Consumer complaint received 2026-01-08 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: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: CO

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding PHH Mortgages handling of my mortgage assistance ( loss mitigation ) application. PHH improperly closed my application despite my full and timely compliance, then treated me as noncompliant and in default, putting my home at risk.

This complaint concerns failures under federal mortgage servicing rules governing loss mitigation ( including Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41, which requires servicers to exercise reasonable diligence in obtaining documents and information to complete a loss mitigation application ) and related Colorado foreclosure protections that incorporate these federal requirements and prohibit dual-tracking conduct. I am requesting CFPB intervention to require PHH to reinstate my application, correct servicing actions taken while my application was pending, and preserve and produce PHHs own internal evidence ( including recorded call audio and receipt logs ). 

Background I initiated my mortgage assistance request due to a documented medical emergency ( multiple pulmonary embolisms with hospitalization ) that caused loss of employment and hardship. I acted promptly, in good faith, and complied with each documentation request. 

Chronology and Compliance ( with PHH confirmations ) XX/XX/XXXX Submitted hardship application and supporting documents to PHH/XXXX , including : My job offer letter ( XXXX XXXX XXXX as proof of income/start date ( no paystub available due to hospitalization ) Paystub for my wife ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX award letter showing income amount and frequency Medical records confirming multiple XXXX XXXX and related hospitalization causing hardship XX/XX/XXXX PHH confirmed receipt in writing and advised allowing approximately XXXX days for processing. 

XX/XX/XXXX PHH called requesting an additional XXXX  hardship letter, stating the underwriter required it, despite hardship already being documented. PHH provided the specific language to use. I submitted it the same day. 

XX/XX/XXXX PHH again confirmed receipt in writing and again stated to allow XXXX days for processing. 

XX/XX/XXXX PHH called requesting additional proof of income. I explained I had already provided my offer letter, but disclosed transparently that my employment start date changed from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX for employer training purposes. I submitted the requested information the same day, including : Updated employer correspondence confirming the revised start date Signing bonus documentation Proof of a good-faith back payment made using the signing bonus XX/XX/XXXX PHH confirmed receipt in writing on XX/XX/XXXX and again instructed me to allow XXXX days for processing. This written receipt is critical because PHH later claimed the documents were received on XX/XX/XXXX and therefore late, and that this alleged late receipt was the basis for closing my application. 

XX/XX/XXXX PHH called stating wage verification was missing. I advised it had been submitted. PHH reviewed the file and confirmed receipt, stating nothing further was needed at that time. 

XX/XX/XXXX I received a default notice. 

XX/XX/XXXX PHH again contacted me asserting wage verification was missing. My wife called back ; PHH again confirmed the documents were already received. When asked about the default notice, PHH stated it was auto-generated. A supervisor later confirmed the file appeared complete. 


XX/XX/XXXX PHH emailed claiming they could not reach me, but my phone records show no such attempts. When I called PHH, I was informed the mortgage assistance application was closed and PHH would not reinstate it, insisting I must start over. XXXX call was terminated while I was on hold. Another representative stated the underwriter refused reinstatement due to delinquencyeven though the delinquency accrued while the application was pending and despite my documented compliance. 

Key servicing failures Improper late receipt determination contradicting written acknowledgments and my email transmission records. 
PHHs stated basis for closure is inconsistent with my date-stamped email showing submission on XX/XX/XXXX and PHHs own written acknowledgment of receipt on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Duplicative and shifting documentation requirements that made compliance unreasonably difficult. 
PHH requested repeated proof of income despite already having my offer letter and later demanded additional/duplicative wage verification on an accelerated timeline. This created a moving target and then PHH penalized me for PHHs own intake/processing delay.

Servicer-caused default and adverse servicing actions while the application was pending.

PHH issued a default notice and then cited delinquency as a reason not to reinstate the loss mitigation review, despite my ongoing compliance and PHH repeatedly confirming the file was complete.

Misrepresentation of contact attempts/ inconsistent communications.

PHH claimed they could not reach me ; my call logs and records contradict these assertions.

Recorded-call evidence and preservation request PHH representatives stated that calls are recorded. Those recordings will corroborate that : PHH confirmed receipt of required documents on multiple dates ; PHH representatives stated nothing further was needed at those times ; and PHHs later claim that documents were missing/late is inconsistent with PHHs own statements. 

I request CFPB require PHH to preserve and produce all account evidence, including : all recorded call audio ( XX/XX/XXXX through present ), internal notes, underwriter notes, and escalation notes, document intake logs and received timestamps, system-of-record history showing when my documents were indexed, and any denial/closure decisioning notes supporting the closure. 

Colorado and federal legal framework implicated This conduct implicates federal loss mitigation servicing rules ( Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41, including the requirement for reasonable diligence in obtaining documents and information to complete a loss mitigation application ). Colorado law governing foreclosure procedures also reflects and incorporates federal loss mitigation timing and diligence requirements and prohibits dual-tracking practices in the foreclosure context ( C.R.S. 38-38-103.2 ). I am requesting regulatory review to ensure PHHs practices comply with these requirements. 

Publicly reported history relevant to CFPB review ( context ) While my complaint is based on my documented record, PHH has been subject to public regulatory scrutiny and legal disputes concerning servicing practices and consumer harm, including publicly reported settlements with government agencies and litigation filings that reference loss mitigation servicing standards. I request that CFPB evaluate my complaint in that broader risk context as well. ( Examples include public reporting of settlements related to servicing/fees and litigation filings that discuss Regulation X loss mitigation standards. ) Harm and requested relief PHHs actions improperly closed my mortgage assistance application, placed me in default, and now threaten my housing stability. 

I respectfully request CFPB require PHH Mortgage to : Reopen and reinstate my original mortgage assistance application using the original submission date and continuous-review posture. 
Acknowledge timely receipt of all documents submitted on XX/XX/XXXX and correct any internal record showing otherwise. 
Suspend any adverse servicing/collection escalation predicated on the improper closure while my loss mitigation review should have remained active. 
Correct any negative reporting or default/collection actions taken while my application was pending and being processed. 
Preserve and produce all recorded calls, internal notes, document-receipt logs relating to my account, and provide a written explanation of the basis for closure. 

I am attaching date-stamped emails ( including PHHs XX/XX/XXXX receipt confirmation ), submission records, and call logs demonstrating compliance and contradicting PHHs stated reasons for closure. 

Borrower : XXXX XXXX Loan Servicer : PHH Mortgage Property State : XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation