Consumer complaint received 2025-10-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Application denials
Company: Mr. Cooper Group Inc.
State: NH

Complaint narrative:
Refer to complaint XXXX. In that I wrote the following : We received your complaint. Thank you. 

Earlier in the year Mr Cooper improperly denied my request for a loan assumption ( loan # XXXX ) based on the conclusion that because the property is not my primary residence it does not meet the requirements in XXXX XXXX loan servicing guide for transfers. In fact, XXXX XXXX loan servicing guide DOES have legal language that protects transfers like mine due to divorce and specific language in section 8406.1 sections c and d : " If the transferee requests to assume the Mortgage and/or the transferor requests to be released from liability, then the Servicer must determine the creditworthiness of the transferee in accordance with the requirements in Sections 8406.2 ( a ) and 8406.2 ( b ). '' The word " must '' is a mandate. It requires the servicer to proceed to a credit evaluation, not to issue a summary denial based on occupancy. The servicer is denying based on the opening of the section 8406.1d part ii which mentions primary residence as a condition. The opening sentence is a general condition for when a servicer can't accelerate a loan. However, the final paragraph provides a specific, overriding instruction for a specific action : the request for a release of liability. For reference I was also able to successfully complete the release of liablility process for a second home, a non-primary residence with the loan servicer XXXX Mortgage for loan # XXXX which is also a XXXX XXXX loan. This suggests Mr Cooper 's interpretation of the XXXX XXXX guide is in error. XXXX Mortgage understood a request for release of liability understood the use of the word 'must ' in the regulatory guidelines and provided a process for release of liability. 

Their response to the complaint was a letter in which they stated : On XX/XX/XXXX, we sent an XXXX Welcome XXXX to acknowledge receipt of your inquiry received via telephone on XX/XX/XXXX. Our records indicate we have not yet received the requested documentation. To facilitate a comprehensive review of your request, which was previously denied on XX/XX/XXXX, we require the following essential documents : Required Documentation Assuming Party Questionnaire Selling Party Questionnaire Divorce Decree ( if applicable ) : Please provide documentation showing the property was awarded to the assuming party in the event of a divorce scenario Important Clarification Social Security Number ( SSN ) and Driver 's License ( DL ) are not required if the assuming party is already on the loan. 
We look forward to receiving the necessary documentation to proceed with your request. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns regarding the required documents. 


I prepared the documents, acquired my ex-wife 's signature and sent them to Mr Cooper on XX/XX/XXXX. An assumptions loan XXXX reached out to me on XX/XX/XXXX by email and stated : " I must apologize as customer service should have advised that investment properties are not eligible for assumption loans when the investor of the loan is XXXX XXXX. '' I am disputing the servicer 's response and the closure of the previous complaint. 

This statement from the assumptions loan XXXX is demonstrably false for XXXX reasons : Contradictory Precedent : As stated in my original complaint, I have another XXXX XXXX loan on a non-primary residence where this exact process was approved. The servicer has ignored this key piece of evidence in all of its responses. 

Contradictory Documentation : The servicer 's own application form, which they sent me, explicitly allows the applicant to select 'Investment ' as the property type. Investment properties are not named anywhere in the XXXX XXXX servicing guide for transfers or assumptions. 

The servicer 's investigation is incomplete and in bad faith. They have ignored the primary evidence of my complaint and are contradicting their own documents. 

I have tried to contact the loan XXXX and he has not responded to emails or calls as of XX/XX/XXXX. I am making this complaint with the expectation Mr Cooper acts in good faith and reviews the loan servicing guide and my original complaint and actually responds to the content within.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation