Consumer complaint received 2025-07-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief
Company: Mr. Cooper Group Inc.
State: AZ

Complaint narrative:
Please see the attached Qualified Written Request ( QWR ) submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, which provides a detailed 8-month timeline, internal call admissions, supporting exhibits, and citations of federal and state law violations, including but not limited to : XXXX Consent Judgment ( Civil Action No. XXXX ) XXXX CFPB Enforcement Action RESPA , TILA , FDCPA, FCRA, UDAAP, Arizona Consumer Fraud Act Since acquiring my mortgage from XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX, Mr. Cooper has engaged in systemic and intentional misconduct that mirrors violations they were previously sanctioned forincluding dual tracking, modification misapplication, and failure to respond to borrower disputes. This conduct violates multiple provisions of the active XXXX Consent Order, which Mr. Cooper is still under.

Despite being notified by XXXX via a Loan Transfer Statement dated XX/XX/XXXX that my account was under an active executed XXXX Flex Modification, Mr. Cooper : - Onboarded the loan incorrectly using a hybrid of pre- and post-modification terms - Omitted the capitalized escrow balance of {$7500.00} and fee waivers of {$1400.00} - Issued a false escrow analysis ( XX/XX/XXXX ) that inflated my monthly payment to {$3400.00} - Treated the loan as delinquent and initiated foreclosure based on these false figures - Ignored internal records showing modification acceptance - Issued a false denial letter on XX/XX/XXXX refuting their own call transcripts and records - Failed to meet RESPA deadlines, SPOC requirements, and QWR response timelines Specific Violations and Errors ( Documented in QWR ) * * Failure to Apply Full Modification Terms effective XX/XX/XXXX * * Capitalized escrow balance of {$7500.00} was ignored * * False escrow analysis inflated monthly payment to {$3400.00} ( XX/XX/XXXX ) * * Initiated foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX despite XX/XX/XXXX call promise to correct account * * Multiple RESPA violations : 2 Notices of Error received no timely response, and no notice of 15-day extensions was provided * * Failure to maintain compliant SPOC, despite repeated assignments * * Conflicting and misleading communications regarding modification status * * Mishandled insurance refund and overcharged PMI based on inflated balance * * Deceptive modification solicitations were sent while ignoring the actual modification * * Inaccurate credit reporting while the loan was under dispute * * Ignored internal call escalations on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX * * Filed foreclosure based on known servicing errors * * Issued a denial letter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) that contradicted call records and internal notes * * Violation of Consent Judgment especially provisions on dual tracking, escrow, SPOC, and accurate modification implementation * * * * Current Status & Inaccurate Reinstatement Demand ( as of XX/XX/XXXX ) : Based on XXXX XXXX inflated and unlawful accounting, they are demanding a reinstatement amount of {$25000.00}, when the accurate reinstatement figure is only {$11000.00}.

Overcharge : {$13000.00} Breakdown of discrepancies includes : - Escrow Overcharge : {$890.00} - Improper Late & NSF Fees : {$240.00} - Improper Anticipated Fees : {$1100.00} - False Delinquent Balance : Overstated by {$10000.00} These charges are not just incorrect they are fabricated from the servicers own admitted and acknowledged onboarding errors since my first contact with Mr. Cooper XX/XX/XXXX. 

* * Summary of Communications & REPSA Acknowledgment Letters Since the date of servicing transfer, the borrower has made repeated good-faith efforts to resolve material errors through formal calls, complaint submissions, and written Notices of Error. Despite Mr. Cooper 's repeated acknowledgments of serious violationsincluding escrow miscalculations, modification misapplication, and unlawful foreclosure filingsno corrective actions were ever taken. Instead, the borrower was subjected to an extended pattern of misrepresentations, broken promises, and systemic misconduct. 

This section outlines a detailed chronology of borrower communications and XXXX XXXX repeated violations of Regulation X, including failures to issue timely RESPA acknowledgment letters, misrouting of modification documents, and dual tracking behavior.

Timeline of Communications & Misconduct XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Initial Escalation Call ( 43 min ) Borrower formally raised account-level errors and violations during this call.

