Consumer complaint received 2016-09-27 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Reverse mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: SUN WEST MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Background. 
This is the second CFPB complaint I 've found it necessary to file arising from a HECM I have with Sun West Mortgage Company ( " SWMC '' ). CFPB Case Number XXXX is incorporated herein by reference. 
SWMC falsely claims that it has not received proper documentation of the completed repairs as a pretext for illegally retaining the unused balance of my repair set-aside funds for its own enrichment. 
SWMC is illegally withholding the unused balance of repair set-aside funds ( well in excess of {$2000.00} ), which it should have reimbursed to me and/or credited to my line of credit four months ago, by using a stratagem claiming that SWMC has not received proper documentation of the repairs. All repair work in connection with this loan has been fully paid for by me, and inspected and certified by an FHA inspector as required by HUD. Further, I have ( a ) documented to SWMC that I furnished all materials and paid my construction provider ( who is a licensed contractor as required and approved by SWMC ) in full, out of my own pocket, for installation, as previously agreed with SWMC ; and ( b ) provided SWMC with a " Paid In Full '' invoice signed by my construction provider and me, as previously agreed with SWMC. In XXXX 2016 I provided SWMC with a written request for reimbursement in the amount of {$1400.00} for my final out of pocket expense for labor, at which point SWMC unlawfully refused to reimburse me as agreed. Instead SWMC demanded that I and/or my construction provider ( SWMC ca n't decide whether it 's one or both ) execute an inappropriate proprietary deposition document by falsely terming it a mechanic 's lien ( it is NOT a valid California mechanic 's lien ). Moreover, SWMC apparently dunned my construction provider with phone calls trying to find out if I really paid him. 
SWMC fraudulently skimmed inspection fees from my repair set-aside. 
SWMC fraudulently skimmed an unauthorized {$100.00} from my repair set-aside funds claiming they used it to pay for an inspection fee that I had already paid ( in fact, over-paid ) in escrow. Skimming inspection fees is a familiar tactic of predatory lenders ( XXXX ). 
SWMC is trying to force this loan into foreclosure. 
As I stated in my XXXX 2016 complaint, I believe SWMC is a lying, thieving, predatory lender using every trick in the book to have an excuse to declare this loan in default and foreclose ( my property is currently worth substantially more than the loan balance ). Likewise, it has recently become apparent that HUD is enabling SWMC 's stratagem to declare this loan in default and foreclose. On XXXX XXXX, 2016 I filed a HUD complaint against SWMC for defaulting on its repair set-aside payments to me ( XXXX reference number XXXX ). For three months various representatives at HUD, FHA, and XXXX XXXX XXXX stonewalled and spun out a string of XXXX XXXX excuses for not acting on my complaint in a timely manner, until they apparently finally ran out of excuses and announced that if SWMC wants me ( or my construction provider ) to sign a document, whether applicable or not, I ( or my construction provider ) am required to sign it. On XXXX XXXX, 2016, by letter I appealed to HUD Secretary XXXX XXXX ( copy attached ) but never received any reply or acknowledgment whatsoever. In light of HUD 's well-known unsavory mortgage sale giveaways to XXXX XXXX speculators, it is my view that HUD has proved beyond a doubt that it is more interested in lining up with its exploitative business partners, lenders and mortgagees like SWMC than with its exploited HECM borrowers. Based on my first-hand experience with the representatives at SWMC, HUD, FHA and XXXX XXXX XXXX, it 's my view that this is based on an insidious, discriminatory, stereotypical perception regarding HECM borrowers being easy prey.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation