Consumer complaint received 2025-05-12 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — USDA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Applying for or obtaining a modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or deed-in-lieu
Company: Mr. Cooper Group Inc.
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Rushmore Servicing for repeated mishandling of my mortgage loss mitigation process, failure to act in good faith, and what I believe may constitute violations of RESPA and consumer protection laws. These servicing failures have directly led to a sheriffs sale being scheduled for XX/XX/year>, despite our consistent efforts to resolve the matter.

Summary of Issues : 1. Initial Application Mishandling : When we first submitted a loss mitigation application, it remained unreviewed for several weeks. 
We were asked repeatedly for documents we had already submitted, including W-2s, even after clarifying that we are self-employed and submitting the appropriate documentation.

Eventually, we learned that the application had been sitting unread in the inbox of a Rushmore employee who had been out of the office.

We were told the application was deniedonly to receive a call two weeks later stating it was actually approved. 

2. Trial Plan and Payment System Failure : We were placed on a USDA standalone Mortgage Recovery Advance ( MRA ) plan and made on-time payments until XX/XX/year>. 
In XXXX, I attempted to make the scheduled payment but was unable to do so due to a malfunction in Rushmores online portal. I have : A time-stamped screenshot showing the Make Payment button was missing and A video recording of me attempting to make the payment by phone and online. 

I was not able to complete the payment until the next business day, XX/XX/XXXX, solely due to the servicer 's system failure. 

3. Appeal and Denial : Our modification was denied for allegedly missing the XXXX payment deadline. We filed an appeal with the evidence noted above. In that appeal, we also cited that Rushmore 's own representative had informed us that payments could be made at any time during the month as long as they were received by the last day. The letter regarding the modification similarly stated that it would only be voided if : The borrower vacated the property, or The payment was not made by the last day of the month.

Nevertheless, the appeal was denied.

4. New Application and Inconsistent Handling : We were told to submit a new loss mitigation application, which we did and as of XX/XX/year>, our online portal showed the application as Approved. I have a screenshot confirming this. Our assigned point of contact with Rushmore, XXXX, told us the application was conditionally approved, and that the only delay was waiting for fees from the law firm to finalize the modification. She even provided the payment amounts and due dates based on the new terms. Despite this, the application was later reversed and denied, with no formal notice. 

5. Shifting Denial Reasons : We were told via a phone rep that the modification was denied because the unpaid principal balance ( UPB ) at the time of default exceeded the USDA threshold.

We verified through Rushmores own attorneys that the UPB at the time of default does not change because the time of default does not change. 
This issue was raised in our appeal, yet it was never addressed in the denial response. 
The denial reason then shifted again, this time stating the application was denied because it had been more than one year since the date of default.

However, the originally approved modification was also more than a year after the default date ( delayed due to Rushmores earlier mishandling. ) 6. Imminent Foreclosure : A sheriffs sale of our home is now scheduled for XX/XX/year>. 
We contacted Rushmore to request a 3-month window to sell the home ourselves so our children could finish school and we could avoid foreclosure due to all the issues and was given the number for a HUD counselor and stated the only way to stop the sale was to pay the full default balance, and that they could only consider an offer if we had one already to submit to the investor.

We are prepared to sell the home and willing to put on the market so soon as possible and had made every effort to resolve the matter without legal or financial escalation.

Supporting Documentation Available : Screenshot showing portal status as Approved on XX/XX/year> Video and screenshots of failed XXXX payment attempts Appeal letters and responses Emails and call notes with Rushmore representatives Call notes from Rushmores attorneys confirming UPB would not change Copies of all loss mitigation applications

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation