Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: This company have misappropriated funds since July Now they are back tracking and trying to find a way to fix their mistakesIn the meantime it has ruined my credit and my lifeThey have lied to me and after sending me a escrow check, they then realized that they should not have and then wanted their money backThey then lied about what was said to me on the notesNobody ever told me that they check sent to me was supposed to be sent backWhich makes no sense at all, if that was the case I would have saved the money.The last few weeks they have been harassing me with regard to this, stating that I have to pay two December paymentsI agreed to make monthly payments and not two monthly paymentsI am a single Mom and cannot afford this, they have threatened to report me to the credit bureau.This is very unfair practice Regards, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:I do not know how to be any more clear than this- SWBC provided information about their Budget Draft option in November or December My wife and I closed on our home in August [redacted] of SWBC informed us during the loan application process...during the Summer of that SWBC provides customers with a bi-weekly option That point SWBC is making about providing documents regarding their Budget Draft process is irrelevant We were told on multiple occasions prior to finalizing our loan, that SWBC offers a bi-weekly option I fail to understand their response; yes, I have been informed of SWBC's Budget Draft procedures...IN DECEMBER Closing took place in August and the loan process began in June/July We should not have been told, during the summer of 2014, that SWBC provides a bi-weekly option when the do not I find it unacceptable for SWBC's representative, [redacted] , to not know her company's policies Even more so, her supervisor, [redacted] ***, was surprised to learn of SWBC's policies Regards, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:The documentation SWBC's response references was not provided until after closing Therefore, I did not know SWBC does not provide a bi-weekly option until after I finalized the loan and closed on the property Again, the topic of a bi-weekly payment plan was discussed with Jennifer [redacted] on multiple occasions, during the loan application process The reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option was also discussed; that being to have two payments each month applied to the loan By making two payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the course of the loan SWBC's response to this complaint is irrelevant Jennifer [redacted] provided my wife and I with inaccurate information When this matter was discussed with Linda ***, Ms [redacted] 's supervisor, the excuse was that neither knew their own company's policies Of lesser importance, but an accurate illustration of their professionalism...or lack thereof, Ms [redacted] and Ms [redacted] failed to return my telephone calls regarding this matter Regards, [redacted]
While we understand and regret the frustration Mr [redacted] experienced due to the lack of communication from the branch manager, our research indicates that the documentation sent to Mr [redacted] explained how the Budget Drafting program works and how his payments would be applied Since we do not offer a bi-weekly program that amortizes payments every days, we cannot comply with his request to set up such a program
*** *** Revdex.com Corporate Office *** ** *** ***
*** ** *** Re: Case Number: ***: *** *** Loan Number: *** Dear *** ***: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated December 15, and an email received from Ms*** on December 13, (copy enclosed)We respectfully disagree with Ms***' statement that "[she] was never told that [she] would have to send anything back." Our records indicate Ms*** was informed the funds she intended for the August monthly installment were applied to the escrow account and refunded with the escrow surplusMs*** was provided this information and was informed that the monthly installment would need to be remitted using a portion of the funds from the escrow surplus on September 9, September and November 24, While we are unable to release a recording of the telephone conversations, attached please find a detailed synopsis of the telephonic communication with the borrower in reference to the escrow surplusAlthough the payment received July 25, was not applied to the monthly installment as the borrower intended, Ms*** received benefit of the funds upon her receipt of the escrow Surplus. Multiple attempts were made to reach the borrower, but were unsuccessfulAdditionally, loan statements as well as delinquent notices were sent to the borrower which reflected the application of funds and current status of the loanCopies of each loan statement and delinquent notice sent to the borrower is enclosed for your referenceAt this time the loan is due for the December 1, monthly installmentThe borrower has been informed that the loan will become delinquent if the December installment is not satisfied before the end of the monthWe note Ms***' statement that she "agreed to pay $1,a month." The loan note she executed at closing established a fixed principal and interest amount of $703.34; however, the total monthly payment may fluctuate based on changes to the escrowed itemsThe payment amount of $1,consists of the principal and interest of $703.34, $for County Taxes, $for Hazard Insurance and $for Private Mortgage InsuranceMs*** contacted our office on December 16, to request we discontinue contacting her regarding the loan paymentsWe are able to limit telephone communication regarding only certain aspects of the loan servicingIf the borrower wishes to discontinue telephonic communication she must send a written request to cease communicationFor her convenience she may fax the request to my attention at ***Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at ***Sincerely, *** *** Service Excellence Administrator Enclosures cc: *** *** *** *** *** *** Plano, TX ***
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: SWBC is responsible for misappropriating funds from July and August and reporting this to the credit bureauinstead of applying my payment to regular payment it was sent to escrowThis has offset my entire accountI was then told that there was an escrow cheque for $going to be sentHowever when it was not found they told me they were sending another oneI was NEVER told that I would have to send anything backThat makes no sense at allI then got a statement on 11/17/showing that I owed $2,I called 11/24/at am an was told that everything was fine I just need to continue making my regular payments. This *** is lying and the first time I was ever told that I need to pay two house payments for December was 12/10/I told him that I was going to sue SWBC if they reported me to the credit bureauI agreed to pay $1,a monthI have kept my side but they have not kept there side not even keeping up with insurance.I signed up so that I did not have to worry about anything and this has ruined my life.
Regards,*** ***
December 11, Revdex.com *** ** *** ***
*** ** *** Re: Case Number ***: *** *** Loan Number: *** Dear Sirs: This letter is in response to your correspondence received in our office on
December 1,First, we would like to apologize to Ms*** for the errors that occurred in the handling of her loan and the subsequent inconvenience she experienced as a resultThis does not reflect the level of service we strive to provideThis situation has been utilized as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skillsThe loan documents Ms***, then known as *** ***, signed at closing require that she furnish evidence of active insurance policies on an annual basis for all insurance coverage required by the LenderWhen evidence of insurance is not received timely, the borrower is notified that a lender-placed insurance policy will be purchased to protect the Lender's interests and that she is responsible for the payment of the lender-placed insurance premium disbursed from the escrow accountOur records indicate that on September 10, 2013, we received a notice of cancellation from *** Insurance Company dated August 22, 2013, indicating the hazard insurance policy was cancelled effective August 20, (copy enclosed)The policy number on the cancellation notice did not match the hazard insurance policy information on our systemThis discrepancy went unnoticed and resulted in our system being updated to reflect the hazard insurance policy cancellationA letter was sent to Ms*** that same day informing her of the cancellation notice and requesting that she provide evidence of a current hazard insurance policyA copy of the text of the letter is enclosedWhen we were not in receipt of her evidence of a current hazard insurance policy, letters were sent on October and November 5, 2013, again requesting that she provide evidence of an active hazard insurance policy (copy enclosed)When we did not receive evidence that a hazard insurance policy was in effect, on December 10, 2013, a lender-placed flood insurance policy was purchased for $2,880.83, effective August 20, to August 20, A notice dated December 27, 2013, was sent to Ms*** informing her that a lender-placed flood insurance policy had been purchased; a copy of the policy was provided (copy enclosed)The annual escrow analysis was completed on March 26, (copy enclosed) which resulted in a new monthly payment amount of $1,effective with the May 1, installmentAlthough Ms***'s payment was $1,631.23, she continued to remit payments in the amount of $1,The payments of $1,received on May and June 3, were applied to satisfy the May and June monthly installmentsLetters were sent to the borrower upon the receipt of each payment informing her we received a payment for less than the amount due and we could not continue to accept payments for less than the amount due (copies enclosed)Our records indicate that on June 27, 2014, Ms*** rented a payment for the full amount due of $1,for the July installmentOn July 25, 2014, we received the borrower's payment of $1,200.00; however, since the funds were not sufficient to satisfy the monthly installment shown on our system, on July 28, 2014, the funds were manually applied to the escrow account as there was an existing escrow shortageSubsequently, on August 11, 2014, the borrower spoke with a representative in our Customer Service Department who informed her that we were not in receipt of the evidence of insuranceThe representative contacted the borrower's insurance carrier the same day to request evidence of insuranceThe representative with *** Insurance, ***, stated that ***'s records did not reflect SWBC as the mortgagee; as a result, *** did not forward the evidence of insurance to usThis information proved to be incorrectNonetheless, our Customer Service Representative provided the correct mortgagee clause and the *** representative stated evidence of the hazard insurance policy would be sent to us via facsimileAccording to our records, on August 11, 2014] evidence of insurance was received for the period of September 4, to September 4, Our system was updated to reflect this information and the lender-placed insurance policy was cancelled effective September 4, A full premium refund in the amount of $2,was applied to the borrower's escrow accountAn escrow analysis was completed on August 21, 2014, and revealed an escrow surplus of $2,(copy enclosed)Our check number for the escrow surplus was mailed to the borrower along with the escrow analysisPlease note: the escrow surplus was calculated based on the current escrow balance at the time of the analysis, which included the payment of $1,applied to escrow on July 28, On September 9, 2014, the borrower spoke to a representative in our Customer Service Department regarding the past-due August monthly installmentThe representative informed the borrower that she would stop payment on our check number *** for the purpose of applying the funds to the August monthly installment; the representative stated that any surplus, which was estimated to be $944.87, would be released to Ms***Due to a processing error, the stop-payment request was not processedOur records indicate that on September 23, 2014, Ms*** contacted our Customer Service Department stating she was not in receipt of the adjusted escrow surplus check, which she approximated to be $The representative identified the processing error, informed the borrower that our check number was still outstanding and at the request of the borrower, payment was stopped on our check number *** in the amount of $2,It is our process to re-apply the funds to the account from which they came and issue a replacement check payable to the borrower, as appropriateOn October 23, 2014, $2,was applied to the escrow account; the replacement check number in the amount of $2,was not issued until November 17, 2014, when it was then stopped and the funds wired to the borrower's bank accountOn December 9, 2014, we attempted to reach Ms*** to confirm her receipt of the escrow refund of $2,check and inquire whether she wants to apply the funds to the December 1,monthly installmentWe were unsuccessful in reaching her and left a message requesting that she return our callOn December 11, 2014, we spoke with Ms***, confirmed her receipt of the funds and discussed that the December 1, monthly installment was dueMs*** stated that she spent the escrow refund, which included funds intended for a monthly payment, and is not able to satisfy the December monthly installmentMs*** was informed that the loan would become delinquent if the December installment was not satisfied before the end of the month We note the borrower's statement that she located the original check number *** and attempted to deposit the checkAs indicated above, payment on that check was stopped at Ms***' the requestWith respect to the credit bureau reporting: The borrower's request for a credit bureau correction was reviewed on October 27, 2014, and it was determined that it was necessary to update the credit bureau reporting for the August monthly installmentAn update was submitted to the credit bureaus the same day to reflect the August monthly installment was paid as agreedGenerally, the credit bureaus recommend that consumers allow days for updates to be reflected on the credit reportsOn December 11, 2014, we confirmed with Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax that the loan is reported as current and "paid as agreed."At this time, the loan is due for the December 1, 2014, monthly installment of $1,Should you have questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 866-*** Sincerely,*** *** *** *** ***Enclosurescc: *** *** *** *** *** *** Plano, TX ***
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Per the contract I signed, there was nothing that declined coverage due to major mechanical break down, or wear and tear per the letter I sent in response to SWBC's refusal to open the claim. I forwarded a cooy of the entire GAP agreement I signed electing the coverage on my loan. I have attached a copy of the letter I sent as well as the GAP election form outlining the coverage. It states that GAP will cover the balance when the vehicle is deemed a total loss (which it was)... it does not say if primary insurance covers the loss... my primary insurance clearly outlines what is and is not covered under the policy. It was not a loss covered by my primary insurance, however, after their investigation, the vehicle has been deemed a total loss. This claim should be covered per their definitions on the forms I signed when I elected coverage. They should honor the agreement I signed that does not exclude major mechanical failure anywhere on it! After the headache and amount of tine I have spent trying to work with this company for resolution, I am disgusted! I am simply seeking the coverage Ibelected under the GAP policy... I can only imagine if I was also seeking compensation for my time in trying to get in touch with someone that could actually help me or for my inconvenience in what should seemingly be a simple process with a relatively fast turn around to clear the balance the loan so that I can obtain a replacement vehicle. I am simply asking this company to do the right thing and honor the coverage I purchased!!
Regards,
[redacted]
According to our records, the loan was paid in full as of June 11, 2015. Once the loan paid in full, a final reconciliation of the escrow account was initiated. On July 3, 2015, the escrow balance was released to the address of record in the amount of $3,634.80. We note in Mr....
[redacted]’s complaint that he no longer resided at the property address and that an alternate mailing address was provided at closing. Please note: the alternate mailing address was provided to Mr. [redacted]’s title company. We have no record of the third party providing us with the updated address; as a result, the check was disbursed to the address on file. Our records indicate on July 13, 2015, Mr. [redacted] contacted our Customer Service Department regarding the status of the refund request. Our agent advised Mr. [redacted] that he had to wait two weeks before the check could be stopped and reissued. This is not our process and we regret the misinformation Mr. [redacted] received. On July 19, 2015, we initiated the process to reissue the escrow check to the new mailing address provided by Mr. [redacted]. Please allow 7-10 business days for receipt of the payment. Since we were provided with a P.O. Box as Mr. [redacted]’s preferred mailing address, we were unable to expedite the request via overnight mail. Additionally, we do not offer electronic deposit as a method of refunding a borrower’s escrow balance at this time. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused Mr. [redacted]. We have utilized this situation as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skills as his experience is not indicative of the level of service we strive to provide.
According to the enclosed amortization schedule received from Mr. [redacted], the first payment date that was accounted for in the amortization of his home loan was February 1, 2012. As a result, the balance reflecting on August 1, 2015 was $92,985.43. However, Mr. [redacted]’...
loan closed on February 24, 2012 with a first payment due date of April 1, 2012. We have enclosed a copy of Mr. [redacted]’ HUD-1 Settlement Statement and Promissory Note that was signed at closing for your review. We have enclosed a standard amortization schedule reflecting the April 1, 2012 first payment date. According to the standard amortization schedule, the principal balance as of August 1, 2015 would be $93,278.33; representing a $292.90 difference from the balance reflected on the amortization schedule that we received from Mr. [redacted].Our records indicate that three principal payments, formally regarded to as principal curtailments, in the amount of $1,000 each were received on June 3, July 3, and July 31, 2015. Enclosed is an amortization schedule accounting for the principal payments which is an accurate depiction of Mr. [redacted]’ loan account. After the application of principal payments, the balance as of August 1, 2015 was$90,266.44, representing a $281.01 difference from the principal balance Mr. [redacted] listed in his correspondence. Please note: each of the monthly mortgage statements generated after the applications of Mr. [redacted]’ monthly installments and principal payments indicates the entire amount that was received was applied to his loan correctly per the terms of the Note.We respectfully disagree with Mr. [redacted]’ claim that he was charged a 10% fee for prepayment. At no time in his telephone interactions with our customer service department was he advised that a re-amortization fee or penalty will be charged. We acknowledge that the Promissory Note signed at closing dictates that no prepayment penalties will be assessed and we have not assessed any re-amortization fees and or prepayment penalties on Mr. [redacted]’ loan account. The afore-mentioned loan account payment history will confirm this information.
According to our records, Mr. [redacted] contacted our office on May 3, 2016, to notify us that the mortgaged property had sustained damage as a result of Hail on April 11, 2016. Due to the size of the claim, the representative informed Mr. [redacted] that we considered the claim to be a...
”monitored-claim,” and explained our monitored-claim process and mailed a monitored-claim package to the address of record the same day with instructions to complete and return all required documents.On October 14, 2016, Mr. [redacted] again contacted our office and requested an exception be submitted in order for him to have funds released early to pay the second contractor so they can begin repairing the damage to the property. Mr. [redacted]’s request was forwarded to our management team for review and consideration that same day. Furthermore, Mr. [redacted] requested to speak with a supervisor again and was told a supervisor would return his call within 48 hours. Our records indicate Mr. [redacted] spoke with a supervisor on October 18, 2016. Due to the extenuating circumstances, we have agreed to release an additional $40,000.00 to pay the second contractor up front to begin working on the damaged property. We ask that Mr. [redacted] allow 2-3 business days for the draw to occur and another 2-3 business days for receipt of the check.We note Mr. [redacted]’s request for a single point of contact for his claim. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide Mr. [redacted] with a single point of contact; however, all of our claim representatives are trained to handle claim related issues. Furthermore, any conversation the borrower has with our representatives are documented in the notes on the account. This ensures that any representative Mr. [redacted] speaks with is aware of the situation and aware of any exceptions that may have been requested.
This letter is in response
to your correspondence dated January 23, 2016.We received notification of the borrower's
death on February 18, 2016. At that time, we advised that we would need the
Independent Administratrix of the Estate. Although Ms. [redacted] called to
request information on the...
loan, it is our policy to not provide loan
information until the requested executor information is received. Please be
advised that we received the Order Granting Independent Administration and
Authorizing Letter of Administration on August 31, 2016. Since we did not
receive the proper documentation citing a representative of the estate until
August 31, 2016, we were unable to release loan specific information to Ms.
[redacted] previously and thus referred her to our foreclosure attorneys,
[redacted]Our records indicate, the loan was approved for foreclosure on May
6, 2016, as the loan was due for the January 2016 installment. However, due to
active loss mitigation, all foreclosure activity has been placed on hold and
there is no sheriff sale date scheduled.[redacted] owns the mortgage loan and as such, we must follow
[redacted]'s requirements with regard to the granting of assistance.On November 14, 2016, a Streamline Trial
Period Offer was mailed to the address of record. The trial period plan was
effective December 1, 2016 through February 1, 2017, with the monthly payment
of $1,626.76. We received timely trial period payments on December 19, 2016 and
the second and third payments on December 20, 2016. Additionally, on January
10, 2017, we received funds in the amount of $1,131.11 and on January 30, 2017,
in the amount of $1,626.76.Please note: [redacted] requires that the trial
period end-date must be expired prior to the issuance of a final modification.
In this case, the trial plan end date is February 1, 2017. At this time, the
final modification review is process. Once the review has been completed, Ms.
[redacted] will be notified of the decision.With regards to the
Securitization of the property:The Note and Security Deed executed at closing
afford the lender the right to inspect the mortgaged property should the loan
be in default, as well as take appropriate action to preserve the property.
Inspections and preservation work for a mortgaged property are referred to a
vendor in such matters.As the loan was not active in an approved
loss mitigation workout option and due for the January 2016 installment, we
instructed our third party vendor to secure the property. As a result, on
August 25, 2016 a lockbox was place on the front door. Should Ms. [redacted] wish
to obtain the access code for the lockbox, she may contact me via telephone at
the telephone number listed below.We respectfully disagree with Ms. [redacted]'s
statement that we are discriminating against the estate and have charged
fraudulent property preservation fees as our review of the loan does not
support this allegation. We have enclosed supporting documentation that reveals
the property required maintenance of the building and landscape.With regards to real estate
taxes:On July 12, 2016, we received notification
from Galveston County, Texas that taxes were delinquent. As a result, the loan
was converted from a non-escrowed to an escrowed loan. Consequently, a
disbursement was made for the base amount of $5,928.56 and the penalty amount
of $2,466.29. Additionally, on December 29, 2016, we disbursed funds in the
amount of $11,349.15 for the 2016 tax year which was due by January 31, 2017.On January 26, 2017, we confirmed that the
taxes were previously satisfied on December 5, 2016 and that our bulk wire had
not been processed. We have requested that the county refund the payment of
$11,349.15. Once the funds have been received, they will be applied to the loan
accordingly. For review, enclosed is a copy of the Loan History which reflects
loan activity.For your convenience, all
documents referenced above have been enclosed.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The documentation SWBC's response references was not provided until after closing. Therefore, I did not know SWBC does not provide a bi-weekly option until after I finalized the loan and closed on the property. Again, the topic of a bi-weekly payment plan was discussed with Jennifer [redacted] on multiple occasions, during the loan application process. The reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option was also discussed; that being to have two payments each month applied to the loan. By making two payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the course of the loan. SWBC's response to this complaint is irrelevant. Jennifer [redacted] provided my wife and I with inaccurate information. When this matter was discussed with Linda [redacted], Ms. [redacted]'s supervisor, the excuse was that neither knew their own company's policies. Of lesser importance, but an accurate illustration of their professionalism...or lack thereof, Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] failed to return my telephone calls regarding this matter.
Regards,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: This company have misappropriated funds since July 2014. Now they are back tracking and trying to find a way to fix their mistakes. In the meantime it has ruined my credit and my life. They have lied to me and after sending me a escrow check, they then realized that they should not have and then wanted their money back. They then lied about what was said to me on the notes. Nobody ever told me that they check sent to me was supposed to be sent back. Which makes no sense at all, if that was the case I would have saved the money.The last few weeks they have been harassing me with regard to this, stating that I have to pay two December payments. I agreed to make monthly payments and not two monthly payments. I am a single Mom and cannot afford this, they have threatened to report me to the credit bureau.This is very unfair practice.
Regards,
[redacted]
Please note - this complaint is not regarding SWBC Mortgage Corporation - the consumer does not have and has not applied for a mortgage with SWBC Mortgage Corporation. Please direct all inquiries regarding the status of this complaint to the Compliance Department for SWBC at...
SWBC administers the GAP program on behalf of the carrier for [redacted]. On 3/26/15, the borrower elected GAP coverage on the vehicle securing the loan. On 5/18/17, SWBC received claim documents outlining the loss, but the claim did not include a calculation of the primary...
insurance payment, which is required under the GAP waiver. SWBC contacted the primary insurance carrier who confirmed that the loss was due to wear and tear and/or mechanical breakdown, which is an excluded peril under their policy. Therefore, there was no primary insurance coverage.
The “GAP Amount” in the waiver is calculated based on the primary insurance payment for physical damage for a theft or total loss. Since there was no primary insurance coverage for physical damage, there was no GAP amount to pay the borrower.
Under “Installment Sales Contract/Loan/Lease GAP Waiver Addendum” in the borrower waiver agreement, it reads “If the collateral is not protected by primary insurance, we will waive only the GAP amount obtained by subtracting the Actual Cash Value of the covered collateral from the unpaid net balance and you will remain responsible for the Actual Cash Value of the collateral”. Since the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle was $8,985, as determined by the primary carrier, and the unpaid net balance was $8,282.86, the borrower is not entitled to payment under the uncovered loss provision of the waiver.
The GAP insurance carrier has confirmed denial of the claim after re-reviewing the file per the borrower’s request.
Southwest Business Corporation (SWBC) administers debt cancellation claims on behalf of [redacted]. SWBC normally processes these claims initiated by the lender ([redacted]) rather than working directly with borrowers at the onset, which resulted in confusion regarding this...
customer’s claim. We have since received and reviewed the loan and claim file, and have approved the customer’s claim. Therefore, two monthly payments will be forwarded to [redacted] on the customer’s behalf and we will be sending the customer a continuing claim form. Upon completion of the continuing claim form, the customer will be entitled to continuing benefits so long as the customer is unemployed, up to the maximum benefit limit.
We apologize for the customer’s frustration and for any confusion caused by SWBC.
Please find below the SWBC response to above referenced complaint. Please let me know of anything further that is needed. Thank you. Resolution: SWBC contacted the underlying carrier and was told to send in revised documentation and the change would be processed within 24 – 48 hours. SWBC e-mailed the original application, along with a hand written note requesting the effective date change for both the 2014 – 15 and 2015 – 16 policies, and SWBC has subsequently confirmed that the policy dates have been changed and the revised policy was mailed to the insured on 10/2/15 [redacted]
While we understand and regret the frustration Mr. [redacted] experienced due to the lack of communication from the branch manager, our research indicates that the documentation sent to Mr. [redacted] explained how the Budget Drafting program works and how his payments would be...
applied. Since we do not offer a bi-weekly program that amortizes payments every 14 days, we cannot comply with his request to set up such a program.
According to our records, the loan originated on November 21, 2014, at which time an escrow account was established for the payment of real estate property taxes and homeowner’s insurance. As evidenced by the Settlement Statement (“HUD-1”) executed at closing, property taxes were estimated in...
the yearly amount of $2,372.52, and the first year’s homeowner’s insurance premium was $1,686.48. These figures were utilized in the designation of the original monthly payment amount of $1,267.03. The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) requires that we perform an annual review of a borrower’s escrow account. The first yearly scheduled analysis for the loan occurred on June 22, 2015. This analysis included the anticipated yearly disbursement amounts of $2,375.90 for taxes and $1,686.22 for homeowner’s insurance, and the monthly payment amount was adjusted to $1,267.50. Disbursements for the payment of taxes were issued in the amounts of $1,964.31 and $1,544.68 on October 7, 2015 and May 2, 2016 respectively. Upon disbursement, our records are updated to retain the amount paid as the anticipated disbursement for the following year. They yearly escrow analysis completed on June 13, 2016 identified a shortage of $4,995.02, due to taxes having been disbursed in a higher amount than previously anticipated. Spread over twelve installments, this shortage resulted in the new monthly payment amount of $1,894.37 effective with the August 2016 installment. On December 29, 2016, the amount of $3,207.00 was disbursed for payment of the homeowner’s insurance premium. On March 16, 2017, our office received a mid-term replacement of the borrower's preferred homeowner’s insurance policy, and the premium of $1,279.00 was disbursed for the new policy the same day. A letter dated March 17, 2017 was sent to the borrower advising that multiple disbursements for homeowner’s insurance premium had been disbursed within the year, which may result in a shortage if the refund from the previous policy was not returned to escrow. A payment of $1,605.64 was applied to the escrow account on March 27, 2017. In accordance with the borrower's request, an escrow analysis was conducted on April 12, 2017, which identified an overage of $179.46, and which adjusted the monthly payment amount to $1,288.30, effective with the June 2017 installment. The lesser monthly payment amount reflects a reduction in the anticipated disbursement amounts for both taxes and insurance, based on the most recent payments made for these items. The overage amount was returned to the borrower by check number 778737 along with an Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement. Upon review, we have identified no errors with the analyzing of Ms. Bink’s escrow account and subsequent adjustments to the monthly payment amount. We thank Ms. Bink for bringing her concerns to our attention, and we look forward to the continued servicing of her loan.
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: This company have misappropriated funds since July Now they are back tracking and trying to find a way to fix their mistakesIn the meantime it has ruined my credit and my lifeThey have lied to me and after sending me a escrow check, they then realized that they should not have and then wanted their money backThey then lied about what was said to me on the notesNobody ever told me that they check sent to me was supposed to be sent backWhich makes no sense at all, if that was the case I would have saved the money.The last few weeks they have been harassing me with regard to this, stating that I have to pay two December paymentsI agreed to make monthly payments and not two monthly paymentsI am a single Mom and cannot afford this, they have threatened to report me to the credit bureau.This is very unfair practice Regards, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:I do not know how to be any more clear than this- SWBC provided information about their Budget Draft option in November or December My wife and I closed on our home in August [redacted] of SWBC informed us during the loan application process...during the Summer of that SWBC provides customers with a bi-weekly option That point SWBC is making about providing documents regarding their Budget Draft process is irrelevant We were told on multiple occasions prior to finalizing our loan, that SWBC offers a bi-weekly option I fail to understand their response; yes, I have been informed of SWBC's Budget Draft procedures...IN DECEMBER Closing took place in August and the loan process began in June/July We should not have been told, during the summer of 2014, that SWBC provides a bi-weekly option when the do not I find it unacceptable for SWBC's representative, [redacted] , to not know her company's policies Even more so, her supervisor, [redacted] ***, was surprised to learn of SWBC's policies Regards, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:The documentation SWBC's response references was not provided until after closing Therefore, I did not know SWBC does not provide a bi-weekly option until after I finalized the loan and closed on the property Again, the topic of a bi-weekly payment plan was discussed with Jennifer [redacted] on multiple occasions, during the loan application process The reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option was also discussed; that being to have two payments each month applied to the loan By making two payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the course of the loan SWBC's response to this complaint is irrelevant Jennifer [redacted] provided my wife and I with inaccurate information When this matter was discussed with Linda ***, Ms [redacted] 's supervisor, the excuse was that neither knew their own company's policies Of lesser importance, but an accurate illustration of their professionalism...or lack thereof, Ms [redacted] and Ms [redacted] failed to return my telephone calls regarding this matter Regards, [redacted]
While we understand and regret the frustration Mr [redacted] experienced due to the lack of communication from the branch manager, our research indicates that the documentation sent to Mr [redacted] explained how the Budget Drafting program works and how his payments would be applied Since we do not offer a bi-weekly program that amortizes payments every days, we cannot comply with his request to set up such a program
*** *** Revdex.com Corporate Office *** ** *** ***
*** ** *** Re: Case Number: ***: *** *** Loan Number: *** Dear *** ***: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated December 15, and an email received from Ms*** on December 13, (copy enclosed)We respectfully disagree with Ms***' statement that "[she] was never told that [she] would have to send anything back." Our records indicate Ms*** was informed the funds she intended for the August monthly installment were applied to the escrow account and refunded with the escrow surplusMs*** was provided this information and was informed that the monthly installment would need to be remitted using a portion of the funds from the escrow surplus on September 9, September and November 24, While we are unable to release a recording of the telephone conversations, attached please find a detailed synopsis of the telephonic communication with the borrower in reference to the escrow surplusAlthough the payment received July 25, was not applied to the monthly installment as the borrower intended, Ms*** received benefit of the funds upon her receipt of the escrow Surplus. Multiple attempts were made to reach the borrower, but were unsuccessfulAdditionally, loan statements as well as delinquent notices were sent to the borrower which reflected the application of funds and current status of the loanCopies of each loan statement and delinquent notice sent to the borrower is enclosed for your referenceAt this time the loan is due for the December 1, monthly installmentThe borrower has been informed that the loan will become delinquent if the December installment is not satisfied before the end of the monthWe note Ms***' statement that she "agreed to pay $1,a month." The loan note she executed at closing established a fixed principal and interest amount of $703.34; however, the total monthly payment may fluctuate based on changes to the escrowed itemsThe payment amount of $1,consists of the principal and interest of $703.34, $for County Taxes, $for Hazard Insurance and $for Private Mortgage InsuranceMs*** contacted our office on December 16, to request we discontinue contacting her regarding the loan paymentsWe are able to limit telephone communication regarding only certain aspects of the loan servicingIf the borrower wishes to discontinue telephonic communication she must send a written request to cease communicationFor her convenience she may fax the request to my attention at ***Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at ***Sincerely, *** *** Service Excellence Administrator Enclosures cc: *** *** *** *** *** *** Plano, TX ***
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: SWBC is responsible for misappropriating funds from July and August and reporting this to the credit bureauinstead of applying my payment to regular payment it was sent to escrowThis has offset my entire accountI was then told that there was an escrow cheque for $going to be sentHowever when it was not found they told me they were sending another oneI was NEVER told that I would have to send anything backThat makes no sense at allI then got a statement on 11/17/showing that I owed $2,I called 11/24/at am an was told that everything was fine I just need to continue making my regular payments. This *** is lying and the first time I was ever told that I need to pay two house payments for December was 12/10/I told him that I was going to sue SWBC if they reported me to the credit bureauI agreed to pay $1,a monthI have kept my side but they have not kept there side not even keeping up with insurance.I signed up so that I did not have to worry about anything and this has ruined my life.
Regards,*** ***
December 11, Revdex.com *** ** *** ***
*** ** *** Re: Case Number ***: *** *** Loan Number: *** Dear Sirs: This letter is in response to your correspondence received in our office on
December 1,First, we would like to apologize to Ms*** for the errors that occurred in the handling of her loan and the subsequent inconvenience she experienced as a resultThis does not reflect the level of service we strive to provideThis situation has been utilized as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skillsThe loan documents Ms***, then known as *** ***, signed at closing require that she furnish evidence of active insurance policies on an annual basis for all insurance coverage required by the LenderWhen evidence of insurance is not received timely, the borrower is notified that a lender-placed insurance policy will be purchased to protect the Lender's interests and that she is responsible for the payment of the lender-placed insurance premium disbursed from the escrow accountOur records indicate that on September 10, 2013, we received a notice of cancellation from *** Insurance Company dated August 22, 2013, indicating the hazard insurance policy was cancelled effective August 20, (copy enclosed)The policy number on the cancellation notice did not match the hazard insurance policy information on our systemThis discrepancy went unnoticed and resulted in our system being updated to reflect the hazard insurance policy cancellationA letter was sent to Ms*** that same day informing her of the cancellation notice and requesting that she provide evidence of a current hazard insurance policyA copy of the text of the letter is enclosedWhen we were not in receipt of her evidence of a current hazard insurance policy, letters were sent on October and November 5, 2013, again requesting that she provide evidence of an active hazard insurance policy (copy enclosed)When we did not receive evidence that a hazard insurance policy was in effect, on December 10, 2013, a lender-placed flood insurance policy was purchased for $2,880.83, effective August 20, to August 20, A notice dated December 27, 2013, was sent to Ms*** informing her that a lender-placed flood insurance policy had been purchased; a copy of the policy was provided (copy enclosed)The annual escrow analysis was completed on March 26, (copy enclosed) which resulted in a new monthly payment amount of $1,effective with the May 1, installmentAlthough Ms***'s payment was $1,631.23, she continued to remit payments in the amount of $1,The payments of $1,received on May and June 3, were applied to satisfy the May and June monthly installmentsLetters were sent to the borrower upon the receipt of each payment informing her we received a payment for less than the amount due and we could not continue to accept payments for less than the amount due (copies enclosed)Our records indicate that on June 27, 2014, Ms*** rented a payment for the full amount due of $1,for the July installmentOn July 25, 2014, we received the borrower's payment of $1,200.00; however, since the funds were not sufficient to satisfy the monthly installment shown on our system, on July 28, 2014, the funds were manually applied to the escrow account as there was an existing escrow shortageSubsequently, on August 11, 2014, the borrower spoke with a representative in our Customer Service Department who informed her that we were not in receipt of the evidence of insuranceThe representative contacted the borrower's insurance carrier the same day to request evidence of insuranceThe representative with *** Insurance, ***, stated that ***'s records did not reflect SWBC as the mortgagee; as a result, *** did not forward the evidence of insurance to usThis information proved to be incorrectNonetheless, our Customer Service Representative provided the correct mortgagee clause and the *** representative stated evidence of the hazard insurance policy would be sent to us via facsimileAccording to our records, on August 11, 2014] evidence of insurance was received for the period of September 4, to September 4, Our system was updated to reflect this information and the lender-placed insurance policy was cancelled effective September 4, A full premium refund in the amount of $2,was applied to the borrower's escrow accountAn escrow analysis was completed on August 21, 2014, and revealed an escrow surplus of $2,(copy enclosed)Our check number for the escrow surplus was mailed to the borrower along with the escrow analysisPlease note: the escrow surplus was calculated based on the current escrow balance at the time of the analysis, which included the payment of $1,applied to escrow on July 28, On September 9, 2014, the borrower spoke to a representative in our Customer Service Department regarding the past-due August monthly installmentThe representative informed the borrower that she would stop payment on our check number *** for the purpose of applying the funds to the August monthly installment; the representative stated that any surplus, which was estimated to be $944.87, would be released to Ms***Due to a processing error, the stop-payment request was not processedOur records indicate that on September 23, 2014, Ms*** contacted our Customer Service Department stating she was not in receipt of the adjusted escrow surplus check, which she approximated to be $The representative identified the processing error, informed the borrower that our check number was still outstanding and at the request of the borrower, payment was stopped on our check number *** in the amount of $2,It is our process to re-apply the funds to the account from which they came and issue a replacement check payable to the borrower, as appropriateOn October 23, 2014, $2,was applied to the escrow account; the replacement check number in the amount of $2,was not issued until November 17, 2014, when it was then stopped and the funds wired to the borrower's bank accountOn December 9, 2014, we attempted to reach Ms*** to confirm her receipt of the escrow refund of $2,check and inquire whether she wants to apply the funds to the December 1,monthly installmentWe were unsuccessful in reaching her and left a message requesting that she return our callOn December 11, 2014, we spoke with Ms***, confirmed her receipt of the funds and discussed that the December 1, monthly installment was dueMs*** stated that she spent the escrow refund, which included funds intended for a monthly payment, and is not able to satisfy the December monthly installmentMs*** was informed that the loan would become delinquent if the December installment was not satisfied before the end of the month We note the borrower's statement that she located the original check number *** and attempted to deposit the checkAs indicated above, payment on that check was stopped at Ms***' the requestWith respect to the credit bureau reporting: The borrower's request for a credit bureau correction was reviewed on October 27, 2014, and it was determined that it was necessary to update the credit bureau reporting for the August monthly installmentAn update was submitted to the credit bureaus the same day to reflect the August monthly installment was paid as agreedGenerally, the credit bureaus recommend that consumers allow days for updates to be reflected on the credit reportsOn December 11, 2014, we confirmed with Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax that the loan is reported as current and "paid as agreed."At this time, the loan is due for the December 1, 2014, monthly installment of $1,Should you have questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 866-*** Sincerely,*** *** *** *** ***Enclosurescc: *** *** *** *** *** *** Plano, TX ***
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Per the contract I signed, there was nothing that declined coverage due to major mechanical break down, or wear and tear per the letter I sent in response to SWBC's refusal to open the claim. I forwarded a cooy of the entire GAP agreement I signed electing the coverage on my loan. I have attached a copy of the letter I sent as well as the GAP election form outlining the coverage. It states that GAP will cover the balance when the vehicle is deemed a total loss (which it was)... it does not say if primary insurance covers the loss... my primary insurance clearly outlines what is and is not covered under the policy. It was not a loss covered by my primary insurance, however, after their investigation, the vehicle has been deemed a total loss. This claim should be covered per their definitions on the forms I signed when I elected coverage. They should honor the agreement I signed that does not exclude major mechanical failure anywhere on it! After the headache and amount of tine I have spent trying to work with this company for resolution, I am disgusted! I am simply seeking the coverage Ibelected under the GAP policy... I can only imagine if I was also seeking compensation for my time in trying to get in touch with someone that could actually help me or for my inconvenience in what should seemingly be a simple process with a relatively fast turn around to clear the balance the loan so that I can obtain a replacement vehicle. I am simply asking this company to do the right thing and honor the coverage I purchased!!
Regards,
[redacted]
According to our records, the loan was paid in full as of June 11, 2015. Once the loan paid in full, a final reconciliation of the escrow account was initiated. On July 3, 2015, the escrow balance was released to the address of record in the amount of $3,634.80. We note in Mr....
[redacted]’s complaint that he no longer resided at the property address and that an alternate mailing address was provided at closing. Please note: the alternate mailing address was provided to Mr. [redacted]’s title company. We have no record of the third party providing us with the updated address; as a result, the check was disbursed to the address on file. Our records indicate on July 13, 2015, Mr. [redacted] contacted our Customer Service Department regarding the status of the refund request. Our agent advised Mr. [redacted] that he had to wait two weeks before the check could be stopped and reissued. This is not our process and we regret the misinformation Mr. [redacted] received. On July 19, 2015, we initiated the process to reissue the escrow check to the new mailing address provided by Mr. [redacted]. Please allow 7-10 business days for receipt of the payment. Since we were provided with a P.O. Box as Mr. [redacted]’s preferred mailing address, we were unable to expedite the request via overnight mail. Additionally, we do not offer electronic deposit as a method of refunding a borrower’s escrow balance at this time. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused Mr. [redacted]. We have utilized this situation as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skills as his experience is not indicative of the level of service we strive to provide.
According to the enclosed amortization schedule received from Mr. [redacted], the first payment date that was accounted for in the amortization of his home loan was February 1, 2012. As a result, the balance reflecting on August 1, 2015 was $92,985.43. However, Mr. [redacted]’...
loan closed on February 24, 2012 with a first payment due date of April 1, 2012. We have enclosed a copy of Mr. [redacted]’ HUD-1 Settlement Statement and Promissory Note that was signed at closing for your review. We have enclosed a standard amortization schedule reflecting the April 1, 2012 first payment date. According to the standard amortization schedule, the principal balance as of August 1, 2015 would be $93,278.33; representing a $292.90 difference from the balance reflected on the amortization schedule that we received from Mr. [redacted].Our records indicate that three principal payments, formally regarded to as principal curtailments, in the amount of $1,000 each were received on June 3, July 3, and July 31, 2015. Enclosed is an amortization schedule accounting for the principal payments which is an accurate depiction of Mr. [redacted]’ loan account. After the application of principal payments, the balance as of August 1, 2015 was$90,266.44, representing a $281.01 difference from the principal balance Mr. [redacted] listed in his correspondence. Please note: each of the monthly mortgage statements generated after the applications of Mr. [redacted]’ monthly installments and principal payments indicates the entire amount that was received was applied to his loan correctly per the terms of the Note.We respectfully disagree with Mr. [redacted]’ claim that he was charged a 10% fee for prepayment. At no time in his telephone interactions with our customer service department was he advised that a re-amortization fee or penalty will be charged. We acknowledge that the Promissory Note signed at closing dictates that no prepayment penalties will be assessed and we have not assessed any re-amortization fees and or prepayment penalties on Mr. [redacted]’ loan account. The afore-mentioned loan account payment history will confirm this information.
According to our records, Mr. [redacted] contacted our office on May 3, 2016, to notify us that the mortgaged property had sustained damage as a result of Hail on April 11, 2016. Due to the size of the claim, the representative informed Mr. [redacted] that we considered the claim to be a...
”monitored-claim,” and explained our monitored-claim process and mailed a monitored-claim package to the address of record the same day with instructions to complete and return all required documents.On October 14, 2016, Mr. [redacted] again contacted our office and requested an exception be submitted in order for him to have funds released early to pay the second contractor so they can begin repairing the damage to the property. Mr. [redacted]’s request was forwarded to our management team for review and consideration that same day. Furthermore, Mr. [redacted] requested to speak with a supervisor again and was told a supervisor would return his call within 48 hours. Our records indicate Mr. [redacted] spoke with a supervisor on October 18, 2016. Due to the extenuating circumstances, we have agreed to release an additional $40,000.00 to pay the second contractor up front to begin working on the damaged property. We ask that Mr. [redacted] allow 2-3 business days for the draw to occur and another 2-3 business days for receipt of the check.We note Mr. [redacted]’s request for a single point of contact for his claim. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide Mr. [redacted] with a single point of contact; however, all of our claim representatives are trained to handle claim related issues. Furthermore, any conversation the borrower has with our representatives are documented in the notes on the account. This ensures that any representative Mr. [redacted] speaks with is aware of the situation and aware of any exceptions that may have been requested.
This letter is in response
to your correspondence dated January 23, 2016.We received notification of the borrower's
death on February 18, 2016. At that time, we advised that we would need the
Independent Administratrix of the Estate. Although Ms. [redacted] called to
request information on the...
loan, it is our policy to not provide loan
information until the requested executor information is received. Please be
advised that we received the Order Granting Independent Administration and
Authorizing Letter of Administration on August 31, 2016. Since we did not
receive the proper documentation citing a representative of the estate until
August 31, 2016, we were unable to release loan specific information to Ms.
[redacted] previously and thus referred her to our foreclosure attorneys,
[redacted]Our records indicate, the loan was approved for foreclosure on May
6, 2016, as the loan was due for the January 2016 installment. However, due to
active loss mitigation, all foreclosure activity has been placed on hold and
there is no sheriff sale date scheduled.[redacted] owns the mortgage loan and as such, we must follow
[redacted]'s requirements with regard to the granting of assistance.On November 14, 2016, a Streamline Trial
Period Offer was mailed to the address of record. The trial period plan was
effective December 1, 2016 through February 1, 2017, with the monthly payment
of $1,626.76. We received timely trial period payments on December 19, 2016 and
the second and third payments on December 20, 2016. Additionally, on January
10, 2017, we received funds in the amount of $1,131.11 and on January 30, 2017,
in the amount of $1,626.76.Please note: [redacted] requires that the trial
period end-date must be expired prior to the issuance of a final modification.
In this case, the trial plan end date is February 1, 2017. At this time, the
final modification review is process. Once the review has been completed, Ms.
[redacted] will be notified of the decision.With regards to the
Securitization of the property:The Note and Security Deed executed at closing
afford the lender the right to inspect the mortgaged property should the loan
be in default, as well as take appropriate action to preserve the property.
Inspections and preservation work for a mortgaged property are referred to a
vendor in such matters.As the loan was not active in an approved
loss mitigation workout option and due for the January 2016 installment, we
instructed our third party vendor to secure the property. As a result, on
August 25, 2016 a lockbox was place on the front door. Should Ms. [redacted] wish
to obtain the access code for the lockbox, she may contact me via telephone at
the telephone number listed below.We respectfully disagree with Ms. [redacted]'s
statement that we are discriminating against the estate and have charged
fraudulent property preservation fees as our review of the loan does not
support this allegation. We have enclosed supporting documentation that reveals
the property required maintenance of the building and landscape.With regards to real estate
taxes:On July 12, 2016, we received notification
from Galveston County, Texas that taxes were delinquent. As a result, the loan
was converted from a non-escrowed to an escrowed loan. Consequently, a
disbursement was made for the base amount of $5,928.56 and the penalty amount
of $2,466.29. Additionally, on December 29, 2016, we disbursed funds in the
amount of $11,349.15 for the 2016 tax year which was due by January 31, 2017.On January 26, 2017, we confirmed that the
taxes were previously satisfied on December 5, 2016 and that our bulk wire had
not been processed. We have requested that the county refund the payment of
$11,349.15. Once the funds have been received, they will be applied to the loan
accordingly. For review, enclosed is a copy of the Loan History which reflects
loan activity.For your convenience, all
documents referenced above have been enclosed.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The documentation SWBC's response references was not provided until after closing. Therefore, I did not know SWBC does not provide a bi-weekly option until after I finalized the loan and closed on the property. Again, the topic of a bi-weekly payment plan was discussed with Jennifer [redacted] on multiple occasions, during the loan application process. The reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option was also discussed; that being to have two payments each month applied to the loan. By making two payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the course of the loan. SWBC's response to this complaint is irrelevant. Jennifer [redacted] provided my wife and I with inaccurate information. When this matter was discussed with Linda [redacted], Ms. [redacted]'s supervisor, the excuse was that neither knew their own company's policies. Of lesser importance, but an accurate illustration of their professionalism...or lack thereof, Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] failed to return my telephone calls regarding this matter.
Regards,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: This company have misappropriated funds since July 2014. Now they are back tracking and trying to find a way to fix their mistakes. In the meantime it has ruined my credit and my life. They have lied to me and after sending me a escrow check, they then realized that they should not have and then wanted their money back. They then lied about what was said to me on the notes. Nobody ever told me that they check sent to me was supposed to be sent back. Which makes no sense at all, if that was the case I would have saved the money.The last few weeks they have been harassing me with regard to this, stating that I have to pay two December payments. I agreed to make monthly payments and not two monthly payments. I am a single Mom and cannot afford this, they have threatened to report me to the credit bureau.This is very unfair practice.
Regards,
[redacted]
Please note - this complaint is not regarding SWBC Mortgage Corporation - the consumer does not have and has not applied for a mortgage with SWBC Mortgage Corporation. Please direct all inquiries regarding the status of this complaint to the Compliance Department for SWBC at...
[email protected] so that they can respond accordingly.
SWBC administers the GAP program on behalf of the carrier for [redacted]. On 3/26/15, the borrower elected GAP coverage on the vehicle securing the loan. On 5/18/17, SWBC received claim documents outlining the loss, but the claim did not include a calculation of the primary...
insurance payment, which is required under the GAP waiver. SWBC contacted the primary insurance carrier who confirmed that the loss was due to wear and tear and/or mechanical breakdown, which is an excluded peril under their policy. Therefore, there was no primary insurance coverage.
The “GAP Amount” in the waiver is calculated based on the primary insurance payment for physical damage for a theft or total loss. Since there was no primary insurance coverage for physical damage, there was no GAP amount to pay the borrower.
Under “Installment Sales Contract/Loan/Lease GAP Waiver Addendum” in the borrower waiver agreement, it reads “If the collateral is not protected by primary insurance, we will waive only the GAP amount obtained by subtracting the Actual Cash Value of the covered collateral from the unpaid net balance and you will remain responsible for the Actual Cash Value of the collateral”. Since the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle was $8,985, as determined by the primary carrier, and the unpaid net balance was $8,282.86, the borrower is not entitled to payment under the uncovered loss provision of the waiver.
The GAP insurance carrier has confirmed denial of the claim after re-reviewing the file per the borrower’s request.
Southwest Business Corporation (SWBC) administers debt cancellation claims on behalf of [redacted]. SWBC normally processes these claims initiated by the lender ([redacted]) rather than working directly with borrowers at the onset, which resulted in confusion regarding this...
customer’s claim. We have since received and reviewed the loan and claim file, and have approved the customer’s claim. Therefore, two monthly payments will be forwarded to [redacted] on the customer’s behalf and we will be sending the customer a continuing claim form. Upon completion of the continuing claim form, the customer will be entitled to continuing benefits so long as the customer is unemployed, up to the maximum benefit limit.
We apologize for the customer’s frustration and for any confusion caused by SWBC.
Please find below the SWBC response to above referenced complaint. Please let me know of anything further that is needed. Thank you. Resolution: SWBC contacted the underlying carrier and was told to send in revised documentation and the change would be processed within 24 – 48 hours. SWBC e-mailed the original application, along with a hand written note requesting the effective date change for both the 2014 – 15 and 2015 – 16 policies, and SWBC has subsequently confirmed that the policy dates have been changed and the revised policy was mailed to the insured on 10/2/15 [redacted]
While we understand and regret the frustration Mr. [redacted] experienced due to the lack of communication from the branch manager, our research indicates that the documentation sent to Mr. [redacted] explained how the Budget Drafting program works and how his payments would be...
applied. Since we do not offer a bi-weekly program that amortizes payments every 14 days, we cannot comply with his request to set up such a program.
According to our records, the loan originated on November 21, 2014, at which time an escrow account was established for the payment of real estate property taxes and homeowner’s insurance. As evidenced by the Settlement Statement (“HUD-1”) executed at closing, property taxes were estimated in...
the yearly amount of $2,372.52, and the first year’s homeowner’s insurance premium was $1,686.48. These figures were utilized in the designation of the original monthly payment amount of $1,267.03. The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) requires that we perform an annual review of a borrower’s escrow account. The first yearly scheduled analysis for the loan occurred on June 22, 2015. This analysis included the anticipated yearly disbursement amounts of $2,375.90 for taxes and $1,686.22 for homeowner’s insurance, and the monthly payment amount was adjusted to $1,267.50. Disbursements for the payment of taxes were issued in the amounts of $1,964.31 and $1,544.68 on October 7, 2015 and May 2, 2016 respectively. Upon disbursement, our records are updated to retain the amount paid as the anticipated disbursement for the following year. They yearly escrow analysis completed on June 13, 2016 identified a shortage of $4,995.02, due to taxes having been disbursed in a higher amount than previously anticipated. Spread over twelve installments, this shortage resulted in the new monthly payment amount of $1,894.37 effective with the August 2016 installment. On December 29, 2016, the amount of $3,207.00 was disbursed for payment of the homeowner’s insurance premium. On March 16, 2017, our office received a mid-term replacement of the borrower's preferred homeowner’s insurance policy, and the premium of $1,279.00 was disbursed for the new policy the same day. A letter dated March 17, 2017 was sent to the borrower advising that multiple disbursements for homeowner’s insurance premium had been disbursed within the year, which may result in a shortage if the refund from the previous policy was not returned to escrow. A payment of $1,605.64 was applied to the escrow account on March 27, 2017. In accordance with the borrower's request, an escrow analysis was conducted on April 12, 2017, which identified an overage of $179.46, and which adjusted the monthly payment amount to $1,288.30, effective with the June 2017 installment. The lesser monthly payment amount reflects a reduction in the anticipated disbursement amounts for both taxes and insurance, based on the most recent payments made for these items. The overage amount was returned to the borrower by check number 778737 along with an Annual Escrow Account Disclosure Statement. Upon review, we have identified no errors with the analyzing of Ms. Bink’s escrow account and subsequent adjustments to the monthly payment amount. We thank Ms. Bink for bringing her concerns to our attention, and we look forward to the continued servicing of her loan.