Consumer complaint received 2024-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue with the application process
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
On XX/XX/XXXX I put in a request to see if the mortgage on the home was assumable. On XX/XX/XXXX I received an email stating the mortgage was indeed assumable with a list of required documents. The home located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IL XXXX was purchased by myself and my ex husband in XXXX. In XXXX the home was refinanced at the beginning of the divorce and somehow my name was removed from the loan. Though it was not removed from title insurance and the deed was quit claimed back to me post divorce per the divorce decree. I sent in all the notarized documents and additional information needed for the assumption. After several weeks, phone calls and emails my application was finally received by XXXX. *emails attached. He was treating the application as an assumption purchase which came with a hefty XXXX XXXXXXXX in expenses. I tried to explain that I already own the home and this was a modification/refinance/or credit qualifying assumption. He stated that his attorneys said it had to be done as a purchase. I was asked to write a contract from myself to myself to sell myself the home I already own. I attempted contact with XXXX supervisor XXXX XXXX several times with absolutely no reply. I knew what they were doing was wrong. When my title company received the order they confirmed my concerns and explained that it was not possible to do what they were asking. At this point XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX from New Rez were also on the emails. The initial email sent to my title company - I was not copied on and only received notice from the title company as it is one I have worked with in the past. The title company was persistent in that it was not possible and New Rez just stopped responding. After several attempts and finally mentioning that a complaint was going to be filed I finally got XXXX to return a call. It was not a transaction his department could handle but he had calls out. Another 14 days passed and XXXX who was on the emails to begin with ended up being the one who could help. She sent an email and called. Said it was going to underwriting, on XX/XX/XXXX I recieved an email stating the mortgage had been 30 days late two times and it was not an option. - Why did I get an email on XXXX saying it was assumable when a part of that criteria is on time payments? Was it to push me into a purchase with a XXXX XXXXXXXX expense? Also, on XX/XX/XXXX I received a document by USPS dated XX/XX/XXXX stating that they were declining my purchase application - which ironically had already been attempted to be titled and my fee disclosures signed. The same day this letter was issued an email was sent from me to the New Rez team begging for a reply and stating that if I heard nothing I'd file a complaint. ( emails all attached ). XXXX first replied to me by phone and email on XX/XX/XXXX and said she was out of the office until XX/XX/XXXX. I patiently waited. On Friday XX/XX/XXXX she had all of my documents and was sending it to underwriting. That was at XXXX cst. On XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX she said it was denied for lates. This was cleared on XX/XX/XXXX. The current status of the lates is under XXXX XXXX. As the mortgage assumer with XXXX credit score- how have I been denied twice and only after fighting to get answers after being forced to write myself a contract, being sent to title, signing a CD with nearly XXXX  XXXX in expenses and only after catching all of that am I mysteriously denied? In the process my home owners insurance which is escrowed in was paid very late and nearly cancelled. None of this is ok. It seems to me if I were an uneducated consumer I would have used the " recommended title company '' and paid the massive fees for this to be cleared. Only on catching the errors was this denied as evidenced by the time line and the denial letters received.

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