Consumer complaint received 2017-01-17 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Case number : XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, TX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX Chase Acct No : XXXX XXXX Acct No : XXXX XXXX XXXX District of Texas Bankruptcy Court Case NO. XXXX Judge : XXXX - Trustee : XXXX XXXX XXXX Discharge Order Filed XXXX Case number : XXXX My thoughts on the matter of including XXXX name on the reimbursement check from Chase, and their claim that " they found no instances of deceptive or misleading tactics '', as they stated in their letter dated XX/XX/XXXX : 1. If the terms of the contract are satisfied, the contract is complete, and only XXXX XXXX name should have been on any refund check, since the funds being reimbursed were paid by him only, after the contract was paid off. If there had not been any deception on Chase 's part, they would n't be returning me {$4900.00}. 
2. The last payment to Chase from the bankruptcy court 's trustee was made in XX/XX/XXXX, which should have satisfied the terms of the contract, since 100 % of the original bankruptcy amount has been paid back to Chase by the court trustee. Yet, somehow Chase saw fit to claim that I still owed almost {$23000.00} on the loan, and repeatedly issued letters to me saying that if I did not make payments, they were going to enter into accelerated foreclosure. Those payments made under duress are the funds now being refunded to me ( without the interest I demanded ). 
3. Due to an oversight and incompetence by my original bankruptcy lawyer, XXXX XXXX, the bankruptcy court did not finally close the case until XX/XX/XXXX, yet AFTER that date, Chase continued to insist that I still owed them almost {$23000.00}. 
4. On XXXX, Chase transferred my supposed account debt to XXXX for " servicing '', saying that I no longer dealt with Chase, and was only to deal with XXXX. Once the account was transferred to XXXX, Chase no longer had a contract with me, therefore, my name is the only one that should have been on the check. 
5. After repeated complaints filed with both State of Texas and Federal banking and mortgage agencies, XXXX decided to release my lien, which should have indicated that any contract for mortgage was satisfied, whether it was with XXXX or Chase. Again, the terms of the mortgage contract were satisfied, and there was no reason to include XXXX XXXX name on either the refund of tax escrow check issued by XXXX, OR the refund of payments which had been made to Chase. 
6. I repeatedly demanded that both checks should have only my name on them, and my demands were ignored. Chase said that since both names were on the contract, both names had to be on the checks. I countered that the funds were paid by me only, that XXXX XXXX has had nothing to do with the house since XX/XX/XXXX, and that the terms of the mortgage contract was satisfied before these refunded monies were collected by Chase. Now I have to track down XXXX XXXX to cash both checks. XXXX XXXX signed a quit claim deed for his half of the property in XX/XX/XXXX, and has not lived there in 10 years. Including his name on the checks against my objection is a major inconvenience for me, and should never have been done in the first place, since the contract was paid off in XX/XX/XXXX. I feel very strongly that this was done in spite, just to XXXX me around ... a final parting shot by Chase to end a very unpleasant arrangement. 

I also want you to know that Chase promised a {$4300.00} refund check to me " in XXXX 10 days '' in a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. Today is the 21st day after that letter was written on XX/XX/XXXX, and I STILL have not received that refund check from Chase. 

You should also know that I have had a total of 6 different representatives in the Chase Executive Office " handling '' my case : XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation