Consumer complaint received 2016-10-06 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Home equity loan or line of credit
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
PROBLEM 1 : From XX/XX/XXXX Wells Fargo ( WF ) failed to apply timely & accurate payments ( PYMTs ), failed to maintain accurate account ( ACCT ) statements & lied about it ; XX/XX/XXXX- Deposited bank-check {$14000.00} at WF branch for Equity LOC loan PYMT. Collection Dept. kept calling. Could n't stop them ; XX/XX/XXXX Sent letter to WF Chairman & CEO XXXX XXXX to help correct PYMT record. XX/XX/XXXX WF Executive Office said PMYT was NOW recorded right. [ LIE! ] ; Later asked for Verification of Debt & got my PYMT Transaction Summary ( PTS ) showing PYMTs of {$12000.00} & {$13000.00}. Asked WF to explain & XXXX WF said : $ XXXX " This PYMT was returned to your bank as insufficient funds, therefore was reversed out of the ACCT. '' [ LIE! ] ; $ XXXX " This PYMT was also returned to your bank as insufficient funds, therefore was reversed out of the ACCT. Later this PYMT was made again & cleared your bank. It was applied to your ACCT effective XXXX XXXX, XXXX. '' [ LIE! ] ; XXXX Asked WF for PROOF the statements were true ; XXXX WF responded, 'You originally requested details surrounding four PYMTs made on your ACCT between XXXX, XXXX - XXXX, XXXX. We provided details surrounding each of the four PYMTs in question. Without any new or different info, the guidelines established by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) do not require us to perform further research. ' [ Is this a LIE? ] ; Asked XXXX XXXX for copies of checks- {$12000.00}, {$13000.00}, {$14000.00}. Bank sent proof checks for {$12000.00} & {$13000.00} NEVER EXISTED. Only {$14000.00} existed & was both written/cashed on XXXX ; XXXX XXXX WAS HORRIFIED with WF 's explanation of non-existing PYMTs & that my {$14000.00} PYMT was not recorded & that PTS showed multiple entries for dates & PYMTs that do not reflect reality from XXXX to XXXX XXXX ; XXXX Sent WF law firm ( XXXX ) & WF a letter w/'Proof ' from XXXX XXXX on what 'actually ' transpired & asked for response. [ See docs ] ; WF law firm ( XXXX ) & WF ignored my letter so file stays corrupted since XXXX ; PROBLEM 2 : WF told MISLEADING INFO to deny my MANY Loan Modification ( LM ) requests ; WF inflates my PYMT amt. for ( property tax + insurance + loan PYMT to be & lt ; 31 % of monthly income ) so I never meet ( or come close to meeting ) the criteria for a LM ; o WF uses highest # s possible : For property taxes, WF uses 'Full ' XXXX. taxed vs 'Actual ' amt. paid ( w/ deductions ) ; For 'monthly loan PYMT ', amt. based on : Original monthly loan PYMT amt. before my hardship vs a WF optional lower amt. to reflect my hardship ; 'Full ' loan amt. ( XXXX ) vs a WF optional reduction in loan total amt ; WF never offered option to forgive late PYMTs & fees ; PROBLEM 3 : WF purposefully delayed, denied settlement offers & inflated my home value-all to force me into foreclosure ; Denied a LM in XXXX. WF said '1 option = a settlement offer ' ; o Offered XXXX ( ATTACHMENT XXXX ). For house disrepair we offered photos or on-site visit. WF refused both ( until 1 year later ) ; o After our offer, WF told lawyer WF changed its process to prevent this loophole again ; o WF said to expect a timely response w/in 14 days - WF took 194 days ; In XXXX WF asked for XXXX & lawyer told WF in XXXX none existed because I did n't make enough money ; In XXXX XXXX XXXX for 'Proof of Funds ' so sent XXXX 'Pre-Approval for a Reverse Mortgage ( RM ) ' ( ATTACHMENT XXXX ). On XXXX WF told lawyer 'proof of funds ' was 'sufficient ' ; o WF denied offer ( XXXX ) w/o due diligence on inside repairs ; HUGE HARMFUL IMPACT = Denial meant new RM eligibility criteria such that {$50000.00} of my money will be held in escrow for years! WF cost me {$50000.00}! 
WF overstates home value w/multiple 'comp ' appraisals vs one in-house appraisal ( XXXX ) -WF wo n't share it.

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