Consumer complaint received 2017-02-01 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: Ditech Financial LLC
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I was formerly dealing with Green Tree Mortgage when I was informed in XXXX that my new mortgage company would be Ditech. I made my payments to Ditech and they were {$290.00} per month. I am a senior citizen and I am receiving social security as my main support. I asked that the company change the due date on the mortgage because of my pay date. I was told that that would be illegal. 
XXXX said it was not illegal. But, I continued to make my payments in the month that they were due, even though the payment was often made past the XXXX of the month. 
This year the city of XXXX XXXX XXXX sent my water bill to Ditech for payment. I have been living in this house since XXXX and paying mortgage payments since that time, but my water bill was never ever sent to a mortgage company before. 
I received a statement from Ditech that my house payments would be raised to more than {$450.00} per month. Later, I was told my payments would be {$380.00}. 
Wanting to know why, I called Ditech. I was told my taxes were raised and that the additional monies were needed to pay into my escrow account. I was toldthat {$600.00} in taxes was needed to pay for this year 's bill and additional monies wereneeded to store up for the next year of taxes that would be due. 
I went to the city of XXXX XXXX XXXX and the clerk said that they had sent the water bill to the mortgage company and I got a statement to indicate that the raise was due to a one time water bill and not due to an increase in taxes. I sent a copy of the statement to Ditech, but the company representative said that it was not received by them. I sent a check for {$300.00} which was my regular mortgage payment plus an additional {$10.00} to go towards my escrow. No amount of telephone calls to the company rendered relief. On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a woman from Ditech called me and said she wanted to collect my mortgage payment. I asked how much she needed and then I asked if {$450.00} would satisfy Ditech. She said, " Oh! Yes! That would be fine. '' I gave her all the information for an electronic withdrawal from my bank. 
She gave me a confirmation number. Two days later I received mail that I had to sign papers to avoid foreclosure. Then, I got a handout from Ditech. It was put on my door. It was not mailed, but it was put on the door while I was in the house. It seemed like a message to me that Ditech has a presence to my house and I was afraid which is what I am certain is what the company wanted. 
I phoned Ditech. The representative told me that they never got my {$450.00} in XXXX. They told me on another occasion that there was no money in my bank account and my check had bounced. 
I said there was money in the account and that there was more than enough to cover the electronic payment. After a minimum of 15 calls to Ditech I only recently got an oral statement from a representative admitting that they did get the payment, but that they could not take it because they had already started loan modifications. 
All this happened, inspite of the fact that I did not owe more than one months payment and I had been given a confirmation number. 
Previously, I went in person to my band and was told that Ditech had never presented the electronic check for payment. 
After the XXXX XXXX attempt to pay, I was told by a ditech representative that I should not make payments for XXXX or XXXX, because of a restructuring of my loan. I was told that XXXX and XXXX would be put at the end of my loan and that I should only make payments of only {$250.00}. 
I said I did not understand. I was told that the lower payment was a test. The test was to see if I could meet the terms of the contract. The representative said the probation period would last three months. It has been six months, I never received the papers they were talking about. 
The mortgage stateme

Company public response: Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation