Consumer complaint received 2016-02-09 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
OCWEN is the servicing bank : has held homeowner in extending processing, and not evaluating documents properly. Homeowner has submitted the RMA requesting modification. Homeowner has been in default since XXXX/XXXX/2015 and is 991 days passed due. Homeowner is formally appealing the denial based on errors in home value, income, DTI and LTV Loan to Values used by the services in the denial of the RMA application. 
The service'r has commenced double tracking while homeowner was acting in good faith under the DOJ/XXXX States Attorney Generals Agreement : the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement. 

The servicer ' is discriminating against homeowner claims, in a form of reverse discrimination ; holding the mortgage in extended processing, denying a loan modification while homeowner is qualified, lost documents when homeowner has already provided. 

This homeowner, feels that their case has been unfairly treated for the following reasons : 1. No active single point of contact, constantly changing, when calls made to the single point of contact, routine routed to the collection department, never the same contact person. 
2. A Single point of contact was assigned ; calls were made to the point of contact : the calls were never returned by the contact. Calls returned were from the collection department and never the same so called : " relationship manager ''. 
3. The service'r has held the homeowner in extended process in bad faith, during which the value of property has increased and fallen for 991 days from XXXX/XXXX/2015 to XXXX/XXXX/2015. 
4. On the last RMA application : all requested documents were provided as requested. Homeowner has confirmation via fax that documents were received by the service, bank claims that documents lost. 
5. Homeowner has made numerous calls ( 20 ) inquiring on status of application, as a foreclosure date has been set and reset ; calls were routed to next available collection department agent, comments were : A ) wrongfully advised that documents were not submitted, or B ) documents were submitted, or C ) resubmit documents because documents lost, or D ) the foreclosure date is set and homeowner is responsible for not providing the requested documents : these XXXX points are causing a state of confusion and terror to the homeowner. 
6. Servicer started a double tracking procedure upon the notice of default. The foreclosure agent was aware of the loan modification in process, and moved forward with the double tracking anyway. 
This is a clear violation under the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement ; specifically double tracking while homeowner provided all documents under good faith. 
7. Homeowner has contacted the foreclosure agent before the foreclosure sale : that the sale was extended to another 30 days. Service'r never advised homeowner of the extended sale date. 
9. As of the above CFPB complaint date above, service'r has not advised or confirmation that the foreclosure date of sale is on hold. 
10. Homeowner is in a state of fear created by the collection tactics by Service'r and or the foreclosure agent. 
11. Homeowner was not advised of their HAMP/Department of Justice modification guidelines or options. 
12. Homeowner was not provided the name of the investor as requested. 
13. Homeowner was not provided a NPV Net Present Value Report to approve or deny the RMA application. 

The Banks ' failure to discharge their required loan modification obligations, during homeowner 's honest attempt to save their home from foreclosure. 
Homeowner is claiming mortgage processing discrimination in delaying processing : by overloading servicer 's processing agents with a case work load of XXXX+ cases as per agents statement : ( disclosed by relationship manager via recorded conversation, for training and quality assurance ). 

We formally appeal the loan modification denial. We request that a SPOC Special Point of Contact be assigned homeowner.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation