed ( only {$120.00} of an expected ~ $ XXXX was paid ), and the resulting escrow surplus of {$2200.00} was retained by U.S. Bank XXXX U.S. Bank has provided no accounting, no explanation, and no refund of this {$2200.00} balance. III. RESPA REQUIRES RETURN OF THE FULL ESCROW BALANCE Under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ), 12 CFR 1024.34 ( b ), when a mortgage loan is paid in full, the servicer is required to return any amounts remaining in the escrow account to the previously confirmed Successor in Interest and previous owner of the property, XXXX XXXX, within 20 business days of the loan being paid off. The statute does not permit a servicer to return only a portion of the escrow balance. It does not permit a servicer to selectively refund taxes while retaining insurance reserves. The obligation is to return the entire remaining escrow balance every dollar held in escrow that has not been disbursed for its intended purpose. U.S. Banks refund of {$2200.00} covered only the tax component. The remaining {$2200.00} in escrow documented on U.S. Banks own annual statement has been withh eld in violation of 1024.34 ( b ). IV. U.S. BANK HAS ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED ESCROW OBLIGATIONS ON THIS ACCOUNT In its XX/XX/XXXX response to CFPB Case # XXXX, U.S. Bank made a business decision to issue an escrow refund check. The check issued, however, accounts for only approximately half of the escrow funds held at the time of loan payoff. U.S. Bank did not provide any written accounting explaining why {$2200.00} in escrow reserves was excluded from the refund, nor did it identify any outstanding disbursement obligation that would justify retention of those funds. To be clear : U.S. Banks own 2025 Annual Tax & Interest Statement documents the {$2200.00} ending balance. This is not a disputed figure. It is U.S. Banks own number, on U.S. Banks own statement, for an account U.S. Bank has confirmed is closed and paid off. V. THIS CONTINUES A DOCUMENTED PATTERN OF MISHANDLING This incomplete refund is the latest in a multi-year pattern of escrow and account mismanagement by U.S. Bank on this account, documented across two prior CFPB complaints and multiple U.S. Bank response letters. CFPB XXXX # XXXX ( filed XX/XX/XXXX ) : This initial complaint addressed U.S. Banks refusal to issue any escrow refund whatsoever following loan payoff. At that time, U.S. Banks position was that XXXX XXXX had not been established as Successor in Interest and therefore was not entitled to escrow funds despite U.S. Bank having issued a formal written XXXX confirmation on XX/XX/XXXX, and having addressed its own XX/XX/XXXX settlement letter to XXXX XXXX ( Deceased ) and Successor In Interest XXXX XXXX before accepting {$11000.00} in certified funds from XXXX XXXX in that capacity. CFPB Case # XXXX ( filed XX/XX/XXXX ) : This follow-up complaint identified specific federal regulatory violations including : ( a ) U.S. Banks lack of legal authority under Regulation X to unilaterally revoke a confirmed SII designation ; ( b ) violation of 12 CFR 1024.34 ( b ) requiring return of escrow funds within 20 business days of loan payoff ; ( c ) promissory estoppel based on five years of conduct consistent with confirmed SII status ; and ( d ) a demand for a full written accounting of all escrow funds held. U.S. Banks own admissions across its XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX response letters confirm the following errors : On XX/XX/XXXX, U.S. Bank issued a formal XXXX confirmation letter to XXXX XXXX that U.S. Bank now claims was sent in error On XX/XX/XXXX, a U.S. Bank representative mistakenly discussed payoff information with XXXX XXXX without proper verification because the representative did not realize a death certificate was on file On XX/XX/XXXX, U.S. Bank incorrectly confirmed XXXX XXXX XXXX status by phone during the exact period he was completing the {$11000.00} settlement based on XXXX Banks own settlement letter designating him as SII On XX/XX/XXXX, U.S. Bank issued a settlement letter explicitly addressed to XXXX XXXX ( Deceased ) and Successor In Interest XXXX XXXX, accepted {$11000.00} in certified wired funds on that basis, and only after receiving those funds claimed the XXXX designation was invalid On XX/XX/XXXX, a U.S. Bank representative assisted XXXX XXXX on the account despite acknowledging he was not yet verified as XXXX and not authorized on the account at that time In its XX/XX/XXXX response, U.S. Bank stated that an administrative error does not establish Successor in Interest status and reliance on an administrative error does not substitute for documentation while simultaneously making a business decision to issue an escrow refund check, effectively acknowledging the obligation while disputing the legal basis The escrow refund itself was only issued under regulatory pressure. U.S. Bank refused to return any escrow funds until compelled to respond to the second CFPB complaint. Even then, U.S. Bank issued only a partial refund of {$2200.00} covering the tax component while retaining {$2200.00} in insurance escrow reserves without explanation or accounting. This is now the third time XXXX XXXX has been forced to seek regulatory intervention to compel U.S. Bank to meet basic servicing obligations on this closed account. The pattern is consistent : U.S. Bank withholds funds it is legally obligated to return, provides no accounting, and releases funds only under regulatory pressure and even then, incompletely.

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 non-monetary relief