Consumer complaint received 2026-05-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan
Company: LoanCare, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE COMPLAINT. THIS IS NOT A DUPLICATE COMPLAINT. LoanCare has repeatedly attempted to avoid responding to my servicing issues by falsely labeling new complaints as duplicates, even when they involve new facts, new dates, new violations, and new servicing misconduct. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ( B ), a servicer may only treat a complaint as duplicative if it has already provided a complete written response to the same issue which LoanCare has not done. This filing contains new, unresolved issues that LoanCare has never addressed, including new servicing errors, new misrepresentations, and new violations of FHA and CFPB servicing rules. Therefore, this complaint is not duplicative and must be fully investigated. LoanCares refusal to provide the required itemized breakdown of the {$24000.00} amount constitutes an Unfair, Deceptive, and Abusive Act or Practice ( UDAP ). This concealment of material servicing information misrepresents FHA program requirements and prevents me from understanding, verifying, or disputing the claimed arrears. I have never missed a payment since origination except for the protected months covered by my FHA approved forbearance from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. Because I entered forbearance fully current, I should have been eligible for a straightforward FHA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Instead, LoanCare placed me into a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) I did not request and has never provided a written explanation for why the SXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was not offered. HUD confirmed in writing that the Mortgage Loan Servicer prepares the Partial Claim documentation and determines the necessary partial claim amount and that any questions related to the Partial Claim amount should be directed to your Mortgage Company who can provide a breakdown showing how the partial claim funds were applied. See Exhibit C ( FHA Resource Center Response ). LoanCares refusal to provide this required breakdown, despite multiple requests, is a deceptive withholding of information borrowers are legally entitled to receive. My online dashboard has toggled between two contradictory account statesone showing me as current in a XXXX with XXXX and XXXX marked as {$0.00} due, and another showing a full arrears balance of {$15000.00} with online payments XXXX. These incompatible statuses can not both be true and indicate manual manipulation of my account classification. On XX/XX/XXXX, after representative XXXX falsely alleged that I failed the XXXX, supervisor XXXX stated that the investor requires the three payment trial. When I requested that this requirement be provided in writing, she refused and claimed LoanCare does not do personal letters. I was not requesting a personal letter ; I was requesting written accountability, as required by federal law. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( d ), a servicer must provide a written notice stating the specific reason an investor requirement applies, and under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) ( 5 ), a servicer must provide accurate information regarding loss mitigation options. XXXX refusal to provide written confirmation, combined with her verbal assertion that the {$24000.00} amount is a separate matter despite its inclusion in the FHA XXXX agreement, constitutes a deceptive attempt to avoid written accountability. Lip service does not override written documentation, and LoanCares refusal to document its claims violates federal servicing standards and constitutes an unfair, deceptive, and abusive act or practice. XXXX Timing Rules and Contradictory Instructions : According to the written Trial Payment Plan rules, a trial payment may only be made up to 15 days before the scheduled due date, and any payment made earlier than 15 days before the due date will not be applied as a trial payment. The XXXX also states that each payment must be made in the month in which it is due. XX/XX/XXXX would have been too early because LoanCare had already reclassified my XX/XX/XXXX payment as the XXXXXXXX Trial Payment Received for the XXXX installment, meaning the system had already credited Mays trial payment and would not accept another XXXX payment until the XXXX window opened. When I contacted LoanCare, XXXX representative instructed me to pay on XX/XX/XXXX, which directly contradicted both the written XXXX rules and LoanCares own internal reclassification of my XXXX payment. Another representative told me to simply make payments in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX within the month they are due, and that afterward my account would become current and the missed payments would be moved to the end of the loan. These instructions contradict both the written XXXX rules and the FHA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX process. See XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. LoanCares inconsistent guidance demonstrates a lack of adherence to its own written requirements and further supports the pattern of misinformation and contradictory servicing practices. Additionally, I received a certified letter dated XX/XX/XXXX claiming LoanCare was unable to contact me, which is false. I have been in continuous written communication with both HUD and LoanCare. Every time XXXX XXXX states that someone will be reaching out to you, no one ever contacts me. Instead, whenever I call, I am immediately asked, How are you going to pay the past due amount? or I am spoken to as if my forbearance never existed and as if there are no FHA options available. LoanCare repeatedly treats my FHA loan as if it were conventional, which results in me being routed to the collections department rather than to anyone knowledgeable about FHA forbearance or post forbearance options. I am now receiving additional certified XXXX mailpieces from LoanCare that reuse the same article number as the XX/XX/XXXX letter. Certified mail is typically used to create a record for default or foreclosure activity. This raises a serious concern : is LoanCare attempting to manufacture a false contact history to justify improper default actions while I am actively communicating and participating in an FHA protected process? See XXXX XXXX ( LoanCare Certified Letter ). LoanCare also misrepresented FHA requirements by telling HUD specialist XXXX XXXX that completing the affordability attestation would trigger a Stand Alone Partial Claim review. See XXXX XXXX ( HUD Email, XX/XX/XXXX ). I completed the attestation solely because HUD instructed me to based on XXXX representation. See XXXX XXXX ( Borrower Submission of Affordability Attestation ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Signed Affordability Attestation ). FHA rules do not require a XXXX for borrowers who entered forbearance current. If I am misinterpreting any FHA requirement, LoanCare can explain in writing why a TPP is required before I can be considered for a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, especially when FHA rules state the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX must be evaluated first. Because I attested, LoanCare reclassified my XX/XX/XXXX payment as the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX payment, causing XXXX to show {$0.00} due. I paid again on XX/XX/XXXX to comply with FHAs 15 day timing rule, and LoanCare then reflected XXXX as {$0.00} due. See XXXX XXXX XXXX LoanCare XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Received ). LoanCare also informed me that failure to complete all three trial payments would result in liability for the full {$15000.00}, even though this amount is protected under FHA policy and should have been resolved through a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This manipulation of my payment history, reclassification of payments, and coercive threat of financial harm is deceptive, unfair, and abusive. My dashboard further confirms that both XXXX and XXXX were marked as {$0.00} due and Paid, consistent with the systems reclassification of my XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payments. See Exhibit F XXXX ( LoanCare XXXX XXXX XXXX ). After I filed CFPB Complaint No. XXXX XXXX, LoanCare uploaded an FHA XXXX reflecting an inflated and mathematically impossible Partial Claim amount of {$24000.00}, even though my contractual monthly payment of {$2100.00} already includes escrow and the correct arrears for the XXXX protected months total {$15000.00} after subtracting a voluntary {$60.00} late fee. LoanCare can not lawfully charge escrow twice, nor can it retroactively code protected months as delinquent. I repeatedly requested a breakdown of the {$24000.00} because I had no past due balance before entering forbearance, no gaps in FHA protection unless LoanCare improperly coded XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX as delinquent, and my XX/XX/XXXX payment was made immediately after XXXX. See XXXX XXXX XXXX FHA XXXX XXXX XXXX ) confirming the servicer must provide the breakdown. LoanCares refusal to provide the required itemizationcombined with contradictory verbal statements, concealment of servicing records, misclassification of payments, and reliance on unwritten explanationsconstitutes unfair conduct ( causing substantial injury that can not be reasonably avoided ), deceptive conduct ( misrepresenting or omitting material servicing information ), and abusive conduct ( taking unreasonable advantage of the borrowers reliance on the servicer for accurate FHA program information ). This pattern of behavior violates HUD servicing requirements, CFPB Regulation X, and statutory UDAP prohibitions. Despite my dashboard showing that both XXXX and XXXX were marked as {$0.00} dueconfirming that my XX/XX/XXXX payment was treated as the first trial payment and my XX/XX/XXXX payment was treated as the second trial paymentI was verbally informed that I failed the XXXX. This is not possible under FHA or servicer system logic, as the dashboard reflects full compliance with the required payments to date. A borrower can only fail a TPP if a payment is missed, short, late, returned, or rejectednone of which occurred. This contradiction between system records and XXXX verbal statements indicates manual manipulation of my account classification and constitutes deceptive and abusive servicing conduct. Let me reiterate that I clearly informed LoanCare that I could not pay the lump sum amount of {$15000.00}, that I was not interested in a repayment plan or modification, and that I was seeking the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Instead of providing consistent FHA compliant guidance, LoanCare continues to give contradictory information. This is a clear pattern of misinformation, and it appears LoanCare is creating conditions that set borrowers up to fail.

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