Consumer complaint received 2022-06-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — 
Company: MUFG AMERICAS HOLDINGS CORPORATION
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
Summary : Union Bank 's mishandling of my account has escalated into overt criminal harassment, intimidation and continued violations. Most recently, Union Bank solicited a third party agent to photograph inside my home windows and open my front unlocked storm door and attempt to open my locked front door. See surveillance videos and photo stills ( turn volume on for doorbell camera-the trespasser did not knock or ring the doorbell ). Union Bank sent out this " agent '' AFTER, Union Bank and Borrower were in a loan modification trial plan agreement and Union Bank had received the Borrower 's first payment-this occurring several days PRIOR to their sending out a creepy person dressed in all black, wearing a hood and photographing inside windows and trying to enter the home. No reason and no notice provided. Did not knock or ring the doorbell. 

Timeline of Events On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a streamline loan modification solicitation offer- after having filed a prior complaint against Union Bank for their mishandling of my account post covid-19 forbearance. However, Union Banks initial offer provided : ( 1 ) an incorrect interest rate per the XXXX XXXX streamlined modification interest rate guidelines/table ; and ( 2 ) a shortened response deadline that is also inconsistent with XXXX XXXX guidelines. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I brought Union Bank 's deficiencies in their streamline solicitation offer dated XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX, manager of the mortgage assistance department. I provided XXXX XXXX with the specific guideline citations she had violated. XXXX XXXX stated she needed time to research the XXXX XXXX Guidelines. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a new streamline solicitation offer with an interest rate of 3.875 % and a response deadline of XX/XX/XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I made the first payment under the payment plan agreement and I returned the signed agreement to Union Bank via email and overnight mail. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, a woman wearing all black with a hood pulled over her head took photos all around my home, put her camera into my windows and snapped photos of the interior of my home and opened the unlocked front storm door and tried to walk inside the front door. I was in the room next to the front door and I heard someone open the front storm door ( which creaks as it opens ) and attempted to open the front door to my home. ( see attached videos ). The noise of the person trying to unlawfully enter my home woke up my dog as heard in the video, which apparently spooked her. The audio and video also corroborates the fact that the attempted intruder never knocked or rang the doorbell. It was very scary and intimidating. 

I was already on heightened awareness for reasons described later. 

If the person had walked through my door as she intended to do, she would have been XXXX 

Please read that last sentence again. If the person had walked through my door as she intended to do, she would have been XXXX. Think about that for a moment. 

The police were called immediately and a report was filed. The person that tried to enter my home was believed to be an associate of a federal inmate that had escaped from prison. The surveillance videos were requested by and provided to City Police XXXX County Sheriff 's Deputy and the US Marshal 's Service. I was terrified. 

Law enforcement believed that she or the escaped inmate would return to my home. The responding officer reviewed the surveillance videos and noted how she intentionally covered her head with her black hood to shield to face. Law enforcement sent video to forensics to enhance the license plate on the perpetrator 's XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. 

I was absolutely terrified. I feared that someone would return to my home and that they were taking photographs to document the layout, etc. I was scared to be alone. I had someone stay with me. I was scared to leave my house for fear of someone being in my home upon my return, so I could not leave my home. I covered all my windows with solid curtains. I added additional cameras to the 10 existing cameras. I added more exterior lights. I had to have someone stay at my home while I went to visit my sick mother on mother 's day. The day I had planned for my mother was cut short because of the fear that someone would return and successfully break in. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, at the suggestion of a neighbor/attorney, I contacted Union Bank ( mortgage company ), out of an abundance of caution, to see whether the creepy woman with a hood trying to enter my home was an agent of theirs. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX from Union Bank confirmed that Union Bank had NOT sent anyone to my home. XXXX confirmed receipt of payment and the signed agreement with the bank having been received XX/XX/XXXX and reiterated the fact that " there would be no reason for us to send anyone out as we received your payment plan agreement and your payment on XX/XX/XXXX. '' He said there was no mention of anyone being sent out on my file and said that it looked like I had been in frequent communication with Union Bank, including his department manager, XXXX XXXX. XXXX said he would send a note to XXXX XXXX to double check for me. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX contacted me and admitted that Union Bank had " mistakenly sent someone to the property, but that that person should not have tried to come inside and she should not have put her camera through a window to photograph the interior of the home. '' XXXX XXXX said that she needed to investigate the invasive nature of this inspection. I told XXXX XXXX I had surveillance footage depicting everything I had described to her, yet she was not interested in viewing the footage. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, a manager at Union Bank, called me and stated that the Deed of Trust allows them to send someone out at any time and look inside the home. I know that to be false and stated that is untrue. XXXX XXXX claimed that the inspector tried to knock. Again, false information that is disproved by the surveillance footage and video doorbell footage. See attached video. The person never knocked, never rang the doorbell, and she tried to enter my home. The Deed of Trust does NOT allow for any uninvited person to enter my home or take photos of the interior of my home without written notice. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, contacted me. XXXX is the third party contractor who employs the person that violated my constitutional right and tried to enter my home without written notice, reason or permission. XXXX tried to convince me that it is legal to photograph INSIDE someones home and is okay for them to try to enter that home or try the locks as XXXX said. XXXX refused to cite any legal authority that would supersede my constitutional right to privacy in my home. 

I did not authorize Union Bank to provide Safeguard with my personal phone number to continue their harassment campaign and further attempt to convince me that their intrusive and unlawful conduct were somehow okay based on their misrepresentations of the Deed of Trust-just as several of Union Banks managers had prior thereto. 

XXXX Bank had multiple different senior level managers contact me, many on the same day. I kept getting passed around, but theyd all misrepresent the Deed of Trust the same. 

Because XXXX XXXX misrepresentation of the Deed of Trust was rejected, on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX of residential lending, contacted me. XXXX XXXX once again tried to convince me that the Deed of Trust provides Union Bank the authority to enter my home and photograph inside my windows. Again, I rejected XXXX XXXX misrepresentation of the Deed of Trust. I asked XXXX XXXX to read the specific clause that she claims provides Union Bank the authority to violate my constitutional right to privacy without prior written notice and articulated reason. 

Needless to say, XXXX XXXX failed to articulate any clause permitting said conduct. To the contrary, the Deed of Trust reads as follows : Lender or its agent may make reasonable entries upon and inspection of the property IF it has REASONABLE CAUSE, Lender may inspect the interior of the improvements on the property Lender SHALL GIVE BORROWER NOTICE AT THE TIME OR PRIOR SUCH AN INTERIOR INSPECTION SPECIFYING SUCH REASONABLE CAUSE. 

XXXX XXXX became very hostile and unprofessional by adding words to change the meaning of the Deed of Trust and then our phone call mysteriously disconnected.

Also, the property is very well maintained. It is evident from the public street or sidewalk that the property was/is occupied. Not to mention Union Bank and I had already established a new agreement and payment had been made several days prior to the person having been sent out to harass me. There was no reason for Unio
XXXX Bank to send someone to put their camera in my windows and open my front storm door and try to enter my front door. 

I have since made multiple attempts to communicate with XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX. No one will return my calls/messages. No one at Union Bank has apologized for what it has done. Union Bank has and will continue their campaign of harassment and violations.

There was no reason for Union Bank to believe the property was vacated. Not only is the property very well maintained from the exterior, Union Bank and I had been under written contract at the time and Union Bank had received payment several days prior to their sending an agent to look in my windows and open my doors. Whats more, during each of the countless phone calls with Union Bank over the past few months prior to this incident, representatives have consistently confirmed that I live at the mortgaged property that I pay for. There was no reason for Union Bank to have sent out an inspector to a Borrower 's property that has paid and was/is in complete compliance with their agreement, but to harass and intimate the Borrower.

The only thing that prevented that person from successfully entering my home was a deadbolt lock. Had I forgotten to lock it ( like I forgot to lock the storm door she walked through ), she would probably be dead right now. The complete negligence and recklessness and lack of boundary on part of Union Bank is astounding.

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