Mr. Cooper ( agent and escalations manager ) acknowledged onboarding errors and waived a {$1400.00} XXXX late fee, confirming internal awareness of missed modification terms. 

Promised corrected escrow analysis and loan statement within two weeks.

No SPOC was mentioned.

No RESPA acknowledgment letter was issued.

Critically, Mr. Cooper failed to disclose that the executed modification agreement had not yet been received from XXXX omission that deprived the borrower of the opportunity to correct the issue. 

The borrower reasonably relied on the servicers assurances, delaying further escalation in reliance upon promised correction.

Violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 & 1024.40 XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Second Escalation Call ( 90 min ) Borrower exhaustively explained account issues again, and claimed several regulatory violations related to the account errors.

Mr. Cooper again acknowledged servicing errors and promised resolution.

Agent specifically stated We Mr. Cooper have issues with onboarding our loans correctly.

Agent and escalations manager confirmed misrouted modification from previous XX/XX/XXXX call. Agen committed to resolving the account errors and issuing a corrected loan statement and escrow analysis.

Agent provided address to send XXXX XXXX  refund check, which later proved to be an incorrect address ( see section Homeowners Insurance Refund Mishandling ) Agent confirmed sending modification to a formal modification department for review ( later proved this agent sent the modification to the wrong department, and no one did anything to reroute to the correct dept. ) No SPOC mentioned.

No RESPA acknowledgment issued.

Mr. Cooper withheld material information regarding the still-missing executed modification.

Repeat violations of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ), deceptive servicing conduct ( UDAP ) XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Third Escalation Call ( 56 min ) Again, borrower exhaustively explained account issues, expressing emotional distress over continued mishandling and lack of resolution.

Borrower claimed several regulatory violations related to the account errors.

Agent admitted prior correction request on XX/XX/XXXX call was misroutedthe modification was sent to the wrong modification department. Resulting in the modification sat idle for 28 days ( no one rerouted the modification to the correct department, therefore nothing was followed through from previous escalations phone callagain ).

Borrower demanded priority handling due to months of mishandling and delay, expressing extreme frustration with Mr. Coopers behavior and stating several related regulatory violations.

Mr. Cooper agent refused to prioritize review, stating it would take 3+ weeks for the modification review, and thats all they could offer.

No SPOC mentioned.

No RESPA acknowledgment was issued.

Servicing failure compounded by systemic control breakdowns XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Phone Call ( 46 min ) Again, borrower exhaustively explained account issues, expressing emotional distress over continued mishandling and lack of resolution, and addressed several regulatory violations compounding.

Borrower is clearly speaking with a defeated tone and belief that Mr. Cooper is unable or willing to fix their internal errors impacting the borrower.

Borrower addressed Mr. Coopers receipt of the Homeowners Insurance refund check and asked Agent why the refund check was uploaded into Mr. Coopers Insurance Claim portal.

Agent stated that there was no record of the insurance refund check being received by Mr. Cooper. Borrower stated that was impossible because they were looking at the Cooper Insurance Portal real time with the check information uploaded as Claim Tracking Number # XXXX. 

Agent still could not find record of the check but stated they would investigate this including the account modification review.

Conflicting statements revealed systemic communication failure.

No SPOC mentioned.

No RESPA acknowledgment was issued.

Servicer continued to operate with no meaningful internal accountability XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Key Recorded Call ( 110 min ) ( Agent XXXX XXXX ) Transcript & Flash Drive with recording available Again, borrower exhaustively explained account issues, expressing emotional distress over continued mishandling and lack of resolution, and addressed several regulatory violations compounding.

Agent admitted the executed modification was not received from XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX. This was the first time borrower heard that Mr. Cooper was even missing a XXXX signature. 

Agent and escalations manager stated that the account was correct and there were no active errors on the account. The amounts showing due and documents were all accurate.

Borrower stated that the account was in fact NOT correct, and the full terms of the modification still had not been applied, like adjusting the negative escrow carry-forward at the time of onboarding.

For over an hour the Agent and escalations manager provided reason after reason that the account was correct, and the reasons were literally like someone pulling XXXX out of a hat and throwing it at the wall. Basic 101 servicing standards and accounting were being dismissed, the borrower was being gaslit, and flat out being told they were wrong.

Borrower exhaustively went back through every document from the beginning to promote understanding that seemed so simple and clear, and finally the Mr. Cooper agent and manager confirmed the loan was in fact still WRONG and mishandled from onboarding, acknowledging the errors that have persisted for months.

The Agent promised resolution by XX/XX/XXXX and stated this would be the dead last date for correction to the account. Agent said the loan accounting errors would be updated, they submitted to have a new escrow analysis rerun, and the loan statements corrected from XXXX to current date, and assured foreclosure would be canceled.

Agent then addressed the borrowers concerns about the homeowners insurance refund mishandling. The agent admitted that prior Mr. Cooper agents gave inaccurate information and directed borrower to deposit refund check into their personal account and use as discretionary funds, that Mr. Cooper did not need to endorse the check. ( See Section Homeowners Insurance Refund Mishandling ) Agent stated it would be smart to hold payments until the account resolution was in effect.

Agent promised to handle the resolution and keep an eye on the account and promised to follow up with the borrower including a voicemail if borrower was unable to answer.

Agent advised to watch the online account for the updates. Borrower felt maybe this time they were finally heard, and the account would see resolution.

No promised follow-up or voicemail occurred from the agent, XXXX XXXX . No corrective actions occurred.

Direct evidence of dual tracking and material misrepresentation XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Unlawful Foreclosure Filed Mr. Cooper filed foreclosure despite explicit promises to cancel on XX/XX/XXXX call.

Borrower discovered foreclosure filing via third-party individual solicitations to buy home, not from the servicer. This caused profound distress and exacerbating emotional harm.

Filing contradicted all prior assurances and deepened borrowers emotional and financial harm Violation of dual tracking prohibitions, UDAP, and due process Since Foreclosure filing, borrower and co-borrower has received hundreds of solicitations from 3rd parties to purchase of the home or offer modifications via text, email, people showing up at the home consistently making offers to purchase the home in foreclosure.

In response to learning of the foreclosure filing, borrower had a complete emotional melt down because Mr. Cooper filed an unlawful foreclosure after countless promises to fix their internal errors on the account since XX/XX/XXXX. The borrowers health declined significantly after this and realized this was a hopeless situation and just how vile, deceptive, abusive, and incompetent Mr. Cooper was. 
XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Follow-Up Call Post Foreclosure Filing Borrower followed up after promised XX/XX/XXXX failed resolution from XX/XX/XXXX call. 

Agent was unfamiliar with the file and offered no resolution. Dismissed borrowers concerns and distress of the account being wrong. Agent stated it was simply filed foreclosure due to borrowers failed payments. Agent refused to see further than the surface level, and borrower lost temper toward the end yelling and hung up in tears.

Clear example of continuity failure and willful non-responsiveness XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Borrower Submits Formal Complaint via Mr. Cooper Chat Feature Borrower filed a formal Notification of Error via Mr. Coopers online complaints chat platform.

Detailed the servicers errors, unlawful foreclosure, prior misrepresentations, and emotional harm.

Compliant submission process was undermined by ensuing actions XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX - Mr. Cooper Complaints Responds, Blocks Chat Feature Access Complaints team stated due to the nature of the complaint it was referred to the Research Team. With a contact email XXXX. 

Mr. Cooper further blocked the borrowers access to complaints platform chat feature after their referral to the research team, preventing future tracking.

Borrower evidence screenshot showing Not Eligible for Chat after the date of the complaint team response.

Retaliatory behavior and transparency evasion XXXX. Email Escalation to Research Team ( XXXX ) The following summarizes an email exchange between the borrower and Mr. Cooper 's Research Team ( XXXX ) following a referral from the Complaints team. This correspondence underscores Mr. Coopers inadequate accountability, lack of clear escalation procedures, and operational dysfunction, resulting in compounding confusion and negatively impacting the customer. 

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Borrower to Research Team Borrower sent an email to the Research Team, noting the referral from the Complaints team. The email included a comprehensive summary of unresolved account errors, regulatory violations, and a demand for prompt resolution. 

XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX Research Team Response The Research Team replied, stating, " Due to the nature of the inquiry, it has been forwarded to the appropriate team for review. '' No specific contact information or details about the " appropriate team '' were provided. 

XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Borrower Follow-Up to Research Team Borrower responded, requesting clarification on the identity of the " appropriate team '' mentioned previously.

The email emphasized frustration over the ongoing unresolved account issues and highlighted Mr. Cooper 's internal process failures dating back to XXXX. 

XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX Research Team Clarification The Research Team confirmed the inquiry had been forwarded to the Customer Relations Group.

They indicated that an acknowledgment letter would be sent to the borrower within five business days. 

XXXX. Formal Acknowledgment ( RESPA ) Letters A Pattern of Non-Responsiveness Following the communications outlined above ( since Mr. Cooper took over servicing and the borrower began escalating the account errors in XX/XX/XXXX ), Mr. Cooper issued only three formal RESPA acknowledgment lettersall committing to provide resolution within 30 business days or an additional 15 with written notice. In every case, the servicer either missed the deadline or failed to provide an accurate, legally compliant response.

These repeated RESPA violations demonstrate a clear and deliberate pattern of non-responsiveness, procedural bad faith, and systemic avoidance of accountability. Mr. Coopers silence following formal acknowledgmentsespecially while continuing foreclosure proceedingsserves as clear evidence of dual tracking and deceptive servicing conduct. 

XX/XX/XXXX First RESPA Acknowledgment Letter Research Reference # XXXX  Related to borrowers XX/XX/XXXX call ( Notice of Error ) No specific contact listed other than the Mr. Cooper front-line customer service phone # No response or written extension was ever received by XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Second RESPA Acknowledgment Letter Research Reference # XXXX Related to borrowers XX/XX/XXXX, complaint submitted Contact lists Research Team email and Mr. Cooper front-line customer service phone # no contact names provided No response or written extension was ever received by the 30-business-day deadline XX/XX/XXXX Third Acknowledgment Letter ( issued same day as previous letter, but new ref # ) Research Reference # XXXX Related to borrowers XX/XX/XXXX, email escalation. Mr. Cooper filed letter in online account as Complaints Acknowledgment Letter No specific contact listed other than the Mr. Cooper front-line customer service phone # Promised formal resolution by XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This third letter ( # XXXX ) resulted in a formal resolution issued XX/XX/XXXX, which still failed to address the borrowers core complaints, repeated known errors, and doubled down on misrepresentations that Mr. Cooper had already admitted were false. This letterreviewed in detail in Section M belowstands as written confirmation of Mr. Coopers intent to deny wrongdoing, avoid accountability, and perpetuate servicing misconduct. 

XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Formal Notice to Trustee ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Borrower issued formal demand for foreclosure cancellation based on wrongful servicing.

Included detailed documentation of servicing misconduct and Mr. Cooper 's admissions.

No response received from the Trustee, despite being placed on notice.

This notice represents a formal attempt to halt the foreclosure proceedings and notifies the trustee of the alleged misconduct by Mr. Cooper. The notice explicitly connects the specific grievances to broader patterns of servicing failures documented in prior legal actions against Mr. Cooper.

Trustee may bear liability for proceeding with unlawful foreclosure after receiving formal dispute XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX - Co-borrower, XXXX XXXX, filed multiple complaints and notices My co-borrower, XXXX XXXX, submitted the following complaints and notices via certified mail and/or official electronic channels to the following parties. Please note, the attached QWR will be added to the following, and submitted on its own merit. XXXX  Arizona Attorney General via email and certified mail XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) via email and complaint submission c. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Case # XXXX Mr. Cooper Case XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mr. Cooper RESPA Address Certified mail XXXX XXXX XXXX Certified mail XXXX Mr. Cooper General Counsel XXXX XXXX Certified mail to XXXX XXXX TX XXXX Experian Certified mail and online dispute submission XXXX XXXX General Counsel XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. Conclusion This chronology of borrower communications reveals : A deliberate pattern of acknowledgments without correction Withholding of material facts Failure to comply with RESPA response timelines A servicer-wide strategy of operational avoidance, silos, and non-responsiveness Emotional and financial harm directly tied to these actions

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation