Consumer complaint received 2026-01-05 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: CrossCountry Mortgage LLC
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this as a supplemental statement to my CFPB complaint against CrossCountry Mortgage to document not only escrow misconduct and evidence withholding, but a complete breakdown of the regulatory framework that is supposed to protect homeowners from exactly this type of conduct.

This matter is not closed. Escrow funds were taken and disbursed without lawful justification, without verified evidence, and without compliance with federal servicing obligations. CrossCountry Mortgages attempt to label this matter closed, while treating continued demands for proof as new requests, is procedurally improper and substantively indefensible.

CrossCountry Mortgage was on notice of a bona fide dispute regarding the validity and enforceability of the HOA charge prior to and/or at the time of disbursement. Once notice exists, a mortgage servicer has independent, non-delegable duties to investigate, document, and verify the legal basis for any escrow disbursement. Those duties can not be delegated to an HOA, ignored, or replaced by a regulators refusal letter. 

To date, CrossCountry Mortgage has never identified or produced the evidence it relied upon to justify taking and disbursing escrow funds. If such evidence exists, it must be produced. If it does not exist, the disbursement was not justified.

CrossCountry Mortgage has attempted to rely on correspondence from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) to justify its conduct. That reliance is improper. Even if XXXX had conducted a review, a state regulators position does not relieve a federal mortgage servicer of its independent obligations under federal law. A refusal to investigate can not substitute for compliance. 

XXXX own correspondence demonstrates that no meaningful investigation occurred. The letter does not identify what evidence was reviewed, what records were obtained, what documents were examined, or what factual findings were made. XXXX has not stated that it reviewed my recorded deed, HOA source financial records, escrow account documentation, or county recording records. 

This raises unavoidable questions that remain unanswered : What specific evidence did XXXX rely upon to justify its conclusions? 

Did XXXX obtain and review my recorded deed, and if so, where in that deed does it authorize the conduct being excused? 

If XXXX did not review the deed, how could it evaluate deed-based obligations or determine enforceability? 

Did XXXX verify whether any lien, assessment, or enforceable obligation was ever lawfully recorded with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX? To date, no such recording exists. 

An investigation without evidence is not an investigation. Conclusions issued without documentation are unsupported. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX program also reviewed aspects of this matter. While no formal enforcement action was taken, the VA acknowledged the validity of the concerns raised. That acknowledgment further confirms that the issues presented were real, substantiated, and required scrutiny. Yet despite that acknowledgment, no corrective action followed. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX has also declined to take action, stating that it only handles certain types of complaints. As a result, the Attorney General will not intervene, XXXX will not investigate, the HOA will not produce records, and CrossCountry Mortgage refuses to produce evidence while declaring the matter closed. 

This leaves homeowners in an impossible position. 

When every agency tasked with oversight disclaims responsibility, when no evidence is produced, when no lien exists, and when escrow funds are nevertheless taken, what is a homeowner supposed to do? 

What is the purpose of these regulatory bodies if they neither compel evidence nor enforce compliance? 

This is not a hypothetical concern. This is a live example of systemic regulatory failure that allows escrow funds to be taken without proof and without accountability. 

If XXXX Mortgage or XXXX contend that evidence exists but can not be produced, that raises serious record-retention and preservation concerns. If no evidence exists, then their conclusions are unsupported and the escrow disbursement can not be justified. Either scenario demands federal intervention. 

I respectfully request that CFPB require XXXX Mortgage to either ( 1 ) produce the specific documentary evidence relied upon to justify the escrow disbursement and to declare this matter closed, or ( 2 ) formally acknowledge that no such evidence exists and take corrective action accordingly, including reimbursement and a written compliance explanation. 

Until verified evidence is produced, this matter can not be considered resolved and will not be considered resolved until the money taken from illegally is returned.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation