Consumer complaint received 2025-12-04 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief
Company: AmeriHome Mortgage Company, LLC
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
My loan was in a COVID XXXX era default status. I applied for loss mitigation in XX/XX/XXXX. 
In XX/XX/XXXX, AmeriHome approved a loss mitigation application on my loan for a VA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). This offer included a Trial Payment Plan ( TPP ) dated and was dated XX/XX/XXXX. The offer contained a clear internal discrepancy : the principal-and-interest plus escrow amounts totaled {$2100.00}, but AmeriHome demanded {$2400.00}. No explanation was provided anywhere in the offer that explained or could account for the {$360.00} discrepancy in the requested payment vs the payment itemization. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted our written acceptance of the XXXX offer as instructed per the XX/XX/XXXX terms to prevent foreclosure action and I requested clarification on the amount we were expected to pay and informed amerihome that it appears there is a request for overpayment. We asked clarifications be given prior to the date of the first payment for the TPP ( XX/XX/XXXX ). AmeriHome did not respond. In a recorded call, AmeriHome informed us that TPP payments may be made any time during the month they are due, which we relied on as we awaited correction of the miscalculation. 
As XXXX approached and AmeriHome remained silent, we submitted a formal Notice of Error ( NOE ) dated XX/XX/XXXX. At that point AmeriHome had both : ( 1 ) our written acceptance, and ( 2 ) an active NOE requiring a Regulation X response. 
We tendered the full {$2400.00} through money orders in XXXX. A XXXX tracking receipt confirms AmeriHome physically received the payment on XX/XX/XXXX. The funds were unconditional and delivered during the correct month. Nothing prevented AmeriHome from cashing or applying the payment to the XXXX TPP installment. And prior to sending, we received verbal affirmation that offer was still valid, and payment could be accepted through the end of the month of XX/XX/XXXX form amerihome. 
We included an allocation instruction based on AmeriHomes own numbers and specifically stated that if our understanding was incorrect, and the total was not an inflated/ over-calculation, AmeriHome should contact us immediately. AmeriHome never contacted us, never objected, and never returned the funds. 
AmeriHomes own statements then show : The full payment was logged as PARTIAL/UNAPPLIED PAYMT on XX/XX/XXXX they had the money but did not apply it to the XXXX installment. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, AmeriHome applied the entire {$2400.00} amount against Escrow Shortage ( Taxes and Insurance ) not to the TPP, not to arrears, and not to principal or interest. 
We later learned AmeriHome had internally terminated the TPP in XXXX but never disclosed this to us. We later learned, they treated our XXXX NOE as an appeal. In XX/XX/XXXX, AmeriHome sent us an appeal decision dated XX/XX/XXXX, stating they had taken a second look and were upholding their determination, even though we had never appealed anything and our NOE was still unanswered. The letter made no sense and did not address the underlying mathematical error. 
Even more concerning, I called AmeriHome in XX/XX/XXXX after this letter was generated and the TPP canceled, and in a recorded call, AmeriHome explicitly told us the loss-mit option was still active, that the review was concluded and they sent us a full break down of the amounts and we should be getting it anytime, and that we would be receiving all the clarification we had requested. That clarification never came. In fact, it appears the appeal denial letter is the letter we were told is on the way- and it provided no such answer to our NOE or clarification on the obvious error in our loss mit offer. AmeriHome staff continued to represent that the option was open despite the fact that AmeriHome had already terminated it internally. At the time, we believed the letter was on its way that would explain how to proceed. 
Instead of receiving clarification as promised, we got a new foreclosure notice. Approximately XXXX months after secretly terminating the TPP offer, AmeriHome recorded a Notice of Default on XX/XX/XXXX, initiating a new foreclosure while : a complete loss-mit review had been approved, our written acceptance was on file, the full XXXX payment had been tendered and received on XX/XX/XXXX, AmeriHomes staff were affirmatively stating the TPP remained active, and the NOE remained unanswered.

This conduct constitutes prohibited dual-tracking under 12 C.F.R. 1024.41. 
Since the events of XX/XX/XXXX, we have repeatedly requested the exact termination date of the XXXX offer and the reason for termination. AmeriHome has never provided either. No cancellation notice was issued. No NOE response was provided, in violation of RESPA/Reg X . Only an appeal decision that made no sense in the circumstances and was not expressly stating a current status of the loss mitigation offer. 

We sent a QWR letter to the new servicer in XX/XX/XXXX right after getting a notice in late XX/XX/XXXX essentially saying we had no active loss mitigation activity. 
We never received the requested documents regarding this issue and it was deemed a request that was over board and burdensome. We made many verbal requests, those never result in action either. 

Finally, I want to be clear to the servicer/ lender that nothing in this complaint should be used by AmeriHome to terminate, delay, or negatively affect any currently pending or complete loss-mitigation reviews or protections currently in place that the VA has confirmed approving. Filing this complaint is not a withdrawal, abandonment, or refusal to cooperate. It is a request for regulatory oversight to correct prior servicing errors. Any adverse action on a pending loss-mitigation review based on this complaint would violate RESPA/Reg X and would constitute prohibited retaliation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation