Ekko Title

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: see attached letter
Regards,
*** ***

Dear **. [redacted]
We are in receipt of your letter dated February 10, 2014 referencing the Complaint filed with your company by one of our past customers. We are writing in response.
The Complaint reflects the Customer’s frustration at having to pay an additional one...

month of interest in connection with the payoff of her FHA-insured mortgage loan related to a refinance transaction which was originally scheduled to take place at our [redacted] office on January 2, 2014. It appears that the Customer, with the assistance of their loan officer, has concluded that Ekko Title is to blame for this additional expense. We are not.
As background, it is important to recognize that a borrower paying off an FHA-insured loan must select a settlement date that allows the settlement company sufficient time to conduct the settlement and record the appropriate documents at the county courthouse prior to disbursing the loan payoff funds to the FHA-insured lender. If the FHA-insured lender does not receive the payoff funds by 2pm on the first business day of the following month, the borrower is required to pay another month of interest to the lender. It is also important to recognize that there is a mandatory 3-day waiting period (known as a “rescission period”) after the date of settlement which must elapse before the settlement company is permitted to record the documents at the county courthouse and thereafter disburse the payoff funds.
Ekko Title was not afforded sufficient time to (I) close the transaction, (2) allow the 3-day rescission period to elapse, (3) record the documents at the county courthouse, and (4) disburse the payoff funds to the FHA-insured lender so that they were received by the lender prior to 2 pm on the first business day of the month. Closing took place on Friday, December 27, 2013. The rescission period expired at 12 midnight on Tuesday, December 31. January 1 was New Years Day and the county courthouse was closed. On January 2, we promptly delivered the appropriate documents to the county courthouse for recording but did not receive confirmation that recording was complete until late afternoon, as is the usual case. As a result, it was impossible to meet the 2 pm deadline imposed by the FHA-insured lender and an additional one month of interest was collected.
Settlement companies such as Ekko Title have numerous responsibilities in the process of completing a refinance transaction. However, selecting a settlement date is not one of them. Customarily, borrower and lender communicate to select a settlement date that is satisfactory to both. Settlement companies then focus their efforts 011 closing on the selected date. As is mentioned above, this settlement was originally scheduled to take place on January 2, 2014. However, the Customer and their loan officer apparently decided to move the closing up and, accordingly, contacted our office to schedule the settlement date for December 27. Although such a last-minute change requires significant adjustments on our part, we did our best to accommodate the Customer’s request.
In order to meet the revised settlement date, Ekko Title ordered a payoff demand letter from the Customer’s existing lender. It was not until the afternoon of December 26 when we received and reviewed the payoff demand letter. It was only upon receipt and review of this documentation that we were even aware that the Customer’s existing loan was FHA-insured and that the requirements discussed above would apply. We were never advised of this fact by either the Customer or their loan officer at any point in the transaction. Clearly, we were made aware of this information too late in the business day to complete a settlement on December 26. Hypothetically speaking, even if we had been made aware earlier of the existing FHA-insured loan payoff and the transaction had closed on December 26, it is unlikely that we would have been able to get on record at the county courthouse on December 31. The courthouse closed at 12 noon on New Year’s Eve and, it being the last day of the month, the last day of the year, and a notoriously busy day at Clerk’s recording window, the odds of getting on record before 12 noon on December 31 would have been slim.
It is understandable that the Customer is upset about paying an additional month’s interest on a loan that they were paying off. However, it is apparent that the Customer has utilized “20/20 hindsight” to contrive an argument that our employee’s failure to return a single e-mail from them at one particular point in time in the process was the sole cause of the entire problem. Disingenuous at best.
Thank you very much for affording us the opportunity to respond to the Complaint. We would appreciate it if you would refrain from editing this response.

Review: Ekko Title employee [redacted] neglected to schedule our closing in a timely manner despite my reaching out to her (I sent her an email on December 20, 2013--she didn't respond) which resulted in my husband and I paying an additional $1,179.14 in interest. My loan officer informed me that I should have been informed by the title company that closing had to take place by December 26, 2013 to ensure the loan would be funded by the end of December. Since **. [redacted] did not respond to my email I called the office and spoke with [redacted] asked me what date I wanted to close. I told her December 27th. Had **. [redacted] contacted me to schedule closing on December 26th my husband and I would have obliged. I sent an email to **. [redacted]'s supervisor, [redacted] Lyon, on January 7, 2014 and he has not responded.Desired Settlement: I would also like a response to the email I sent to [redacted] explaining **. [redacted]'s lack of communication.

Business

Response:

Dear **. [redacted]

We are in receipt of your letter dated February 10, 2014 referencing the Complaint filed with your company by one of our past customers. We are writing in response.

The Complaint reflects the Customer’s frustration at having to pay an additional one month of interest in connection with the payoff of her FHA-insured mortgage loan related to a refinance transaction which was originally scheduled to take place at our [redacted] office on January 2, 2014. It appears that the Customer, with the assistance of their loan officer, has concluded that Ekko Title is to blame for this additional expense. We are not.

As background, it is important to recognize that a borrower paying off an FHA-insured loan must select a settlement date that allows the settlement company sufficient time to conduct the settlement and record the appropriate documents at the county courthouse prior to disbursing the loan payoff funds to the FHA-insured lender. If the FHA-insured lender does not receive the payoff funds by 2pm on the first business day of the following month, the borrower is required to pay another month of interest to the lender. It is also important to recognize that there is a mandatory 3-day waiting period (known as a “rescission period”) after the date of settlement which must elapse before the settlement company is permitted to record the documents at the county courthouse and thereafter disburse the payoff funds.

Ekko Title was not afforded sufficient time to (I) close the transaction, (2) allow the 3-day rescission period to elapse, (3) record the documents at the county courthouse, and (4) disburse the payoff funds to the FHA-insured lender so that they were received by the lender prior to 2 pm on the first business day of the month. Closing took place on Friday, December 27, 2013. The rescission period expired at 12 midnight on Tuesday, December 31. January 1 was New Years Day and the county courthouse was closed. On January 2, we promptly delivered the appropriate documents to the county courthouse for recording but did not receive confirmation that recording was complete until late afternoon, as is the usual case. As a result, it was impossible to meet the 2 pm deadline imposed by the FHA-insured lender and an additional one month of interest was collected.

Settlement companies such as Ekko Title have numerous responsibilities in the process of completing a refinance transaction. However, selecting a settlement date is not one of them. Customarily, borrower and lender communicate to select a settlement date that is satisfactory to both. Settlement companies then focus their efforts 011 closing on the selected date. As is mentioned above, this settlement was originally scheduled to take place on January 2, 2014. However, the Customer and their loan officer apparently decided to move the closing up and, accordingly, contacted our office to schedule the settlement date for December 27. Although such a last-minute change requires significant adjustments on our part, we did our best to accommodate the Customer’s request.

In order to meet the revised settlement date, Ekko Title ordered a payoff demand letter from the Customer’s existing lender. It was not until the afternoon of December 26 when we received and reviewed the payoff demand letter. It was only upon receipt and review of this documentation that we were even aware that the Customer’s existing loan was FHA-insured and that the requirements discussed above would apply. We were never advised of this fact by either the Customer or their loan officer at any point in the transaction. Clearly, we were made aware of this information too late in the business day to complete a settlement on December 26. Hypothetically speaking, even if we had been made aware earlier of the existing FHA-insured loan payoff and the transaction had closed on December 26, it is unlikely that we would have been able to get on record at the county courthouse on December 31. The courthouse closed at 12 noon on New Year’s Eve and, it being the last day of the month, the last day of the year, and a notoriously busy day at Clerk’s recording window, the odds of getting on record before 12 noon on December 31 would have been slim.

It is understandable that the Customer is upset about paying an additional month’s interest on a loan that they were paying off. However, it is apparent that the Customer has utilized “20/20 hindsight” to contrive an argument that our employee’s failure to return a single e-mail from them at one particular point in time in the process was the sole cause of the entire problem. Disingenuous at best.

Thank you very much for affording us the opportunity to respond to the Complaint. We would appreciate it if you would refrain from editing this response.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: see attached letter.

Regards,