Consumer complaint received 2018-06-09 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
This is the only specialty of Ocwen. This is the only duplicate their lair rep mentions about. The send criminals to XXXX on your property stole your private property using forge documents, lying to clients, deceiving clients and if they see that this I not working they used death threats tactics in order to intimidate people. This criminal organization must close soon permanently. I get death treats from XXXX 18 to 28 per days. Since I am not scare of this criminal behavior as I discover some IP addresses of those criminals I will go to XXXX to file criminal charges and close the doors of those hate-Americans criminals forever. This is the only expertise this pirate mortgage company has. 
Serviced loans using error-riddled information : Ocwen uses a proprietary system called XXXX to process and apply borrower payments, communicate payment information to borrowers, and maintain loan balance information. Ocwen allegedly loaded inaccurate and incomplete information into its XXXX  system. And even when data was accurate, XXXX  generated errors because of system failures and deficient programming. To manage this risk, Ocwen tried manual workarounds, but they often failed to correct inaccuracies and produced still more errors. Ocwen then used this faulty information to service borrowers loans. In XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwens head of servicing described its system as ridiculous and a train wreck. 
Illegally foreclosed on homeowners : Ocwen has long touted its ability to service and modify loans for troubled borrowers. But allegedly, Ocwen has failed to deliver required foreclosure protections. As a result, the Bureau alleges that Ocwen has wrongfully initiated foreclosure proceedings on at least 1,000 people, and has wrongfully held foreclosure sales. Among other illegal practices, Ocwen has initiated the foreclosure process before completing a review of borrowers loss mitigation applications. In other instances, Ocwen has asked borrowers to submit additional information within 30 days, but foreclosed on the borrowers before the deadline. Ocwen has also foreclosed on borrowers who were fulfilling their obligations under a loss mitigation agreement. 
Failed to credit borrowers payments : Ocwen has allegedly failed to appropriately credit payments made by numerous borrowers. Ocwen has also failed to send borrowers accurate periodic statements detailing the amount due, how payments were applied, total payments received, and other information. Ocwen has also failed to correct billing and payment errors. 
Botched escrow accounts : Ocwen manages escrow accounts for over 75 percent of the loans it services. Ocwen has allegedly botched basic tasks in managing these borrower accounts. Because of system breakdowns and an over-reliance on manually entering information, Ocwen has allegedly failed to conduct escrow analyses and sent some borrowers escrow statements late or not at all. Ocwen also allegedly failed to properly account for and apply payments by borrowers to address escrow shortages, such as changes in the account when property taxes go up. One result of this failure has been that some borrowers have paid inaccurate amounts. 
Mishandled hazard insurance : If a servicer administers an escrow account for a borrower, a servicer must make timely insurance and/or tax payments on behalf of the borrower. Ocwen, however, has allegedly failed to make timely insurance payments to pay for borrowers home insurance premiums. Ocwens failures led to the lapse of homeowners insurance coverage for more than 10,000 borrowers. Some borrowers were pushed into force-placed insurance. 
Bungled borrowers private mortgage insurance : Ocwen allegedly failed to cancel borrowers private mortgage insurance, or PMI, in a timely way, causing consumers to overpay. Generally, borrowers must purchase PMI when they obtain a mortgage with a down payment of less than 20 percent, or when they refinance their mortgage with less than 20 percent equity in their property. Servicers must end a borrowers requirement to pay PMI when the principal balance of the mortgage reaches 78 percent of the propertys original value. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has failed to end borrowers PMI on time after learning information in its XXXX system was unreliable or missing altogether. Ocwen ultimately overcharged borrowers about {$1.00} XXXX for PMI premiums, and refunded this money only after the fact. 
Deceptively signed up and charged borrowers for add-on products : When servicing borrowers mortgage loans, Ocwen allegedly enrolled some consumers in add-on products through deceptive solicitations and without their consent. Ocwen then billed and collected payments from these consumers. 
Failed to assist heirs seeking foreclosure alternatives : Ocwen allegedly mishandled accounts for successors-in-interest, or heirs, to a deceased borrower. These consumers included widows, children, and other relatives. As a result, Ocwen failed to properly recognize individuals as heirs, and thereby denied assistance to help avoid foreclosure. In some instances, Ocwen foreclosed on individuals who may have been eligible to save these homes through a loan modification or other loss mitigation option. 
Failed to adequately investigate and respond to borrower complaints : If an error is made in the servicing of a mortgage loan, a servicer must generally either correct the error identified by the borrower, called a notice of error, or investigate the alleged error. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has allegedly routinely failed to properly acknowledge and investigate complaints, or make necessary corrections. Ocwen changed its policy in XX/XX/XXXX to address the difficulty its call center had in recognizing and escalating complaints, but these changes fell short. Under its new policy, borrowers still have to complain at least five times in nine days before Ocwen automatically escalates their complaint to be resolved. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has received more than 580,000 notices of error and complaints from more than 300,000 different borrowers. 
Failed to provide complete and accurate loan information to new servicers : Ocwen has allegedly failed to include complete and accurate borrower information when it sold its rights to service thousands of loans to new mortgage servicers. This has hampered the new servicers efforts to comply with laws and investor guidelines. 
Operations Targeted Financially Distressed Consumers in Danger of Losing Their Homes XXXX XXXX The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today announced actions to halt two alleged mortgage loan modification scams it believes ripped-off thousands of struggling homeowners across the country. In total, these operations took in more than {$10.00} XXXX by charging consumers for services that falsely promised to prevent foreclosures or renegotiate troubled mortgages. 
We are taking on schemes that prey on consumers who are struggling to pay their mortgages or facing foreclosure, said CFPB Director XXXX XXXX. We are especially concerned with those who misrepresent government programs or websites to divert distressed homeowners from needed assistance. 
At the request of the CFPB, U.S. District Court Judges in the State of XXXX have ordered a halt to both operations, the XXXX Law Firm and the National Legal Help Center, and frozen their assets while the CFPB moves forward with the cases. The case involving the National Legal Help Center was initially referred to the CFPB by the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program ( SIGTARP ) and Treasurys Office of Financial Stability, which have coordinated closely with the Bureau throughout the investigation. 
It is absolutely unacceptable for unscrupulous con artists to take advantage of our nations housing crisis by targeting homeowners looking for help from TARPs Home Affordable Modification Program, said XXXX XXXX, Special Inspector General for TARP ( SIGTARP ). We thank the CFPB for protecting homeowners. SIGTARP will continue to stop these scams and educate homeowners that mortgage modifications through HAMP are free. 
The CFPB is targeting loan modification operations that attempt to disguise their false promises of relief for struggling homeowners with claims that they are performing legal work or are a law firm. The Bureau is also particularly concerned with schemes that attract victims with false claims that they are endorsed by or represent the government. These tactics are used by mortgage relief scams to attract victims, add credibility to their schemes, or exploit certain legal exemptions for the practice of law. 
The CFPB complaints allege that the defendants in both cases violated the Dodd-Frank Act and Regulation O, formerly known as the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services Rule. These laws prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices and protect distressed homeowners from mortgage relief scams. 
Violations of the law alleged in the CFPBs complaints in both cases include : Illegally charged large upfront fees : It is against the law for mortgage relief providers to charge fees before services are provided. However, the defendants in both cases collected fees early on, typically ranging between {$1000.00} and {$4500.00} from each distressed homeowner, for services that rarely if ever materialized. 
Deceptively claimed to be affiliated with government agencies and/or programs : Defendants in both cases used deceptive language and mailings with government logos, letterhead, and/or marks to mislead consumers into believing that their mortgage relief services were sponsored by or associated with government agencies or programs. 
Misrepresented that they would secure loan modifications for consumers : Defendants misled consumers that the defendants were experienced negotiators who would substantially reduce mortgage payments, and that defendants would identify legal violations by consumers banks or mortgage companies to use as leverage in loan modification negotiations. However, it appears that defendants failed to provide meaningful relief for consumers. 
Instructed consumers to stop paying their mortgages and stop contacting their lenders : Financially distressed consumers were told to avoid interactions with their lenders and to stop mortgage payments because the defendants would provide relief, potentially putting the consumers unknowingly at risk of losing their homes and/or ruining their credit scores. 
The CFPB also alleges that, after pocketing thousands of dollars in illegal fees from one distressed homeowner after another, the defendants in both cases typically stopped returning consumers phone calls and emails. In the end, many consumers learned that the defendants had not contacted their lenders or obtained any meaningful relief for them. Ultimately, homeowners across the country lost thousands of dollars each and suffered significant economic injury, including losing their homes. 
National Legal Help Center The more recent of the two actions involves XXXX   residents XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX and their operation, National Legal Help Center, which appears to target consumers in all 50 states with false promises of mortgage relief. According to the CFPB, National Legal Help Center falsely claimed that they would provide legal representation for consumers even though the individual defendants are not attorneys and consumers received no actual legal representation. 
Defendants falsely claimed that, for a fee, they could assist consumers in getting benefits from government-affiliated programs, including the recent nationwide mortgage servicing settlement between state attorneys general and the federal government, and the five largest mortgage servicers. Defendants also falsely claimed that they were associated with the Independent Foreclosure Review program overseen by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) and the Federal Reserve. In reality, the defendants were not affiliated with either of the programs or in a position to provide the promised benefits to consumers. In fact, on XX/XX/XXXX, the OCC issued an alert on its website about this scam. 
This is the trophy activity of Ocwen In one case, a former in-home caregiver and her husband who were indicted in XXXX  for allegedly defrauding an elderly veteran with XXXX out of about {$180000.00}. More charges are expected, and police say the couple took about {$500000.00} from the XXXX-year-old man. 
In another case, a handyman convinced an elderly woman to give him power of attorney. He took out a reverse mortgage on the home which the woman had owned since the XX/XX/XXXX, and she never saw any of the money. She almost lost her home due to the scam. 
We also heard a troubling story about how the CEO and CFO of a XXXX investment firm were charged with 66 felony counts of elder abuse, securities fraud, and conspiracy for bilking older investors of more than {$2.00} XXXX over an eight-year period. 
The Government Accountability Office report on combatting elder financial abuse identified cases that are particularly thorny for social service, criminal justice, and consumer protection agencies. These cases involve exploitation by in-home caregivers, agents with power of attorney, and financial service providersexactly the kinds of cases mentioned above. These cases also demonstrate why family members or others who have close contact with older adults can play an important role in spotting and preventing elder financial abuse and exploitation. 
At the inaugural meeting of the Elder Justice Coordinating Council last fall, we heard concerns that echo what the XXXX reported. We shared those concerns with Congress shortly after the report came out. We also detailed the work our Office for Older Americans is doing to combat some of these problems. We are : Developing guides for family members and others with legal authority to handle money for older relatives or friends, but who may not have formal training. The guides will help people understand proper record keeping, good frameworks for investing, and other basics of managing a vulnerable adults money. They also will help people recognize and respond to financial exploitation. 
Producing a guide for people who operate group living centers dedicated to serving older adults, such as XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX. We are also establishing partnerships with organizations to help distribute this information. 
Partnering with the FDIC to create XXXX XXXX for Older Adults, a community education and training program for older adults and for caregivers. 
Coordinating with stakeholders in several states to create and sustain multi-disciplinary older American protection networks. We are also developing strategies to communicate that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act generally does not prohibit companies from reporting suspected elder financial exploitation. For many of them, this is often a point of confusion.

The Bureau also alleges that Ocwen has failed to remediate borrowers for the harm it has caused, including the problems it has created for struggling borrowers who were in default on their loans or who had filed for bankruptcy. For these groups of borrowers, Ocwens servicing errors have been particularly costly. 
Through its complaint, filed in federal district court for the XXXX District of XXXX, the CFPB seeks a court order requiring Ocwen to follow mortgage servicing law, provide relief for consumers, and pay penalties. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law. 
The lawsuit is available at : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX The Bureau also alleges that Ocwen has failed to remediate borrowers for the harm it has caused, including the problems it has created for struggling borrowers who were in default on their loans or who had filed for bankruptcy. For these groups of borrowers, Ocwens servicing errors have been particularly costly. 
Through its complaint, filed in federal district court for the XXXX District of XXXX, the CFPB seeks a court order requiring Ocwen to follow mortgage servicing law, provide relief for consumers, and pay penalties. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law. 

Operations Targeted Financially Distressed Consumers in Danger of Losing Their Homes XXXX XXXX. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today announced actions to halt two alleged mortgage loan modification scams it believes ripped-off thousands of struggling homeowners across the country. In total, these operations took in more than {$10.00} XXXX by charging consumers for services that falsely promised to prevent foreclosures or renegotiate troubled mortgages. 
We are going to have 150,000 demonstrating in XXXX against those criminal activity of Ocwen After it the doors of this filthy pirate mortgage company will be close permanently This is the prce for this {$100000.00} property stolen temporary from me. In XX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX in order to intimidate me they put XXXX criminals to call me 15-20 a day, making even death threats or claiming they are from US Gov. Grants Dept. or from IRS or from Justice Dept. or even FBI or Police Dept. I suspect that a low-level clerk XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX  is directly responsible for organizing this XX/XX/XXXX looting perform by XXXX since Ocwen and XXXX was the only Institution informed about my trip to XXXX and this action was in ravage to my opposition to their fraudulent and criminal activity. Low level Ocwen clerk XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX  and the low lever worker XXXX from XXXX knew I will be in XXXX ( documenting Ocwens and XXXX forge documents ) informed XXXX  that used XXXX, that used looter XXXX XXXX to loot, vandalize destroy my property in XX/XX/XXXX. Again in a top secret close door knowing that I will not be home to protect from such a criminal attack

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation