Consumer complaint received 2026-02-19 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: CrossCountry Mortgage LLC
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
This is ourXX/XX/XXXXcomplaint regarding the improper escrow disbursement of {$1100.00} by our mortgage servicer to XXXX XXXX XXXX. This matter has now progressed beyond a billing dispute. It reflects a documented pattern of materially inconsistent explanations, shifting legal justifications, and failure to provide a stable, substantiated basis for the servicers actions. Pattern of Shifting Legal Positions Throughout this dispute, the servicers justification has changed repeatedly, including but not limited to : Asserting that the matter falls under Washington Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act ( XXXX XXXX ), despite the community being created in 2006 and not opted into that statute Referring to generalized super lien authority without identifying applicable statutory grounding Suggesting reliance on Deed of Trust provisions without identifying specific language authorizing escrow disbursement during an active dispute Recharacterizing the matter as private when regulatory scrutiny is requested, yet treating it as legally enforceable when disbursing funds or referencing collection authority These shifting explanations are not minor clarifications. They are materially inconsistent representations of the legal authority relied upon. At no point has the servicer provided a consistent, document-supported legal basis demonstrating : XXXX. Verification of perfected lien authority under applicable Washington law XXXX. Compliance with notice and procedural requirements XXXX. Escrow investigation consistent with Regulation XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX and XXXX ) XXXX. Internal compliance review prior to disbursement Escrow Administration Concerns Under federal servicing standards, escrow disbursement requires reasonable investigation when an error is asserted. In this case, funds were disbursed during an active dispute concerning : The validity of the HOA assessment The accuracy of accounting Compliance with statutory lien procedures We have repeatedly requested documentation of the legal analysis conducted before disbursement. Substantive production has not occurred. Systemic Regulatory Concern This is now our XX/XX/XXXX complaint. Each prior complaint has been processed as an isolated consumer dispute and forwarded for routine response. However, when a regulated mortgage servicer provides multiple, evolving legal explanations for the same action, that pattern alone warrants supervisory attention. The volume of contradictory representations should itself trigger review. The issue is no longer whether the amount was {$1100.00}. The issue is whether regulated entities can provide inconsistent legal justifications until a homeowner exhausts remedies. Request for Action We formally request : XXXX. Supervisory investigation into the servicers escrow administration practices XXXX Review of the materially inconsistent legal representations made in this matter XXXX. Written clarification of the CFPBs position regarding servicer obligations when HOA assessments are actively disputed XXXX. Determination of whether compliance standards were properly applied prior to disbursement We are prepared to provide full documentation of the inconsistencies referenced above. This complaint is submitted because the pattern of shifting positions, unsupported assertions, and procedural avoidance has now reached a level that can not reasonably be characterized as routine dispute handling. We respectfully request formal supervisory review.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation