Statewide Collections

Contrary to the complainant's position, Statewide Collection Bureau legally responded to complainant's written correspondence Moreover, complainant has not been contacted by Statewide Collection Bureau subsequent to receiving notice not to telephone

I am rejecting this response because: I attached this company's response in my initial complaintThis company did not address the issue in the letter I was sent or in this complaint.This company has not presented me with sufficient documentation that would indicate this debt belongs to meI have caller ID on both my work phone and personal phone which show the dates and times I've been called

I am writing this letter in response to the complaint regarding a Reverse Mortgage (HECM) loan application from early this year.
The customer completed and signed her Reverse Mortgage loan application with our loan officer on Saturday, March 14th, 2015. The appraisal and title search was ordered...

on March 17, 2015. The borrower paid for the appraisal and was not charged for the title search. The borrower stated that she thought her property was worth $250,000.00.
The independent appraisal was completed on March 24, 2015 and the appraised value was $125,000 which was much lower than the borrower’s estimated value of $250,000. The appraiser also stated that the customers property is legal non-conforming to local zoning and indicated there were restrictions on re-building and also the property required several repairs. [redacted] (the lender) required proof from the local zoning or building department confirming that the property can be rebuilt to its current specifications and use.
The loan officer emailed the borrower on April 1, 2015 stating BCI received the appraisal and requested her to call BCI regarding the appraisal. The loan officer also e-mailed the borrower on April 3, 2015 stating her property is legal non-conforming to zoning and indicated restrictions on rebuilding and the lender ([redacted]) is requiring a letter from the local zoning or building department confirming the property can be rebuilt to its current specifications and use. He also stated that the property required a number of repairs. The loan officer also sent a follow-up email on April 8, 2015 because he was unable to reach her by telephone.

The borrower and loan officer finally spoke on April 14, 2015 regarding the customer getting proof from the local zoning or building department and the borrower stated she would contact the local zoning or building department. They also discussed the appraised value of $125,000 along with the condition of the property and required repairs. Based on the valuation and other issues, we stated that the expectation was that the loan would take extra effort to get approved, but nothing could happen if we did not get the zoning letter very soon. We clearly told the customer that quick response to our lender is very important.
The loan officer did not hear back from the borrower. The loan officer tried to contact the borrower on a number of occasions, but was unsuccessful. The lender ([redacted]) contacted BCI requesting the status on the loan. As there was no conversation with the borrower in a 30 day period, the lender is required to make a final lending decision and the loan was withdrawn.
This entire process happened in March/ April 2015. Since that time, until the Revdex.com letter was received, BCI had no correspondence with this customer.
BCI called the customer on October 2, 2015 and left a detailed voice mail and an invitation to return our call. However, her only avenue is to get the letter from zoning, make the required repairs to the property and start the process again, as appraisals are only good for 120 days under current mortgage guidelines.

Contrary to the complainant's position, Statewide Collection Bureau legally responded to complainant's written correspondence.  Moreover, complainant has not been contacted by Statewide Collection Bureau subsequent to receiving notice not to telephone. ...

Review: On February 27, 2015 I requested verification of the validity of a debt from Statewide Credit and Collection Bureau. On March 4, 2015, I received a reply from this collection agency that I "had not provided documentation evidencing I am not the obligor of this debt so it must belong to me." I have received calls from this company while at work despite my requests not to call me at work. The collection agency attempts to attempt to identify me by the last four digits of social security number #[redacted]" during this phone call. This is inadequate and inappropriate validation.Desired Settlement: Delete this erroneous information from my credit files and quit harassing me.

Business

Response:

Contrary to the complainant's position, Statewide Collection Bureau legally responded to complainant's written correspondence. Moreover, complainant has not been contacted by Statewide Collection Bureau subsequent to receiving notice not to telephone.

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because: I attached this company's response in my initial complaint. This company did not address the issue in the letter I was sent or in this complaint.This company has not presented me with sufficient documentation that would indicate this debt belongs to me. I have caller ID on both my work phone and personal phone which show the dates and times I've been called.