Consumer complaint received 2018-10-04 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — 
Company: Seterus, Inc.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
My mortgage was with XXXX XXXX XXXX. Once I mentioned HARP to them, the loan was transferred to Seterus Inc. The principal balance was carried over along with two alleged late payment fees which could not be reconciled or verified as valid by Seterus. These alleged late fees were from the following months according to Seterus documents I received : XX/XX/XXXX for {$36.00} XX/XX/XXXX for {$36.00} After that, Seterus added an additional late fee of their own on XX/XX/XXXX for {$36.00} The total for these fees was {$100.00} There was another additional fee allegedly brought over from XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$9.00} and Seterus added another fee in XX/XX/XXXX for {$15.00} for an unverifiable drive-by inspection which I did not approve or authorize. Seterus chose to have this service performed so they are responsible for the cost of the unnecessary service. If they chose to purchase my mortgage and decided they needed a drive-by inspection then that is their cost of doing business ; not mine. 

At this point the total fees that were on my account was {$130.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX Seterus sent me a letter stating that if I made a payment to cover the 3 late fees listed above by XX/XX/XXXX, the total amount due for these late fees would be reduced by 50 %. The total for the 3 fees was {$100.00} and 50 % would be {$54.00}. 
I made this payment along with a {$10.00} telephone payment fee and received a confirmation letter from Seterus dated XX/XX/XXXX. 

If all accounting at Seterus were done correctly, the fee total on my account should have went from a total of {$130.00} down to {$24.00} as broken down below : Total Fees = {$130.00} subtract My payment of {$54.00} subtract Seterus 50 % reduction agreement {$54.00} Remaining balance = {$24.00} However, my very next statement showed my payment of {$54.00} but Seterus never removed the other 50 % as part of their agreement if paid by XX/XX/XXXX. 
This is obvious since my fee balance was {$79.00} which is {$130.00} minus the {$54.00} I paid. 

This immediately displays the lack of administrative documentation at Seterus. If this wasn't bad enough, Seterus then again sent me a letter on XX/XX/XXXX with an identical type offer concerning late fees again. 

This time, the same late fees that were included on the first letter referenced above were again still showing as outstanding but minus the {$54.00} I had already paid. So instead of my late fee total being at {$0.00} from the prior payment, the 50 % reduction was never performed by Seterus. In addition, Seterus added 2 more late fees on in the amount of {$36.00} each for XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. 

So now my fee total was up to {$120.00} which is the {$54.00} which was never removed by XXXX, plus the two additional fees of XXXX. Once again, the letter stated that if I paid by XX/XX/XXXX, this amount would be reduced by 50 % so I would only owe {$63.00}. 

It is very obvious that the accounting practices at Seterus are very questionable. When I called to ask about this second letter, I was told that the fees included late fees from XXXX, XXXX and XXXX of XXXX. XXXX should have already been removed with the payment associated with the first letter however their lack of accounting quality assurance and control, allowed it to be added back into my balance. 

During this call I was also told that Seterus uses the " processed '' date when determining whether a payment is late. They do not use the date that they " receive '' the payment which I believe is legally required. The Seterus rep also informed me that Seterus does not have the capability of documenting the date a payment is received. I have signed postal service delivery receipts showing payments were " received '' by Seterus within the grace period permitted however Seterus still charges late fees because the payment was not " processed '' until after this grace period expired. If it is not illegal to charge late fees based on the date the payment was processed, then it surely has to be illegal to continue to demand payment for a late fee when it was already supposed to have been removed based on an agreement Seterus made to me. 

I honestly believe Seterus does this with the hopes people won't be diligent enough to check their statements and the math. When I again called Seterus to point out these mistakes, the rep on the phone could not do the math to even admit to a mistake being made. She also said it was impossible to transfer me to anyone who works with the loans because the loan people were not trained to receive phone calls. I was told I would have to submit a letter asking for a review. How ridiculous is it that you can not talk to someone on the phone to clarify and correct an error made by their people. 

I had submitted a complaint through CFPB awhile ago demanding these late fees be removed from my account since I was able to supply the USPS signed delivery receipts for all the payments that Seterus claimed were late. Seterus had agreed to remove these fees but to date they still have not been removed. 

This company acts like they are above and beyond the laws of this land mostly because I believe they feel nothing will ever get done to them. If they get caught, they say they will correct the problem and remove errors but they never do. Nobody forces them to do it so they just keep on doing business as usual. This is one company that deserves a major audit and investigation by the US Government. 

My next step will be to contact my local Congressmen to urge for an investigation. This is my third complaint against this company and I have all the documentation to show their unethical and most likely illegal accounting techniques. The absolute refusal of this company to allow any phone conversations with loan managers is a disgrace and outrage. Someone needs to close the doors to this company or fine them so heavily that they will not be able to continue to operate in this way.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with monetary relief