Consumer complaint received 2017-08-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: MS

Complaint narrative:
On XXXX XXXX my mother refinanced her home in XXXX XXXX, La for {$96000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX La and GMAC, parent of Homecomings Bank, acted as originators of fraudulent mortgage The initial mortgage application defects were 1 ) unlawful fabrication of declared income statement of mortgagor ; 2 ) unlawful appraisal of property to support inflated loan-to-value claim ; 3 ) a portion of mortgage proceeds were unlawfully applied to origination fees ; 4 ) a portion of mortgage fees were unlawfully rebated to owner as incentive. These defects of unlawful income fabrication and unlawful appraisal were created and committed because without these defects XXXX XXXX would not have fit within the criteria used to quantify a loan of this type. Her ability to repay was glaringly shown to be inadequate for standard legal underwriting practices. 
21. Because of this and without a full understanding to her financial, emotional, mental and XXXX granted Peace of Mind the Mortgagor, faced with payments of 95 % of income quickly went into default. The mortgage was restructured by the mortgagee. Among the restructured mortgage application defects were the continued use of 1 ) unlawful fabrication of declared income statement of mortgagor ; 2 ) unlawful appraisal of property to support inflated loan-to-value claim ; 3 ) a portion of mortgage proceeds were applied to origination fees ; 4 ) The growing obligations of the mortgagor were effectively concealed by the mortgagee. By their own admission in foreclosure proceedings the mortgage companies of GMAC, HOMECOMINGS, XXXX XXXX AND XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have stated the restructuring of this mortgage in this manner was carried out a total of 13 times between from XXXX XXXX until XXXX XXXX when hurricane XXXX hit the XXXX XXXX area of La. My mother XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Even after her death XXXX has entered into evidence a workout arrangement supposedly signed by mother. My mothers ( who was XXXX and XXXX XXXX from having a XXXX in XXXX XXXX verifiable and correct income was no more than {$1300.00} per month I have bank and social security statements to corroborate this. My mother Never should have qualified for a mortgage that started out with payments of XXXX per month.This was undue hardship that led to a faster and further health deterioration ultimately leading to her having a second XXXX and XXXX in the home. The parties mentioned all have had prior complaints with regards to these matters of Predatory Lending and servicing practices. This loan has ballooned in amount from {$96000.00} to almost {$300000.00} from excessive Lawyer fees escrow charges fraudulent late fees and service fees. Because my mother was placed in a loan that in effect required her to use 95 % of her monthly income to pay she was unable to pay for proper medical care for herself, she could not afford to even feed herself. She found herself becoming more dependent on the public assistance give to her older sister who is diagnosed as XXXX for whom she was the caretaker. I am including one of the workouts so you can see for yourselves that the entities involved did nothing to assist my mother in trying to correct this XXXX of justice and curtail the criminal activities by lowering her payments and bringing it back to the original loan amount of {$96000.00}. Instead they kept calling, sending letters and summons to my mother creating more stress leading to her XXXX XXXX. I have been fighting these entities since XXXX with all their maneuverings inside the courts and the expense I have had to incur including but not limited to money, ( business ) time and overall peace of mind, finally they won a MOS and were given possession of the house in XXXX of XXXX. I had improper service of the decision so I was not afforded a response or appeal, through 2nd District Court in XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX ' courtroom. I can only assume this was the intention all along to steal a property from someone who the parties involved knew could not fulfill the terms of a loan that was equivalent to loansharking or extortion.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation