Consumer complaint received 2026-04-26 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
Borrower : XXXX XXXX XXXX Loan # : XXXX Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Servicer : Newrez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This complaint arises from a pattern of improper mortgage servicing conduct by Newrez, including : Failure to comply with federal force-placed insurance laws Unauthorized escrow disbursements totaling {$5400.00} Refusal to accept valid borrower-provided insurance Improper and duplicative lender-placed insurance charges Creation of artificial escrow shortages Misapplication of payments and obstruction of loan payoff Assessment of improper fees, including late charges Failure to provide required notices and account transparency These actions violate RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2605 ) and its implementing regulations under 12 CFR 1024, and constitute unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices ( UDAAP ). DETAILED TIMELINE OF EVENTS 1. Escrow Manipulation by Servicer Newrez added hazard insurance to escrow ( ~ {$1100.00} ) Then removed it ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Demonstrates servicernot borrowercontrolled escrow classification 2. Unauthorized Insurance Disbursement XX/XX/XXXX : Newrez paid {$5400.00} for hazard insurance Claimed justification : cancellation notice per internal policy Issues : No proof of borrower authorization No explanation of : who authorized it why amount increased from ~ {$1100.00} to {$5400.00} No supporting documentation provided despite repeated requests 3. Failure to Comply with 45-Day Rule ( RESPA Violation ) XX/XX/XXXX : Second and Final Notice issued XX/XX/XXXX : Action taken ( insurance placement ) Only ~17 days elapsed Required : 45 days minimum Additionally : No first notice has been produced or provided Violates 12 CFR 1024.37 4. Contradictory Coverage Determinations Newrez claims : They paid insurance to maintain coverage BUT ALSO : Asserted there was a lapse Issued deficiency notices Charged for additional insurance These positions are mutually inconsistent ( See dedicated section below ) 5. Refusal to Accept Valid Insurance Borrower provided valid insurance via : XXXX XXXX XXXX Newrez : refused/delayed acceptance imposed unnecessary requirements ( EDI cancellation ) continued to treat coverage as deficient Violates 12 CFR 1024.37 ( g ) 6. Improper Lender-Placed Insurance Charges System shows effective date : XX/XX/XXXX Charged borrower : XX/XX/XXXX Backdated internally to : XX/XX/XXXX Issues : Charged BEFORE coverage effective Backdated charges Charged despite valid borrower insurance 7. Artificial Escrow Shortage Creation Newrez created negative escrow ( ~ {$4600.00} ) Driven by : {$5400.00} disbursement improper insurance charges Then used this to : delay payoff demand additional funds justify account restrictions 8. Payoff Obstruction ( {$0.00} Balance ) Remaining principal : {$0.00} Borrower attempted to pay off loan Newrez : applied payment to escrow instead of principal refused to apply correctly admitted it could be fixed, then reversed position after escalation This artificially kept the loan open 9. Improper Fees Newrez assessed late charges ( {$69.00} ) Despite : borrower attempting payoff account being in dispute servicer-created escrow issues Fees are based on servicer-caused conditions 10. Failure to Provide Information Borrower repeatedly requested : who authorized {$5400.00} payment why it was made No answer provided after multiple calls ( including 3-hour call ) Violates 12 CFR 1024.36 SECTION : CONTRADICTORY INSURANCE COVERAGE DETERMINATIONS Newrez asserts that a hazard insurance payment of approximately {$5400.00} was made to maintain coverage. However : If coverage was maintained no lapse existed If no lapse existed no lawful basis for notices or lender-placed insurance Despite this, Newrez : issued deficiency notices claimed coverage issues charged for additional insurance Additionally : borrower has documentation confirming no lapse in coverage This creates a no-win contradiction : Either : Coverage existed all charges and notices invalid OR Coverage did not exist {$5400.00} payment was improper LEGAL VIOLATIONS 12 CFR 1024.37 Failure to follow 45-day notice requirement Improper force-placed insurance 12 CFR 1024.17 Improper escrow disbursement Inaccurate escrow accounting 12 CFR 1024.35 Failure to correct servicing errors 12 CFR 1024.36 Failure to respond to borrower inquiries 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( RESPA ) Failure to properly service loan Failure to provide accurate information UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) Creating artificial debt Misleading borrower Using internal policy over law PATTERN OF CONDUCT Newrez has engaged in a pattern of : Escrow manipulation Unauthorized payments Failure to follow federal law Refusal to answer basic questions Creation of artificial balances Obstruction of payoff This is systemic misconduct, not isolated error DEMAND FOR RESOLUTION Newrez must : Reverse the {$5400.00} unauthorized payment Remove all lender-placed insurance charges Correct escrow balance Remove all fees and penalties Apply all payments correctly ( including payoff ) Provide full transaction history Provide : proof of first notice authorization for {$5400.00} payment Confirm loan is paid in full REGULATORY REQUEST I request that regulators : Investigate Newrezs servicing practices Require full accounting Enforce corrective action Evaluate for systemic violations affecting other borrowers FINAL STATEMENT Newrez has demonstrated a consistent pattern of : ignoring federal law mismanaging borrower funds providing contradictory information and obstructing resolution This has caused financial harm, delay, and significant burden.

Company public response: Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation