Consumer complaint received 2025-09-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure
Company: Fay Servicing, LLC
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint against Fay Servicing regarding abusive, unfair, and discriminatory handling of my conventional mortgage loan ( XXXX XXXX ). 

XXXX. Loss Mitigation Denials & Foreclosure Threats I submitted complete loss mitigation applications in XXXX, XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. Fay acknowledged receipt, but XXXX application was denied the very next day without meaningful review. At the same time, they threatened immediate foreclosure, in violation of Regulation X ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ). 

XXXX. Inflated & Unsustainable Repayment Plan Fays XX/XX/XXXX letter stated arrears of {$11000.00}, yet the repayment plan requires XXXX XXXXXXXX for XXXX months ( over {$20000.00} ). This is more than XXXX XXXX of my contractual monthly payment ( {$1900.00} ). Conventional investor guidelines ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) cap repayment plans at 150 % of the monthly payment without approval. 

On a three-way call with my HUD advocate , Fays representative claimed the repayment plan included future mortgage payments and no late fees, even though the written letter explicitly states late fees are included. 

XXXX. Evaluation Based Solely on Income On that same call, the Fay representative admitted that once they saw our increased household income from recent promotions, the review was stopped and the plan was compressed into XXXX months because they can pay it back. This is an improper evaluation standard and violates Regulation X, which requires servicers to evaluate the entire application and borrower circumstances, not just income in isolation. 

XXXX. Refusal to Disclose Investor XXXX When I requested investor repayment-term policies under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36 ( Request for Information ), Fay refused to provide them. This is a direct violation of federal servicing law. 

XXXX. False & Backdated Credit Reporting Fay has reported my account as XXXX days delinquent, backdated as if no payments were made since XXXX. This is false : Fay only acquired servicing in XX/XX/XXXX. My prior servicer, XXXXXXXX XXXX reported no late payments from XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. 

I was also in an approved forbearance from XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX due to an emergency medical leave. Under the CARES Act, no negative reporting should have occurred during that period. Fay nevertheless reported XXXX day delinquencies both for a time when they did not service my loan and while I was in approved forbearance/loss mitigation. This violates the FCRA, the CARES Act, and Regulation X. 

XXXX. Misrepresentation of Options The Fay representative suggested a deferment option after my forbearance ended, even though deferment is not available on conventional loans. Presenting an unavailable option and then using it to justify foreclosure demonstrates bad faith servicing and further highlights Fays abusive and misleading practices. 

XXXX. Documented Discrepancies in Late Fees & Credit Reporting During a three-way call with my HUD-certified advocate and Fays relationship manager, we specifically questioned whether late fees or negative credit reporting were being applied while I was under CARES Act protections and loss mitigation review. The representative stated there were no late fees and no negative reporting. However, Fays written letter and my credit report both show late fees assessed and XXXX day delinquencies reported. My advocate and I documented these contradictions and conflicting statements, which demonstrate a lack of integrity and accuracy in Fays communications. 

XXXX. Discriminatory Treatment Despite repeated requests for reassignment, my account has been left with the same relationship manager, who has exhibited hostile communication, refusal to provide accurate information, and denial of repayment accommodations that are typically available to similarly situated borrowers. These actions raise serious concerns under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) and the Fair Housing Act, both of which prohibit discrimination in mortgage servicing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation