Consumer complaint received 2021-08-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: SN SERVICING CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
SN Serving acquired our loan after it was transferred several times from our original mortgage company which resulted in about 4-5 months of trying to figure out who was our loan provider. Once SN Servicing finally acquired our loan, we reached out to them to start making payments. Due to the loan being sold and re-bought several times in the span of a few months, it was quite delinquent. We entered into a repayment plan with SN right away with a good faith payment upfront in the amount of {$18000.00} and then a 14-month modified payment for the delinquent balance. We were paying more money than our previous loan with XXXX XXXX, and we were being billed late fees which XXXX XXXX was not enforcing on our account. I questioned why they were changing the terms of the loan when I was told from XXXX XXXX, everything would stay the same. But they insisted they were within their rights to charge additional fees. 
After making full payments around {$900.00} more than our previous mortgage, and on time, and making it more than halfway through the 14-month plan, we had a COVID-19 hardship. My XXXX was shut down and all work stopped. I lost several jobs due to fear and uncertainty and couldnt make the larger monthly payments anymore. We proactively reached out to SN for mortgage assistance due to the COVID-19 emergency. They did not respond to the Covid 19 hardship request until 4 months later. Even though we continually followed up with them by email and phone. Upon completing the proper paperwork and showing proof of hardship, SN denied our request due to failure to meet deferment-forbearance guidelines. Meaning we were already delinquent when they bought our loan. Except for we made a large down payment and larger payments every month since they bought the loan. 
At that point we were told to apply for Loss Mitigation which they again denied us based on ineligible income. As the economy started to open back up our income increased. Business started picking back up and my spouse obtained a job as a second income. We increased our income and decreased our expenses. We tried to contact SN to inform them of the new information but couldnt get a response until we filed a complaint with CFPB. We reached out to a HUD counselor who has been involved since, trying to help get responses and a resolution from SN. 
After months of time passed, we were told to apply for Loss Mitigation again. In our hardship explanation we informed SN we were able to resume making our original mortgage payment amount. We offered a {$10000.00} lump sum towards the past due balance or towards escrow shortage, but needed assistance with the loan to recover completely. SN then informed us they cancelled their review of our account for assistance as they showed no response from us. We then had to contact SN and show proof that we had clearly submitted everything required within their allowed time frame. They admitted they made a mistake and reopened our request. This with all the lack of timely responses from SN further delayed a resolution and is increasing our past due amount. These delays have added months of back dues and is now being used against us as a negotiating tool for being too high of an amount, or too far out to modify now. 
SN denied our 2nd request for loss mitigation due to ineligible income again. As their denial letter was very vague, the HUD counselor and I asked for clarification on how they came up with this determination numerous times. According to the HUD counselor, our numbers should have been good enough to qualify for a modification the last time. We again couldnt get a response from SN until we filed another complaint with CFPB. Its been over a year since we started the process with SN for a resolution. The last communication from SN was that at this point reinstatement or a repayment plan are the retention options. There was no response to our offer of the {$10000.00} lump sum towards the outstanding balance. SN is not being realistic in providing a loss mitigation option, just a repayment plan. Which would be a monthly payment almost triple of what our current payment is or a payment of the entire past due balance. If anyone was able to pay this amount, they would not be in the position to need assistance to begin with.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation