Consumer complaint received 2024-04-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Truist took over our Suntrust mortgage and required us to go to great lengths to prove that we had purchased compliant XXXX XXXX for the entire life of the XXXX. Due to numerous rejections of XXXX for various time periods, this process took over XXXX months of back and forth. Following this exchange, around XXXX of XXXX, Truist sent a notice asking us to request another XXXX  from a previous insurance company to provide proof of insurance for 5 days in XXXX of XXXX. 

Back in XXXX of XXXX, we had a homeowners insurance policy from an old policy but there was some confusion on where the invoice was to be sent as our prior lender had paid for the homeowners insurance on the XXXX. Unbeknownst to the old policy, we had signed on with a new insurance company before the old policys expiration date, but it took the underwriters until XXXX  days after renewal of the old policy to approve and send the new policy. After we had the new policy, we called to cancel both the homeowners and other insurance policies. We instructed our old insurance company to withhold the cost of the XXXX period so that insurance would be continuous and send a refund check for the remaining amount. 

Fast forward to XX/XX/XXXX, when we requested proof of coverage for the XXXX period at Truists insistence, the old insurance company told us that it could not provide proof of insurance for short term insurance more than XXXX months after cancellation. The old insurance further explained that policies cancelled after only a few days were purged from their system after a year. 

However, none of this should even matter as Section XXXX of the Hazard Insurance Authorization, Requirements and Disclosure Statement in our Loans closing documents states, Lender may require borrower to provide evidence of insurance on or after the XXXX day BEFORE ( emphasis on BEFORE ) the termination date of an existing insurance policy. If this requirement is not met, the LENDER OR ITS SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS MAY AT THEIR OPTION, BUT WITHOUT OBLIGATION TO DO SO, PROVIDE COVERAGE TO REPLACE ANY EXPIRING POLICIES WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY RENEWED. ( emphasis in original ). While our lender does have the right to request proof of insurance, the purpose of this provision is clearly to ensure that ongoing coverage is maintained, not to harass people years later regarding changing carriers where no claims exist. In this instance, Truist wasnt even our lender during the XXXX period in question. Suntrust didn't even send us Truist 's notice that they would start to transition over until XX/XX/XXXX. Rather, this appears to be a predatory lending practice to reduce a mortgagors risk on existing, purchased loans. Again, no claim occurred during the XXXX timeframe in question and no lender has experienced ANY loss nor have we materially breached the contract by our inability to provide documentation ( now over the statute of limitations ) after the fact. 

Following our old insurance company 's notification of inability to provide the policy, around XXXX of XXXX, we began a series of calls to Truist to explain the situation and discuss options to meet our loan requirements. We spent countless hours being passed around from department to department, then being hung up on, only to start all over again. We were told on at least XXXX occasions by Truists own disgruntled customer service representatives that Truist didnt care about what we went through and were now going to enroll them into an escrow account. Without notifying us, Truist paid our homeowners insurance despite us having already set up auto-debit for a monthly plan. After sorting out what was going on, we agreed to pay Truist their homeowners insurance payment in addition to the mortgage costs. We made these payments of {$2100.00} timely for months. 

However, Truist also required that we make additional payments to pre-pay escrow expenses for the following year in the amount of approximately {$300.00} a month. We had intentionally took out XXXX loans on this Property to avoid having an escrow account for this very reason ( extra money sitting in an account doing nothing ) We already pay more money in interest on another loan just so we don't have to have an escrow account. We attempted to negotiate the escrow payment amount with Truist at that time, and we were told that MAYBE they could take off XXXX dollars! 

We refused to pay for next year 's insurance, especially when we did nothing wrong! Nevertheless, we continued to timely pay our mortgage payment plus what would have been our monthly insurance payment for a total of approximately {$2100.00}. After a few months, Truist refused to accept any payment if we could not pay the additional escrow amount Truist had demanded. We continually pursued resolution of this issue, but when we called Truist, we were passed around to many departments as Truists customer service team had no idea who we should even speak with to resolve our issues. In the meantime, Truist reported us for failure to pay to credit agencies and significantly downgraded our once strong XXXX XXXX, despite our willingness to pay the originally agreed mortgage payment in addition to the insurance charges directly to Truist. 

Soon we received notification that the XXXX had been sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. We now tried contacting them but were met with even more resistance as their answer was " we just acquired this loan, if you want to file a dispute you can. '' After XXXX attempts with a dispute and even hiring an attorney, we did get a response. The response however was HORRIBLY written and didn't address anything. The response literally said we would defer to what Truist says. Truist 's response had illegible XXXX and bypassed the entire " breaching of the agreement clause '' and they didn't even acknowledge the correct insurance company. Needless to say, if I produced that kind of product in my line of work I would be fired. After more calls and more passing around, I am left with the ONLY option of filling out a loan modification. I can't believe that this is the only option we have when this whole ordeal wasn't our fault to begin with.

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