Consumer complaint received 2015-05-15 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: Podium Mortgage Capital LLC
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
My mortgage is serviced by Pinnacle Capital Mortgage XXXX. Approximately three months ago we submitted a hazard insurance claim on our home to XXXX XXXX Insurance to allow for repairs to the roof, siding, windows, and fence which occurred in XXXX 2014. The claim was quickly processed by XXXX XXXX and we received a check for the damages in the amount of approximately {$12000.00} ( depreciated value ) of a total claim of XXXX. We were required to have Pinnacle Mortgage endorse the check. We contacted Pinnacle for instructions on how to obtain their endorsement and proceed with ordering/paying for repairs. We were instructed in writing that we would need to endorse the check over to Pinnacle and submit proof of 100 % completion of repairs to receive distribution of funds. We called to inquire as we could not complete or start repairs without funds from the claim. We were told that even though the written requirements indicate a need for a certificate of completion, that in fact that was not true and we could simply endorse the check over to them and upon receipt they would initially re-issue us XXXX of the funds with the XXXX XXXX issued with proof that the work was 50 % complete, and the final XXXX upon proof that the work was 100 % complete. We were told however, that we could submit a formal request to have 100 % of the funds distributed immediately, which we deemed necessary due to the requirements for up-front payments in excess of the XXXX offered to us to our contractors. We submitted the formal written request for full disbursement in early XXXX. We provided all requested information, including the TIN for our contractor. After three weeks of no additional correspondence from Pinnacle we called and were told for the XXXX time that the request was not processed because we failed to provide our contractor 's TIN. At this time, we were told we would need to re-submit the request, but we asked if we could simply provide the TIN over the phone to expedite the process and were told we could. We provided the TIN over the phone and were told the request would be processed and we would receive our check for the {$12000.00} claim within XXXX5 business days. A few more weeks went by with no check and no additional correspondence from Pinnacle so we called to inquire as to the status. At this time we were told that our claim had been rejected. We asked what our options were because at this point we needed to pay our contractor for materials to allow work to begin. Pinnacle told us we could take XXXX of the distribution or we could re-submit a request for the entire {$12000.00}. So we requested a slightly smaller distribution of {$10000.00} be distributed to cover expected near term costs. Within one week of submitting this request Pinnacle called and said the request had been approved and we would receive a check in XXXX to 5 business days. After this, we waited 7 days and then we received a letter requesting that we call them because their records showed no work had been completed on the property and asking us to explain why. We called and again told them we had not started work as we had not yet received any of the money. Upon calling they indicated we could disregard the letter and we would get our check in XXXX5 days. It has now been 7 days and we have not received the check. We understand Pinnacle 's responsibility to protect the security of their mortgage and their need for controls to ensure insurance claims are used to make necessary repairs, but we also believe their delays and mismanagement in processing the claim are unfair and abusive under UDAAP. We, and I am sure most borrowers can not afford to initiate repairs without distribution of funds and the delays to this point result in loss of scheduling priority with contractors and loss of value in our home.

Company public response: Company can't verify or dispute the facts in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation