{"took":198,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":79,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2854369","_score":21.391836,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My problem is with the servicer of my FHA mortgage loan, Loancare. I was facing a foreclosure sale date and filed bankruptcy in order to give me a chance to negotiate and be considered for government programs. However Loan Care sold my home anyway!! I then had to go through a process with the Master Commissioner to get the sale voided. Once this happened LoanCare assured me they would review me for government options for assistance. However, after sending my paperwork in they made excuse after excuse and continually lost paperwork and never actually conducted a review. They assured me my sale date was on hold but then they went and sold my home AGAIN last week! Instead of considering me for modification or partial claim or repayment plan they tried to sold my home! I wanted to file this complaint because I think Loancare is violating the servicing guidelines for a loan backed by HUD I live in this home with my wife and XXXX daughter. I was excited as a first-time homebuyer to qualify for this loan due to my income and steady employment at the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Problems started a little over a year ago when my hours were cut by 1/3rd. This was unexpected and I could not make ends meet for a time and missed a couple of mortgage payments. When I contacted Loancare to try and resolve this matter they told me they did not want a partial payment or a single payment. They wanted the whole past due amount along with late fees. I was only two months behind at that moment, but was still struggling and could not afford to make two payments at once plus all the late fees and junk fees that Loancare had added. Due to this I fell further behind. I asked Loancare for other options. I asked for the opportunity to apply for a loan modification but was told there was only one option, reinstatement in full. \n\nLoancare has failed to follow the rules for the servicing of an FHA loan. They have not conducted a review of my current and correct financial information nor have they assigned a single point of contact. They have not allowed me to apply for any homeowner assistance options such as modification, partial claim, special forbearance or repayment plan and have obstructed my efforts to save my home and have instead pushed me into foreclosure. Additionally, they failed to provide any Occupied Conveyance paperwork for me, which I think they are supposed to send out PRIOR to setting any type of foreclosure sale date. \n\nI am beyond frustrated with this company. I just wanted an opportunity to be reviewed for these programs now that my temporary financial hardship is over. However Loan Care went and sold my house instead.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-03-23T19:43:32.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"427XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2854369","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"LoanCare, LLC","date_received":"2018-03-23T19:39:17.000Z","state":"KY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["However <em>Loan</em> Care went and sold my house <em>instead</em>."],"company":["<em>Loan</em>Care, LLC"],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[21.391836,"2854369"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6920415","_score":20.352411,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On or about XX/XX/2010, we applied for a conventional refinance of an existing loan with Wells Fargo and received a loan disclosure statement which contained the terms and conditions of the refinance loan. \nWithin the required three-day rescission period, we sent a written notice of rescission to Wells Fargo by overnight mail, requesting to cancel the refinance loan. This notice of rescission was delivered to Wells Fargo as confirmed by the United States Postal Service and the postmaster. \nWells Fargo failed to honor our rescission request within the required twenty-day period. \nInstead, Wells Fargo instructed us to continue making payments on what we believed was the original loan, pending Wells Fargos response to the rescission request. \nWe complied with these instructions and made payments on the what we believed was the original loan for approximately two years.\n\nDuring this time, we repeatedly contacted us Wells Fargo by phone and by mail, demanding a reply to the rescission request and an explanation of the status of the loan. We never received a response.\n\nUpon advice of one of Wells Fargos mortgage specialists, we stopped making payments on the original loan, as a prerequisite for applying for a loan modification. \nUnbeknownst to us, the original loan had been extinguished by the new unapproved loan. This was not a conventional loan it was a modified loan. \nWe agreed to a loan modification document with a trial payment plan, which required three monthly payments, but unbeknownst to us this process was not even possible because a modified loan could not be modified again so these trial payments were merely illegal debt collection tactics.\n\nWe made two payments under the trial plan but stopped making payments when Wells Fargo refused to provide any details of the new loan or confirm that Plaintiff qualified for a permanent modification.\n\nIn at least three instances Wells Fargo informed us through the XXXX Mail that we were never qualified for a loan modification because the conventional loan we thought we were getting was actually a XXXX  loan, ( therefore non convention and already considered a modified loan ). This was NEVER disclosed. \nWells Fargo never recognized or acknowledged the rescission request or refunded any of the payments that we made on the new loan.\n\nAs a result of Wells Fargos actions and omissions, we have suffered actual damages, including but not limited to : negative impact on credit score ; physical health, emotional distress ; and attorney 's fees and costs.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-05-02T23:01:34.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"17055","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6920415","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2023-05-02T22:55:01.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We made two <em>payments</em> under the trial <em>plan</em> but stopped making <em>payments</em> when Wells Fargo refused to <em>provide</em> any details of the new <em>loan</em> or confirm that Plaintiff qualified for a permanent modification.\n\nIn at least three instances Wells Fargo informed us through the XXXX Mail that we were never qualified for a <em>loan</em> modification because the conventional <em>loan</em> we thought we were getting was <em>actually</em> a XXXX  <em>loan</em>, ( therefore non convention and already considered a modified <em>loan</em> )."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[20.352411,"6920415"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21657003","_score":19.200659,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Repeated Failure to Provide Supporting Documentation and Substantive Response Federal Student Loan Servicing ( Central Research , Inc. ) I am submitting an additional follow-up complaint regarding Central Research , Inc. ( CRI ), as their most recent response continues to be incomplete, unsupported, and unresponsive to my requests. \n\nSummary of Ongoing Issue CRI has acknowledged that my repayment plan was incorrectly configured, resulting in a miscalculated monthly payment. They have since increased my payment from {$140.00} to {$380.00}. \n\nHowever, despite multiple requests, CRI has failed to provide sufficient documentation or explanation to verify that : * The recalculation was performed correctly * I was not financially harmed during the period of misconfiguration -- - Deficiencies in CRIs Most Recent Response In their latest response, CRI : * Repeated prior statements without providing new supporting documentation * Asserted that no additional or excessive interest accrued * Provided general statements about how interest accrues, which do not address my specific situation Critically, CRI did not provide : * Pre- and post-correction amortization schedules * Any calculation demonstrating that my lower prior payment did not result in additional interest accrual * A step-by-step explanation of how my new payment amount was determined -- - Core Issue Being Ignored My concern is not whether interest generally accrues on student loans. My concern is : > Whether the incorrectly low required payments during the period of servicing error caused additional interest to accrue compared to what should have accrued under a correctly configured repayment plan CRI has not addressed this question.\n\n-- - Pattern of Non-Response This is now a pattern across multiple interactions : * CRI acknowledges an error * CRI makes conclusions about lack of financial impact * CRI refuses to provide documentation supporting those conclusions * CRI declines to engage substantively in writing and instead directs me to call This prevents transparency and makes it impossible for me to verify the accuracy of their claims. \n\n-- - Requested Resolution I am requesting that CRI be required to provide : 1. Pre- and post-correction amortization schedules clearly showing : * What my balance and interest accrual would have been under a correctly configured plan * What actually occurred during the period of misconfiguration 2. A quantitative analysis demonstrating whether any additional interest accrued due to lower required payments 3. A step-by-step calculation of my current monthly payment of {$380.00} 4. Written confirmation that my account has been fully corrected to reflect the position I would have been in absent the servicing error 5. All responses provided in writing, without requiring phone communication -- - Final Note CRI has acknowledged a servicing error but has repeatedly failed to provide sufficient documentation to verify that the correction was accurate or that I was not financially harmed. \n\nAt this point, this is no longer a matter of clarificationit is a matter of lack of transparency and failure to substantively respond to a documented servicing issue. \n\nI am requesting regulatory intervention to obtain a complete and verifiable response.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-28T06:36:26.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"92111","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21657003","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Central Research Inc","date_received":"2026-04-28T06:20:21.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Pre- and post-correction amortization schedules clearly showing : * What my balance and interest accrual would have been under a correctly configured <em>plan</em> * What <em>actually</em> occurred during the period of misconfiguration 2. A quantitative analysis demonstrating whether any additional interest accrued due to lower required <em>payments</em> 3. A step-by-step calculation of my current monthly <em>payment</em> of {$380.00} 4."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[19.200659,"21657003"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14910539","_score":18.613255,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I took out a loan with Stratus Financial for XXXX XXXX in XXXX of XXXX. The approved loan amount was {$89000.00}, but Stratus only disbursed approximately {$12000.00} to the school.According to the records Stratus provided to me, along with XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX only {$16000.00} was disturbed to XXXX XXXX and {$18000.00} were disbursed to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and shortly thereafter, {$11000.00} from XXXX XXXX and {$10000.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX were refunded back to Stratus Financial, leaving approximately {$12000.00} as the total amount actually used between both Aviations schools.Despite this, Stratus try to recast the loan based on {$37000.00}, and even referencing amounts such as {$66000.00} that were never disbursed to me or any of my schools, let alone used by me.Despite that, they continued to charge me interest based on the full {$89000.00} balance, not just the disbursed amount. I raised this issue multiple times to them and requested a breakdown or a corrected loan balance reflecting the actual funds used but they have failed to provide it.\n\nI also contacted Stratus Financial repeatedly by phone and email to resolve this discrepancy. Instead of working with me to fix the issue, they stopped responding altogether to my emails and countless phone calls.No repayment plan was agreed upon, no clear communication was provided to me and yet they still reported this debt to my credit file as if I had defaulted or missed payments on the full loan.Which is inaccurate and misleading since the first contract became null, and i was not agreeing with the terms and conditions of the recast they offered me. \n\nI have never received the full loan amount, nor have I ever agreed to any formal repayment terms on the remaining undisbursed balance. It is unethical and potentially unlawful to charge interest on money that was never disbursed and to report a balance to credit bureaus that was never actually funded to me when they know i did not agree to the recasting repayment option they offered because it does not make since. And when i try to communicate with them directly, i keep getting run-arounds by different Stratus Financial servicing associates and misleading information by Stratus Financial Servicing manager . Instead of communicating directly with me to solve the issue, they rather stop all sorts of communications but have the capacity to report it to my credit bureau. Not one single collection calls by them, let alone emails attempting to collect a debt or a resolution to my concern.\n\nI am requesting that this matter be thoroughly investigated. I want any inaccurate or unverifiable account removed from my credit report, and I ask the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to hold Stratus Financial accountable for misreporting and failing to communicate transparently.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-27T16:19:31.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"33401","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14910539","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Stratus Financial LLC","date_received":"2025-07-27T15:51:04.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trouble with how payments are being handled"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I raised this issue multiple times to them and requested a breakdown or a corrected <em>loan</em> balance reflecting the actual funds used but they have <em>failed</em> to <em>provide</em> it.\n\nI also contacted Stratus Financial repeatedly by phone and email to resolve this discrepancy."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[18.613255,"14910539"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3189450","_score":18.48097,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"Sallie Mae is the original lender ; Navient is the current one. I am reporting on both companies - namely to complaint about a systematic effort on their part to provide misleading and incomplete information about the multitudinous forbearances and deferments granted by these two lenders to the primary borrower on 2 loans where I am listed as the co-signer. Even when explicitly requested information about these deferments/forbearances in writing, including information about terms and timeframe, Sallie Mae and now Navient have both withheld this information or refused to comply with the requests. This meant for over 1 years I had little information about the types of forbearances that these two were providing and whether they had made any effort whatsoever to offer less expensive payment plans - ones that dont cause the loans to balloon in size during periods of reduced payments. These reduced payments did not make possible for the borrower to be able to request a co-signer release after over a year of on-time payments, but they netted both Sallie Mae and Navient a significant profit. Recently I have been in touch with agent XXXX XXXX at Navient was the most recent individual at Navient to provide false and incomplete information about these loans. 3 months ago she had notified me that Navient had provided the borrower - XXXX XXXX - with yet another reduced payment forebearance but would not disclose the terms. It seems that Navient is intent on ensuring that the borrower would never be able to be eligible for a co-signer release and thats shes eager to have me back take over payments : in short, they fail to provide the borrower with a payment plan that actually pay off the loan, but instead allows it to increase in size as her reduced payments dont even cover interest. XXXX did disclose that Navient continued to allow the borrower to make below-interest payments as she took out new loans. If the borrower had the capacity to borrow more, then she didnt need a forebearance, and the granting of these to the borrower over and over again is meant simply to boost its profits at my expense. 3 months XXXX ago did say only that the borrower was to make 3 payments and then her account would no longer be past due. However, several days after the 3rd scheduled payment, Navient sent me another past due notice demanding payment for her loan. In short, Navient had lied again. \n\nId like to know why Navient continues to lie to me and why they continue to push these pointless forebearances on the the borrower that simply balloon the loan when not only does Navient know that she had recklessly borrowed since she first nearly defaulted on these loans, but that the borrower has NEVER made a single regular payment on these 2 loans, one of which Im now paying. The borrower has shown Navient that the borrower doesnt use forebearances to get back on her feet and be able to make regular monthly payments. No. She uses them to cause me the co-signer to be on the hook for more, as Navient profits. I charge that Navient has been and continue to collude with the borrower irresponsibly to rake in profit when it knows full well from her payment history alone that she has absolutely no intention to use these forebearances to be able to make regular payments that qualify for co-signer release. \n\nI also filed multiple fraud complaints that she signed these loans in my name but neither Sallie Mae nor Navient accepted them. They simply dismissed them. But she still committed fraud.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-25T14:45:27.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"22041","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3189450","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2019-03-25T13:59:50.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It seems that Navient is intent on ensuring that the borrower would never be able to be eligible for a co-signer release and thats shes eager to have me back take over <em>payments</em> : in short, they <em>fail</em> to <em>provide</em> the borrower with a <em>payment</em> <em>plan</em> that <em>actually</em> pay off the <em>loan</em>, but <em>instead</em> allows it to increase in size as her reduced <em>payments</em> dont even cover interest. XXXX did disclose that Navient continued to allow the borrower to make below-interest <em>payments</em> as she took out new <em>loans</em>."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[18.48097,"3189450"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"1874574","_score":17.773722,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"My current loan provider is Ed Financial. I consolidated my federal loans with them in XXXX XXXX. I have been paying my loans back on a graduated repayment schedule since XXXX XXXX. The payments increase every 2 years on this repayment plan. I had been on the year 8 ( payments XXXX ) repayment category when I went out on maternity leave in XXXX XXXX. I did n't make payments for XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ( after discussing this with my loan provider ). At that point I had \" paid ahead '' and did n't have payments due for 3 months. When I returned to making payments in XXXX XXXX, they returned to listing my graduated repayment \" amount due '' in the year 1-2 ( payments 1-24 ) category. But I am paying at the year 8 category ( payments XXXX ) as I had been. Since I am paying more than what is \" due '' per this reset calculation, they are listing my next payment due date as XXXX XXXX. I have asked that they place me into the appropriate payment tier for repayment, so that my payments will increase every 2 years on a graduated schedule. I was told that my payments will not increase every two years ( unless I remember to change my payment every 2 years ) since I am now considered to be \" paying ahead ''. They told me that they just ca n't increase my monthly payment every 2 years and that this would \" cause more problems and hurt more people that it would help ''. I explained that I wanted them to provide me with an accurate payoff date based on the amount I am currently paying, with an increase every 2 years. I told them that my goal is to pay off my student loans faster. They told me what I am asking them to do is \" hypothetical '' and they do n't understand why I would want them to do this. They offered to give me a monthly payment of around XXXX dollars for the next XXXX payments. I told them that again, my goal was to shorten my repayment term, not lengthen it. And I pointed out that if I only paid XXXX dollars for the next XXXX payments, this would lengthen the repayment, not shorten it. After spending 2 hours on the phone, with XXXX different people at EdFinancial, I was left with being told to find my own amortization schedule online by googling it so see how I could pay my loan off faster and estimate the maturation date of the loan. They also failed to provide me with an accurate maturation date for the loan. They continue to provide me with a maturation date based on the payment tier they are listing me in ( years 0-2 ) instead of where I am currently paying and would be projected to increase every 2 years. I expressed my frustration and concern to EdFinancial and even requested to speak to a supervisor, who was actually the one who told me to look up an amortization schedule online myself. I explained to them that I have another student loan provider who provides me with payoff information in real time based on my current payment. Again, I was informed they could not provide me with this information.","date_sent_to_company":"2016-04-11T18:56:26.000Z","issue":"Dealing with my lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"19438","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"1874574","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EdFinancial Services","date_received":"2016-04-11T18:56:25.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Need information about my balance/terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They continue to <em>provide</em> me with a maturation date based on the <em>payment</em> tier they are listing me in ( years 0-2 ) <em>instead</em> of where I am currently paying and would be projected to increase every 2 years. I expressed my frustration and concern to EdFinancial and even requested to speak to a supervisor, who was <em>actually</em> the one who told me to look up an amortization schedule online myself."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"]},"sort":[17.773722,"1874574"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20554390","_score":16.78994,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Narrative I am submitting this complaint regarding Freedom Mortgages handling of my mortgage loan servicing, specifically its treatment of property tax payments for XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, the creation of an escrow account, the application of my payments, and its failure to properly respond to my written notices. \n\nThe underlying problem began when Freedom Mortgage disbursed property taxes to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX even though an active payment plan already existed with the taxing authority. Freedom Mortgage did not provide advance notice before making that tax disbursement. After doing so, Freedom Mortgage treated the account as though it could impose or maintain an escrow arrangement tied to that disbursement, even though that action was not authorized under the terms I understood to govern this loan relationship. Regulation X treats servicing errors involving the failure to properly handle taxes and other escrow-related charges as covered errors, and Regulation X also recognizes that whether an escrow account may be established depends in part on the loan documents and other applicable law. [ 1 ] [ 5 ] [ 7 ] After the tax disbursement, Freedom Mortgage began treating my loan as delinquent and/or handled my payments through suspense or other unapplied-payment methods instead of correctly applying payments to principal, interest, escrow, or other charges under the loan terms and applicable law. Mortgage servicers must credit payments as of the date of receipt and may not handle payment posting in a way that causes late charges, additional interest, or negative credit reporting when the payment was timely received. [ 1 ] [ 3 ] [ 5 ] I then sent written communications disputing these servicing errors and requesting information. My written notices identified me, identified the mortgage loan account, and described the errors and information requested. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, a servicer must investigate and either correct the error or provide a written determination after a reasonable investigation. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36, a servicer must acknowledge a written information request within 5 business days and generally respond within 30 business days unless a valid extension applies. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] Freedom Mortgage did not provide a timely and adequate resolution. It failed to properly address my Notices of Error, failed to provide the requested information, and failed to explain its basis for disbursing the taxes, imposing escrow-related charges or treatment, placing funds into suspense, and reporting the loan as delinquent. Regulation X requires a servicer to conduct a reasonable investigation and provide a written response explaining either the correction made or the reasons it concluded no error occurred. For information requests, the servicer must either provide the requested information or state after a reasonable search why the information is not available. [ 2 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] The servicing errors caused financial and credit-related harm. Freedom Mortgages conduct created confusion about the amount actually due, interfered with my efforts to maintain the loan, and resulted in inaccurate delinquency treatment and/or reporting. Texas law also prohibits misrepresenting the character, extent, amount, or status of a consumer debt in collection activity. [ 9 ] I request that Freedom Mortgage : 1. Provide a complete written accounting of all payments received, all suspense-account activity, all escrow transactions, and the date and reason for each posting ; 2. Explain in writing why it disbursed XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX taxes despite the existing tax payment plan ; 3. Identify the contractual and legal basis it relied on to create, impose, or maintain any escrow requirement related to this issue ; 4. Correct any misapplied payments and remove any improper suspense balances ; 5. Correct any inaccurate delinquency status or negative credit reporting arising from these servicing errors ; 6. Reverse any fees, charges, or shortages that were caused by the improper tax disbursement or payment application ; 7. Provide all documents and servicing notes relied upon in responding to my prior written Notices of Error and Requests for Information ; and 8. Confirm in writing that the account has been corrected.\n\nThis complaint concerns mortgage servicing errors, not loan origination issues. The matters raised here involve payment application, tax disbursement, escrow handling, account status, and failures to respond to written servicing-error notices and information requests.\n\nReferences 1.\n\nCFPB Regulation X 1024.35 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation X Current 2.\n\nCFPB Regulation X 1024.36 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation X Current 3.\n\nCommentary to 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Official Interpretation Current 4. \nXXXX  Mortgage Servicing Rule Federal Register Final Rule XXXX 5.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.35 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 6.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.36 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 7.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.17 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 8.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1026.36 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 9.\n\nTexas Finance Code Chapter 392 Texas Legislature Statute Current","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-24T19:57:55.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"77493","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20554390","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Freedom Mortgage Company","date_received":"2026-03-24T18:59:58.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It <em>failed</em> to properly address my Notices of Error, <em>failed</em> to <em>provide</em> the requested information, and <em>failed</em> to explain its basis for disbursing the taxes, imposing escrow-related charges or treatment, placing funds into suspense, and reporting the <em>loan</em> as delinquent. Regulation X requires a servicer to conduct a reasonable investigation and <em>provide</em> a written response explaining either the correction made or the reasons it concluded no error occurred."],"issue":["Trouble during <em>payment</em> process"]},"sort":[16.78994,"20554390"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12457847","_score":16.274418,"_source":{"product":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","complaint_what_happened":"Predatory lending is any lending practice that uses deceptive or unethical means to convince a consumer to accept a loan under unfair terms or to accept a loan that you do not actually need. \n\nWells Fargo is actively engaging in predatory lending by convincing consumers into 0 % financing transactions that do not amortize to retire the debt over the term provided and then charges interest accrued at usuary levels ( 28 % + ) when the term ends, and remaining balance is not paid off. \n\nWells Fargo further pushes consumers to set up ACH Auto Debit payments for these financings as a deceptive means to dissuade the consumer from active management of payments and account balances, thus ensuring an unexpected and therefore unpaid remaining balance at the end of what is now bait and switched as a promotional period versus a financing term. \n\nWells Fargo uses these 0 % financing schemes to convince consumers into accepting a loan the consumer does not actually need by selling them the misconception that they are somehow getting something ( time ) for nothing ( no interest ). \n\nFurther Wells Fargo uses non-bank partners ( XXXX XXXX among others ) to sell their financings deceptively with scripts that state the financings being entered into are a means to stretch payoff of an item over a longer period of time and as long as monthly payments arent late will charge no interest for that period. These scripts fail to identify that the consumer is signing up for a credit card, do not disclose that the monthly payment will not fully amortize the purchase over the time period and the paperwork presented does not adequately define terms of significance such as Minimum Payment or even mention terms that would provide knowledge of the true nature of the transaction such as Balloon Payment. \n\nI am a well-educated, upper-middleclass consumer who was set up by Wells Fargo to incur XXXX not insignificant expense ( approximately {$840.00} ) that was completely unnecessary by accepting a 0 % financing plan offered through XXXX XXXX. I had the means to make an outright purchase but was enticed by deception to finance instead. And Wells Fargos scheme being deceptive enough to entrap a well-educated consumer, such as myself, really highlights just how predatory this scheme is to more vulnerable consumers such as the less educated, minorities, the elderly and poor. \n\nFurther, despite my business savvy, education, and financial means, I was purchasing at a time of significant vulnerability, which the salesperson garnered in conversation and in retrospect could be argued to have taken advantage and targeted me for this scheme. \n\nTo provide the landscape, in XX/XX/XXXX, my teenage son had just undergone a significant XXXX, which involved a lengthy inXXXX stay, and upon release a long recovery period with significant pain that required XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The purchase I made in XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX was a fully reclining chair to provide comfort and improved quality of life to my son during his lengthy recovery period at home. I was physically and mentally tired at the time of this purchase and even though I have great healthcare coverage I had concern on whether all our accumulated medical expenses would be covered by insurance. This whole situation was disclosed when the salesperson ( Wells Fargos partner ) engaged me in a seemingly innocent conversation to provide the background and purpose of my purchase. In retrospect, an argument for targeting of a vulnerable consumer does exists. \n\nAt the end of the transaction, I was encouraged to take advantage of 0 % financing ( not a credit card ) to pay for my purchase over an extended period. I was encouraged to set up Auto ACH Debit to ensure I would not default on the on-time payment requirement of the financing. At no time was the transaction verbally disclosed as a credit card purchase. At no time was it verbally disclosed that the payments would not be set to amortize the balance during the term. At no times was a balloon payment requirement disclosed. The paperwork was flipped through by the salesperson ( Wells Fargos partner ), with the salesperson verbalizing his summary of the terms on each page, giving the impression of a reasonable review of the paperwork. I acted as any typical consumer and relied upon my understanding of what was verbalized and presented which was a straightforward interest-free financing. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Wells Fargo after I noted statement continuation and wondered why my purchase was not paid off yet. Please note, I acknowledge loan statements were sent but, my payments were on Auto ACH debit and my understanding was those payments were fully amortizing the balance, so I was not in the habit of reviewing those statements. I will not make that mistake of trust again. \n\nAnyway, I reviewed the XXXX statement and noted an interest charge and a higher-than-expected balance. I then pulled the prior XXXX statements and became aware of a XX/XX/XXXX balloon payment that the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX debit amount ( set by Wells Fargo ) did not cover. I immediately paid the balloon amount and contacted Wells Fargo to dispute the charge for past accrued interest ( approximately {$840.00} ). The Wells Fargo representative transferred me to a customer service supervisor who failed to acknowledge how the situation set up by Wells Fargo was deceptive and represented predatory lending. The supervisor also failed to address Wells Fargos unfair profit by crediting me back the charge for past accrued interest. Instead, the supervisor stated he would escalate my complaint and I continue to await response from Wells Fargo. \n\nIn the meantime, I am reporting Wells Fargo to consumer advocates as well as regulatory authorities and request investigation pf their predatory lending practice and corrective action.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-13T16:01:35.000Z","issue":"Charged fees or interest you didn't expect","sub_product":"Installment loan","zip_code":"19027","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12457847","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2025-03-13T15:26:26.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These scripts <em>fail</em> to identify that the consumer is signing up for a credit card, do not disclose that the monthly <em>payment</em> will not fully amortize the purchase over the time period and the paperwork presented does not adequately define terms of significance such as Minimum <em>Payment</em> or even mention terms that would <em>provide</em> knowledge of the true nature of the transaction such as Balloon <em>Payment</em>."],"product":["Payday <em>loan</em>, title <em>loan</em>, personal <em>loan</em>, or advance <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Installment <em>loan</em>"],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[16.274418,"12457847"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8826632","_score":16.17554,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being submitted due to PHEAA 's failure to service past requests which have been requested many times. Several Agents over the phone have stated that the paper mailings would be converted to electronic communications. However, the company still sends paper mail. Despite my many attempts at getting the company to stop sending paper mail and instead send to the email address on file, they continuously send mail. In speaking with different representation, this is a common problem with PHEAA. They somehow have no means of operating in an orderly fashion and their methods of handling requests are quite obviously misguided or not formulated in a way that actually follows the requirements of a Student Loan servicer. As a result of their disturbing failures, borrowers consistently receive Representatives who appear out of their mind or extremely unqualified to handle requests that should easily be forthcoming whenever presented with the opportunity to help borrowers over the phone. Representatives who are unstable or emotionally impaired should not be dealing with requests from borrowers over the phone especially those Employees who seem to turn things into a personal vendetta whenever I challenge the Representatives with serious questions. \n\nCommentary which can corroborate this damning claim : Communication Breakdown With Borrowers What about when you receive bad information straight from your servicer? Communication through customer service is a big part of loan servicing. Failing to communicate important information to a borrower is an obvious mistake by a servicer like AES, but communicating wrong information is just as bad, if not embarrassing. \n\nHeres what we found : A borrower stopped making payments on their loan, and AES failed to reach out to the co-signer. After five years, during which interest continued to accrue, AES finally spoke to the co-signer, who informed them that the borrower had died. The co-signer then started making payments on the loan. End of story? Not quite. AES keeps asking the co-signer for the deceased borrowers contact information. \nAnother borrower writes she decided to pay back her loan in full to get it off her plate. After she paid via a phone call, she was given the impression the whole balance was paid. AES continued to send her bills. \nOne borrower just wanted access to their payment history and the amortization schedule ( or how long it would take for the loan to be paid in full ) of a private loan. AES failed to provide either. Another borrower wanted to get a payment history on their federal loan, but AES had not provided it. \nOne borrower received a letter that they were delinquent on their payments. They had auto-pay set up with their bank account and had been paying their loan on time for 9 years, so they were confused. AES had suddenly turned off the auto-pay, the account became delinquent, and was reported to the credit bureaus. When the borrower called to rectify the issue, the customer service rep said their account would be reviewed and the credit agencies notified. Nothing happened. Time and time again, the borrower reached out, was promised resolution and nothing happened. The case is marked closed on the CFPB website, but again, its hard to know if its a happy resolution. \nOne person wrote on behalf of their daughter who said {$10000.00} worth of payments made over 17 months had been deemed lost by AES. The parent and daughter provided evidence of the payments to AES, including the bank statements showing the date and amount debited to the servicer. Still, AES insisted they did not have any of the money. Despite all this, in order to regain good standing with the loan, the daughter set up a new payment plan. The daughter successfully made one payment, but the second payment was lost and the whole issue began once again. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-23T00:14:42.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"178XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8826632","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AES/PHEAA","date_received":"2024-04-22T23:47:51.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with customer service"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["One borrower just wanted access to their <em>payment</em> history and the amortization schedule ( or how long it would take for the <em>loan</em> to be paid in full ) of a private <em>loan</em>. AES <em>failed</em> to <em>provide</em> either. Another borrower wanted to get a <em>payment</em> history on their federal <em>loan</em>, but AES had not provided it. \nOne borrower received a letter that they were delinquent on their <em>payments</em>. They had auto-pay set up with their bank account and had been paying their <em>loan</em> on time for 9 years, so they were confused."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[16.17554,"8826632"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14940043","_score":15.546083,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/year> EdFinancial Services XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, TN XXXX RE : Account # XXXX | SSN ( Last XXXX Digits ) : XXXX Dear EdFinancial Services, This letter serves as my formal complaint and continued request for documents related to my federal student loan account. It supplements my previous written and certified correspondence, including a certified letter mailed on XX/XX/year>, and an additional letter dated XX/XX/year>. I am now submitting this communication and supporting documentation electronically through your document upload portal, as I have already spent over {$40.00} of my own funds sending certified return receipt letters through the USPS and do not intend to waste further personal resources due to your persistent non-compliance. \n\nAs stated in prior correspondence, I have requested the following materials which have still not been provided : Full payment history of all loans associated with my account A clear and itemized breakdown of all capitalized interest by date and amount Disbursement records for each loan, including original amounts and dates Copies of any Master Promissory Notes ( MPNs ) with my signature A record of all deferments, forbearances, and payment plan changes A complete loan chain of custody, documenting the transfer of my loans between prior servicers and EdFinancial, to verify the accuracy and legality of those transfers Instead of receiving these materials, I was sent documents dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, that do not contain the information requested. These documents are generic billing summaries and payoff schedules that do not satisfy the statutory right of the borrower to receive complete documentation and transparency concerning the origin and servicing history of a federal student loan. \n\nTo date, EdFinancial has ignored or failed to provide : Any of the above documents requested A legitimate explanation as to why they can not be provided An acknowledgment of my repeated requests Because of this ongoing refusal, I am left to question whether EdFinancial actually possesses these documentsor whether the original loan structure and repayment history is even legitimate. Until these documentation requests are honored, I now consider this loan formally disputed and possibly fraudulent. I will not be making any further payments on this account until EdFinancial satisfies its obligation to provide the documentation required by federal law. \n\nFurthermore, I am now escalating this matter : I am filing a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) I am filing a formal complaint with the Federal Student Aid Ombudsman Group As a borrower who began receiving Social Security at age XXXX and has had to delay full retirement until now ( age XXXX ), I have faced serious financial hardship. My student loanswhich never led to sustained, livable employment for my family of sevenhave ballooned to over {$200000.00}, largely due to excessive interest, forbearances, and the COVID-era payment pause. \n\nYour most recent letter states that my monthly IDR payment of {$340.00} will resume in XX/XX/year>, increasing to over {$3000.00} monthly in less than XXXX yearsan amount that consumes approximately 75 % of my combined Social Security and pension income. This is not only unconscionable but entirely unsustainable and a reflection of a deeply flawed, negligent, and arguably incompetent loan servicing process. \n\nLet this letter serve as notice : unless I receive the full and complete documentation I have outlined above, I will treat this loan as unenforceable due to EdFinancials noncompliance. You are hereby advised that this matter remains open, active, and in formal dispute. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX XXXX ( Last XXXX ) : XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-30T01:29:08.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"84118","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14940043","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EdFinancial Services","date_received":"2025-07-30T01:18:34.000Z","state":"UT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Need information about your loan balance or loan terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["To date, EdFinancial has ignored or <em>failed</em> to <em>provide</em> : Any of the above documents requested A legitimate explanation as to why they can not be provided An acknowledgment of my repeated requests Because of this ongoing refusal, I am left to question whether EdFinancial <em>actually</em> possesses these documentsor whether the original <em>loan</em> structure and repayment history is even legitimate."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"],"sub_issue":["Need information about your <em>loan</em> balance or <em>loan</em> terms"]},"sort":[15.546083,"14940043"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5095717","_score":15.155447,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I'm doing my best to avoid litigation with this company, but they are making it impossible. This is my final attempt at an amicable resolution to this problem before I proceed with a lawsuit. I've contacted LoanCare over THREE dozen times, by telephone and email, regarding FHA Loan # XXXX. I have not received any response or return calls/messages as of the date of this complaint. \n\nOn 9/15/21, as my approved Covid-19 forbearance plan was ending, I contacted LoanCare to discuss options to bring my loan current. I had a lengthy and detailed conversation with an agent who explained that because I had returned to work, but with my income/hours reduced by fifty percent due to continued impact of the pandemic  on my job, and the hospitality industry in XXXX XXXX, I would be eligible to receive an offer for a lower APR and modified terms to reduce the monthly amount of my payment to a more affordable amount. I was also promised my missed payments would be \"added on\" to the end of my loan period so that I could continue making payments until the loan was paid off. I was told I'd receive the packet in 10-12 days by mail to sign, notarize and return.\n\nFinally, I received 'paperwork\" on XXXX--TWO FULL MONTHS later! But the paperwork was not as promised (details below). Meanwhile, in the interim and EVERY DAY SINCE (including the date of this complaint), LoanCare has sent me auto-emails and placed robocalls several times each day (including Saturdays and Sundays) threatening me with foreclosure and collections! Again, I didn't do anything wrong! LoanCare didn't deliver the documents they promised, not me!\n\nWorse, as previously stated, when this so called document packet/paperwork finally arrived, the package did NOT include ANY of the promised provisions whatsoever! There was NO offer for the reduction of my APR or lowered payments so I could continue making my mortgage payment. The terms were NOT changed to add the missed payments and extend the length of the loan to accommodate as promised. \n\nInstead, the packet demanded that the missed payments be due in one lump sum at the maturity of the loan. This is NOT loan modification! This was a partial claim, I never indicated I was interested in this option. On the phone, the representative did not offer this option. Again, I spent a great deal of time asking questions and clarifying the offer. I have a RECORDING of our phone call! He promised me documents for a modification to lower my monthly payments with reduced APR. I didn't make a mistake or misunderstand; this company is being deceitful, fraudulent and unscrupulous. The lies the state repeatedly in the attach XXXX XXXX XXXX  shall serve as proof.\n\nLoancare did NOT send the paperwork in a timely manner, and they did not send the CORRECT documents as indicated to include the offers promised by Loancare's customer service agent on XX/XX/XXXX Now, here we are in a New Year--and Loancare is still pursuing illegal collection activity with daily emails and robocalls threatening me. I AM STILL WAITING FOR THE CORRECT DOCUMENTS TO BE SENT FROM THEM TO REDUCE MY APR AND LOWER MY MONTHLY PAYMENTS! I'm not sure how to make this statement in plainer English. What is their problem? What is their disconnect? I'm not convinced this is just a series of unfortunate errors that, unfortunately negatively impact me. No, I'm hard-pressed to believe these actions are one under percent intentions on the part of this company. Here's why:\n\nI am convinced this company has no interest in reducing my APR and monthly payments ands instead is trying to \"run out the clock\" so they can foreclose on me giving the bogus excuse I didn't \"return their documents\" or some nonsense, when in truth, they REFUSE to send the CORRECT documents to me to have notarized and return! An example of this is, in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXomplaint attached, XXXX XXXX at Loancare claims the correct documents were sent, however, this is FALSE. To this day, I still have not received them. If XXXX  can deliver a package to me in an afternoon, why does this company have such trouble with the MAIL?\n\nFurther, I attempted to contact XXXX XXXX at her number, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX to explain she told a falsehood to the XXXX  and never set the application/documents for loan medication as promised and noted in her response to XXXX. Her voicemail greeting answers, however, you are unable to actually leave a message and are instead returned to the main menu--a common tactic Loancare employs. \n\nMy attorney has looked over this case and agrees it appears the company is perpetuating fraud here, so he believes we have a strong case against Loancare if I'm forced to sue to their refusal to cooperate. I have all of my records, I have the voice recording of the aforementioned conversation on XXXX and the promises made, copies of emails I've sent to XXXX XXXX on their Loss Mitigation team, phone logs showing all dates/durations for the calls I've made to their offices. I have all the receipts from certified mail I have sent them regarding this matter, as well as the letters my attorney has sent. I also have a copy of the 100% false statements they made to the XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding my complaint with them; find it attached. (Which is actually great because it will help prove our claims of fraud and illegal handling of this matter in court). What I DON'T have is, any actual response from Loancare, whatsoever! Save robocalls and threatening emails, that is...\n\nThis complaint with CFPB is my final attempt at an amicable resolution before taking this matter to court. Unfortunately, I have exhausted all other options. Loancare has repeatedly deceived me, defrauded me, and damaged my credit rating through no fault of my own. They continue to engage in illegal collection activity daily. They are threatening me with foreclosure, but repeatedly have either failed or intentionally refuse to provide the promised documents so I can modify my loan to bring it current. They are also incorrectly and illegally reporting a delinquent status to the credit reporting agencies, which has caused serious damage to my credit rating--which is another reason I'll be suing for any and all available damages. And again, ALL of this is because of LOANCARE's inaction, mistakes, fraud, and incompetence--not mine! Reduce my APR and lower my payments to an amount I can afford now that my income is 50% less due to Covid and I will pay the mortgage!","date_sent_to_company":"2022-01-12T12:04:40.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"90046","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5095717","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"LoanCare, LLC","date_received":"2022-01-12T10:48:31.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There was NO offer for the reduction of my APR or lowered <em>payments</em> so I could continue making my mortgage <em>payment</em>. The terms were NOT changed to add the missed <em>payments</em> and extend the length of the <em>loan</em> to accommodate as promised. \n\n<em>Instead</em>, the packet demanded that the missed <em>payments</em> be due in one lump sum at the maturity of the <em>loan</em>. This is NOT <em>loan</em> modification! This was a partial claim, I never indicated I was interested in this option."],"issue":["Trouble during <em>payment</em> process"],"company":["<em>Loan</em>Care, LLC"],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[15.155447,"5095717"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5359070","_score":14.793637,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"My first loan through FedLoans was XX/XX/XXXX for my XXXX  degree. I subsequently took out a total of 5 loans throughout the course of my educational endeavor of varying amounts, keeping each to a minimum and my cost of living low. I was on loan forbearance while attending school, but did continue to make payments. I have worked for a non-profit in public service the entire time, including specific public service programs and qualified for the PSLF plan, submitting the appropriate paperwork. \n\nI have been meticulous in sending in my employment verification, adjusting my loan plans to match my qualifications for them. I did get a lot of conflicting information several times, even additional conflicting information even amongst supervisors and ultimately wrong plans which I had to change multiple times because they misinformed me several times, all of which caused a great deal of stress, but that's not my biggest complaint as grueling and frustrating that has always been. \n\nThe main problem I face is that throughout the course, FedLoans has been making internal adjustments and losing my records, ones I faxed and received confirmation years ago for and none of what I have submitted thus far has been applied. \n\nIn fact they told me XX/XX/XXXX that they did not have any of the documents I worked so hard to fill out appropriately, all this time I spend getting information and signatures from my employers, and they lost every single one of them. \n\nI even resubmitted an old document from XXXX and they could not find any documents that matched it because they literally lost every single document I have submitted thus far and never applied any of them in the real time, in which before the online tracker was viewable, I would receive confirmation faxes, emails, and made phone calls to ensure all was well trusting that all has been taken care of, applied, and completed on their end, now finding out none of this has been done. \n\nThe online tracker says I have XXXX eligible payments needing employment verification ( only need XXXX to qualify for forgiveness or 10 years time ), which as I just stated I have submitted my proper documentation on a regular basis. \n\nAnd so I have since resubmitted everything through the course of my loan and nothing has been applied. \n\nI have contacted customer service after taking time off work to make phone calls and 2 of those days, the calls required me to be on hold for 6+ hours ( lost wages ). On top of that no representatives or supervisors know what to do about it. They can't even calculate it themselves. They can't even see how to apply it to reconcile my account. I've sent several emails. Responses are unhelpful, generic, often, autogenerated, often no reply at all. \n\nInstead they tell me to be patient which I have and so far no one as remedied the situation. \n\nAs a borrower I am in good standing but I want to be complete in my end of contract and service with them but nothing is being done and nothing reflect even one thing of everything I have submitted thus far to meet the qualifications of the PSLF program which I am overdue for and have been for a while now.\n\nI would appreciate any assistance you can provide me as they have poor record keeping, outright lost records, never recorded my accomplishments, communications, documents all along, didn't give me any updates, customer service is poor, they don't even know what to do and admit they don't know what to do except wait longer, wait longer, and they have yet to provide any appropriate updates as a business, no any answers or remedy for my situation after months of waiting, and actually years of waiting total since I was initially qualified for forgiveness. \n\nI would be due for a refund in this case based on the over payment calculations. And this is money that I don't have in my pocket that I could be applying to other areas of my life so I've lost time, money, and ground just on that which is incredibly disappointing and distressing. \n\nIt should be remedied on my credit report, should say paid in full at this point so I can have that reflected in the other financial investments I want to make that I have had put on hold for a few years now, all because FedLoans can't maintain their ledger and have poor business practices as a student loan company and what should be a fair, transparent corporation with standards that would be up to par, a borrower contract and promise that they should have intention to keep properly and on time as they expect payments from me mutually, and a well-functioning business, but they have failed, greatly. And lastly I will say that this has been going on before the pandemic, so they can't blame it on that.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-04-12T19:31:46.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"59102","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5359070","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AES/PHEAA","date_received":"2022-03-23T04:07:06.000Z","state":"MT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trouble with how payments are being handled"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["as they expect <em>payments</em> from me mutually, and a well-functioning business, but they have <em>failed</em>, greatly."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"]},"sort":[14.793637,"5359070"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12875010","_score":14.45482,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"My rights have been violated on multiple occasions. Customer service has been a nightmare. Please see details below amongst many others. \n\nSteering into Forbearance with Capitalization of Interest & Misleading PracticesI was steered into forbearance multiple times despite potentially qualifying for income-driven repayment plans or other programs that could have provided more favorable terms. Forbearance led to the accrual of interest, which was capitalized and added to my principal balance, ultimately exacerbating my financial burden. Forbearance should have been honored without accruing interest during periods of national emergencies such as COVID-19. However, interest still accrued during the forbearance, violating federal policies. These actions also appear to be a violation of federal regulations prohibiting such steering and the manipulation of borrower options for the benefit of the loan servicer. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was placed into forbearance, but XXXX continued to deduct payments during this time, leading to overdraft fees due to insufficient funds. The letter I received from XXXX did not adequately explain that interest would continue to accrue during this period and contradicts the agreement that payments would not be deducted during this time. This created unnecessary financial hardship and violated the terms regarding forbearance under the XXXX provisions. I was not provided with a revised loan agreement or clear documentation reflecting the new loan terms following the forbearance period. Specifically, on XX/XX/XXXX, I reached out to inquire about a revised loan agreement. The response I received stated that no new contract would be issued, and instead, periodic statements would be provided. However, these statements failed to clarify the revised loan terms or provide clear details regarding my payment obligations. \n\nConfusion Regarding Loan OwnershipI have also faced confusion surrounding the ownership of my loan. The loan was transferred to \" Navient Private Loan Trust, '' but I was never properly notified of this change, nor was I provided with the required details regarding the new ownership, as stipulated in my loan agreement. This lack of transparency left me uncertain about how to manage and repay my loan effectively. \nThreat of DefaultI have repeatedly been subjected to threats of loan default, which I believe were made in bad faith, without proper consideration of my financial hardship advised many times on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX and active attempts to negotiate. Private student loans often go into default after missing XXXX monthly payments, but threats of default were made multiple times. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was notified that my loan was in jeopardy of default and encouraged to make a minimum payment of {$790.00} to avoid further consequences. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received another warning that my loan was close to default, with the entire balance potentially becoming due immediately. These threats continued over the following months : XX/XX/XXXX : I received a letter from XXXX detailing the \" cost of default, '' which included threats of credit reporting repercussions. XX/XX/XXXX : My account was under review for litigation due to continued delinquency. XX/XX/XXXX : I was again threatened with default, and I was told that my account would be considered in default by XX/XX/XXXX, if no payment arrangements were made. These aggressive and harassing communications placed undue stress on me and created a sense of urgency that I could not meet due to my financial situation. The threats of default were made under duress and designed to deceive me into agreeing to unfavorable loan restructuring, Particularly when it was known that I was experiencing financial hardship. Such practices could be considered bad faith behavior and constitute coercion under unconscionability and coercion, violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and other consumer protection laws. These threats may constitute unfair and deceptive practices under the Debt Collection Practices Law ( 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p ), which prohibits lenders from making false, deceptive, or harassing threats about legal action that they do not actually plan to take.\n\nMisleading Communications and Conflicting TermsOn multiple occasions, I received conflicting information from XXXX about my forbearance period and repayment terms. For example, on XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email stating that my forbearance period would begin on XX/XX/XXXX, with a XXXX duration and a resumption date of XX/XX/XXXX. However, the statement I received on the same day indicated a different forbearance period running from XX/XX/XXXX, to XX/XX/XXXX. This discrepancy led to confusion and significant financial uncertainty. \nImproper Enrollment in ProgramsOn XX/XX/XXXX, I was informed by XXXX that my loan terms had been modified to a reduced APR and extended term, committing to a monthly payment of {$490.00}. However, the following day I received a Notice to Cure from Navient Private Loan Trust demanding an immediate payment of {$6300.00}. Despite my conversations with XXXX and Navient, there was a constant back-and-forth between conflicting loan terms, including changes to my repayment term from 210 months to 244 months and, ultimately, to 240 months. These misleading actions regarding loan options, as well as their use of threats to push loan modifications, constitute violations under the Wisconsin Consumer Protection Act ( WCPA ) designed to protect consumers from deceptive practices. \n\nContinued Collection Efforts After Agreement & Debt Collection ViolationsDespite confirming new terms with XXXX and Navient, I continued to receive calls and emails threatening delinquency and reporting inaccurate information. My repeated requests for these communications to cease went unheeded, further violating the FDCPAs prohibition on harassment. The loan contract clearly states that you have the right to stop automatic payments by accessing your online account or contacting the company directly. I submitted a request twice to stop payment using the online portal.However, my request to stop automatic payments was not honored, and payments continued to be deducted, leading to further financial strain. \n\nFalse AdvertisingEarnest consistently advertised programs that were not offered, such as the Rate Reduction Program, Term and Rate Modification Program, and the Skip-A-Payment offers, among others. I was not provided with information about how these programs worked and what benefits I would be entitled to, which ultimately led to confusion and poor financial decisions. These misrepresentations constitute violations of the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) and the Federal Trade Commission Act ( FTC Act ), which prohibit deceptive advertising and failure to disclose accurate loan terms.\n\nInaccurate Credit Reporting and False Delinquency ReportsAs a result of the erroneous handling of my account, XXXX has failed to accurately report my payment history to the three major credit bureaus, which has caused unnecessary damage to my credit score. These actions are violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which mandates the accurate reporting of credit information and the correction of any discrepancies. \n\nIllegal Clauses and Violations of Consumer Protection LawsI believe my loan agreement contains several clauses that are potentially illegal and unfair. For example, the contract allows Navient to disclose my delinquency to investors without my consent, which I believe violates privacy protections under 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p. Additionally, the contract includes clauses that is deceptive and unfairly places burden on the borrower, such as requiring me to pay for communication costs related to my loan. \n\nDid not provide a revised loan upon new terms. Reference communication below. \nXX/XX/XXXX : The loan contract that I sent to you previously is the only contract for your loan at this time. We do not re-issue the entire contract with updated progress on your loan. Instead, we send periodic statements to keep you apprised of your loan details. Your monthly statements are available on your loan dashboard. Those statements will show recent payments, remaining balance, interest rate, and more. If you are experiencing any issues with locating these documents from your loan dashboard, please let me know. \nXX/XX/XXXX : I requested where I could find a copy of my contract and he advised on the XXXX website there is a loan breakdown on the statements. I requested he resend a copy of my agreement and he said he has requested this. Did I receive the same original contract? \n\nInterest should not have accrued during forbearance/covid according to the contract below but the statements have shown opposite of this along with verbal communication. \nYou may give me a forbearance in three ( 3 ) month increments if I am temporarily unable to make my scheduled loan payments for reasons including, but not limited to : financial hardship, unemployment, or illness. Under certain circumstances, you may also give me forbearance without requiring me to submit a request or documentation. These circumstances include, but are not limited to, the following : periods necessary for you to determine my eligibility for a loan discharge, a period of up to sixty ( 60 ) days in order for you to collect and process documentation related to my request for a deferment, forbearance, change in repayment plan, or a local or national emergency ( interest is not capitalized during this period )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-28T16:58:52.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"53221","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12875010","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2025-04-08T18:35:21.000Z","state":"WI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Specifically, on XX/XX/XXXX, I reached out to inquire about a revised <em>loan</em> agreement. The response I received stated that no new contract would be issued, and <em>instead</em>, periodic statements would be provided. However, these statements <em>failed</em> to clarify the revised <em>loan</em> terms or <em>provide</em> clear details regarding my <em>payment</em> obligations. \n\nConfusion Regarding <em>Loan</em> OwnershipI have also faced confusion surrounding the ownership of my <em>loan</em>."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[14.45482,"12875010"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8078300","_score":14.423148,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"-- Issue Summary -- 1. Issue with Statement Billing : Loan servicer statements provided to borrowers on XXXX  plans do not clearly indicate that the portion of their XXXX  payment that is applied to their principal is reduced daily from the statement date, and that waiting until their due date may negatively impact them financially as their payment towards the loan principal is reduced. A due date implies that there will be no negative impacts if paid prior to that date. As a result, borrowers are negatively impacted when an XXXX  payment made on the due date may no longer covered unpaid interest, and no portion of their payment is applied to their loan principal as anticipated per their billing statement, and as it would have been applied if paid on the statement date. \n\n2. Issue with Autopay : According to the Federal Student Aid website, \" If you sign up for auto pay, youll pay 0.25 % less in interest each month. '' This auto pay discount is also heavily advertised on loan servicer websites, including reminders that you will save XXXX   amount if you sign up for autopay. However, loan servicers schedule autopay for the payment due date, and do not provide options for payment on the statement date or other sooner dates, resulting in interest accrual on loans prior to the due date. This negatively impacts borrowers on the XXXX  income driven repayment plan. According to the Federal Student Aid website, \" The XXXX XXXX eliminates 100 % of remaining monthly interest for both subsidized and unsubsidized loans after you make a scheduled payment. '' Because this full pay off of all accrued interest only occurs \" after payment, '' loan servicers that limit autopay to the statement due date and apply the borrower 's payment to interest accrued as of that date negatively impact borrower 's ability to apply their payment to their principal balance. \n\n-- My situation -- The issues described above have impacted me since I began repayment after the federal student loan pause. Prior to repayment resuming, I was approved for the XXXX XXXX  for income driven repayment, and I had no unpaid interest outstanding on any of my federal student loans. Due to the issues outlined above and described in detail below, my loans have been negatively impacted, and I am concerned about the implications for all student loan borrowers. \n\nXXXX. Issue with Statement Billing : With my prior servicer, XXXX XXXX, I received my first billing statement showing that my XXXX payment would fully cover unpaid interest on my loans, with the remaining payment amount applied to the loan principal. However, when I made my full payment prior to the due date, my payment did NOT cover all the interest accrued on my account ( as shown in the statement ) because interest had accrued between the statement date and the due date. I thought this was an error, so I contacted both XXXX and Federal Student Aid requesting my payment be applied per my statement. I received responses from both entities explaining interest had accrued between my statement and due date, which I was already aware of. However, I had assumed my payment would be applied as shown in my statement because I am on an XXXX Plan. The responses from both parties fail to recognize a fundamental issue with statement billing and repayment because it is not reasonable for a consumer to assume they will be impacted negatively by paying on or before the due date. A due date implies that there will be no negative impacts if paid prior to that date. However, I was negatively impacted because my payment no longer covered my unpaid interest, and therefore no portion of my payment was applied to my loan principal as it would have been if paid on the statement date. This is an issue that affects all borrowers, and particularly borrowers on XXXX plans. \n\nXXXX. Issue with Autopay : After my first payment through XXXX, I received a notice that I wasn't signed up for XXXX, and that I would receive a monthly discount for doing so. I signed up for auto pay for future payments to receive the advertised discount. After signing up for autopay, I was again debited on my due date, and my payment, which should have covered all unpaid interest as of the statement date and then applied to my principal, only went to accrued interest. After this happened, I investigated my autopay options through the servicer, and confirmed they did not offer an option through the online portal to schedule autopay for the statement date. The following month, my servicer was changed to MOHELA because I certified employment qualifying for XXXX. Again, the servicer advertised discounts available to sign up for autopay, and again, I investigated autopay options, and MOHELA only offered autopay on the due date with no early options. MOHELA advertised that I would save $ XXXX if I enrolled in XXXX, which would be LESS than the interest I would accrue, and therefore reduce my principal payment by, if I enrolled in autopay that was debited on the due date. I am not currently enrolled in autopay because it would be financially disadvantageous, and I would like my payments debited on the statement date to receive the most benefit of my XXXX payment. \n\n-- Why CFPB should take action -- XXXX ) It is a deceptive practice for consumers to receive a billing statement showing how their payment will be applied to their loans and interest without a clear disclaimer next to both the \" due date '' and \" unpaid interest '' calculation that these calculations only reflect unpaid interest as of the statement date and payments applied after the statement date will be applied to interest accrued as of that date, not per the statement. While there is a blanket statement about interest near the bottom of the statement, it is especially not clear to borrowers on the XXXX XXXX that when they make their payment on or before the due date, their payment XXXX not cover the interest as displayed in their statement because more interest has accrued since they received the statement, and none of their payment XXXX end up going to their principal balance. This is deceptive because reasonable consumers will rely on their statement to be an accurate reflection of how their payment will actually be applied on the due date, not how the payment would theoretically be applied if they paid on the statement date. It is also deceptive because a due date implies there are no negative consequences as long as you pay by that date. \n\nXXXX ) It is a deceptive practice to advertise a discount for autopay that results in an increased cost to the borrower due to accrued interest when autopay is debited on the due date. For many borrowers, the autopay \" discount '' is less than the interest that will accrue as a result of loan servicer practices that autodebit on the payment due date, instead of offering options for debit on the statement date. Therefore there is no autopay \" discount '' for many borrowers, but in fact, an autopay penalty. \n\nXXXX ) Loan servicer practice of autodebiting on the due date negatively affects consumer use of a government benefit through an auto pay discount. By not providing an option to schedule auto pay for the statement date, loan servicers are benefiting from denying a government benefit by collecting more in interest payments from XXXX borrowers. Further, the consequences of this issue should merit not only requiring loan servicers to offer autopay on the statement date, but defaulting and/or prioritizing that option.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-12-29T15:36:43.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"55412","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8078300","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MOHELA","date_received":"2023-12-29T13:51:51.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Trouble with how payments are being handled"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["However, <em>loan</em> servicers schedule autopay for the <em>payment</em> due date, and do not <em>provide</em> options for <em>payment</em> on the statement date or other sooner dates, resulting in interest accrual on <em>loans</em> prior to the due date. This negatively impacts borrowers on the XXXX  income driven repayment <em>plan</em>."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"]},"sort":[14.423148,"8078300"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12252871","_score":13.664851,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Complaint Regarding Escrow Calculation Practices for FHA Loans To Whom It May Concern at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding a systemic issue with escrow calculation practices for FHA loans. This issue affects not only my personal mortgage but also poses a significant financial risk to first-time homebuyers across the country. It relates to the way mortgage servicers, such as NewRez LLC/Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing , calculate initial escrow payments based on outdated property tax rates, despite knowing that property taxes will unlock and increase after the sale of a home. This practice guarantees escrow shortages, leading to sudden, unaffordable increases in borrowers monthly mortgage payments. \n\nBackground on My Personal Experience I purchased my home in XX/XX/XXXX with an FHA loan serviced by NewRez LLC/Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing . At the time of purchase, the mortgage servicer used the previous homeowners property tax rate of {$1700.00} from XXXX XXXX to calculate my escrow payments. However, NewRez knew or should have known that the property taxes would unlock and increase significantly after reassessment. \n\nAs expected, my property taxes increased drastically in the following years : - XXXX XXXX ( at closing ) : {$1700.00} - XXXX Taxes : {$5600.00} ( {$3900.00} ) - XXXX Taxes : {$6300.00} ( {$640.00} ) - XXXX Taxes : {$6300.00} ( {$45.00} ) Despite knowing that my property taxes would increase by over 220 % in XXXX, NewRez failed to account for this change when establishing my escrow account. Instead, they used the outdated tax rate from the previous homeowner, resulting in an inevitable escrow shortage and forcing me to cover an unexpected increase in my monthly mortgage payment. \n\nCompounding the issue, my homeowners insurance also increased : - XXXX : {$1300.00} - XXXX : {$1300.00} - XXXX : {$2000.00} These cumulative increases created a financial burden that was entirely preventable had my escrow account been properly funded from the beginning. \n\nEvidence of Misconduct : Deliberate Escrow Underfunding at Closing Upon reviewing my mortgage documents, I discovered clear evidence that NewRez initially planned to account for the tax increase but then deliberately underfunded my escrow at closing. \n\n- XX/XX/XXXX : My initial Closing Disclosure estimated my closing costs at {$3300.00}, which correctly anticipated the unlocked tax rate. \n- XX/XX/XXXX : My final Closing Disclosure reduced my cash-to-close to {$1000.00}, significantly underfunding my escrow account. \n\nBy reducing the escrow funding at closing, NewRez made my mortgage appear more affordable than it actually was, while knowing that a drastic escrow shortage was inevitable. This practice created an artificial sense of affordability at closing but set me up for financial distress later when the tax increase took effect. \n\nThe Core Issue : Deceptive and Unfair Escrow Calculations This practice is both deceptive and predatory because : - Mortgage servicers know that property taxes will increase for new homebuyers but fail to account for it when setting up escrow accounts. \n- They deliberately use outdated tax rates from the previous homeowner instead of forecasting the reassessed rate, guaranteeing an escrow shortage. \n- They fail to properly disclose this to homebuyers, misleading them into thinking their mortgage payments will remain stable when they will, in fact, increase significantly. \n\nThis practice results in avoidable financial hardship, unexpected payment increases, and potential foreclosure risksall of which could be prevented if mortgage servicers accurately calculated escrow deposits using real-time property tax data. \n\nRequest for CFPB Action I am requesting that the CFPB investigate and take the following actions to prevent this harmful practice : XXXX ) Investigate Mortgage Servicer Practices- Review how servicers like NewRez calculate initial escrow payments for FHA loans. \n- Determine if the use of outdated tax rates at closing constitutes unfair or deceptive practices under consumer protection laws. \n\nXXXX ) Issue Guidance or Rulemaking - Require mortgage servicers to use the actual and expected property tax rates when calculating escrow payments. \n- If servicers are aware that property taxes will unlock, they should be required to account for the increase in the initial escrow deposit. \n\nXXXX ) Require Remediation for Homeowners - Provide financial relief for FHA loan borrowers impacted by escrow shortages due to these practices. \n- Homeowners should not be financially penalized for mortgage servicers ' failure to account for foreseeable tax increases. \n\nXXXX ) Enhance Disclosures at Closing - Require that borrowers receive a clear, written warning that property tax increases are expected due to reassessment or unlocking. \n- This disclosure should include an estimate of future mortgage payments to prevent financial shock. \n\nImpact on Homeowners This practice disproportionately harms first-time homebuyers, particularly those using FHA loans , who may not be aware of how property tax reassessments work. The financial consequences include : - Payment shock, as borrowers face sudden and drastic mortgage increases. \n- Escrow shortages, forcing homeowners to make unexpected lump-sum payments or deal with higher monthly payments. \n- Risk of foreclosure, as these unexpected financial burdens become unsustainable. \n\nFHA loans are designed to make homeownership affordable, but this escrow mismanagement undermines that goal by misleading borrowers about their true housing costs. \n\nRequested Resolution I am seeking : 1 ) Financial relief for the escrow shortages I have experienced.\n\n2 ) A CFPB investigation into NewRez LLC/Shellpoint Mortgage Servicings escrow handling. \nXXXX ) Stronger FHA guidelines to ensure borrowers are protected from deceptive escrow practices. \n\nThank you for your time and attention. I am happy to provide supporting documentation, including : My initial and final Closing Disclosures showing the deliberate underfunding of my escrow account. \n\nXXXX ) My correspondence with HUD, confirming that NewRez followed FHA guidelines but failing to address the deceptive nature of their escrow calculations. \nXXXX ) My escrow analyses from NewRez, showing how my property taxes and homeowners insurance increased each year, leading to an unavoidable financial burden. \n\nI urge the CFPB to take swift action to prevent mortgage servicers from misleading borrowers and creating financial instability through improper escrow calculations. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-28T17:31:47.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"482XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12252871","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","date_received":"2025-02-28T17:12:43.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX ) Issue Guidance or Rulemaking - Require mortgage servicers to use the actual and expected property tax rates when calculating escrow <em>payments</em>. \n- If servicers are aware that property taxes will unlock, they should be required to account for the increase in the initial escrow deposit. \n\nXXXX ) Require Remediation for Homeowners - <em>Provide</em> financial relief for FHA <em>loan</em> borrowers impacted by escrow shortages due to these practices."],"issue":["Trouble during <em>payment</em> process"]},"sort":[13.664851,"12252871"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3198357","_score":13.637186,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"Issue # 1 Unauthorized account activity by Navient. Payment options for loan were turned off causing a loss of a .25 % reduction for over 18 months. Federal loans and other loans lost the .25 % reduction benefit to the account. I was told that I would be contacted so this could be addressed and benefit reapplied, yet years later, this has not been addressed even though this is Navient 's fault.\n\nIssue # 2 Never received proper information for Income Based Repayment, IDR and forebearances and deferments were marketed to account, so account lost short-term and long-term benefit of the income based repayment. Also, forfeiting months of the forbearance and deferment that has a finite number of months that could have been applied at a later date. \n\nIssue # 3 Account did not receive proper notification that the auto-pay was taken off around XXXX and XXXX by Navient causing the .25 % loss of benefit on the loans. \n\nIssue # 3 When paying loan, payments are not directed toward the correct loans causing loan to be viewed as delinquent when they are not. Payments are incorrectly directed toward loans that have {$0.00} due and not loans with an amount due, even though payments are clearly labeled to be made to those loans with amount and loan number. \n\nIssue # 4 Unable to make payments to account online, banking accounts linked to Navient for years now being asked for verification, no other way to pay online I.e. debit, credit cards making payment options limited and difficult. Banking information previously applied and valid for years are now being asked for verification with no reason. Being asked to provide notice that the account is valid, even though the same account has always been linked to Navient for several, several years. So I am asked to take time to ask bank to provide a letter that says the account is verified without any notice of Navient and no reason given. \n\nIssue # 5 Improper account notification when things affect the account causing improper delinquency, no mail or email when Navient mishandled account and turned off auto-pay on accounts around XXXX and XXXX. No notification saying they applied payments to wrong loans causing delinquency. \n\nIssue # 6 Improper and negligence actions toward the account, when application for IDR was never applied to the account and told it was sitting in fax machine around XXXX and because of Issue # 4,  proper notification never occurred. Department of Education instead extended notification saying account was delinquent. If Navient workers properly handled paperwork and accounts, this mishandling of the account would never happen and it would have not inaccurately showed delinquency and risked adverse reporting to the credit bureaus essentially risking financial health. \n\nIssue # 7 Lack of professionalism when calling over years including XXXX, XXXX. Lack of responsibility and ownership in mishandling the account. \nWhen called XXXX XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XXXX answered, when I started to talk she hung up on me. Called back despite requesting auto-call back, which was unsuccessful. After speaking to XXXX XXXX Spoke to supervisor XXXX XXXX on private loan side, after which she was going to transfer me to the Federal loan side and to speak with a supervisor, she said I could ask for one, I explained that I had already been on-hold for several, several minutes each time and on the line for over 43 minutes and asked to be directly routed to a supervisor to which she agreed. I was on hold for a longer time and she disconnected the call. I had been on the phone nearly an hour and she hung up on me. \nWas told during call the misapplication of the payment could be retroactively applied correctly to the account, but received a less than sincere response that this could be done for the lossed benefit of the auto-pay deduction that was dismissed by Navient costing the account a .25 % deduction for over 18+ months without my authorization, knowledge, consent and notification. Why is Navient quick to retroact on behalf of itself and not the account, when retroaction would benefit the account and it was Navient that caused the issue of the auto-pay being turned off around XXXX and XXXX. \n\nIssue # 8 Asked who Navient reports to I was told they report to no one. Asked to speak with someone who would be able to rectify this situation, they said there is not a specific department or anyone I could speak to about this and transfered me to supervisors.??? See Issue # 6, that's probably why they hung up on me, because they do not want to deal with these issues Navient has caused on the account. \n\nIssue # 9 Asked who Navient reports to I was told they report to no one. Asked to speak with someone who would be able to rectify this situation, they said there is not a specific department or anyone I could speak to about this and transfered me to supervisors.??? See Issue # 6, that's probably why they hung up on me, because they do not want to deal with these issues Navient has caused on the account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Income based repayment plan, recertified. XXXX XXXX a supervisor. \nHowever, I actually recertified several months prior in XX/XX/XXXX. \nReceived information from Student Higher Education that I was late saying I missed 3 payments. Was not supposed to be in repayment anyway risked negative credit reporting. Received zero contact from Navient in writing nor email nor call. \nAsked for documentation that it would not affect my credit never received any mail to date. Actually, received a pre-dated document saying I authorized a forbearance, which I did not authorize. Navient is acting as fraudulent vipers who make up things regarding loans to benefit its bottom line. Additionally, on previous calls they said forbearance was only option and did not tell me about the income based repayment form. \nWhen I finally learned of this option and sent in a form it was improperly handled and never processed when it was handled because of a slight difference in the form. Navient said it sent a denial, but this is untrue an one was never received nor any call, email, mail saying that. I was told the form was an expired form. I received and downloaded a new form. Also, on the form I used the expiration date of the form listed was much later. Old form had 12 pages, new form had 10 pages and the information was exactly the same by DOE. They said the old 12 page form expired in beginning of XXXX. The form that I submitted had an expiry date of XX/XX/XXXX, and thats the unexpired form I submitted. Both forms are the same. All they had to do was transfer my information on the new form. Additionally, the XXXX pages of the form that they actually use has the same information. \nWhile explaining this and speaking with XXXX, I hear laughing in the background. XXXX escalated case manager, Employee Code XXXX. Who told me they have to use the new application or a newer application. Why was my application not considered a newer applications which is what I had submitted? This makes no sense. Navient changes the rules as it sees fit. \nIf I had not called in then, they would have wrongfully marked my file as late, because it was just 7 days away from being reported to the credit bureaus! This is negligent! \nWant the additional credits retroactively applied to account. I would like to have the IDR plan applied for months that I was pushed the forbearance and deferment and reclaim the months of forbearance and deferment lost on the account. \nI did not receive a letter saying the income payment was denied, I did not receive a call, I did not receive any email. I did not receive any correspondence from Navient! I did not receive any correspondence saying I was in repayment. \nThe only notification I received was from Department of Higher Education. \nAdditionally, the auto-debit was cancelled without my permission. How is auto-debit cancelled for one group of loans and not the other? \nAuto-pay was terminated on XX/XX/XXXX for the account for one group of loans, but not for the other. Who is accessing the account making these unauthorized changes. Never received any information about who turned off my auto-pay, who did that?! Payment wasnt processed from the account. \nNavient, unauthorized a previous payment due. Navient never processed IDR for XXXX and XXXX in a timely manner. They left paperwork sitting at a fax machine, never processed payment and then in XXXX they failed to process the application because it was out of date and never informed me. \n\nThey never sent any email notifications about my income based repayment. \nI never took off the auto-pay, and I should have been and should be getting the .25 % reductions on the account for over the past 18+ months. I would like a back-date of all the interest that was charged on the account. The .25 % interest that I was charged needs to be refunded to the account, because I was never informed that the payment was over 18 months of extra interest coming on the account. Please refund the additional 18+ months of not benefiting of the additional .25 % reduction to the account. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX Spoke to XXXX XXXX who said she could apply the amount due back on the correct loans ( Signature Student loans ) and said she asked supervisor XXXX XXXX who said nothing could be done. Spoke to XXXX and expressed all issues listed here including 4-9 which I also recently dealt with. \n\nThank you.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-02T01:29:26.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"10457","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3198357","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2019-04-01T23:06:11.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trouble with how payments are being handled"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Payments</em> are incorrectly directed toward <em>loans</em> that have {$0.00} due and not <em>loans</em> with an amount due, even though <em>payments</em> are clearly labeled to be made to those <em>loans</em> with amount and <em>loan</em> number. \n\nIssue # 4 Unable to make <em>payments</em> to account online, banking accounts linked to Navient for years now being asked for verification, no other way to pay online I.e. debit, credit cards making <em>payment</em> options limited and difficult."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[13.637186,"3198357"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6407162","_score":13.582526,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Sir/Madam ; This memorandum documents our experience while securing a refinance/buy-back loan from Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ) during XXXX XXXX. We found the conduct of NFCU and its employees during this experience uniformly unsatisfactory. Because of the likelihood that this recounting alone will fail to stimulate internal consideration of personnel evaluation and business practices at NFCU, it has also been provided to various regulatory, personnel certification and business ratings organizations as seem appropriate. \nBackground In XX/XX/XXXX, we identified a townhome under construction in XXXX XXXX, XXXX, that we wished to purchase. Wishing to avoid a XXXX mortgage, our financing strategy was to take out a loan against our current home in XXXX, and use the money to purchase the XXXX property for cash. We determined to apply for the loan and lock-in a rate immediately, as news reports indicated mortgage rates would rise significantly throughout XXXX and early XXXX. The completion date for the property is XX/XX/XXXX. So, we also planned to delay closing the refinance/loan until as late as possible to allow time to refine the precise loan amount, and reduce the number of payments required prior to closing on the property. \nChronology of Events The following chronology is provided as an objective outline of the sequence of events that led to our current situation. \nEarly XX/XX/XXXX. We applied for what the NFCU XXXX XXXX termed a refinance-buy back loan. We explained the background described above to the XXXX XXXX, including our desire to refine the loan value prior to closing, delay closing the loan for as long as possible within the rate lock period, and occasionally pay down principal with the objective of reducing monthly payments. \nXXXX. We received pre-approval of the loan package for a maximum value of {$400000.00}, locking in a XXXX XXXX rate on a XXXX, fully-collateralized loan. The expiration for the rate lock-in was XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX. We notified the XXXX XXXX, by phonecon and email, that the final loan amount desired for the loan was {$270000.00}. We have copies of the emails and, presumably, NFCU has recordings of the phonecon relaying this information. \nXXXX XXXX. Loan documents were delivered for signature. The loan value identified in the documents was {$400000.00}, rather than the {$270000.00} we requested. We signed the documents, assuming we could either cancel the contract, or that NFCU would undertake whatever administrative procedures were necessary to correct its error. We contacted the XXXX XXXX immediately, who responded that NFCU would not correct its error and that if we exercised the three-day cancellation option, NFCU would not rewrite the contract within the rate lock period. \nXXXX XXXX. The XXXX XXXX rate lock-in period expired. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. We contacted the XXXX XXXX to express our dissatisfaction with being held accountable for NFCUs clerical error. She provided us another point of contact at NFCU Member Services. \nXXXX XXXX. We called NFCU Member Services. The advisor informed us that the monthly payments for the loan could not be recast, ever, and that payments would be required for the full value of the erroneous {$400000.00} loan amount. \nXXXX XXXX. Calls to and from NFCU yielded various limited options for correcting NFCUs mistake. \nNFCUs Response The conduct of virtually all NFCU personnel involved has been uniformly unhelpful, frequently condescending to the point of insulting, and breathtakingly uninformed throughout this process. While starting off as little more than annoyances, the general sloppiness, laziness, technical incompetence and lack of attention to detail, culminated in a major clerical error on the part of NFCU that may, as of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, result in significant financial consequences for us, with no apparent adverse consequences or accountability, either corporate or individual, for NFCU. In some scenarios NFCU might actually benefit, at the customers expense, from its own mistake. \nBecause she was the principal customer interface, and is personally responsible for the major clerical error, XXXX XXXX XXXX, the NFCU XXXX XXXX bears at least initial responsibility for the problem. Starting out with the annoyances, that in some cases exacerbated her mistake, XXXX XXXX provided several different names, phone numbers and email addresses for contact. Her supervisors contact information, listed on the signed loan documents, is incorrect. That NFCU is unable to provide something as simple as clear, unambiguous, correct, contact information unfortunately accurately reflects the overall competence demonstrated during this experience. XXXX XXXX seemed to have difficulty comprehending our desire to delay closing as long as possible, and perhaps erroneously assumed that mistakes on the closing documents were of little consequence since she expected there would be time to fix them. Contributing to the lack of timely response to this clerical mistake, beyond NFCUs general lack of a sense of urgency or customer service, was XXXX XXXX insistence on assigning a title agent from XXXXXXXX XXXX, rather than the local XXXX title agent that we specified. No explanation for this arbitrary assignment of a non-local title agent was provided. Most significantly, despite being notified on XXXX XXXX both in writing and on the phone of the required new loan amount, and despite a lengthy previous phonecon on the same subject, XXXX XXXX failed to ensure that the correct loan amount was entered in the loan documents provided for signature. This was a significant clerical error. XXXX XXXX apparently lacked the authority to correct her mistake. Her supervisor was completely absent during all phases of this process and is, presumably, XXXX of the problem ( s ). Supervisor, and supervision seem completely absent at all levels at NFCU. \nThis explicit commission of errors, and more general demonstration of incompetence, lassitude and indifference, were in no way confined to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX attempted to pass the consequences of her failure to properly process our loan on to XXXX XXXX XXXX in Member Services. When contacted, XXXX XXXX, having obviously made no effort to inform herself on the issue in the intervening XXXX days, proceeded to deliver a condescending and utterly uninformed lecture on the nature of our loan and the limited options we had to mitigate the consequences of NFCUs gross incompetence. Subsequent discussions with NFCU supervisors, such as they are, suggest XXXX XXXX was grossly misinformed as to our loan, and basic NFCU procedures. \nThroughout this process, NFCU and its employees consistently failed to acknowledge any responsibility ( or accountability ) for this mistake or take any initiative to address the consequences to the customer. Instead, we were contacted by a series of employees who were so comprehensively ignorant of the situation, and NFCUs own procedures, that we received completely different answers from each, and often different answers from the same employees at different times. On occasion the strategies offered were so utterly implausible we were left wondering if they were not simply efforts to stall until our options had all expired. This made planning and damage control, on our part, virtually impossible. NFCUs position has changed, at the time of writing, within bounds roughly defined by the following positions. \nPresumably, the initial plan was to process the loan properly. We borrow {$270000.00} at XXXX XXXX, and begin making payments in XXXX. This became untenable on XXXX XXXX when NFCU provided incorrect documents for signature and refused to correct the mistake. \nProcess the loan for an amount we did not request, we pay down the principal by the overage before the first payment, and recompute the loan payments for the new principal ( recast ), putting us more or less back on the same track, except we only have two opportunities to pay down principal, one of which is exhausted correcting NFCUs mistake. \nProcess the loan for the wrong amount, deny us the opportunity to pay down principal at all, and require monthly payments on a {$400000.00} loan that we did not request. We determined extricating ourselves from this mess of NFCUs creation would result in a loss to us of around {$40000.00}. This was XXXX XXXX position, and would have required recourse to legal action. \nProcess the loan for the wrong amount, allow us to pay down principal at an unspecified future date of NFCUs choosing. This option still required us to pay the full {$400000.00} loan monthly payment for somewhere between XXXX to XXXX months while NFCU processed the loan. This seemed so fantastically incomprehensible that we assumed it was probably illegal, so much so we never really believed it was an option. Simply threatening legal action would have presumably collapsed this scenario, had it lasted long enough to do so. \nAt some point, NFCU clarified, or altered, its position on recasting the loan, and declared that this process was allowed twice a year, not twice over XXXX years. The actual loan documents indicate that the recomputation of loan payment will be done at the lenders discretion with no additional qualifications. So, apparently, recasting can be done never, twice, XXXX times, as many times as the lender allows, or as many times as the borrower desires. This single issue serves as a convenient metaphor for the astonishingly amateurish manner in which this entire incident has been handled by NFCU. \nOn XXXX XXXX, NFCU offered to grant an indulgence to pay down the principal with the overage, and recast the loan, before the first payment. \nThe XXXX XXXX offer was followed by yet another slightly different offer on XXXX XXXX that, apparently, involves actually resubmitting the notarized loan paperwork for a {$230000.00} loan, purportedly also still at the original XXXX XXXX locked rate. Why this fix is now possible with nothing more than yet more inconvenience for the customer was not explained. \nUnfortunately, none of these scenarios have been provided in writing. Experience suggests that verbal agreements with, or explanations by, NFCU and its employees are likely to be at best obfuscatory, and frequently blatant falsehoods. We might be excused for being skeptical that the most recent offer of what seems to be essentially a new loan- actually close to the original loan we asked for at the original rate ( well after the rate lock has expired ) might simply be yet another NFCU stratagem for covering up its own mistake and passing on the consequences to the customer. \nSummary No formal summary should be necessary. Even if resolved in a manner that does not result in adverse financial consequences for the customer it has been - that hardly constitutes what could be deemed a successful business transaction. The burden and stress of mitigating the consequences of NFCUs mistakes and pervasive incompetence has fallen entirely on the customer. \nNFCU would do well to start at the basics by reflecting on the meaning of the word customer. Customers pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in finance fees for a service consisting of little more, beyond the risk of the loan itself, - XXXX in our case since our collateral is valued at substantially more than the loan than bookkeeping, secretarial work, and the occasional provision of coherent explanations and reassurance. Our experience with NFCU illustrates lack of competence at any of these tasks, aggravated by one or more layers of supervisors who neither supervise nor are technically competent at solving problems when they do arise. All this is complemented by a seeming default position of ignorance, rudeness, blamecasting and condescension when dealing with those same customers. The right answer here, that apparently continues to elude NFCU management, was on the afternoon of XXXX XXXX, we are contacted by someone in a position of sufficient authority to apologize for NFCUs mistake, and with a guarantee ( with a credible timetable ) that NFCU will make it right without further burden to the customer. How NFCU might subsequently handle its glaring training, competence and supervisory shortcomings is a different matter. \nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-06T19:56:34.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Reverse mortgage","zip_code":"82070","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6407162","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2023-01-06T19:26:32.000Z","state":"WY","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Presumably, the initial <em>plan</em> was to process the <em>loan</em> properly. We borrow {$270000.00} at XXXX XXXX, and begin making <em>payments</em> in XXXX. This became untenable on XXXX XXXX when NFCU provided incorrect documents for signature and refused to correct the mistake."]},"sort":[13.582526,"6407162"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8667188","_score":13.378857,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX declared a national emergency due to the XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX announced that part of the CARES ACT would include a nation-wide pause ( Administrative Forbearance ) on all federal student loans. This was made retroactive to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nDuring the XXXX Emergency Relief Act federal student loans were paused and payments were not required, interest rates were set at 0 %, income re-certifications to calculate income-driven payment ( XXXX ) plans were not required, and these administrative forbearance months all counted towards XXXX and XXXX forgiveness XXXX If student loan borrowers had made payments accidentally during this pause, they could request refunds from their student loan borrowers several years after the fact. \nIn XXXX of XXXX my student loans were being serviced by XXXX and I was in an Income Driven Repayment Plan ( XXXX ) known as Income-Based Repayment ( IBR ). I had been on the XXXX plan since XXXX of XXXX. Part of being in an IDR requires that you recertify your income annually to recalculate your monthly payment based upon your income. While on XXXX if your income increases to a point where you no longer meet partial financial hardship or if you fail to recertify your income before the annual plan anniversary, your payment increases to the standard payment plan amount based on the amount owed by the borrower when they first entered XXXX ( XXXX for me ). Student loan servicers take anywhere between XXXX to XXXX weeks to process an income recertification application and so they instruct their student loan borrowers to send in their income recertifications well before the annual plan anniversary. My annual payment plan anniversary is on XX/XX/XXXX. And XX/XX/XXXX would be the first new monthly payment calculated upon my most recent income tax return. I have attached a letter from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX indicating that my payment plan would be $ XXXX and would be active from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. This indicates that I still had partial financial hardship when the pause began on XX/XX/XXXX and that I had XXXX remaining payments of {$590.00} on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. This is important, because ultimately XXXX would instruct student loan borrowers and companies that when payments resumed that the student loan borrowers monthly payment would be what it was before XXXX began and my payment was $ XXXX. \n\nIn order to successfully comply and honor the XXXX week timeline, XXXX informed XXXX that my deadline to recertify in XXXX was XX/XX/XXXX. In order to meet the deadline, I filled out a paper-based income recertification application signed on XX/XX/XXXX and mailed it to XXXX. \n\nHowever, on XX/XX/XXXX the XXXX XXXX was announced ( same day as my XXXX recertification deadline ) and made retroactive to XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX day before my signed re-certication application ). I emphasize again that income recertifications were not required during the pause and that this income recertification would result in my payment increasing from $ XXXX to the XXXX standard-payment amount of $ XXXX starting XX/XX/XXXX. So XXXX should not have processed my IDR application, given it wasnt required and it was no longer in my best interest as a student loan borrower and because XXXX had clearly stated that the payments would resume at the amount they were before the XXXX pause began. I remind you that during this pause, borrowers were able to request refunds of payments made if it was in their best interest. All of the COIVD measures were made to act in the borrowers best interest. Indeed, I received correspondence from XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX stating that they were unable to process my application request. The XXXX pandemic was an ongoing, evolving situation and, as a consequence, the XXXX pause was set to end multiple times and then extended multiple times. Each time the payment pause was set to end, student loan servicers, without any guidance from XXXX, sent out notification to their borrowers months in advance instructing them to recertify their income for XXXX plans. I did so, incorrectly, as instructed by XXXX and recertified again XX/XX/XXXX, which would have resulted in my payment increasing to {$2800.00}. However, again the pause was extended along with all the benefits associated with it, to include no requirement for income recertification. \n\nMy student loans were transferred to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX after XXXX lost their contract with the federal government. Again my loans were transferred a third time to Mohela after I submitted a PSLF form on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, well before the XX/XX/XXXX deadline. My federal student loans were transferred to Mohela on XX/XX/XXXX. \nMuch to my consternation Mohela had my projected payment on their website listed as being {$2800.00}. I was supposed to have XXXX more payments of $ XXXX left on my payment plan. However, with constantly changing information from XXXX, I decided to wait until more information came in about loans restarting and the requirement for income recertification. The new projected date to restart payments was XX/XX/XXXX. At this time multiple individuals on the internet were stating they too had been burdened with a higher monthly payment amount due to incorrectly recertifying during the covid pause at their student loan companys request. Many of these individuals were able to undo those recertifications and have their payments put back to their pre-covid levels. In a XXXX XXXX, I learned of an individual whose loans were serviced by Mohela who had recertified with XXXX in XXXX of XXXX causing his payment to increase by thousands of dollars. He transferred his loans to Mohela and then requested his income re-certication be reversed. They refused and he filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Mohela granted his request ( XXXX years after he recertified ) and he posted the letter Mohela had written him on the XXXX XXXX. With this proof in hand, I called Mohela in XX/XX/XXXX and made this request for myself. I was denied. \n\nIn XXXX XX/XX/XXXX I sent Mohela an in-box message asking for them to restore my payment to what it was pre-covid. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX Mohela replied they submitted a request to put my payment back to what it was pre-covid. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX they told me they received an IDR from me and that my application was incomplete. This is incorrect. I did not submit an IDR. I asked for them to restore my previous payment. \n\nThe payment pause finally ended on XX/XX/XXXX and the guidance from XXXX was that income recertifications were STILL NOT required until XX/XX/XXXX. Effectively, this meant millions of student loan borrowers were making monthly payment amounts based on their XXXX income tax returns. Despite this instruction from XXXX, student loan companies STILL incorrectly bullied and harassed their borrowers under threat to recertify their income starting in XXXX of XXXX. Millions did, resulting in higher monthly payments. XXXX then took action and pushed the requirement for income recertification out AGAIN to XXXX of XXXX. I repeat, federal student loan borrowers are NOT required to recertify their income from the dates of XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. Both of my recertifications happened within this time frame, causing me harm. Furthermore, XXXX took more aggressive action with these student loan companies who incorrectly threatened their borrowers into recertifying in early and instructed the companies to restore the monthly payment amounts to the previous lower payment amount. This is currently being enacted right now and I wish to be treated the same, even though I recertified much earlier than XX/XX/XXXX. The same XXXX happened to me as these individuals. I was told to recertify when I didnt have to and my payment went up. This has happened to millions since XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX has given clear instructions to the loan companies to restore the borrowers lower monthly payment. This is what I am asking for. It doesnt matter if I had recertified in XXXX of XXXX, XXXX of XXXX, or XX/XX/XXXX, the instruction from congress XXXX clear. Student loan borrowers werent required to recertify, so the companies are being instructed to restore borrowers lower monthly payments. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX I submitted a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau explaining my situation. I told them that I wanted Mohela to deactivate my voluntary income disclosures made on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX during the COVID payment pause, because income recertifications were not required during this pause and this ultimately hurt me as a student loan borrower. I wanted them to restore my income disclosure I made on XX/XX/XXXX, which used my XXXX income tax return to calculate my monthly payment of {$590.00} and this was the payment amount active on XX/XX/XXXX when the covid pause began. I would never have recertified if I knew that income recertification wasnt going to be required until XXXX of XXXX, because it resulted in my payment increasing by thousands of dollars. And this is unfair because millions of student loan borrowers are still making monthly payment amounts from XXXX because they did not recertify as incorrectly instructed by their student loan servicers, like I unfortunately have. I have been harmed by following the instructions of my student loan servicers. \n\nMohela responded on XX/XX/XXXX via the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau complaint that they would request additional information from ( my ) prior servicer for evaluation of ( my ) past repayment schedules eligibility for extension under the XXXX payment pause. This was excellent news to me, because I still had XXXX more months left on my plan when the pause began so I was definitely eligible for extension of my plan. I did not hear from Mohela again and called for an update in early XXXX. Mohela told me they had no record of my complaint to CFPB but they would submit my request again to revert my payment back to pre-covid levels. On XX/XX/XXXX, this is the response I received. Please note them telling me I need to recertify before XX/XX/XXXX AGAINST official federal guidance AND that they sent me this response on XX/XX/XXXX telling me I need to perform an action before XX/XX/XXXX ( clearly several months in the past. ) Thank you for contacting MOHELA, We apologize for any inconvenience this XXXX have caused. Your monthly payment has recently increased because the certification period for your reduced payment on your XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) plan has ended. You will need to recertify your IDR plan prior to the XXXX XXXX forbearance ending XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIn the interim I have sent multiple complaints, letters, correspondence to Mohela. Ive made many phone calls. On XX/XX/XXXX they sent me correspondence stating they denied my IDR application and that I needed to provide proof of income. I submitted my XXXX income tax return which was the tax return that was used to calculate my payment that I was making when the COVID pause began and I sent them a letter from XXXX stating that my XXXX plan was active from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX at a monthly payment of {$590.00} and I sent them a letter from XXXX explaining that I was in XXXX and what my monthly payment amounts have been each year since XXXX to XXXX. They responded back telling me that my tax return was old and I needed more recent income in order to recertify my income. Again I told them, I am not recertifying my income. I am asking to deactivate my XXXX prior income disclosures because they harmed me and werent required. After such exasperation, I finally resorted to sending them a screen shot and the Mohela letter I found online where they granted another individual my same request. When I asked them why they granted this individual my request, but not me, they told me they cant talk to me about other peoples accounts. I asked them to read the letter they sent to that individual out loud to me and tell me how I can achieve that same outcome and the person on the phone hung up on me. \nThis is XXXX of the many messages I have sent to Mohela : My federal student loans were being serviced by XXXX at the start of XXXX. I am on the Income-Based Repayment plan ( IBR ) which is a type of Income-Driven Payment plan that requires yearly income recertification or the payment increases to the what the borrower would have paid had they been on a standard payment plan when first entering IBR. On XX/XX/XXXX I received notification that my XXXX payment would soon increase and that I needed to recertify my income by XX/XX/XXXX or my current payment rate ( {$590.00} ) would expire on XX/XX/XXXX and subsequent payments and would increase to {$2800.00}. On XX/XX/XXXX I submitted my XXXX recertification to XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX the XXXX Emergency Relief and Federal Student Aid ( COVID forbearance ) went into effect was announced with starting retroactively to XX/XX/XXXX. All federal student loan borrowers, including myself, were notified by XXXX that payments were automatically paused, interest was set at % XXXX, and income recertifications were not required while the forbearance was in effect. On XX/XX/XXXX I received the following email from XXXX XXXX could take up to XXXX business days for us to review and process this request for you. We understand that you want a response as quickly as possible and appreciate your patience.~~ However, the XXXX forbearance went into effect starting retroactively on XX/XX/XXXX. Thus, on XX/XX/XXXX my certification had NOT been officially processed and therefore my XXXX plan for XXXX, based on my XXXX tax return, was still active and in effect on XX/XX/XXXX when COVID forbearance began. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX sent me a correspondence date XX/XX/XXXX that I no longer met partial financial hardship and that my payment would increase to {$2800.00}. Thus, my recertification was processed on XX/XX/XXXX when recertifications were NOT required during the covid forbearance. I recertified again on XX/XX/XXXX after being inappropriately told by XXXX that I needed to recertify in time for student loan repayments to restart. This was not required since the XXXX relief act was extended. XX/XX/XXXX I received the following correspondence from XXXX XXXX XXXX Repayment ( XXXX ) plan request could not be processed.~~ On XX/XX/XXXX my loans were transferred to Aidvantage automatically after XXXX lost their federal student loan servicing XXXX. My loans were transferred to Mohela on XX/XX/XXXX after I submitted an XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Upon resumption of payments XX/XX/XXXX, The XXXX XXXX aid states that the earliest anyone would be required to submit income recertification is XX/XX/XXXX. Because I followed my student loan servicer~~s instructions and submitted my recertification 2 days before my deadline on XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX and because XXXX recertified again on XX/XX/XXXX due to incorrect instructions from XXXX, my XXXX has now significantly increased since the pause ended on XX/XX/XXXX. It has been increased to {$2800.00} after resumption of payments instead of remaining {$590.00} because I submitted these unrequired, voluntary recertifications. It is unfair for me to be punished for trying to do the right thing and I should be entitled to the same benefit afforded to everyone else as no one else as been required to recertify their income during the COVID forbearance starting XX/XX/XXXX Because my recertification deadline was XX/XX/XXXX, which is the exact date the COVID XXXX relief act was announced, and my payment due on XX/XX/XXXX was still scheduled to be {$590.00} from my XXXX XXXX recertification, and because recertifications were not REQUIRED I feel that my XXXX recertifications in XXXX and XXXX should be rescinded and that my XXXX XXXX recertification ( based on my XXXX income ) should be correctly honored and my payment should continue to remain at {$590.00} until I am actually official required to recertify. I contacted MOHELA representatives via telephone and my request was escalated to a supervisor. They both told me that these unrequired recertifications from XXXX and XXXX could not be undone, which I know to be untrue from research online, where others have been able to get their recertifications submitted during the forbearance undone. I submitted a complaint to the CFPB and Mohela stated they were \" requesting additional information from your prior servicer for evaluation of your past repayment schedule~~s eligibility for extension under the XXXX payment pause. '' I called today XX/XX/XXXX for an update and was told mohela had no knowledge of this complaint but escalated my request for rescinding my XXXX recertifications form XX/XX/XXXX onward. My case number for this encounter is XXXX. I expect my payment to be reverted to {$590.00} and to receive a refund for overpayments from XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and any further months spent in overpayment. I do NOT consent to be placed in any forbearance related to processing my request. \n\n\nI am attaching some PDFS including my letter from XXXX stating my active XXXX plan of $ XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, a letter to Mohela explaining XXXX what I wanted accomplished, the screenshot of the letter Mohela wrote XXXX a third individual whose request was granted, as well as the screenshot from a XXXX group XXXX XXXX third individual explained his situation. All of these correspondences have been ignored my Mohela and they flat out refuse to discuss the fact that they are discriminating against me by granting another individual my request and not me.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-01T10:12:13.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"65775","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8667188","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MOHELA","date_received":"2024-04-01T10:03:08.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["While on XXXX if your income increases to a point where you no longer meet partial financial hardship or if you <em>fail</em> to recertify your income before the annual <em>plan</em> anniversary, your <em>payment</em> increases to the standard <em>payment</em> <em>plan</em> amount based on the amount owed by the borrower when they first entered XXXX ( XXXX for me )."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[13.378857,"8667188"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7749267","_score":13.147327,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On multiple dates starting back as early as XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted request to Atlantic Bay Mortgage Group, seeking to know weather the followed GAAP related to my promissory note. I also ask ABMG whose property is the promissory, did my signature on the Note create the value for the purchase of the item for this property. I asked ABMG to provide answers to these kinds of question in a specific time frame or XXXX  the account balance and remove all negative credit reporting and send me a release of lien. The company responded with copies of the Note, Deed of trust, a closing disclosure document, but never responded to my request for answers to my inquiry. If I may be allowed to provide date as an amendment I will, when I am near those dates at home. The company never responded to my questions. I learned that I since my Note provided the Value for the alleged loan that ABMG claimed they provided to me, not actually, I could accept their presentment, mailed to me and return it to ABMG signed for the discharge of the alleged debt. I returned that presentment, it was received by ABMG notated on the account but not applied. ABMG continued to send me presentments/ payment coupons and we continued to send Federal Reserve Notes ( FRN/ Dollars ) to pay for something that was already paid. I continued to do research and found that to communicate with Corporations, it needed to be done via Notices. So in XX/XX/XXXX I sent ABMG a Non-Negotiable-Notice of Conditional- Acceptance ( herein after NNNCA ) The NNNCA stated before I can accept their offer, the fundamentals of contract is \" certainty of terms '' and I needed ABMG to clarify the terms of the offer I received in the mail. The NNNCA also stated that I wanted to settle this matter as soon as possible. Therefor I sent ABMG questions to answer and return the answers to me by mail within 14 days from the date of the NNNCA. I stated in my Private and Public duties I examined their offer and found errors. I did a Forensic Analysis of their Offer/presentment, ( returned it ) and asked ABMG to stop and correct those errors to avoid possible mail fraud possible fictitious use of language pertaining to the fraud act 18 U.S. Code 1001. I asked ABMG to mail me a corrected Offer in a language I can comprehend and forwarded ABMG a XXXX  ANALYSIS GUIDE. This was designed to safeguard and verify if ABMG knew it could be in Jeopardy of violating federal law from making materially false and possible fictitious or fraudulent statement or presentation whether in person, in writing or via mail. This NNNCA, also expressed terms and conditions if ABMG failed to answer these questions in the specified time.. \nSpecifically, you will be deemed to have agreed to the following : that no further payment is owed, that the outstanding debt has been discharged in full thereby reducing the account balance to zero, that you will remove negative credit reporting you have reported to the crediting agencies, that you will mail me a lien release, that you are accepting this NOTICE as full accord and satisfaction. \nOf course ABMG failed to answer the questions, but they did respond by sending documents, like the Deed of trust, closing statement and a copy of My promissory not that contained my and my wife 's signatures only. I will attach a copy of a NNNCA I used as a template to send to ABMG. Additionally I sent ABMG Notice 's of rescission for each of the documents they sent as a response for the NNNCA to rescission for cause my signatures from those documents. I also sent a Notice of acceptance of their Offer ( remittance coupon ). I learned base on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX the the remittance coupon, is a voucher and evidence of an obligation and is used to release the money to discharge a debt. That additionally that coupon can be paid or accepted. When accepted and endorsed it can be used to release the money/credits to discharge a debt. I used the AI tool to assist me with understanding terms and definitions found in the previously mention XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. I send all my notices Certified Mail, to verify they are received. Onec received by ABMG they will send a response but fail to address the main issue of the Notice, like answering relavant questions to the Practices and principles related to my NOTE. I sent the acceptance of their Offer/ remittance coupon to the place and person responsible to accept that presentment and apply it to the account fo the discharge of the thing. They will acknowledge receiving all my notices except the ACCEPTANCE Notice designed to be applied against the alleged outstanding balance for the discharge. I have also sent Non-Negotiable-NOTICE -OF FAULT-AND-OPPORTUNITY -TO CURE, giving ABMG the opportunity to Cure their fault for not using the same method that was used to create the debt to discharge it. I also sent via certified mail a Non-Negotiable Notice-of -Default-and -Dishonor-and Estoppel, but ABMG continue to persist in tactics of threat and operate in Dishonor. \nThis all came about when ABMG failed to reveal relevant information about this transaction which would have allow us to make a decision based on all the factors related to this transaction. Once I learned that a contract must have 2 parties with both parties bringing and exchanging something of value which make for a valid contract. ABMG brought no value to the transaction. ABMG used actions that relates to stealing, by using my note as value, taking it for themselves and then allowed me to think they were making me a loan of my own property. Who would knowing allow someone to take some think like money form your pocket and then turn around and make you a loan of your own thing of value and then require you to pay back what was already yours in the first place. So instead of accusing ABMG of fraud, We did a rescission on all the documents that had our signatures on them. According to the legal thesaurus and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX we could rescission those documents and reset this transaction as way were before there was an alleged contract. According to the documents, ABMG swapped my interest for theirs without proper process, ABMG, presented us with documents that require judges to be present when these types of property changes are made, none were present, neither were there any lawyers present, to ensure all notice and relevant notice were given to us, the signers of the promissory note and the true creditors. ABMG is operating as debt collector who will not validate the debt by answering and swearing under oath to those answers. ABMG appropriated my valuable property without proper notice and then swapped my interest for theirs. This whole transaction is fraught with deception and intentional, knowing and willing actions by ABMG that smells of theft, fraud. But as with now as I stated the Non- Negotiable Notice Of Acceptance, I indicated my acceptance of your offer by my signature and date on the presentment. I did not and am not arguing facts, jurisdiction, law or venue. I requested ABMG adjust and set-off all Public Charges by the exemption in accord with Public Policy. I requested discharge and gave them 5 days to respond and comply. Then stated Dishonor may result if ABMG failed to respond and comply. I had sent the Notice of Conditional acceptance when ABMG sent the coupon I planned to Conditionally accept. I sent a rescission of my signatures on all documents for cause. With mistake being reason. According to the most widely used law book available and the combined research IA tool that ranked mistake as one of the top 5 reasons people rescission contracts. The most important part of the rescission definition that the AI tool provided, is I can rescission a contract with or without consent of other parties as long as I'm not claiming wrong doing by the other party, creating no conflict. ABMG gave up its control when I captured their presentment and offered something of value when i returned it with a stamp and I set the terms and conditions moving forward. ABMG decide to continue to evade the required conditions of my notices. We have a contract that they failed to honor, by responding to the most basic questions. Did My promissory Note bring the value to the transaction? What did they provide as consideration in the alleged contract? Did ABMG follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles?\n\nAccording to Federal Reserve Bank publications and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles -- the standard bookkeeping entries banks are required to follow- the promissory note was recorded as a loan from me to the alleged lender or financial institution involved in the alleged loan recorded as a loan from me to the alleged lender or financial institution involved in the alleged loan?\n\nAccording to the alleged loan agreement, was the alleged lender or financial institution involved in the alleged loan to lend their money as adequate consideration to purchase the promissory note ( loan agreement ) from the alleged borrower?\n\nAccording to the bookkeeping entries of the financial institution involved in the alleged loan, did the alleged lender or financial institution involved in the alleged loan lend their money as adequate consideration lent to purchase the promissory note ( loan agreement ) from the alleged borrower?\n\nAccording to the bookkeeping entries of the financial institution involved in the alleged loan. Did the lender or financial institution involved in the alleged loan accept anything of value from the alleged borrower that was used to give value to a check or similar instrument in approximately the amount of the alleged loan? \n\nXXXX XXXX or its agent, decided that this requested information is either not in their best interest to answer or respond point by point. It instead responded with information that did not address the questions asked, all the while sending ABMG toward being in a status of fault. Your representative acknowledges receiving additional Notices of Rescission for Cause, Notice of Fault and Opportunity to Cure until finally ABMG was mailed via Certified Mail, Notice of Default in Dishonor and Estoppel. Your agent neglected to acknowledge in your latest response receipt of the Non Negotiable Notice of Acceptance, Certified Mail Receipt XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that again could have given ABMG the opportunity to be in a position of Honor instead of Dishonor.\n\nABMG failed to reveal to me that it would exchange value for value in this possibly fraudulent agreement. So instead, ABMG would not respond to my questions point by point. Our interest in settling a stated matter fell on deaf ears. We reaccessioned all documents for cause because of mistake.\n\nFinally, in the a letter their counsel stated that there is no evidence ABMG engaged in fraudulent or unfair practices. My position is, by not answering our questions and responding to our issues point by point, not detailing what method the used to come to its conclusion, not assigning a person and telephone number to provide a solution to a XXXX  is in violation. ABMG ahs faulted al the way around and it's time to give me my equity in the form of my deed free and clear.\n\nI want to get this matter resolved lawfully as soon as possible. I will grant you 10 ( Ten ) days from the date of this NON-NEGOTIABLE NOTICE OF ALLEGED LOAN DISPUTE for your response on a point-by-point basis. \n\nSince ABMG failed to provide a response within the stated timeline, it was presumed that ABMG have accepted the terms and conditions as stated herein.\n\n\" Specifically, you will be deemed to have agreed to the following : that no further payment is owed, that the outstanding debt has been discharged in full thereby reducing the account balance to zero, that you will remove negative credit reporting you have reported to the crediting agencies, that you will mail me a lien release, that you are accepting this NOTICE as full accord and satisfaction ''","date_sent_to_company":"2023-10-24T17:19:05.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"23434","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7749267","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ATLANTIC BAY MORTGAGE GROUP LLC","date_received":"2023-10-24T14:30:17.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Payment process"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I will grant you 10 ( Ten ) days from the date of this NON-NEGOTIABLE NOTICE OF ALLEGED <em>LOAN</em> DISPUTE for your response on a point-by-point basis. \n\nSince ABMG <em>failed</em> to <em>provide</em> a response within the stated timeline, it was presumed that ABMG have accepted the terms and conditions as stated herein."],"issue":["Trouble during <em>payment</em> process"],"sub_issue":["<em>Payment</em> process"]},"sort":[13.147327,"7749267"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3889309","_score":13.124296,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, ( cc : all public complaints websites, Congress, Senate, DOJ, media ) Please find my complaint against Caliber Home Loan , Inc, a sham conduit for XX/XX/XXXX, who poses as a \" servicer '' for someone whom Caliber is not able to identify. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I submitted an application for a loan with a local company who pretended to be a Lender, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX in fact was not a lender but impersonator hired by XXXX XXXX ( here : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX ) to purchase from me a security aka Promissory Note for a mortgage to sell it on the open market as derivatives and unsecured bets to investors. \n\nI was not informed about this secretive transaction and was confident that am buying a loan from a legit Lender. \n\nXXXX, who was not a Lender and not even originator, immediately passed my application to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( former Lender ; s XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ) and XXXX, XXXX who were the actual originators who passed me a payment for my Note from a table pool operated by Investment Banks where they collect money from sales of unsecured bets from investors. This payment was masqueraded as a \" loan '' which I suppose to return with interest as tax-free revenue to investment bank ( XXXX  ) PLUS give XX/XX/XXXX a tax-free gift in form of my escrow money. \n\nBased on most recent evidence, neither Caliber or new self-proclaimed \" servicer '' XXXX did not pay my property taxes and insurances. It is done by their \" tax vendor '' XXXX, XXXX who apparently handles escrow accounts which XXXX manipulates to create bogus deficiencies. \n\nProperty Taxes and insurances are also paid from the same table pool from sales of unsecured derivatives backed by DATA about my  loan and operated by XXXX XX/XX/XXXX while my escrow money are pocketed by XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX as tax-free revenue. \n\nAfter the origination or acquisition of the apparent loan transaction ( read : payment for my financial services ), a new player was introduced ( e.g. Caliber ), who claimed to have been hired to service the loan accounts that are apparently owned by someone whom neither Caliber or XXXX or new fake Servicer XXXX is unable to identify. Caliber initially claimed to be the \" owner '' of my debt, but changed the ownership to XXXX XXXX ( in whole ). XXXX claims to be a buyer of my loan - but is not able to identify the Seller. XXXX also claims that they collect my payments to pass it to Trustee XX/XX/XXXX who pass them to investors ( aka PennyMac ) which is a lie because my payments are collected and processed by XXXX, XX/XX/XXXXand pocketed by XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX. \n\nCaliber claimed to be a Servicer - but when I asked WHOM Caliber was servicing all this time - they were not able to identify their Client. According to XXXX XXXX XXXX guide, my loan must be pooled in some Trust created by the Lender who issued some securities guaranteed by XXXX XXXX. None of it happened. XXXX never created any Trusts and never issued any securities. XXXX merely took their fees at the closing for posing as a fake \" Lender '' - while XXXX never funded or even originated any \" home loans '' Caliber MAYBE only partially serviced the account. It might have authority to act as agent for the designated \" Trustee '', but the designated Trustee has neither authority or ownership of the obligation. So Caliber is a designated party for whoever is really doing the servicing. That party is in most cases XXXX XXXX or XXXX. In the Chess analogy XXXX XXXX is the XXXX who serves its masters ( investment banks ) and is willing to sacrifice itself and the self-proclaimed servicers to protect the King ( investment bank ). \n\nThis means that all records, payment history and document handling does not originate with Caliber ( much less with XXXX ), but rather with XXXX XXXX and XXXX, who are actually answering to an investment bank who receives both proceeds from homeowner payments, all escrow money and proceeds from illegal foreclosure sales. And the investment bank receives it as off balance sheet transactions that are actually revenue that is untaxed. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX Caliber ( read : XXXX XXXX ) assigned \" servicing '' of my loan to XXXX who claimed to be a \" buyer '' ; \" owner '' ; \" servicer '' of my loan and even \" issuer '' of securities backed by my loan. \n\nAll of it are lies. \n\nIn reality, XXXX stole information about my loan from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and posed as a Servicer to deceive me about the real parties - XXXXXX/XX/XXXXwho pocket my payments and escrow money ; and their REAL servicers - XXXX XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX whose duties are to cover up this biggest economic fraudand push homeowners in foreclosures. \n\nAccording toXX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX letter to Supreme Court in XXXX (! ), ALL loans are destroyed at origination. See attached. See also XX/XX/XXXXdocument shredding procedures how original loan documentation is destroyed after it was imaged by XXXX XXXX who later present reconstructed \" Notes '' misrepresented as \" originals '' in illegal foreclosures. \n\nInvestment Banks plan could work only by destruction of the original loan documents. If they needed an original they would create it. \nWhen the attempt to name MERS and the servicers as the real parties in collections - but specifically foreclosures - failed utterly, the banks pivoted to saying that indeed there were XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and that they owned the loans an assertion that was as untrue as the same assertions for MERS and the servicers. In order lend credence to the newest lie they hired banks like XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to pretend that they were trustees for the XXXX trust an assertion that was and remains wholly untrue. XXXX never confirmed to me that they actually handle my loan entrusted to them by (??? ) an unknown Trustor That gave the action an institutional flavor and judges started allowing the collections and foreclosures to proceed without any knowledge as to whether the trust existed, whether the debt existed and whether anyone had the right to enforce the debt, note or mortgage. \n\nSince I am a current on my \" obligation '' ( a non-existing debt to non-existing Lender on payments that were apparently due on what turned out to be a nonexistent obligation ), the response is always zilch. No answer. \n\nSo I arrived at the conclusion that the documents did not exist and had been shredded contemporaneously with the loan closing, which makes perfect sense if people are willing to trade on images instead of the real thing. Banks can always print more images and sell them. \n\nNeither Caliber or XXXX, who fail to answer a basic question - who sold them my loan and who currently has my loan as an asset, do not perform ANY servicing functions for he following reasons. \n\nFirst, here is nobody for Caliber or XXXX to service. \n\nSecond, nobody needs Caliber or XXXX 's services. All payments are collected and processed by XX/XX/XXXX who have lockbox agreements with XXXX XXXX and XXXX. All money, including escrow, are pocketed by Investment Bank.  XX/XX/XXXX who has no Trustees duties since here are no Trust where my so-called \" loan '' was pooled, never distributed any payments to any investors. Interest on investors unsecured Certificates are paid by Investment bank from their operating pool which is consisted from Investors ' own money ( aka Ponzi Scheme ). \n\nTaxes and insurances are paid by XXXX from the same pool, not from my escrow account which was never established. \n\nThird, without XXXX XXXX 's XXXX and XXXX neither Caliber or XXXX can not do ANY servicing. After XXXX was removed from the XXXX, XXXX, who always handled tax payments, had to reveal themselves as the real party who is servicing about {$39.00} billion of so-called loans. \n\nI am entitled for FULL disclosures and compensation for damages ; and I demand Caliber to identify the Company ( not XXXX XXXX at large ) whom Caliber was servicing from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX ; and provide me the name of the Seller of my loan to XX/XX/XXXX, along with a lien release provided to Caliber by XXXX after they purportedly PURCHASED my loan. \n\nI demand XX/XX/XXXX to disclose which Trust holds my loan and where and when I can stop by at XX/XX/XXXX custodian 's office to review ORIGINAL documents - such as my Promissory Note and Mortgage - along with releases of all liens from each purported sale of my loan.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-10-08T11:21:48.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"490XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3889309","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Caliber Home Loans, Inc.","date_received":"2020-10-08T10:14:41.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was paid"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This means that all records, <em>payment</em> history and document handling does not originate with Caliber ( much less with XXXX ), but rather with XXXX XXXX and XXXX, who are <em>actually</em> answering to an investment bank who receives both proceeds from homeowner <em>payments</em>, all escrow money and proceeds from illegal foreclosure sales. And the investment bank receives it as off balance sheet transactions that are <em>actually</em> revenue that is untaxed."],"company":["Caliber Home <em>Loans</em>, Inc."]},"sort":[13.124296,"3889309"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2676023","_score":12.676516,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I found loan officer XXXX XXXX through the XXXX XXXX XXXX website where there were only five or so participating banks listed. He represented Flagstar bank. I contacted him on XX/XX/XXXX, and inquired specifically about the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) program ( Email attached ). I was interested in this particular loan product because it was designed especially for those looking to purchase distressed homes in the city of XXXX, and it would allow me to finance both the purchase, and repair costs associated with buying such a property, at one time. In addition, there is no PMI nor MIP insurance on this mortgage, and a minimal, if any, down-payment requirement. The buyer is only responsible for 1 % of the total loan value out-of-pocket. I later learned that I could use down-payment assistance to cover the rest of the down payment amount. OnXX/XX/XXXX XXXX sent me a pre-approval letter for the XXXX program, and I began to shop for homes ( see email and pre-approval letter ). \n\nAfter a months long search, I was finally able to sign a purchase agreement on a home, which I sent to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. At that time ( and another time weeks later ) he requested pay stubs, and my most recent bank and XXXX statements ( see both emails ). Later that day I spoke to him, and he advised me that Id need a project manager to assist with bids for the repair of the home, and suggested one that he was familiar with from a local organization. I paid the man {$450.00} to create a scope of work to present to the bank regarding necessary repairs, and XXXX denied both requests ( the first via email, the second in a phone conversation ), stating that they included items that were not covered within the scope of my loan program ( see email ). I never got my money back, and when I spoke to XXXX about it, he just told me the man no longer worked at the organization. No apology, no explanation, nothing. \nOnXX/XX/XXXX, I notified XXXX that I was approved for a {$15000.00} down payment assistance program, called LIFT. At the time, he confirmed that I could use these funds to cover all but the 1 % of out-of-pocket costs for the home purchase. The deal on this property fell through after several months, but then in XX/XX/XXXX, I found another home for a greater purchase price, and requested a new preapproval letter. When I spoke to XXXX, he agreed to provide it, but questioned what type of loan I was requesting. I told him that I was under the impression that we were still working with the XXXX program, but he suggested something to the effect that a conventional loan would be easier to close, so I agreed. Upon visiting the home, I found that it did not have a working furnace, at which point, XXXX advised that I would have to use a FHA XXXX or conventional renovation loan ( seeXX/XX/XXXX email ), never mentioning the XXXX program that I originally requested, and was subsequently approved for ( see doc ). He then sent a preapproval letter for a Conventional Loan w/ repairs ( see preappXX/XX/XXXX ). My offer on that home was not accepted, but shortly after, I found another one, and had to request another approval letter, as this property cost more than the previous one. I asked XXXX onXX/XX/XXXX for the maximum allowable approval amount ( both purchase price & rehab ) that I would qualify for ( see email XX/XX/XXXX). He replied by phone, stating that he wouldnt be able to calculate the exact preapproval amount until he received the bid requests for the needed repairs for the home. He then sent me yet another approval letter ( see preapp XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ), this one listing the type of loan as XXXX XXXX XXXX, which I imagine was supposed to be XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), as the XXXX first originated as a partnership between local banks and the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Upon arriving at a final purchase price w/ seller, and estimating repair costs, XXXX provided me with a second XXXX XXXX XXXX preapproval letter onXX/XX/XXXX ( see XXXX ). Then on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX requested verification of my monthly student loan payment, which I provided ( see student loan doc ). Upon receiving my loan statement, he informed me that he would have to record my student loan at 1 % of its total value, instead of the payment I was actually required to make each month under my payment plan, which was over {$230.00} less, unless I could provide further documentation of the amortization table of the loan. I provided this documentation onXX/XX/XXXX ( see email XXXXXX/XX/XXXX ),  and was advised by XXXX that with this, he would accept the actual loan payment, both via email ( see email XXXXXX/XX/XXXX) and by phone, rather than the 1 % value he originally mentioned. However, when I reviewed my loan documents, I saw the 1 % value listed on my loan application, as opposed to the lesser amount. Though I now know that the FHA requires student loan balances be calculated this way, I dont appreciate him lying to me in saying he was using the lower amount when he was not. In addition to the loan discrepancy, I noticed that there were two credit card balances reflected there that had already been paid off, along with a credit card that did not belong to me. During this same period, he called to request my tax records for the previous two years, then said he would have to deduct the {$1500.00} average loss Id reported from a side business over that period from my income. When I asked why that was necessary, given that I hadnt used that business to qualify for the loan ( since I work full-time for an employer ), he told me it didnt matter, and that hed still have to count it against me. Then sometime between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, almost an entire year after first providing preapproval for the program, and three weeks prior to the closing deadline, XXXX called me and advised that I no longer qualified for the XXXX, given my excessive debt to income ratio. When I asked what had changed, he stated that my student loan payment, along with the {$1500.00} average loss on my taxes over 3 years, had driven the ratio too high to qualify for the XXXX program. I then asked XXXX why he would wait until so close to closing to request tax info, if that was in fact, a part of the criteria needed to qualify me for the loan? Upon later reviewing the XXXX  handbook, tax losses only factor into a loan decision for self-employed individuals, using their business income to qualify for a loan, which is not my case. At the time, XXXX claimed that the reason he never asked for tax info was because I told him I had no other income, which I didnt have because the business was operating at a loss, and I wasnt using that income to qualify for the loan anyway. Still, XXXX told me that in order to proceed with the loan, my only option was an FHA XXXX. He never explained in any detail how the program worked, nor the excessive paperwork and processes that were necessary to close on this type of loan. I only agreed to proceed because I believed I had no other option. After a week or two of working with contractors and paying them for repair estimates, I submitted the bids to XXXX, at which time he sent them all back, claiming that they werent completed correctly. He became frustrated with me because he wanted me to use a single contractor for the work, but I told him that I couldnt afford to. When I explained to him that hed given me no direction on how to ask the contractors to complete the forms, he claimed that he did, then told me that this was the reason why most people used an FHA XXXX Consultant for these loans. This was the first time hed ever mentioned this. When I asked him about it further, he said that I may want to consider using one, but never mentioned that they were required for full FHA XXXX loans, and that they were suggested for the streamlined version. The only reason I ended up hiring a consultant was because I saw that XXXX was refusing to offer any insight into how the process worked, and I was under a tight deadline to close, as the extra week it took to have the paperwork redone to specification forced me to request an extension on the closing deadline. I hired a consultant I found on the FHA XXXX website, and paid him {$250.00} to prepare the necessary documents to submit to the bank. It wasnt until two or so weeks later, after he submitted two sets of improperly completed documents, that XXXX advised my realtor of a consultant the bank worked with on a regular basis who could do the work for much cheaper. I had to extend the closing deadline again in order to allow the new consultant time to prepare a new write-up. Up until this point, I was never provided with a Good Faith Estimate, and every time I asked for an approximate amount from which to budget contractor repairs and improvements, he said he couldnt give me a figure. Out of curiosity, I contacted another Flagstar loan officer, and told him nothing about my pending loan. Instead I just asked him to tell me about the FHA XXXX loan program, and learned more from him in our 5 minute conversation then XXXX had told me since he first switched me to this loan. That confirmed my suspicion that he was not following proper procedure in guiding me through the loan process. Everyone that I spoke to at Flagstar, from the loan processor, to her supervisor, to XXXX supervisor, to loan officers at other branches, all agreed that XXXX was an expert in these types of loans, and very efficient at his job. Yet he consistently provided me with little to no information, even upon being asked, or even worse, inaccurate information about my loan and the loan process. Throughout this experience, he asked me for sets of documents from my contractors, then once I provided them, asked for more, or asked for information never initially requested, instead of outlining upfront what was needed. He requested an insurance declaration page for one of the contractors, then upon receiving it, stated that wasnt the document he was looking for, he instead needed something listing the coverages ( see email XXXXXX/XX/XXXX ). If not for the fact that he claims to have 30+ years of experience in this area, I would think he was just incompetent at his job, but he seems to be held in high esteem at Flagstar , and his coworkers rave about how good he is, so my only conclusion is that he purposely bumbled all of the work associated with my loan. From using outdated/inaccurate info on my application, to higher than quoted homeowners insurance rates, he just did a terrible job. When I asked him about these inaccuracies, he emailed a response that failed to address the question ( see email incorrect debt listed ) and simply told me when I called him to follow-up on it that it doesnt matter anyway because I still wouldnt qualify for the XXXX It took the supervisor of loan processing, XXXX XXXX, to go in and update/change the application to reflect a current snapshot of my credit info, but the inaccurate homeowners insurance premium listed on my loan estimate was never corrected. Also, the preapproval amount constantly changed. I was told {$150000.00} for repairs and purchase upon signing the XXXX for the last property, but then on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX claimed that he had to use my down payment assistance funds towards home repairs, because of the increased debt-to-income ratio caused by tax losses and a judgment repayment plan of $ XXXX. ( see email XXXX ). Unfortunately, when I contacted the issuers of the LIFT that same day, I learned that the {$15000.00} in down-payment assistance that I was receiving from them had been forfeited, due to lack of communication from the lender. When I called to find out what happened, I was told that XXXX was to keep in touch with them, and advise them when I switched purchase properties, however, they never heard from him. When I questioned him about, he acted as if it was no big deal, just a formality to have the money reissued ( see email XXXX ), but then when he saw that he would most likely not be able to get the funds reinstated, he simply passed the buck to me, stating that I would need to follow up with them ( see email IncreasedClosingCosts ). I had to reapply to the program, and beg them to expedite the approval process in order for me to receive docs in time for a third deadline extension. Unfortunately, it didnt matter that they rushed the approval, because my realtor was advised by XXXX shortly thereafter that Flagstar would still need another few weeks to close, even though at that point, we were over 2 month into the process, and theyd received all requested documents from my contractors, consultant and myself. \n\nIn the midst of all this, I received an email from XXXX stating that instead of the {$12000.00} that I was projected to need at closing, I would now need {$28000.00}! When I asked how that was so, and broke down the numbers, XXXX called me on the phone instead of responding on the email thread that we were previously conversing on ( with my realtor, the supervisor of processing, him and myself ) ( see email IncreasedClosingCostQuestionXX/XX/XXXXXX/XX/XXXX). He went in with a bunch of nonsensical logic about Flagstar having to increase the down payment by so much because of the increase in repair costs, although he couldnt provide any specific formulas to indicate what percentage of the total value he was charging, or where the extra costs and fees came from. While waiting to hear back from the LIFT program, I found another down payment assistance program that offered more money to close, and asked XXXX if it was compatible with the FHA XXXX. \nWhen I asked him why I wasnt allowed to use this new program to cover the new {$28000.00} closing cost, he asked me to resend him the information. This is after he clearly told me a week prior that the program did not qualify. When I asked him what had changed between then and now, and if hed ever bothered to look into it last week, or just said no without researching it first, he became upset and began to yell. I then told him how frustrated I was with his poor service, changing fees and repeated extended deadlines, and that I planned to file a complaint about my experience. He responded by accusing me of attempting to defraud him by failing to tell him about the loss Id reported from the side business, on taxes that he never asked for until hed already qualified me for a loan, and I was weeks away from closing on my house. \n\nI was so outdone after realizing that he actually expected me to come up with an extra $ 16k, for no justifiable reason, that I called both his supervisor, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX supervisor, XXXX XXXX ( sp ). XXXX called me back ( XXXX ( sp ) ) never did, and had the same nonchalant attitude that he did when I spoke to him a few weeks prior and told him about the issues I was having with XXXX, and requested a new loan officer. He assured me then that I was almost to close, that things should be smooth from that point forward, and that he would look into it and call me back. He never bothered to call me back until then, and even then, he had no concrete answers for me. He was unfamiliar with both of the down payment assistance programs that I mentioned to him, and seemed unbothered by the fact that his loan officer had potentially jeopardized my whole deal by blowing my down payment assistance. He didnt seem alarmed by the extra, out-of-nowhere closing costs, and proposed no solution to the matter, other than the fact that hed talk to XXXX again, and call me back, again, and again, I never heard from him. \n\nThis was an absolutely horrific experience, from start to finish. I eventually ended up switching to another lender, but by then it was too late, because the seller was tired of waiting to close, and therefore cancelled the deal on the house. This loan officer practiced various forms of predatory lending practices against me, as follows : Excessive Points and Fees through all of these unexplained and unnecessary out of pocket costs with no Good Faith Estimate provided within first days of applying for the loan, Steering and Targeting, by trying to force me into loan products with less favorable terms and higher fees, designed for those with bad credit and/or low income, even though I am in neither of those groups, Inadequate or False Disclosures by changing loan programs and terms throughout the course of my time working with him, without any real explanation as to why. \n\nI have not been treated fairly in my dealings with XXXX XXXX, nor this bank, and I do n't know why. Not sure if it 's due to the picture on my license, my XXXX address, my gender, or something else altogether. But if this is how XXXX and Flagstar treats XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, then they need not advertise in the city, nor be conducting business period, for that matter. Ive done everything I could to appeal these issues within the bank itself, to no avail. No one has even bothered to seriously look into my claims, and even those who have done preliminary inquiries into the matter quickly backed off once they either realized the offending party, and/or were persuaded by XXXX that this all somehow made sense. Any help that you can provide would be immensely appreciated, as I have now wasted an immense amount of time and money on contractor and consultant inspection fees, and almost a year of my life, due to the unethical and unscrupulous behavior of XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-09-16T20:04:47.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"48219","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2676023","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Flagstar Bank, N.A.","date_received":"2017-09-16T18:56:10.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Then on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX requested verification of my monthly student <em>loan</em> <em>payment</em>, which I provided ( see student <em>loan</em> doc ). Upon receiving my <em>loan</em> statement, he informed me that he would have to record my student <em>loan</em> at 1 % of its total value, <em>instead</em> of the <em>payment</em> I was <em>actually</em> required to make each month under my <em>payment</em> <em>plan</em>, which was over {$230.00} less, unless I could <em>provide</em> further documentation of the amortization table of the <em>loan</em>."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[12.676516,"2676023"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14156275","_score":12.670559,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"We applied for a home loan through XXXX XXXX XXXX in early XX/XX/year>. My partner, XXXX, was initially listed as the borrower, and we were told nothing for weeks while our loan XXXX, XXXX, vacationed in XXXX. During that time, we received no communication, despite multiple follow-ups, and were led to believe our loan was processing. Weeks later, the processor, XXXX, informed us XXXX had not qualified and that we should have known that weeks ago. This information delay caused the loss of our original XX/XX/XXXX closing date, forced me to be added to the loan last-minute, and completely disrupted our relocation plans. We were then given an XX/XX/XXXX closing date. In reliance on that, we relocated our entire family including XXXX children ( XXXX of whom is autistic ), XXXX dogs, and my business from North Carolina to Kentucky. Despite the revised timeline, closing was delayed yet again until XX/XX/XXXX. During that time, our family lived out of XXXX, spending {$2300.00} out of pocket not including the hotel our realtor paid for when we had nowhere else to go. We hemorrhaged money trying to maintain stability for our children, and my husband nearly lost his job due to the time he had to take off. Throughout this ordeal, communication was unprofessional, delayed, and unclear. XXXX routinely failed to respond to emails or texts. Promises were broken repeatedly from clear to close dates to final cost estimates changing within minutes of signing. We were misquoted several times, with documents and numbers shifting right up to the closing table. At XXXX point, the file was allegedly sent to the title company, but they confirmed they had not received it. The seller was turned away at the title company because there was no file sent. The seller was threatening to walk away and we almost lot our home. Even the sellers agents had to step in to chase basic information. XXXX, the processor, admitted that he didnt understand why XXXX XXXX been so neglectful and acknowledged that this situation was unprecedented. He even sent an apology email acknowledging that everyone dropped the ball after seeing the negative review I left the only acknowledgment we received after XXXX months of chaos. We repeatedly asked to speak to a supervisor and were either ignored or dismissed for weeks. XXXX man we were finally told to contact by text responded that this is the price you pay with bad credit an untrue and inappropriate remark that ignored the actual issues. Worse, our safety was at risk. I told both XXXX and XXXX that I suspected our landlord was stalking us and had access to cameras in our home. There have been police reports filed. I explicitly asked that they not share our new address. Despite this, we were met with indifference. We explained multiple times that we were in danger and needed to leave and no urgency was shown. Instead, our loan XXXX was publicly posting on social media, tanning on the beach asking did you close yet? while we fought to keep our family safe and housed, and we actually were not even approved. XXXX XXXX advertises themselves as VA loan specialists and people first, but they acted with gross negligence, indifference, and disorganization. They caused irreparable emotional and financial harm. What should have been a joyful milestone buying my first home turned into a traumatic and expensive ordeal that could have been avoided if they had acted with even basic integrity. I have extensive documentation of expenses, communications, and timelines, and I am willing to provide it if requested. But I urge the CFPB to investigate this companys practices and lack of accountability particularly their treatment of vulnerable families, military-connected borrowers, and XXXX dependents. \n\nAdditional Note : Weeks after closing and weeks before our first mortgage payment is due XXXX, the same loan XXXX responsible for this entire ordeal, sent a text message to my husband asking if we had made our first mortgage payment. This is wildly inappropriate for several reasons : ( XXXX ) he is not our servicer and has no reason to contact us post-closing, ( XXXX ) our first payment isnt due until XX/XX/XXXX, and ( XXXX ) the timing felt manipulative, as if trying to preempt or retaliate against the complaint we had already filed. Given everything that had already occurred, this unwanted communication crossed a line and is being included in this complaint to document the continued lack of professionalism and boundaries. I am explicitly requesting that no further contact be made through XXXX under any circumstances.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-30T15:16:14.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"411XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14156275","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MortgageOne, Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-18T15:13:24.000Z","state":"KY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Delays with the closing process"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Instead</em>, our <em>loan</em> XXXX was publicly posting on social media, tanning on the beach asking did you close yet? while we fought to keep our family safe and housed, and we <em>actually</em> were not even approved. XXXX XXXX advertises themselves as VA <em>loan</em> specialists and people first, but they acted with gross negligence, indifference, and disorganization. They caused irreparable emotional and financial harm."]},"sort":[12.670559,"14156275"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3753976","_score":12.497543,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"NOTE : This is a copy of the complain sent directly to Carrington Mortgage Services. \n\nTo whom it may concern, I have previously written in regarding your reporting practices while I am participating in this loan modification program. Your response dated XX/XX/XXXX is not only inaccurate, its ignoring some incredibly important information. I highly question the capabilities of the person whom you entrusted to do this research because even the most basic of investigations would verify when I called in and when I paid, yet now you are requiring me to prove everything you already have. \n\nFirst point in contention : Your justification for reporting me to the credit bureau by referencing the initial agreement. The initial agreement states, Your credit score may be adversely affected by accepting the Trial Period Plan. It says your score MAY be affected. The word may alludes to the possibility that it may be affected but it also equally means that it may NOT be affected. It was never clearly stated that regardless of my on-time payments and abiding by your rules, you would still be reporting me. Your words, instead, lead one to believe there is a way to NOT have your account reported and there is a possibility it wont. That is a flat out lie and your terms should reflect that instead of giving false hope that credit wont be affected. \nHad I known that you were still going to report me late to the credit bureaus I would have never accepted this agreement. Why would I? I have been trying to repair my credit and was already nervous about my upcoming bills which is what prompted me to ask for assistance in the first place. I even stated as much on the phone to your rep who talked to me about what options I had back in XXXX. Your attempt to deflect culpability is not going to pass. \n\nSecond point of contention : You stated in your response that no payments were recorded for XXXX or XXXX. I beg to differ. XX/XX/XXXX I spoke to a representative there at XXXX when I realized my mortgage was still showing as not paid. I discovered then, that my payment had gone up. I had already paid {$450.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX because my previous payment was {$440.00} and change ) so I was deficient by {$55.00} and change. I was told to make up the difference by XXXX XXXX to avoid late fees and reporting to the credit bureaus. I didnt have the money to do it at that moment but once my SSDI check hit my account at the end of the month ( XX/XX/XXXX ) I made a payment for {$560.00} which was posted to my bank account on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. That covered the amount I was deficient in XXXX, plus my XXXX payment. At the end of XXXX, I received the paperwork that I was accepted into the TPP and my payments would start XX/XX/XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX, I called into the call center to ask what my payment should be for XXXX since I had just sent back the documents for the program. I was instructed by your representative, that no payment was due. My program started XX/XX/XXXX, and that no payment could be taken because it could nullify my participation in the program if I made any additional payments ( that is also covered in your terms ). I attempted to pay in XXXX and was refused. LITERALLY REFUSED TO TAKE MY PAYMENT. \nXX/XX/XXXX, I called in and spoke to XXXX, and paid my first reduced payment, confirmation # XXXX. XXXX confirmed what I was told in XXXX about why I was not allowed to make my payment because my plan didnt start until XXXX. He said I needed to make my payments by phone while program. Thats TWO DIFFERENT CARRINGTON REPS TELLING ME TO NOT PAY XXXX PAYMENT. \n\n\nPlease note, in my previous communication, I stated that I made my XXXX payment at the new payment amount plus extra to cover the difference on XX/XX/XXXX for {$560.00}. That was a typo and the date was actually XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nAs I stated previously, this is a clear violation of terms that your company set out and its surely violating my rights as a consumer. I find it offensive that I am further required to provide documentation to prove my payments were made when you already have that information in your system and it was acknowledged by the Supervisor I spoke with today ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nAs of the date of this letter, I have already received the XXXX package with my final signatures and sent that back last week. Ive attached the proof you requested, from my bank showing my payments WERE made. I am also requesting ( again ) you amend my credit report immediately and REMOVE the late payments as I am not late. I have complied with your instructions. I have not retained an attorney yet, but I am taking steps to do so and will continue to proceed if you fail to comply with my request. Your company should be ashamed of taking advantage of your customers like this, especially in a time of need. \n\nI would like a full written response to my complaint so I know when this has been handled. Thank you. I am also sending this complaint the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. \n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX, Fl XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2020-07-20T16:21:04.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"32526","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3753976","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC","date_received":"2020-07-20T16:15:59.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/XXXX, I called in and spoke to XXXX, and paid my first reduced <em>payment</em>, confirmation # XXXX. XXXX confirmed what I was told in XXXX about why I was not allowed to make my <em>payment</em> because my <em>plan</em> didnt start until XXXX. He said I needed to make my <em>payments</em> by phone while program. Thats TWO DIFFERENT CARRINGTON REPS TELLING ME TO NOT PAY XXXX <em>PAYMENT</em>."]},"sort":[12.497543,"3753976"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5499982","_score":12.168126,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I have three separate issues that I would like help with. I have done my best to summarize the issues below. \n\nFollowing the summary of the three issues, I have also included a full timeline of my loan including the context around the issues mentioned. \n\nIssues 1. - AES put my loan into some type of forbearance program and provided incorrect information about how this would affect my loan and payoff date. \n\no In spring of XXXX, I called to ask some questions about the COVID payment and interest rate pause because I had had some financial setbacks due to a job loss and medical issues. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that XXXX, but was still struggling to catch up financially. \n\no I was told that the COVID payment pause would not be a good fit because my loans would still accrue interest. The AES rep recommended a program that would be better because it will lower the payments. I asked a lot of questions and was told that this would not change the due date, would not increase the amount due, and would not change the interest rate. \n\no The following year, I noticed that the total amount of the loan was not decreasing. I located my payment records on the website and found that almost 100 % of the payments were going to interest only. \n\no When I called AES, I was told that I was actually on a forbearance program. I dont think the rep in XXXX explained that. Even if I somehow misunderstood that part, she still did not answer some of the questions correctly. \n\no The rep I spoke with in XXXX said there are documents on the website, but they were hard to find and apparently they do not stay on the site permanently. He emailed the information. The information shows that my payoff date has now been pushed out to XX/XX/XXXX. My loan amount has not gone down and I do not know if there will be other adverse ramification to my loan after being put on this program. \n\n\n2. - The information AES reports to the NSLDS and XXXX  about my student loan is incorrect. It shows I have two unsubsidized loans, but my larger loan is a subsidized loan. It also shows an interest rate of 4.88 % however my rate is 3.875 % and has been for close to 12 years. \n\no I want to consolidate to direct federal loans and apply for PLSF temporary waiver that expires in XX/XX/XXXX since I have worked for an eligible non-profit since XX/XX/XXXX. \n\no The incorrect information reported to the XXXX prevents me from consolidating my loans to direct federal loans and switching to a new servicer. The XXXX  representatives I spoke with said that I needed to get AES to correct the information they are reporting before applying to consolidate my loans with another servicer. Although the new servicer may receive the correct information from the old servicer ( AES ), its possible they may not. If they consolidate using the wrong information, they said it will be almost impossible to get it corrected after the loan consolidation is finished. \n\no The higher interest rate and compounded interest added to my principle would make my payments considerably higher, would significantly increase the amount I have left to pay, and would push my payment timeline well into the future. The consolidation process rounds the percentage rate up from the reported interest rate. \n\no I also can not use the XXXX payment plan calculator tool to choose a payment plan ( as required for the consolidation application ) because the higher numbers skew the proposed payment amounts significantly higher. \n\no I have been contacting AES since XX/XX/XXXX and was told on more than one occasion that this has been taken care of, that they have submitted the correct information to the NSLDS, and that I would see updated, correct information on the XXXX website in five to 10 business days. \n\no They never corrected the information as promised. XXXX  representatives recommended that I file a case with the Ombudsman about the incorrect information as well as the forbearance issue. \n\no In XX/XX/XXXX I filed a case with the XXXX Ombudsman and uploaded supporting documentation. \n\no The XXXX Ombudsman did not respond within the 10 business day timeframe. I finally received an email that just said that I would need to work with AES and that they have closed my case. The email was brief and only mentioned the interest rate issue and nothing about the forbearance or anything else. \n\no I called the XXXX ombudsman and found out that the case had been sent to the AES ombudsman ( not AES ). They said that the AES ombudsman was required to respond via email within 10 business days. They said that if I did not receive a satisfactory response, I should call them back to appeal and reopen my case. \n\no I did not receive any emails or communication from the AES ombudsman within the 10 business day timeframe. \n\no On day 11, I received a vague voicemail from an unknown number that said This is AES and we are just calling to let you know that you can contact us anytime if you have a question about your loan. I was confused because the voicemail did not mention my case or if the caller was with the ombudsmans office. \n\no Within 10 minutes, I called the number given on the voicemail only to discover it was the general AES customer service number. When got through the phone tree and the hold time, the customer service person was confused. He said that he could see that there was an outgoing call to my number, but there were no notes whatsoever in the system. He had no way to help or understand why someone had called me. He tried to track down the caller, but could not. I asked him if the call could have been from the ombudsmans office since a case had been sent to them. He put me on hold again and was then immediately able to track down the person who had called me. \n\no He connected me to the person from the voicemail, but she seemed reluctant to provide any information or help. I had to ask twice if she was with the ombudsmans office and she finally admitted that she was. I learned that nothing had been done on my case. I explained my concerns about the incorrect interest rate reporting and the forbearance. She immediately said oh the interest rate was probably just a temporary incentive program. I explained that I had never heard the words temporary incentive program and that my loan had been at the 3.87 % fixed rate for well over the past decade. \n\no She said there wasnt much she could do, but maybe send an email to check on it. I explained again that I wanted to look into the possibility of applying for the PLSF waiver, but that I couldnt consolidate and that I was running out of time. \n\no She said that I did not need to worry about running out of time because I would be eligible to apply for the PLSF waiver as long as the consolidation process had been started. I explained that information was incorrect. You need to complete the loan consolidation process ( which can take months ) and then apply for the PLSF waiver before XX/XX/XXXX when it expires. She told me twice that was incorrect and that I did not need to worry about running out of time. I have since confirmed with the XXXX that her information was wrong. \n\no I asked why they had not responded via email within 10 business days as required by the XXXX. She said that they had experienced technical difficulties and that her email was not working. I asked if they have a number and she did give me her phone number and extension ( it was a completely different number than the main customer service number she had left on my voicemail ). I asked if she could have them correct the loan reporting as they had promised and asked if she could email me back with an update. She said it would take time but that she would call the following week. \n\no Within the next hour or so, I received an email that said : Good afternoon, I received a response regarding the interest rates on the National Student Loan Data System ( NSLDS ) website. NSLDS reflects the statutory interest rate and does not update due to rate reduction programs. In addition, the 4.88 % that is currently showing on NSLDS, is rounded to the hundredth place since the initial interest rate was 4.875 %. Because your current interest rate of 3.875 % is a result of an incentive program, when we receive the consolidation application the incentive would be lost and, the loan would be consolidated at the original rate of 4.875 %. \n\nPlease let me know if you have any further questions. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX AES Ombudsman Group o I do not know if this information is correct, but I do know that it is the opposite of what I had been told by AES on more than one occasion. Since the other information she gave me about PLSF was incorrect, I do not feel confident in the validity of the answer. \n\no Furthermore, even if they refuse to allow me to keep the 3.875 % fixed interest rate, I still do not understand how they can report to the NSLDS and the XXXX that I am paying 4.88 % when I have actually been paying 3.875 % for the past 12 years. \n\no I called the XXXX ombudsman that same day and they filed an appeal and reopened my case. The person I spoke with said that they would expedite the response since so much time had elapsed. Since this was a Friday afternoon, she said that I would receive a phone call from the XXXX ombudsman the following Monday ( XX/XX/XXXX ) or Tuesday at the latest. \n\no It is now late XXXX and I have yet to receive a call, email, or any other communication from the XXXX ombudsmans office. When I tried to check on the XXXX website, I could not find an open case. \n\n\n3. - I would also like some clarification about my loan interest rate and payoff date. I am worried that there may have been discrepancies I missed in the past that could have affected my payoff date or amounts paid. \n\no As Ive been researching more about my loans and payments, I found that my original Stafford loans consolidated back in XX/XX/XXXX all show an interest rate of 2.32 %. I do not understand how the original consolidation loan recommended by my schools financial aid office had a blended interest rate of 4.88 %. \n\no Another confusing thing is that my loan schedule says that I am on extended select 2 which shows a term of XXXX payments ending on XX/XX/XXXX. I counted the number of payments I have made since the consolidation in XX/XX/XXXX ( not counting the two deferment periods, of course ) and I see XXXX payments. If you dont count the forbearance that they put me on in XXXX, it is still XXXX payments since XX/XX/XXXX. ( There were also payments made in XXXX XXXX, but Im assuming none of those factor into the equation or starting date. ) However, the most recent payoff date I can find now says XX/XX/XXXX and that I still owe {$20000.00} of the original {$32000.00} loan amount. The payments Ive made ( since XX/XX/XXXX ) total {$29000.00}, but {$15000.00} of that has gone to interest ( more than half ). \n\no If I was on the extended select 2 repayment plan, then why have I made in excess of XXXX payments and why is my payoff date still so far away? If the forbearance plan payments they recommended in XXXX dont count, I should still be getting close. \n\no I looked at the qualifications for the extended select 2 schedule and I dont see how I could have been put on that later since one of the requirements is that the person must have in excess of {$30000.00} outstanding on the loan. I have had less than that amount due since XXXX, so I would not have qualified after that point. \n\no I am certainly not an expert in student loans, but the more I try to understand what I owe and when I will complete the loan payments, the more conflicting information I find. \n\no If nothing else, I do not understand why my loan information is not being reported accurately to the XXXX \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX made loan payments when I could not attend school due to work and other commitments. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Graduated from continuing education program at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XX/XX/XXXX Was advised by school financial aid office to consolidate loans XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX so there would only be one payment with a blended interest rate that would lower the payment on some. The information I have shows that the consolidation loan had XXXX payments at 4.88 % with a payoff date of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX loan payments. My understanding was that I was under the standard repayment plan. I was told on more than one occasion that I did not qualify for any other plan even though I had a single income and other debts ( school, medical, relocation, etc. ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX deferment XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX loan payments under the standard repayment plan. \n\nXXXX XXXX - Was struggling with payments due to financial and other hardships. Called on more than one occasion to inquire about payment plans, consolidating to direct loans per XXXX XXXX program, and other options. The interest rate was reduced to 3.875 %. I thought the loans had been consolidated to a federal direct loan. ( Upon a later inquiry in XX/XX/XXXX, I learned that the loans were actually never consolidated and were still under the old XXXX program. ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX deferment XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX payments under the standard repayment plan XX/XX/XXXX Struggling with payments due to job loss and other financial and medical setbacks. Called AES to ask some questions about the COVID program that temporarily suspended loan payments and interest. Was told that if I took part in that program, my loans would still accrue interest. \n\nThey said I qualified for a program that was better because it would lower my payments and the interest would not accrue. I was skeptical and asked if lowering the payments would push the payoff date later. ( I explained that I was 50 and concerned about my ability to save for retirement if the loans are pushed out farther. ) I was definitively told no - that the payoff date would not get pushed later. I asked if the loan principle would still get paid off and I was told that it would. I asked if the interest would be higher and was told no that it would be the same rate I have now. I asked other questions like whether it would be a variable rate, if there would be some kind of balloon payment at the end, are there other issues I should be concerned about. I was told it would be the same rate I have now, fixed, no balloon payment, etc. ( I think this part was true. ) I said I didnt understand how I could just qualify for lower payments without any kind of catch and I was told I qualified for the program due to the amount of time I had been paying on the loan. I had been struggling to pay on the loan for around XXXX XXXX at that point, so I believed her. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX now loan payments under this new program XX/XX/XXXX I noticed that my loan amount did not seem to be decreasing. I looked online and downloaded the record of my payments and saw that all of those payments had gone almost entirely to interest. The principle was almost exactly the same as it had been in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nPer someones advice, I contacted the XXXX and created an account on studentaid.gov. They said they could not help because my loans had never been consolidated to a federal direct loan and that I would need to work it out with AES. The customer service rep recommended that I consolidate the loans afterward and explained I would need to fill out an application with the XXXX  for that to happen. \nI called AES to ask why the loan amount was not decreasing and was informed that I was on a forbearance program. This customer service person ( XXXX XXXX was actually very kind and helpful. He explained that there were documents on the AES platform ( I was not aware of that ) but that they only remain on the platform for a certain amount of time. He sent me some information about the forbearance via email. He also recommended that I consolidate the loan to a federal direct loan. He asked about my employer and said that I may qualify for PLSF since I had been working for an eligible non-profit organization since XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWhen I called AES in XXXX, I definitely did not understand the nature of the program the rep recommended and the ramifications were not explained accurately. It is possible she said the word forbearance and I didnt hear or understand her ( I dont think so, though ). Regardless, I asked many, very specific questions about whether this new payment program would adversely affect my loan, payoff date, or amount due in any way and she literally and cheerfully said nope! each time. \n\nIn XXXX, it would have made more sense for the rep to advise me to consolidate my loans to direct federal loans, take part in the COVID payment pause, and apply for the PLSF program since I was now working for a non-profit. Instead, I made payments that went almost 100 % to interest and pushed the payoff date of the loan. As near as I can tell from the paperwork XXXX sent me, the payoff date of my loan is now XXXX, XXXX, XXXX! \n\nXX/XX/XXXX there was an announcement about a temporary waiver to count XXXX payments towards the PLSF program. I verified my current employer qualifies, but wanted to see if this program might help me to pay off my loans sooner. I also wanted to choose a new servicer because I was upset at the number of times I had been given confusing or incorrect information from AES. \n\nI tried to consolidate the loans on the studentaid.gov website, but you are required to choose a repayment plan using XXXX repayment calculator tool. I discovered that the payment calculations were much higher because AES has been reporting my interest rate to the XXXX as 4.88 %. My rate had been lowered in XXXX to 3.88 % fixed. They also reported that both loans were unsubsidized loans, however, the larger of my two loans is a subsidized loan. \n\nThe XXXX  said they can not see this information and that AES would need to correct all of this before I could apply for a consolidation. I called AES and they confirmed that my rate was 3.87 % and that it would be corrected in five to 10 business days along with the loan type to subsidized. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I contacted AES again because the information reported to the DOE had not been updated or corrected. They said that they could see that the ticket had been submitted and was still open. They said to give it another five to 10 business days and that I should see the correct information on the XXXX website. I explained each time that I wanted to consolidate and check into the temporary PLSF waiver to see if I might qualify and was worried about running out of time. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX- I contacted AES again because the information reported to XXXX had not been updated or corrected yet. They said that they could see that the ticket was still open and that it was with the NSLDS to make the correction on the XXXX website. \n\nThey said to give it another five to 10 business days and that I should see the correct information on the XXXX  website very soon. I explained again that I wanted to consolidate and check into the temporary PLSF waiver and was worried about running out of time. \n\nI had also contacted the XXXX during this time and they had recommended that I file an ombudsman case if the matter is not resolved promptly. They cautioned me that I needed to get the reporting resolved very soon so that I could get the consolidation process started. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX None of the incorrect information was updated on the XXXX website. I contacted the XXXX  ombudsman phone number I had been given by the XXXX  reps. I explained the issues with the loan information being reported incorrectly and the forbearance. The person recommended that it would be better if I filed my case on the website instead of by phone because I could upload additional documents to support my case ( XXXX XXXX from the AES website showing my actual interest rate of 3.875 % with subsidized and non-subsidized loans, information showing the loan amount had not decreased since XX/XX/XXXX, etc. ) I offered to email these, but she said it would be better to file online. \n\nI filed the case online and uploaded as much documentation as they would accept ( it was limited ). It said I would hear something back via email in five to 10 business days. \n\nAfter the 10 business days had passed with no word, I finally received a brief email saying the XXXX Ombudsman had sent the issue to AES to be resolved and that my case was now closed. It only mentioned the interest rate and nothing else. There were no next steps or other clarifying information. \n\nI called the XXXX  ombudsman number and explained that AES had had many opportunities to resolve the issues and had repeatedly and deliberately failed to do so. I was at least able to learn that the case was with the AES ombudsman ( not just AES as the email had stated ) and that they were required to reply via email within 10 business days. \n\nI asked what I could do if they did not resolve the issue. I was told I could call to appeal the case and have it reopened. I again expressed my concern that I wanted to see whether I might qualify for the temporary PLSF waiver and was worried I was running out of time. The ongoing 10 business days was adding a lot of time. I explained that the XXXX had recommended that I consolidate asap as soon as the issues were resolved because the process can take months. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX 10 business days later. No word or communication from AES. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received a vague voicemail from an unknown number that said This is AES and we are just calling to let you know that you can contact us anytime if you have a question about your loan. I was confused because the voicemail did not mention my case or if the caller was with the ombudsmans office. \n\nWithin 10 minutes, I called the number given on the voicemail only to discover it was the general AES customer service number. When got through the phone tree and the hold time, the customer service person was confused. He said that he could see that there was an outgoing call to my number, but there were no notes whatsoever in the system. He had no way to help or understand why someone had called me. He tried to track down the caller, but could not. I asked him if the call could have been from the ombudsmans office since a case had been sent to them. He put me on hold again and was then immediately able to track down the person who had called me. \n\nHe connected me to the person from the voicemail, but she seemed reluctant to provide any information or help. I had to ask twice if she was with the ombudsmans office and she finally admitted that she was. I learned that nothing had been done on my case. I explained my concerns about the incorrect interest rate reporting and the forbearance. She immediately said oh the interest rate was probably just a temporary incentive program. I explained that I had never heard the words temporary incentive program and that my loan had been at the 3.87 % fixed rate for well over the past decade. \n\nShe said there wasnt much she could do, but maybe send an email to check on it. I explained again that I wanted to look into the possibility of applying for the PLSF waiver, but that I couldnt consolidate and that I was running out of time. \nShe said that I did not need to worry about running out of time because I would be eligible to apply for the PLSF waiver as long as the consolidation process had been started. I explained that information was incorrect. You need to complete the loan consolidation process ( which can take months ) and then apply for the PLSF waiver before XX/XX/XXXX when it expires. She told me twice that was incorrect and that I did not need to worry about running out of time. I have since confirmed with the DOE that her information was wrong. \n\nI asked why they had not responded via email within 10 business days as required by the XXXX She said that they had experienced technical difficulties and that her email was not working. I asked if they have a number and she did give me her phone number and extension ( it was a completely different number than the main customer service number she had left on my voicemail ). I asked if she could have them correct the loan reporting as they had promised and asked if she could email me back with an update. She said it would take time but that she would call the following week. \n\nWithin the next hour or so, I received an email that said : Good afternoon, I received a response regarding the interest rates on the National Student Loan Data System ( NSLDS ) website. NSLDS reflects the statutory interest rate and does not update due to rate reduction programs. In addition, the 4.88 % that is currently showing on NSLDS, is rounded to the hundredth place since the initial interest rate was 4.875 %. Because your current interest rate of 3.875 % is a result of an incentive program, when we receive the consolidation application the incentive would be lost and, the loan would be consolidated at the original rate of 4.875 %. \n\nPlease let me know if you have any further questions. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX AES Ombudsman XXXX I do not know if this information is correct, but I do know that it is the opposite of what I had been told by AES on more than one occasion. Since the other information was incorrect, I do not feel confident in the validity of the answer. \nFurthermore, even if they refuse to allow me to keep the 3.875 % fixed interest rate, I still do not understand how they can report to the NSLDS and the XXXX that I am paying 4.88 % when I have actually been paying 3.875 % for the past 12 years. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX I called the XXXX  ombudsman and explained the situation. They filed an appeal and reopened my case. The person I spoke with said that they would expedite the response since so much time had elapsed. Since this was a Friday afternoon, she said that I would receive a phone call from the XXXX ombudsman the following Monday ( XX/XX/XXXX ) or Tuesday at the latest. \nIt is now late XXXX and I have yet to receive a call, email, or any other communication from the XXXX  ombudsmans office. When I tried to check on the XXXX website, I could not find an open case. \n\nI do not know if the PLSF waiver or newly-announced IDR changes might help me to pay my loan off faster, but I do know that the incorrect information reported to the XXXX prevents me from consolidating to a new servicer. The higher interest rate and compounded interest added to my principle would make my payments considerably higher, would significantly increase the amount I have left to pay, and would push my payment timeline well into the future. If nothing else, I do not understand how it could be legal for my current loan and interest rate payment information to be reported incorrectly to the XXXX I also do not think it is ethical or fair that AES would try to prevent me from changing servicers by refusing to report the actual interest rate I have been paying for close to 12 years.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-04-26T04:36:08.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"27713","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5499982","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AES/PHEAA","date_received":"2022-04-26T03:26:29.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I thought the <em>loans</em> had been consolidated to a federal direct <em>loan</em>. ( Upon a later inquiry in XX/XX/XXXX, I learned that the <em>loans</em> were <em>actually</em> never consolidated and were still under the old XXXX program. ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX deferment XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX <em>payments</em> under the standard repayment <em>plan</em> XX/XX/XXXX Struggling with <em>payments</em> due to job loss and other financial and medical setbacks."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Federal student <em>loan</em> servicing"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[12.168126,"5499982"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6849759","_score":11.819173,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I am accusing PNC of dual tracking my mortgage from XXXX, charging excessive fees after refusing final trial payment of approved modification, and then accelerating my loan and proceeding with foreclosure before my modification request was denied or time allowed for appeal. In addition to failing to credit more than {$11000.00} in payments, inaccurate credit reporting, and failure to respond to Notice of Error letters in allowed time or at all. \nThe mishandling and deceptive actions by PNC spanned over years and caused financial devastation for me and my family. We are still suffering from the fallout of their deception. Here is an overview of what happened during that time. Additional documentation, confirmation available on request. I purchased my home in XXXX of XXXX with my then husband, XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX and I separated in XXXX and our divorce was finalized in XXXX of XXXX. \nI was awarded the house and a Quit Claim Deed, signed by XXXX XXXX, was filed with the county. I remarried in XXXX of XXXX and informed PNC of my changed marital status and last name. I reached out to PNC the end of XXXX after I had missed XXXX payment. I filed XXXX XXXX bankruptcy, with my current husband, on XX/XX/XXXX. At the time of filing mortgage payment arrears totaled {$4300.00}. I was then 3 months behind in payments. In all of my communications with PNC I indicated my desire to stay in the home and corrected them in regards to my current legal name. The XXXX XXXX bankruptcy plan mandated I was to pay {$1400.00} a month directly to the bankruptcy trustee. The {$1400.00} was to pay lenders as determined by the bankruptcy court. Current mortgage payments to PNC were part of that order. Additionally I was instructed to continue pursuing my hardship modification request directly with PNC to address the {$4300.00} arrears. I made several attempts to contact PNC regarding my request for modification. I was told that PNC could not speak to me directly and had to go through my bankruptcy attorney. PNC had begun to call myself and my ex-husband numerous times but most times we could only get information if we let the calls ring through to voicemail. If we attempted to answer the call it was dropped before reaching a live person. There was some delay in PNC and my bankruptcy attorney actually speaking because PNC kept calling regarding XXXX and XXXX XXXX. My attorney filed for a XXXX and XXXX XXXX. PNCs failure to change my name in their system resulted in more delays. Once my attorney and PNC spoke and they were given the authorization to contact me directly regarding the modification for past due balances I was given instructions on what to submit to officially apply for a hardship modification. I submitted all requested documentation, including another copy of divorce decree and quit claim deed from XXXX XXXX and marriage certificate from XXXX XXXX to PNC on XX/XX/XXXX. I received a letter from PNC dated XX/XX/XXXX asking for more information and further clarification on certain items. I submitted all documents as requested and on XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from PNC indicating they had received my complete hardship assistance application on XX/XX/XXXX and I should hear something from them within 30 days of that XX/XX/XXXX date. I received another letter from PNC dated XX/XX/XXXX indicating again that they had received my completed application as of XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX it was determined that I pre-qualified for the Making Home Affordable HAAMP Modification pending the completion of a Trial Period Plan. I was to make three monthly payments of {$1200.00} beginning XX/XX/XXXX with the final payment due on XX/XX/XXXX. At this time the total amount last due on my account was shown to be {$12000.00}. I was continuing to receive monthly mortgage statements and was very confused with the information. It looked like PNC was not receiving any payments towards my mortgage and had not received any payments since filing for bankruptcy. I knew that was not correct because I was getting monthly account details from the XXXX XXXX XXXXrustee. I checked in with my bankruptcy attorney regularly and he confirmed payments were being sent per the chapter plan. In XXXX of XXXX I received a letter from PNC, dated XX/XX/XXXX, that stated this Dear customer, the review of your hardship assistance request has been completed. Unfortunately, as of XX/XX/XXXX we are unable to proceed further with your request for assistance due to the following reason ( s ) : We did not receive your scheduled plan payments as outlined in the agreement. I also received a Foreclosure Notice also dated XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted my attorney immediately and asked if I needed to be concerned about the inaccurate statements and the unclear revolution of the trial period plan He assured me that everything was fine and I was protected by the bankruptcy so I would not lose my home. I received some court papers in the mail in XXXX that indicated my bankruptcy case was being dismissed for failure to complete the trial period plan ( not accurate ) and not having the pre bankruptcy arrears resolved ( direct result of PNC returning final payment ) I later discovered that the trustee sent in several payments to PNC over the life of the bankruptcy case including submitting all three payments as outlined in the TPP. PNC returned the third and final payment and told the trustee the payment was being returned and all other payments should be held because they were granted relief from the automatic stay ( well before they ever approved me for the TPP ) so they were instead Accelerating my loan and the entire balance was due immediately. According to the bankruptcy trustee PNC was sent and accepted more than {$11000.00} on my behalf. PNC could not give me any explanation as to where those payments went. Once the bankruptcy was dismissed ( on PNCs encouraging ) I found myself in an active foreclosure and well behind the eight ball. It wasnt until after I received the Notice of Trustee Sale I was even able to speak to someone at PNC about my account. I contacted the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Housing Program and attempted to request mediation but was then informed that PNC is exempt from participating in any mandatory mediation programs. With help from XXXX I requested a meeting with the lender. Days after requesting that meeting I was contacted by someone in PNCs Loss Mitigation department stating my account was back with them. At first they told me I did not qualify for a hardship modification because I failed to complete the previous TPP. I disputed that with the rep and was then contacted days later and was told I needed to submit a hardship assistance request and there had to be recent hardships that didnt exist on any previous requests or I would be denied. Now I want to mention that during this time and up until very recently I have made multiple inquiries as to the {$11000.00} + payments sent in by the trustee. I made a request that they correct my name every single time they called. I was issued a complaint number in XXXX but it still wasnt until XXXX I received a call saying they had changed my name. My ex-husband sent in a declaration and I submitted a quit claim deed, marriage certificate, and divorce decree more than half a dozen times with no response or resolution.. It is unclear the total amount of fees and penalties Ive been charged since this began or even since XX/XX/XXXX when the original permanent modification should have begun. \nI feel {$11000.00} paid to PNC by the trustee should be refunded to me. I feel PNC should take some accountability for the status of the loan since XX/XX/XXXX. They charged me a whole year of various charges that would not be so had they honored the modification agreement. I had to sell my home so I could purchase a much needed modified accessible vehicle even though I had over {$300000.00} of equity in my home I could not access any of it. I could not get a loan for anything or secure permanent housing after the inaccurate credit reporting, dismissal of bankruptcy, and unlawful foreclosure attempt. \nI have documentation to verify all statements made and can provide it if requested ( Trustee declarations and motions, attorney conversations, letters and statements from PNC, any items submitted as part of hardship assistance requests, statements form my current or ex husband, etc ). PNC never responded to several Notice of Errors addressing my concerns and any response to credit repair attempts simply say enough information has not been provided to justify an investigation into my claims. \nIf you need to contact me, my currrmt contact information is following this statement. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX WA XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-04-17T09:56:44.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"99301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6849759","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PNC Bank N.A.","date_received":"2023-04-17T08:56:28.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["PNC returned the third and final <em>payment</em> and told the trustee the <em>payment</em> was being returned and all other <em>payments</em> should be held because they were granted relief from the automatic stay ( well before they ever approved me for the TPP ) so they were <em>instead</em> Accelerating my <em>loan</em> and the entire balance was due immediately. According to the bankruptcy trustee PNC was sent and accepted more than {$11000.00} on my behalf. PNC could not give me any explanation as to where those <em>payments</em> went."]},"sort":[11.819173,"6849759"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":79,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":79}]}},"product":{"doc_count":79,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":27,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":13},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":7},{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"Reverse mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":16,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":11},{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":11,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":5},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":2},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":9,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":9}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":6},{"key":"Lease","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Installment loan","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CD (Certificate of Deposit)","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":79,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":14,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trouble with how payments are being handled","doc_count":6},{"key":"Received bad information about your loan","doc_count":5},{"key":"Problem with customer service","doc_count":2},{"key":"Need information about your loan balance or loan terms","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":9,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":2},{"key":"Fees charged","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":4},{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Delays with the closing process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":3},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":2},{"key":"Public record information inaccurate","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":5},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing problem","doc_count":2},{"key":"Problem with fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1},{"key":"Indicated you were committing crime by not paying debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay your loan","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle","doc_count":1},{"key":"Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Charged fees or interest you didn't expect","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Funds not received from closed account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Dealing with my lender or servicer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Need information about my balance/terms","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Charged too much interest","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting a loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with signing the paperwork","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with the payoff process at the end of the loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem lowering your monthly payments","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble using your card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't use card to make purchases","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":79,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":77},{"key":"No","doc_count":2}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":79,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":69},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":9},{"key":"Untimely response","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":79,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":79}]}},"company":{"doc_count":79,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":6},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":5},{"key":"MOHELA","doc_count":4},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":3},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":3},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"Central Research Inc","doc_count":2},{"key":"EdFinancial Services","doc_count":2},{"key":"Fay Servicing, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"LoanCare, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"ATLANTIC BAY MORTGAGE GROUP LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Blitt and Gaines, P.C.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Byrider Franchising, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CCS Financial Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Caliber Home Loans, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CrossCountry Mortgage LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Flagstar Bank, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Freedom Mortgage Company","doc_count":1},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MPOWER Financing, Public Benefit Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"MortgageOne, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"NVR INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENTAGON FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Sequium Asset Solutions, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Stratus Financial LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION - SAN FRANCISCO MAIN BRANCH","doc_count":1},{"key":"UNITED COMMUNITY BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"World Omni Financial Corp.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":79,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":17},{"key":"PA","doc_count":7},{"key":"TX","doc_count":7},{"key":"FL","doc_count":4},{"key":"GA","doc_count":4},{"key":"MI","doc_count":4},{"key":"WA","doc_count":4},{"key":"IL","doc_count":3},{"key":"MA","doc_count":3},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":3},{"key":"NM","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA","doc_count":3},{"key":"KY","doc_count":2},{"key":"MN","doc_count":2},{"key":"MO","doc_count":2},{"key":"NC","doc_count":2},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"OR","doc_count":2},{"key":"MT","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"UT","doc_count":1},{"key":"WI","doc_count":1},{"key":"WY","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":79,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":22},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":11},{"key":"Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":79,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":12},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":6},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":6}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[11.819173,"6849759"],"3":[9.092506,"3014286"],"4":[5.9081173,"20096492"]}}}