Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — USDA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure
Company: Freedom Mortgage Company
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
Our current financial crisis was catalyzed by a severe family hardship that Freedom Mortgage ( FM ) has failed to properly account for in its evaluation. They violated RESPA with illegal XXXX XXXX and uncredited/misapplied payments. 

In XX/XX/XXXX, our family suffered the death of XXXX 's mother. This loss necessitated an immediate shift in our household structure. Following this death, XXXX XXXX the primary wage earner for XXXX  years in the trucking industry ) was required to leave his employment to provide XXXX care for his mom 's brother ( his uncle ) who has been a XXXX  for XXXX  years as she had been his caregiver the entirety of that time. 
Our income shift was not a " loss of income '' but a " restructuring ''. My brother XXXX XXXX XXXX has stepped in as the primary financial contributor. Despite XXXX 's stable XXXX residency and documented income, FM has treated this hardship as an " instability '' rather than a legitimate, documented transition in household management. 

XXXX  is currently engaging in illegal Dual Tracking-pursuing foreclosure while simultaneously confirming the receipt of a complete loss mitigation application. I have received XXXX separate written confirmations stating my loss mitigations package was " Complete. '' Under federal law, these notices establish " Facial Completeness. '' Once established, a servicer is prohibited from proceeding with foreclosure activity. However, within XXXX hours of each " XXXX '' notice, XXXX  issued boilerplate " incomplete '' letters. This circular request is a bad-faith tactic used to bypass the mandatory XXXX evaluation period required by XXXX ( c ) ( XXXX ). The servicer failed to provide a functional Single Point of XXXX ( XXXX ). Out of the XXXX we were assigned XXXX was named " Collections '' and came with an ID number. 
A supervisor named XXXX made it extremely difficult to reach a superior, actively obstructing the escalation of accounting errors. This violates the requirement that personnel be available to provide " accurate information '' regarding loss mitigation status. 
Today, XX/XX/XXXX, marks exactly XXXX year and a day since a payment of {$1600.00} was made XXXX XXXX. XXXX  refuses to credit this bank-verified payment. They also misapplied a {$2200.00} escrow payment to the principal and failed to have on record a {$6200.00} payment until I inquired of it. Because the servicer 's ledger is mathematically incorrect, the " default '' amount they are using from the escrow analysis in XXXX is incorrect and wasn't corrected until XXXX ; using this to justify the foreclosure is invalid. 

The initial escrow deficit was triggered by a {$10000.00} insurance premium. Our broker, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, explicitly lied, claiming XXXX  had " force-placed '' the policy when she had placed it herself. We received an email from her on XXXX, XXXX stating our policy would end XX/XX/XXXX and that she was going to find us a new policy. This lie prevented us from timely remediation. After being formally fired in XXXX ( acknowledged via text ), the broker willfully placed an additional policy on our account in XXXX without authority in the amount of {$5200.00}. XXXX  is foreclosing on a debt rooted in unauthorized and deceptive XXXX transactions. 

Furthermore, I wish to alert the XXXX to a significant procedural irregularity involving XXXX XXXX of Tennessee, XXXX ( the Substitute Trustee ). I received a piece of certified mail regarding my homes scheduled auction date that had been physically tampered with. Specifically, the envelope was marked with the handwritten notation 'Miss Sent ' [ sic ] in ink upon receipt. This appears to be a deliberate attempt to obscure the legal significance of the notice or to simulate a failed delivery. This deceptive handling of a mandatory legal notification violates the spirit of XXXX foreclosure notice requirements under XXXX. XXXX and raises serious concerns regarding the transparency and integrity of the foreclosure process currently being conducted against my family.

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