Consumer complaint received 2026-04-24 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am the borrower on a XXXX home mortgage serviced by NewRez LLC dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing. I am filing this complaint because NewRez has issued a form-letter re-denial of my formal escrow waiver appeal and has failed to engage with the substantive arguments raised in my Qualified Written Request under RESPA, 12 C.F.R. Section 1024.36. Background. On XX/XX/year>, NewRez declined my initial escrow waiver request submitted through their online portal. The stated reason was " The XXXX ratio does not meet the required minimum for your state or property type. '' On XX/XX/year>, I mailed a formal written appeal of this denial to NewRez, structured as a RESPA Qualified Written Request. The appeal letter raised XXXX substantive arguments, including : ( XXXX ) the current loan-to-value ratio of approximately XXXX percent based on the XXXX county appraisal district appraised value against the outstanding principal balance, which is dramatically below any standard escrow waiver threshold including the XXXX percent threshold typically applied by XXXX servicers ; ( XXXX ) XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX waivers at servicer discretion on qualifying VA loans ; ( XXXX ) my consistent payment history with no late payments or delinquencies ; ( XXXX ) NewRez 's denial reason failed to disclose the specific XXXX threshold being applied or to explain how XXXX XXXX does not meet it ; and ( XXXX ) my demonstrated financial capacity to self-escrow property taxes and homeowners insurance. The XXXX XXXX. NewRez logged my mailed appeal in the customer portal as an " XXXX Account Closure '' request and on XX/XX/year> less than XXXX business day after the appeal letter would have arrived declined it again with the identical canned reason : " We carefully reviewed your loan for escrow waiver. Unfortunately, we're unable to approve your request to waive the escrow account for the following reason : The XXXX ratio does not meet the required minimum for your state or property type. '' This response is verbatim identical to the original XX/XX/XXXX portal denial. It does not address any of the XXXX arguments raised in my appeal letter. It does not state what XXXX threshold NewRez is applying. It does not explain how a XXXX percent XXXX fails to meet that threshold. It does not acknowledge the appraised value documentation included with my appeal. There is no possibility that NewRez conducted a substantive review of a five-argument written appeal in less than XXXX hours. RESPA Violation. Under 12 C.F.R. Section 1024.36, NewRez was required to ( a ) provide written acknowledgment of my Qualified Written Request within XXXX business days of receipt, and ( b ) provide a substantive written response addressing the issues raised within XXXX business days. The XX/XX/XXXX form-letter re-denial in the customer portal with no acknowledgment letter, no engagement with the substantive arguments, and no disclosure of the specific XXXX threshold applied does not meet either obligation. This is a textbook failure to substantively respond to a Qualified Written Request. Impact. The denial forces me to continue an escrow account that earns XXXX percent interest at NewRez, when those same funds would earn approximately XXXX percent in a high-yield savings account. At an annualized escrow flow of approximately XXXX dollars for property taxes and homeowners insurance, this represents a recurring annual harm of approximately XXXX to XXXX dollars in lost interest, plus the loss of borrower control over funds I have demonstrated I am capable of managing. Aggravating Factor. NewRez 's automated portal-based response system appears to be circumventing the substantive-response obligations of 12 C.F.R. Section 1024.36 by treating mailed Qualified Written Requests as portal click-through requests subject to automated decisioning. This pattern, if applied to other borrowers, may represent a systemic compliance failure worthy of CFPB attention beyond my individual case.

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