Consumer complaint received 2026-04-14 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue with the application process
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: NM

Complaint narrative:
The entire process with Wells Fargo has been problematic and my attempts to obtain a meaningful resolution have been unsuccessful since before loan closing. When the loan transferred in XX/XX/XXXX, the disputes I had previously raised were neither investigated nor remediated. Wells Fargo repeatedly denied wrongdoing, yet the account history and documentation show multiple material errors and omissions, including but not limited to the following : Payment due date advances were not reflected on the payment schedule on at least five occasions, despite a monthly payment having been made every month since the loans inception in XX/XX/XXXX. There was not a monthly statement submitted for the first year of the loan ; Wells Fargos responseno payment dueand therefore refusal to produce statements is contrary to federal and New Mexico law. The interest rate on my loan changed from the originally disclosed rate ( 3.x % ) to a higher rate ( 4.x % ) without a proper offer to lock or clear explanation ; subsequent communications reflected the higher rate when purchase point calculations were performed. My disputes regarding reliance on the lower rate and the separate dispute concerning the purchase of points were not addressed. There was an unnecessary delay in closing. Wells Fargo issued a tax document for the first year and then reissued the same document as a corrected version in response to a dispute file, which did not remediate the dispute filed. I stated I did not receive all transfer documents. Wells Fargo did not address this concern. The subsequent servicer denied being the servicer when questioned in a CFPB complaint. Therefore, Wells Fargo directing me to contact that purported new servicer compounds Wells Fargos errors and failures to correct and remediate prior issues. Internal correspondence from Wells Fargo representatives closed matters without explanation of what concerns were addressed. Representatives, including XXXX XXXX, instructed me to stop submitting complaints despite unresolved issues ( see attachments ). Requests for copies of original complaints and for clear mappings between complaints and claim numbers have not been honored. Follow up inquiries routinely generate new claim numbers ; these follow ups are closed as duplicate or similar complaints, leaving the original complaint unaddressed or unremedied. Claim numbers are closed without disclosure of what was allegedly investigated or resolved. Deficiencies in Wells Fargos communications include contradictory responses regarding ADA accommodation and point of contact assignment. Original complaint copies have been denied along with investigation files. There continues to be a lack of timely response and a failure to address the concerns of the original complaint, with repeated reiterations of policy language rather than engagement with the underlying issues as noted above. Extension and acknowledgment letters only state that more time is needed or that a complaint was received, without offering a copy of the original complaint to include with the ultimately delivered full response letter. Final response letters reference general topics and fail to attach a copy of the original complaint. Failure to provide the original complaint and to address the underlying issue persists. This lack of clarity and repeated failure to investigate or remediate is the central reason I continue to submit complaints. For example : Wells Fargo responses most recently received are attached. Evidencing Wells Fargos failings and internal contradictions and which do not provide a usable remediation that compensates me for all Wells Fargos errors and untimeliness with failures to address federal and New Mexico state requirements of law. Claim numbers XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Most recent Wells Fargo response for my mortgage account references the eight claim numbers listed above ( & attached ). The attached materials include my letters dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and Wells Fargo letters dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. All WF correspondence appears to be authored by XXXX XXXX, Escalations. The XX/XX/XXXX response states : There are currently two claims open, which will be closed upon the mailing of this correspondence : XXXX and XXXX. The subject matter for claims XXXX and XXXX is not clearly defined or paired with the original complaint. Wells Fargos responses address only what Wells Fargo chooses to respond to, not what I actually submitted. I am left without clarity as to what each claim number specifically refers. This lack of transparency is a central issue in the ongoing complaint. Reviewing the XX/XX/XXXX letter, Wells Fargo has obligations to grant consumer access rights under statutes ( e.g., GLBA, FCRA ), contract, or state law, which may require disclosure or a particular process ( redaction, summary, or explanation ). Regulators expect reasonable transparency about withheld material. MY Letter Date XX/XX/XXXX Mentions a lack of ADA accommodation, point of contact assignment, original complaint copies, investigation files, timely response, & answer without redirection MY XX/XX/XXXX Reiteration of the above ; critique of lack of documentation/clarity ; request for comprehensive timely response. In summary, both letters address the lack of ADA accommodations, inadequate documentation, unclear mapping of claim numbers, the absence of an assigned point of contact, and the need for a comprehensive, transparent resolution process ; the XX/XX/XXXX letter reiterates and expands on the issues raised in the XX/XX/XXXX letter. However, those procedural complaints are distinct from the substantive disputes underlying each claim. I was asking for the current status of each claim and an explicit statement of what each claim number references ; produce a copy of the original consumer complaint that prompted each claim numbers creation. I reiterate that I have requested ADA accommodations ( I do not make or receive phone calls ), so providing only phone contact information does not facilitate timely resolution and excludes me from the process because I can not determine what is allegedly being investigated or have a method to contact the employee assigned to the claim #. The attached document demonstrates generic letters disseminated by WF. XXXX XXXX, escalations has responded by stating all the letters are Acknowledgment letters. However, Acknowledgment letters are initial letters of receipt and an Extension letter is a second letter We need more time to respond to your concernsis a distinct second letter ( same claim number ) that does not identify the concern. In other words, two separate letters ( Acknowledgment and Extension ) are being issued under the same claim number without specifying the underlying issue or providing a copy of the original complaint. Attached XXXX XXXX issues a Final Response under a different claim number stating Were responding to your concerns, it lists items such as denial of ADA accommodation and denial of a single point of contact, provides no original complaint letters, references prior claim numbers without identifying the subject matter, and then closes the new claim number. This practice misleads readers by implying the prior claim numbers relate to the topics listed in the current response. The underlying issues that prompted my dispute letters show multiple material errors and omissions being disputed addressing the Mortgage account, including but not limited as documented above. My items listed above are not being addressed ; instead, have been buried and deflected. While the Final Response focuses on repeat denials of ADA Accommodations, Points of Contact and general refusal to address Mortgage account concerns even prior to the transfer of the loan. Conclusion : Wells Fargos responses follow a pattern of acknowledgment extension final response. The letters are generic, fail to identify the subject matter for each claim number, and frequently create new claim numbers only to deny and close them. All attached responses are signed by XXXX XXXX, yet a single point of contact is denied and XXXX XXXX appears to be the sole responder. Repeated denials of ADA accommodations, inconsistent implementation of accommodations ( e.g., 18 pt font on postal mailings ), and assertions that Wells Fargo finds no fault within itself are confusing and undermine neutral mediation. Statements that no mistakes were made, coupled with refusals to provide copies of original complaints or claiming to provide an original complaint without including full copies for each referenced claim number are inconsistent and impede resolution.

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