Consumer complaint received 2022-02-09 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX of XXXX, my XXXX XXXX mortgage went into XXXX forbearance. In XX/XX/XXXX, my XXXX died. I notified the mortgage company and continued the XXXX forbearance through to the end in XX/XX/XXXX. In XXXX, I filed with the mortgage company to become successor-in-interest and had the title of the house transferred to myself in accordance with my XXXX XXXX will after it was entered into probate. 

Since the beginning, I have been told many things by Wells Fargo. I was told during the process of forbearance that I would be able to add the payments to the end of the loan. When the end arrived, though, I was told I would have to either pay the XXXX XXXXXXXX owed immediately and continue to pay the mortgage as normal under my XXXX XXXX name, or I could go through the assumptions process. I entered into the assumptions process, not my options and trusting that Wells Fargo understood the law. I was turned down. I appealed and was turned down again. 

However, recently, while reading Regulation Z on this very website, I found out that - according to a Bulletin published on XX/XX/XXXX, clarifying the issues surrounding successors-in-interest and becoming an obligor on a mortgage for a property they were willed - I should not have to undergo the assumptions process at all. 

Cited here : " The Bureau is issuing this interpretive rule to clarify that where a successor-in-interest ( successor ) who has previously acquired title to a dwelling agrees to be added as obligor or substituted for the existing obligor on a consumer credit transaction secured by that dwelling, the creditors written acknowledgement of the successor as obligor is not subject to the Bureaus Ability-to-Repay Rule ( ATR Rule ), XXXX, because such a transaction does not constitute an assumption as defined by Regulation Z XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX '' The intent of this rule is to prevent successors-in-interest from having to undergo a strenuous and lengthy process that they may not qualify for after experiencing a loss. 

From the bulletin : " Often, this issue arises upon the death of the obligor, with the surviving spouse or children asserting rights under the mortgage, but it may also present itself in other settings, such as in separation or divorce, after a transfer from living parents to children, or a transfer to an inter vivos trust of which the consumer is the beneficiary. If the XXXX Rule applies when a creditor adds a successor as an obligor, such transactions may be less likely to occur. There can be significant consequences for a successor that is not able to become an obligor on a mortgage. For instance, if the successor seeks a modification of the existing transaction as part of trying to retain the home, the creditor may refuse to modify the terms of the debt on the grounds that the successor is not a party to the existing obligation and therefore can not enter into a modification agreement. '' There is no current obligor on the loan- if they were to add me to the loan, there would be an obligor and they would have their loan secured once more. However, both Wells Fargo and XXXX XXXX insist that I must participate in the assumptions process. 

According to the information I have provided here, from the CFPB publications and this website itself, that is not how it should be. 

" An assumption under XXXX ( XXXX ) occurs when the creditor agrees in writing to accept a subsequent consumer as a primary obligor on an existing residential mortgage transaction. A residential mortgage transaction is a transaction in which a consumer finances the acquisition or initial construction of the consumer 's principal dwelling. See XXXX ( XXXX ) ( XXXX ). For purposes of determining whether the transaction is an assumption, the creditor must look to whether the new obligor is seeking to finance the acquisition of that subsequent consumer 's principal dwelling. [ XXXX ] Whether the existing extension of consumer credit was a residential mortgage transaction as to the existing primary obligor is immaterial. 

A residential mortgage transaction does not arise where a successor takes on the debt obligation that is secured by property the successor previously acquired. In these situations, XXXX ( XXXX ) does not apply when the successor agrees to be added as an obligor on an existing mortgage loan. ( As comment XXXX ( XXXX ) ( XXXX ) XXXX states, the term residential mortgage transaction does not include a transaction involving a consumer 's principal dwelling if the consumer had previously purchased and acquired some interest to the dwelling even through the consumer had not acquired full legal title. ) Although these transactions are commonly referred to as assumptions, they are not assumptions under XXXX ( XXXX ) because the transaction is not a residential mortgage transaction as to the successor. Accordingly, the XXXX Rule in XXXX does not apply to a transaction in which a successor seeks to take on the debt secured by property that the successor previously acquired. '' I have it recorded in an XXXX application for XXXX, dated XX/XX/XXXX, that I provided money to my mother every month to pay a part of the mortgage ( {$220.00}, {$87.00} of which was mortgage ). Even before being willed the home, I held an interest in the home, and have lived here for almost XXXX years. I wish to keep the home and to continue paying the mortgage and to be treated as the successor-in-interest should be, as XXXX XXXX XXXX dictates. That is all I ask.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation