Ditech Financial, LLC

RE: Case#[redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding an account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). Ms. [redacted] should be advised that she did not signed the contractual agreement and therefore has no obligation to this account. As such, without the agreement of the borrower, who signed the contractual agreement, we cannot release any information concerning the account to a third party. The information provided by Ms. [redacted] does not authorize her to receive information concerning this account. Therefore, as previously communicated to Ms. [redacted], we are unable to provide any information concerning this account to her or any agent acting on her behalf. If [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact our Customer Service Department at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT. Sincerely,Shea [redacted] Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor cc: [redacted] Fremont, CA 94536[redacted]

We apologize for any dissatisfaction [redacted] encountered. Our mission is to provide exceptional levels of servicing and we continuously strive to recognize opportunities for improvement.Our review of the concern determined the 2015 school taxes were delinquent in the amount of $3,800.45....

This amount included the base tax payment of $3,381.50 and penalties and interest of $418.95. A payment of $3,381.50 was disbursed from the escrow account on July 14, 2016, for taxes. [redacted] is not responsible for paying the penalties and interest.If [redacted] has any further questions, she should contact her account representative Sommer L. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Anita S. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday -Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/09/09) */
September 9, 2015
[redacted]
Revdex.com OF MINNESOTA AND NORTH DAKOTA
220 S RIVER RIDGE CIR
BURNSVILLE MN 55337
RE: Case # [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to...

the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC ("Ditech").
Pursuant to Mr. [redacted]'s request, we have ceased all outbound telephone communication; however, for his convenience we will continue sending billing statements and other correspondence as required.
The servicing of the above account was transferred from Everhome Mortgage to Ditech effective May 2, 2014. There were no changes to the account terms or conditions as a result of the servicing transfer. During the first 60 days after the transfer of servicing, no late fees were assessed. In addition, payments were not reported as late for the first 60 days after a transfer of servicing to us. Therefore, no late fees were assessed to the account in May and June 2014.
Pursuant to the terms of Mr. [redacted]'s signed loan agreement, late fees may be assessed for payments that are received more than 15 days after the due date. Records indicate that the February through June 2015 payments were not received prior to the late fee assessment date. Therefore, a late fee of $28.12 was assessed for each month. On April 29, 2015 and May 27, 2015, two late fees of $28.12 were collected. In addition, on August 8, 2015, we waived the late fee amount of $28.12 as a courtesy, which resulted in the late fee balance of $56.24.
On August 12, 2015, we received a payment of $56.24. The payment was applied on August 14, 2015, toward the corporate advance balance. The remaining corporate advance balance was from a $150.00 title search fee when Everhome completed the loan modification in October 2012.
Due to the aforementioned, we are unable to reverse the payment of $56.24 to be applied towards the late fee balance. As of the date of this letter, the late corporate advance balance is $53.90 and the late fee balance is $56.24.
If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he should contact his account representative Jami B. at (800)[redacted], extension [redacted], or Juanita S. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at (800)[redacted], Monday - Friday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.
Sincerely,
Vanessa [redacted]
Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor
/jcn/34/
cc: [redacted]; [redacted], Orange Park, FL 32065
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/09/10) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not accept the response. Attached is my payment history from DITECH For the months described in Ditech's rebuttal Feb-Jun 15
Feb late fee payment of $28.12 payment was paid Feb 17, 2015
Mar 15 late fee payment of $28.12 payment was paid Mar 19, 2015
Apr 15 late fee payment of $28.12 payment was paid Apr 27, 2015
May 15 late fee payment of $28.12 payment was paid May 25, 2015
June 15 late fee payment of $28.12 payment was paid Jun 24, 2015
Nothing was given to me as a courtesy, because I paid all of my late fees, and nothing is late on my account, as mentioned as a courtesy waived fee on Aug 8, 2015
Sincerely, [redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/09/17) */
September 17, 2015
[redacted]
Revdex.com OF MINNESOTA AND NORTH DAKOTA
220 S RIVER RIDGE CIR
BURNSVILLE MN 55337
RE: Case #[redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the rebuttal filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC ("Ditech").
In reference to the late fee balance on the account, we have provided the chart below for Mr. [redacted]'s review.
DESCRIPTION DATE ASSESSED AMOUNT DATE PAID AMOUNT WAIVED AMOUNT
LATE CHARGES 07-16-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 07-25-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 08-16-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 08-22-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 09-16-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 09-18-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 11-17-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 11-25-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 12-16-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 12-22-14 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 01-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 01-20-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 02-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 03-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 04-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 04-29-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 05-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 05-27-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 06-16-15 $28.12
LATE CHARGES 08-05-15 $28.12
Records show that the amount of $28.12 received with the February 2015 and March 2015 payments were applied towards the corporate advance balance. Because these funds were applied to the corporate advance balance, the late fee balance remains $56.24.
If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he should contact his account representative Jami B. at (800)[redacted], extension [redacted], or Juanita S. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at (800)[redacted], Monday - Friday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.
Sincerely,
Vanessa [redacted]
Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor
/jcn/42/
cc: [redacted]; [redacted], Orange Park, FL 32065

RE: Case#[redacted] , M. [redacted]Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by M [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech).We understand Mr. [redacted]'s concerns. Please be assured that his correspondence has been reviewed with the...

appropriate department management and the following response is provided.Please note, Mr. [redacted]'s account type requires that only a full payment be applied to the next monthly payment due date. Payments that are received in amounts different from the payment due are placed in the unapplied funds ("UAF"). If sufficient funds are available to apply a full payment, funds are applied to the next monthly payment due and any outstanding amounts such as finance charges, returned payment fees, late fees, escrow due, and acquired accrued interest prior to the application of funds to the principal balance. This form of payment posting is determined by the Mortgage contract and the servicing protocols of the account.Records indicate that an escrow analysis was completed on February 1, 2016, which indicated that a shortage existed in the escrow. If the shortage payment was remitted to the escrow shortage payments address, as indicated on the Annual Escrow Disclosure Statement issued for your account, the monthly payment for the account would be adjusted to $814.75. The address to remit escrow shortage payments is:Ditech Financial, LLC [redacted] Pasadena, CA 91109The above listed escrow payment address is provided on escrow disclosure statements to ensure that escrow payments are correctly credited to the escrow shortage. When a payment is received with no payment instructions, at the regular payment address, it is systematically applied to the account per the payment hierarchy listed above.The escrow shortage payment of $314.70, received on February 26, 2016, was remitted by electronic bill pay and included no payment instructions, therefore, the funds received were placed in unapplied funds. The balance in unapplied funds was the combined with the subsequent payment of $814.75, received on February 29, 2016, and applied to the March 1, 2016, contractual payment due of $840.97. The remaining funds were applied to the principal balance per the above listed payment hierarchy.Pursuant to the correspondence received, payment reallocations to move the funds intended to cure the escrow shortage have been completed. Due to our recent internal system upgrade, payment reallocations have been delayed. The late fees of $193.38, assessed as a result of this matter have been waived, No negative credit reporting has occurred. We apologize for any dissatisfaction the delay may have caused.If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he should contact his account representative Lawanda J. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Rashad N. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday -Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.Sincerely,Kristina [redacted]Customer Service Correspondence Supervisorcc: M [redacted], [redacted], BOWIE, MD 20721 [redacted]

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the rebuttal filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (“Ditech”).In order to fully respond to Mr. [redacted]'s request to provide the events that led to his unpaid principal balance to be increased at the time of the 2013 modification and the current status, we have provided a chronology of events below:On December 20, 2007, a Promissory Note was executed by [redacted] A. [redacted] securing a loan amount of $417,000.00. The execution of this loan reflected a maturity date of January 1, 2038, which meant Mr. [redacted] was to repay the full debt by this date. A review of Mr. [redacted]'s loan confirms that his loan was also originated as a non-impounded account, which meant that he was responsible to maintain and keep the property taxes and/or the hazard insurance up to date.On May 22, 2009, the previous servicer GMAC Mortgage, LLC (GMAC), disbursed $17,836.34 for delinquent property taxes. This disbursement of funds created a negative escrow balance of $17,806.34. Additionally, Mr. [redacted] failed to continue to tender the contractual mortgage payments after March 2009 causing the loan to become delinquent. On December 17, 2009, GMAC offered Mr. [redacted] a Payment Reduction Plan Agreement as follows: 1st payment: $1,773.62 due on 01/01/2010 2nd payment: $1,773.62 due on 02/01/2010 3rd payment: $1,773.62 due on 03/01/2010 4th payment: $1,773.62 due on 04/01/2010 5th payment: $1,773.62 due on 05/01/2010 6th payment: $1,773.62 due on 06/01/2010 Based on the Payment Reduction Plan Agreement, each payment was due on or before the due date. A review of GMAC’s payment history shows that the following payments were received: $1,773.62- received on 12/31/2009 $1,773.62- received on 04/06/2010 $1,773.62- received on 06/04/2010 Therefore, it appears that Mr. [redacted] did not complete the Payment Reduction Plan Agreement. The following escrow disbursements were also made on behalf Mr. [redacted], further increasing the negative escrow balance owed:September 2, 2010: an escrow disbursement was processed in the amount of $15,390.20.November 12, 2010, an escrow disbursement was processed in the amount of $11,630.49December 23, 2010, an escrow disbursement was processed in the amount of $637.17 We have provided Real Estate Property Tax information breakdown from the County of Palm Beach where the subject property is located. Mr. [redacted] may contact the Palm Beach County Tax Collector to validate the payments made by GMAC from May 2009 through December 2010. Our records confirm that Mr. [redacted]'s loan was serviced released to Ditech, formerly known as Green Tree, effective February 1, 2013. Upon the servicing transfer of Mr. [redacted]'s loan, the account was contractually due for the July 1, 2009 payment and had a negative escrow balance of -$43,739.08. The account continued to be a non-escrowed account, in which Mr. [redacted] was still responsible to maintain his property taxes and insurance up to date. Additionally, GMAC did not inform us that a modification offer had been extended to Mr. [redacted] prior to the transfer of his account. On April 20, 2013, Mr. [redacted] was considered for modification after the receipt of a complete Borrower Response Package. At the time of the modification evaluation, Mr. [redacted]'s gross monthly income was validated as $10,952.50. On April 23, 2013, a Trial Period Plan was offered to Mr. [redacted] that required three (3) trial payments: 1st payment: $4,235.26 by 06/01/2013 2nd payment: $4,235.26 by 07/01/2013 3rd payment: $4,235.26 by 08/01/2013 Please note that the investor of Mr. [redacted]'s loan, Fannie Mae (FNMA), deemed the trial payment of $4,235.26 as affordable. In addition, FNMA required that all of Mr. [redacted]’s monthly payments include a monthly escrow payment. If the mortgage loan being considered for a modification is a non-escrowed mortgage loan, the servicer must establish an escrow deposit account prior to the beginning of the trial period. The servicer must ensure that the trial payments include escrow amounts and must place the escrow funds into a separate account identified for escrow deposits. At the time of the trial period offer, an escrow account was activated. Since Mr. [redacted]'s loan was still considered a non-escrow account, our third party property tax vendor conducted a real estate search and identified that the following property taxes were still owed: 2011 property taxes of $10,987.88 2012 property taxes of $11,207.74 On June 24, 2013, the above listed property taxes were disbursed from Mr. [redacted]'s escrow account. Based on the Real Estate Property Tax information breakdown from the County of Palm Beach, Mr. [redacted]'s property taxes were paid in full at that time. On August 26, 2013, a permanent Loan Modification Agreement (Agreement) was mailed for Mr. [redacted]'s execution. The Agreement reflected the following terms: New Unpaid Principal Balance: $554,377.33 Fixed Interest Rate:                   6.1250% Principal & Interest Payment:    $3,098.70 Monthly Escrow Payment:         $1,121.30 Total Mortgage Payment:          $4,220.00 Effective Date:                           08/01/2013 Maturity Term:                           08/01/2053The capitalization of the loan was based on the below breakdown: Beginning Unpaid Principal Balance:    $408,027.26 Capitalized Interest:                              + $93,229.70 Escrow Advance:                                  + $43,739.08 Corporate Advances:                            + $9,381.29 Modified Unpaid Principal Balance   $554,377.33 Please keep in mind that Mr. [redacted]'s loan was contractually due for the November 1, 2009 through the August 1, 2013 payments at the time of the finalization of the modification. In our April 5, 2016 correspondence, a payment history was enclosed that outlined the application of funds towards the delinquency owed when the modification terms were applied on September 19, 2013. After further review, it has been determined that the escrow disbursements processed by GMAC totaling $43,739.08 were included in the 2013 modification. However, a subsequent negative escrow balance, in the amount of -$25,710.22 was not included in the capitalization of the 2013 modification. This negative escrow balance was a result of the property taxes and insurance disbursement proceeds from May 29, 2013 through August 8, 2013. In the event that these monies had been included at the finalization of the 2013 modification, Mr. [redacted] would have seen a total Escrow Advance of $69,449.30, which would have resulted in a higher Modified Unpaid Principal balance of $580,087.55. Additionally, Mr. [redacted] would have been required to pay interest at 6.125% on the additional $-25,710.22 over a 480 month term. As explained in our correspondence letter dated April 5, 2016, Ditech has spread the current escrow shortage/ deficiency over a 60 month period. This escrow shortage spread does not require Mr. [redacted] to pay interest on the escrow deficiency on the Modified Unpaid Principal balance. A review of Mr. [redacted]'s loan confirms that he was considered for a modification on March 11, 2016. During the modification evaluation, it was determined that the gross monthly income was validated as $2,142.48. As previously mentioned, FNMA requires that all of the customer's monthly payments include a monthly escrow amount when considered for modification. Mr. [redacted]'s escrow account is established to pay the following escrow items: Tax Collector/ Agency Installment Estimated Disbursement Amount Parcel / Policy No. Universal P&C Insurance Hazard Insurance Annually $6,630.98 15011301531 Wright National Flood Insurance Annually $345.00 09115005032 Palm Beach County Tax Collector Annually $11,267.08 73414418010120050                                         ...⇄ Total                $18,243.06Based on the annual estimated disbursement amount, Mr. [redacted]'s base monthly escrow collection would be $1,520.25 along with a cushion of two months of the base escrow amount this would require an escrow payment of $1,736.47. Ditech would be unable to extend an affordable modified payment with Mr. [redacted]'s gross monthly income of $2,142.48. Additionally, Mr. [redacted] was mailed a decline letter on March 11, 2016, that provided him the modification reasons along with a Notice of Property Value reflecting a value of $978,300.00. At this time, Mr. [redacted]'s loan is contractually due for the August 1, 2015 payment and all subsequent payments, with an unpaid principal balance of $546,960.49. If Mr. [redacted] can no longer afford the subject property, he may consider a Deed-in-Lieu of Foreclosure. A Deed-in Lieu of Foreclosure is a deed instrument in which a mortgagor (i.e. the borrower) conveys all interest in a real property to the mortgagee (i.e. the lender) to satisfy a loan that is in default and avoid foreclosure proceedings. If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he should contact his account representative [redacted] A. at (800) 643-0202, extension 62586, or [redacted] P. at extension 62890. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at (800) 643-0202, Monday - Friday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Please see the response to the customer's complaint attached.

RE: Case#[redacted], [redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). We regret any dissatisfaction Mr. [redacted] has encountered. Our mission is to provide exceptional levels...

of servicing and we continuously strive to recognize opportunities for improvement. It is our policy and practice is to conduct all communications in a courteous and professional manner and to at all times, treat all parties with respect. Our representatives are trained and monitored to ensure adherence to all applicable collection laws and regulations, both state and federal. The servicing of the above account was transferred from West One Capital Group Inc. to Ditech effective August 31, 2015. There were no changes to the account terms or conditions as a result of the servicing transfer. Pursuant to Mr. [redacted]'s communication, a review of the account has determined that the additional insurance policy was not correctly added to the account's escrow. We have now corrected the issue and a payment of $553.00 was disbursed on June 2, 2016. A refund of the insurance disbursement was received on July 18, 2016. Pursuant to Mr. [redacted]'s request an escrow analysis was completed on August 4, 2016, and a refund of $334.35 was issued as a result of that analysis. The account is now scheduled for two insurance disbursements to State Farm for policy number: [redacted] and policy number: [redacted] to occur in the spring of 2017. Mr. [redacted] should be sure to submit any, policy changes, renewal or cancellation information, by having his insurance agent submit proof of insurance to fax number ###-###-#### or it can be mailed to: Ditech Financial LLC, IAAOA [redacted] Miami, FL 33197-9282 We apologize for any inconvenience this matter may have caused. If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he may contact his account representatives Cathy M. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Bobby M. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT. Sincerely,Shea [redacted] Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor cc: [redacted], [redacted], LOMITA, CA 90717 [redacted]

RE: Case#[redacted], [redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). On June 8, 2016, a payoff quote was created indicating that the amount required to pay Mr. **'s account in full was...

$251,033.40, good through July 8, 2016. The payoff of an account includes the principal balance; interest earned, but not collected; insurance; plus any fees that may have been assessed. The enclosed copy of the June 8th payoff quote created for the account indicates that the payoff consisted of the following amounts: $251,449.32 Principal Balance -$415.92 prepaid Interest $251,033.40 Payoff Quote Total Please note, the payments are applied to Mr. **'s account utilizing unapplied funds ("UAF"). This means that only a full payment can be applied to the account. If the amount received matches the amount due, it will be applied to any payment due. However, if the funds are not sufficient to pay the amount billed, they will remain in UAF until another payment is received. If the funds received are more than the amount due and no instructions are received regarding the intent for application of the funds, the additional funds are placed in suspense. Funds in suspense are reviewed daily and follow a specific hierarchy to determine posting. This hierarchy is based on any outstanding amounts such as finance charges, escrow due, returned payment fees, late fees, and acquired accrued interest. This form of payment posting is determined by the mortgage contract and the servicing protocols of the investor of the loan. Records indicate that on May 31, 2016, a bank bill pay payment of $1,160.00 was received without payment instructions and was applied to the account as the July 1, 2016, contractual payment and an additional principal payment of $0.23. On June 3, 2016, a bank bill pay payment of $3,000.00 was received without payment instructions and was applied to the account as the August 1, 2016, contractual payment and an additional principal payment of $1,840.23. Per the billing statement issued in response to the last payment applied to the account in April 2016, the principal balance of the account was $254,497.22, prior to the receipt of these payments. The above referenced payments affected the principal balance as follows: $254,497.22 -$603.06 -$0.23 = $253,893.93 Principal balance as stated on the May 31, 2016 billing statement. $253,893.93 -$1,840.23 -$604.38 = $251,449.32 Principal balance as stated on June 3, 2016 billing statement. On June 14, 2106, a request to reallocate the funds received on May 31, 2016, and June 3, 2016, which had been applied to the June 1, 2016, and July 1, 2016, payments was entered. The payment reallocation was initiated on June 24, 2016 and completed on June 27, 2016. The reallocation affected the principal balance as follows:$251,499.32 Principal balance prior to reallocation + $603.06 + $0.23 + $1,840.23 + $604.38 = $254,497.22 Principal balance after reversals - $1,160.00 - $3,000.00 = $250,337.22 Principal balance after the payment reallocation to principal on June 27, 2016 Our records indicate that the last payoff quote was generated for the account was on June 17, 2016, for $250,834.48. This amount was quoted prior to the completion of the requested payment reallocation. On June 30, 2016, a payoff payment of $252,009.80 was applied to the account. $252,009.80 - $250,337.22 Principal Balance -$522.11 Interest Owed = $1,150.47 Overpayment The remaining balance of payoff funds received were placed in an interest bearing escrow until the overpayment refund was issued on July 16, 2016. $1,150.47 + $1.01 interest paid = $1,151.48 refund issued.Mr. Lu should be advised that the payoff quote generated on June 8, 2016, indicated that $415.92 in pre-paid interest had been credited to the account. When the payment reallocation was completed on June 27, 2016, all the referenced prepaid interest had been reversed. Since the last regular payment applied to the account was on April 30, 2016, for the June 1, 2016 contractual payment. The account accrued interest between the June 1, 2016 contractual payment and the application of the payoff on June 28, 2016, in the amount of $522.11. Pursuant to the correspondence received, a review of the payoff of the account has confirmed that the refund of the overpayment amount was correct. Copies of the April 30, 2016, May 31, 2016, and June 3, 2016 billing statements, June 8, 2016 payoff quote, and account payment history are enclosed for Mr. **'s review. If Mr. ** has any further questions, he may contact our Customer Service Department at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT. Sincerely, Shea [redacted] Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor cc: [redacted], [redacted], SAN DIEGO, CA 92130 [redacted]

RE: Case#[redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). We apologize for any confusion our most recent response has caused. Our mission is to provide exceptional levels of servicing and we continuously strive to recognize opportunities for improvement. As previously communicated in our last correspondence, an escrow analysis was completed for Ms. [redacted]'s account on January 04, 2016. The escrow account is analyzed by taking into account the total amount of the projected disbursements expected over the next 12 months and spreading them over 12 months to determine the "base" escrow amount. The projected disbursements are typically based on the cost of the previous year's disbursements and were calculated as follows: Projected Escrow Disbursements: County $6,304.02 Total Projected Escrow Disbursements: $6,304.02 Escrow Payment Calculation: $6,304.02 / 12 = $525.34 (Base Amount) The base escrow payment amount of $525.34 was effective with the March 01, 2016 payment. As previously communicated in our last correspondence, we did receive the escrow shortage payment and it was applied to Ms. [redacted]'s escrow account; however, there was still an increase in the base escrow payment due to an increase in Ms. [redacted]'s taxes. This information was outlined in the escrow statement previously provided. Pursuant to Ms. [redacted]'s Home Affordable Modification Agreement (HAMP) the principal and interest portion of her monthly payment was $1,477.37 from April 01, 2015 to March 01, 2016 and would increase to $1,694.51 effective with the April 01, 2016 payment. Please understand that there was an increase in the escrow payment prior to the increase in the principal and interest payment; therefore, Ms. [redacted]'s monthly payment amount increased twice within two months. The March 01, 2016 payment was calculated as follows; principal and interest $1,477.37 + escrow $525.34 = $2,002.71. At no time have we advised Ms. [redacted] that her monthly payment amount was $2,219.58 for the March 01, 2016 payment. The principal and interest portion of the monthly payment was increased with the April 01, 2016 payment as stated above. The April 01, 2016 payment was calculated as follows; principal and interest $1,694.51 + escrow $525.34 = $2,219.58. Please also understand that although there are now enough funds in unapplied funds to cover the amount of $2,002.71 that was due for the March 01, 2016 payment, this amount was not available when the actual payment was due. We have previously advised how the payments received have been applied to Ms. [redacted]'s account. Ditech is legally required to report accurate information to the credit reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion); therefore, we are prohibited from changing credit reporting as a courtesy or to facilitate restoration of Ms. [redacted]'s credit rating.Please be advised that the escrow account is a stipulation of the HAMP agreement and will remain on the account until it is paid in full. Therefore, we are unable to comply with Ms. [redacted]'s request to cancel the escrow account. As of the date of this correspondence, the account is past due for $2,219.85 for the March 01, 2017 due date. There is an unapplied funds balance of $2,155.95; therefore, funds in the amount of $63.90 are required to bring the account current. If Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact her account representatives Justin H. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Bobby M. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/23) */
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] and his direct correspondence regarding his account with Green Tree Servicing, LLC ("Green Tree").
We understand Mr. [redacted]'s concerns. Please be assured...

that his correspondence has been reviewed with the appropriate department management and the following response is provided.
The servicing of the referenced account was transferred from CitiMortgage Inc. ("CitiMortgage") to Green Tree effective September 1, 2014. The servicing transfer does not affect the account terms and conditions, other than those related to the servicing of the account. We make this response, in part, based upon CitiMortgage records. Please note that the sale and transfer of servicing rights between financial institutions is a common occurrence in today's lending industry. These acquisitions do not require the permission of the debtor. There is no option at this time to transfer the servicing of the account.
The payments are applied utilizing unapplied funds ("UAF"). This means that only a full payment can be applied to the account. If the amount received matches the amount due, it will be applied to any payment due within 15 days after the payment was received. However, if the funds are not sufficient to pay the amount billed, they will remain in UAF until another payment is received. If the funds received are more than the amount due up to 15 days in the future, additional funds are placed in suspense. Funds in suspense are reviewed daily and follow a specific hierarchy to determine posting. This hierarchy is based on any outstanding advances such as finance charges, returned payment fees, late fees and acquired accrued interest. The payment hierarchy is as follows:

1. Principal & Interest
2. True Escrow
3. Insurance and Advances smallest to largest balance
4. Insurance Escrow
5. Late Charges
When servicing of Mr. [redacted]'s account was transferred to Green Tree, the account was marked to allow additional funds to be applied to future payments. In response to Mr. [redacted]'s correspondence, Green Tree has flagged the account to have additional funds applied as a principal reduction. As of the date of this response, there are no funds in UAF and the account is next due the May 1, 2015 payment.
If Mr. [redacted] has additional questions regarding this issue, he may contact the account representative, Brad directly at (800) [redacted] extension [redacted] or Jamie at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service is also available to assist and can be reached toll-free at (800)-[redacted], Monday - Friday 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., and Saturday 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. CST.
Sincerely,
Shea [redacted]
Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/04/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not approve of the above. When I had spoke with Ben on 11/21 to have my account flagged to have the additional amounts applied to principal it was not done. The issue had been followed up on serveral occassions to have this done, and every time I was re-assured that this was being done, and on multiple occassions I had found that this was NOT being done. This ongoing issue has caused great amount of unnecessary effort. For me to spend additional time in effort to correct this issue is not acceptable.
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 14, 2015/08/24) */
Additional funds not being applied to mortgage and being left in unapplied.
It appears that there is a very concerning ongoing issue with additional funds not being applied correctly. Since November of 2014 about every 3-4 months my funds are not being applied to principal. After several repeated calls to GreenTree and even a prior case with the Revdex.com (57304574) I was told this issue should be resolved as of today 08/24/2015. I once again see funds still not being paid against principal. After a call speaking with Rebecca(a Director), she was not able to put me intouch with someone to help. She stated all they have is the main Customer Service number and emails to loan servicing.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 16, 2015/08/26) */
This letter is in response to the rebuttal filed by [redacted] on August 24, 2015, regarding his account serviced by Green Tree Servicing, LLC ("Green Tree").
Please be assured Mr. [redacted]'s correspondence was again reviewed with the appropriate department management and the following response is provided.
According to account records, we have been applying additional funds to the loan as a principal reduction. However, in August, Mr. [redacted]'s monthly payment was applied to the loan on August 19, 2015 and backdated to August 16, 2015. Regretfully, due to the timing of the payment, the additional funds in the amount of $14.01 remained in UAF and were not applied to the account as a principal reduction. We have addressed the issue with the appropriate department and the additional funds in the amount of $14.01 have been applied to the loan as a principal reduction and backdated to the date the payment was received. As of the date of this response, the account is next due the September 1, 2015 payment.
If Mr. [redacted] has additional questions regarding this issue, he may contact the account representative, Brad at (800) [redacted] extension [redacted] or Jamie at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service is also available to assist and can be reached toll-free at (800)-[redacted], Monday - Friday 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., and Saturday 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. CST.
Sincerely,
Shea [redacted]
Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. After submitting my complaint to the Revdex.com on 5/13/16 and still having no response from Ditech on 5/23/16, I reached out to their customer service line, yet again, to try to get my issue resolved. After speaking with four different people/departments and spending an hour on the phone and on hold, and after having to send my documentation to them for the THIRD TIME, I believe that my issue might finally be resolved. I'll wait and see if I receive another letter from them next month. Ditech is, by far, the absolute worst company with which I have ever had the misfortune of conducting business. The right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing. Their customer service is horrendous. I wasted countless hours over several months trying to get a simple issue resolved. This company is great at collecting fees, but fails when it comes to owning up to their own mistakes. I look forward to the day when I sell my house, pay off this loan, and hopefully never have to deal with this company again.Thank you to the Revdex.com for your efforts in causing Ditech to finally acknowledge my issue.

RE: Case#[redacted], [redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). Pursuant to Ms. [redacted]'s correspondence a review and additional research into the whereabouts of the...

missing funds was conducted. Ms. [redacted] should be advised that the referenced over payment of $764.67 was electronically returned to Ms. [redacted]'s bank on July 15, 2016. The funds were not rejected or have come back to Ditech in any manner. Since the refund is considered a private transaction between the correspondent bank here in the United States and the receiving bank in England, we are unable to provide any additional information concerning the whereabouts of the funds. Ms. [redacted] should contact her bank for further information related to this transaction. Ms. [redacted] may contact Customer Service Supervisor, Jennifer F. at ###-###-#### or ###-###-####, extension [redacted], for further concerns. We apologize for any dissatisfaction this matter may have caused. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.Sincerely,Shea [redacted] Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor cc: [redacted], [redacted] TW122QS ENGLANDASWwCTnlliZ

I am rejecting this response because:I received a letter dated August 19, 2016 in which I was told the funds were cleared and available for distribution. I called and requested that the funds be distributed and was told that the checks would be mailed the following Tuesday. I called today and was told that no checks have been mailed and that a document was missing, which after my insistence that the document had indeed been submitted, was found. I was given no assurance that the funds would be distributed. The claims representative was confused and flustered by the continuing failure to distribute the funds. To date I have been given no assurance that the funds will ever be sent. My contractor has refused to do any more work until the funds are in his bank.This comedy of incompetency continues.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the rebuttal filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). Please be advised that the principal balance indicated on the payment history on our website was incorrect. This is a known system error with all of our online accounts. Please be assured that we are currently working to the correct this issue. However, the account payment history that was provided with our previous response dated January 26, 2017 is a correct accounting of the account activity and principal balance. Although the principal balance indicated on our website was incorrect, we can advise that the difference of $1,663.33 was the total amount of funds that were applied to principal from June 2016 to November 2016, which were reversed from the account due to the reallocation. The payment history included with our previous response shows activity that occurred on the account line by line. Therefore, after each reversal of the payments indicated above, the history shows the principal balance increasing. The correct principal balance indicated on this history was $86,398.16 on November 26, 2016, before the payment reallocation. After the above payments were reversed, the principal balance was $88,061.49 on December 6, 2016 (a difference of $1,663.33). However after the June 2016 through November 2016 payments, plus the December 1, 2016 payment were applied back to the account, the principal balance was $86,831.13. We sincerely apologize for any confusion or dissatisfaction this matter has caused. If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he may contact his account representatives Walter A. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Zena D. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). We would like to apologize for any misinformation that Ms. [redacted] was provided. This account was paid in full and closed on March 1, 2017. There was a escrow...

surplus of $1,298.76, which was mailed to Ms. [redacted] on March 17, 2017. If Ms. [redacted] has not received this refund, she should contact our Customer Service Department at the telephone number listed below, so a new check can be issued. If Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact her account representatives Alisha M. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or John H. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

RE: Case#[redacted], [redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). We apologize for any dissatisfaction that this matter has caused Mrs. [redacted]. Our mission is to...

provide exceptional levels of servicing and we continuously strive to recognize opportunities for improvement. Please be advised that Mrs. [redacted]'s district taxes are not included in her escrow account and are her responsibility to pay. However, in order to protect our security interest in the property we disbursed funds totaling $3,329.47 from Mrs. [redacted]'s escrow account for the delinquent taxes, which includes penalties and interest of $97.94. If Mrs. [redacted] would like her district taxes to be included in her escrow, she may submit a signed request, along with a district tax bill to the below address or fax number. Ditech Financial LLC L800- Escrow Dept [redacted] St Paul, MN 55102 Fax: ###-###-#### If [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact her account representatives Tracey L. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Zena D. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday -Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). On June 10, 2017, Ditech submitted an Automated Universal Data form (AUD) to the major credit reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion) to...

reflect the account status of paid in full, was a charge off. The individual credit reporting agencies normally take up to 3-5 business days to update their systems. Ms. [redacted] may keep this letter for verification of the change. If Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact our Asset Receivables Management Department at ###-###-####, Monday – Thursday, 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. MT, and Friday 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. MT.

RE: Case#[redacted], [redacted] Dear [redacted]: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). Pursuant to Ms. [redacted]'s correspondence, a review of the account confirms that on November 25, 2016, a payment of $2,503.62 was scheduled to occur on December 16, 2016, by Ditech Customer Service. This scheduled payment for Ms. [redacted]'s account was cancelled pursuant to her request by our pay by phone system on December 2, 2016. The payment referenced in her correspondence, scheduled to occur on December 16, 2016, was not processed by Ditech and as stated above, was cancelled per Ms. [redacted]'s request on December 2, 2016. Our records also indicate that a payment of $1,214.22 was remitted to Ditech from Ms. [redacted]'s banking facility's electronic bill payment services on December 2, 2016. Ms. [redacted] should note that scheduled payments are not shown on our website. As the payment referenced in Ms. [redacted]'s correspondence was cancelled and not withdrawn from her bank, Ditech holds no responsibility towards any non-sufficient funds fees or negative balance status within her bank account. Further, Ms. [redacted] should be advised that should the December 2, 2016, payment of $1,214.22, be returned to Ditech from her bank, as a result of non-sufficient funds, Ditech retains the right, per the contractual agreement, to assess NSF and late fees to her account. A copy of Ms. [redacted]'s recent payment history is enclosed for her review. If Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact her account representatives Sandy M. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Mario C. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT. Sincerely, Shea [redacted] Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor cc: [redacted], [redacted], FORDS, NJ 08863 [redacted]

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his account with Ditech Financial LLC (Ditech). We would like to apologize for any dissatisfaction Mr. [redacted] has encountered. Our mission is to provide exceptional levels of servicing and we continuously...

strive to recognize opportunities for improvement. Records show that two payments of $301.60 received from Mr. [redacted] on May 27, 2016 and September 30, 2016, were applied as principal reductions instead of towards the regular monthly payments. On December 6, 2016, these principal payments were reallocated and applied to the regular payments as Mr. [redacted] intended. Please be assured that all payments were backdated to the dates received to ensure Mr. [redacted] received appropriate credit to his account. We have enclosed an account payment history showing this reallocation. Since the principal balance was higher without the principal reductions of $603.20, when the payments were applied back to the account, the interest collected was a little bit higher, which cause the total principal balance to increase. The principal balance before the reallocation was $86,398.16 and the principal balance after the reallocation was $87,008.44. Please note that this includes payments applied to the June 2016 through November 2016 payments. The amount that was applied to principal for the June through November 2016 payments before the reallocation was $1,060.13 and the amount applied to interest was $1,526.35. The amount that was applied to principal for the June through November 2016 payments after the reallocation was $1,053.05 and the amount applied to interest was $1,533.43. If you take the difference between the principal and interest applied to the account before the reallocation and after the reallocation, the difference is $7.08. If you add that amount to the $603.20 that was reallocated from the principal reduction payments, you have a total principal balance difference of $610.28 after the reallocation was completed. In addition, the December 2016 payment was applied to account due to reallocation, which brought the principal balance to $86,831.13. Our records do not show a principal balance increase of $1,633.33. Please be assured that all late fees assessed due to this matter have been removed from Mr. [redacted]'s account. The current late fee balance is $0.00. In addition, no negative information was reported to the credit reporting agencies. As of the date of this correspondence, Mr. [redacted]'s account is current and next due for the March 1, 2017 payment. The next bi-weekly payment is scheduled to be debited from Mr. [redacted]'s bank account on February 3, 2017, for the first half of the March 1, 2017 payment. If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he may contact his account representatives Walter A. at ###-###-####, extension [redacted], or Zena D. at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at ###-###-####, Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. CT, and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/11) */
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding her account with Ditech Financial LLC ("Ditech").
In January 2015, the current insurance policy on file was renewed; therefore, a disbursement of...

$857.00 was made to Selective Auto Insurance Company on January 19, 2015. On March 12, 2015, Ms. [redacted] advised that she received an invoice from Selective Auto Insurance Company for the amount of $935.00. According to the agent with Selective Auto Insurance Company, they sent a refund check to Ms. [redacted] in the amount of $857.00, which was cashed on February 12, 2015. Ms. [redacted] advised that she did receive this check; therefore, she would send the funds back to Selective Auto Insurance Company. At this time, we disbursed an additional $78.00 from the escrow account to complete the full payment of $935.00.
In March 2015, we were advised of a new insurance policy with Palisades Insurance and this policy was set up on Ms. [redacted]'s account. However we did not receive a cancelation notice for the insurance policy with Selective Auto Insurance Company. Since there were two active homeowner's insurance policies on the account, a letter was mailed to Ms. [redacted] on March 27, 2015, to advise her of the overlapping insurance policies. We did not receive a response from Ms. [redacted] regarding the letter. We also attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] via a telephone call regarding this matter; however, the home telephone number we have on file for Ms. [redacted] has been disconnected.
A disbursement of $614.00 was made to Palisades Insurance on March 30, 2015. In addition, two other disbursements were made to Palisades Insurance on April 6, 2015, in the amount of $6.00 and on May 1, 2015, in the amount of $4.00.
An escrow analysis was completed on September 14, 2015, which included both insurance policies in the projected disbursements. Due to the higher projected insurance disbursements and a small increase in the property taxes, the escrow account had a shortage of $1,226.28. According to this analysis, the new escrow payment was $623.89 and the shortage payment was $47.16, for a total monthly escrow payment of $671.05 beginning with the November 16, 2015 payment. The previous escrow payment was $585.15 for a difference of $85.90.

We received funds from Ms. [redacted], in the amount of $857.00, on October 2, 2015, for the insurance refund. These funds were applied to the escrow account on October 5, 2015, backdated to October 2, 2015. A new escrow analysis was completed on October 7, 2015. This analysis included only the new projected insurance policy with Palisades Insurance, in the amount of $618.00.
According to this analysis, Ms. [redacted]'s base escrow payment will decrease to $545.97; however, there was still a shortage of $206.03. A shortage occurs when the projected balance ($1,630.44) is less than the required balance ($1,836.47), but not in the negative. The shortage was scheduled to be collected in 12 monthly payments of $17.17. We received the shortage payment on October 31, 2015, and it was applied to the escrow account. Therefore, Ms. [redacted]'s monthly home and escrow payment will $1,328.26 beginning with the December 1, 2015 payment. Enclosed are copies of the escrow analyses for your review.
If Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she should contact her account representative Crystal K. at (800)[redacted], extension [redacted], or Sherry B at extension [redacted]. Our Customer Service Department is also available to answer any questions or concerns and can be reached at (800)[redacted], Monday - Friday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. CT.
Sincerely,
Kristina [redacted]
Customer Service Correspondence Supervisor