Waterfront Federal Credit Union

Thank you for the opportunity to fully explain the two listed complaints that were submitted by Mr& Mrs [redacted] individuallyI will address them both in this letter as it is the same situation The complainant's refinanced their truck loan with our credit union for the purpose of repairi ng the truckThe loan was secured on 11/5/and documents signed including an agreement to maintain full coverage insurance on the truck for the duration of the loanDeductibles were not to exceed $1,on the insurance policy The credit union hires a third party insurance carrier to monitor the existence of insurance for all our members with vehicle and home loansApproximately July 2016, this thi rd party conducted an audit of the truck loan of the complai nant'sIt was discovered they were no longer insured with their original auto insurance company as it had been canceled for non-payment in March The third party began sending a series of letters indicating that the credit union required proof of who they were insured with, deductibles of no more than $,and to name the credit union as the loss payee on the policyThe first letter was mailed by US Post on September 10, The second letter was mailed October 4, A final letter was sent certified mail to the complainants on November 1, The final letter stated; if proof of insurance was not received, the credit union would be adding an insurance premium of $3,to their loan to protect the security interest of the credit unionUnfortunately, our borrower did not respond to the certified letter until November 17, by which time the cred it union had force placed the insurance for the amount stated in the final letter It was explained to the complainant's that we could remove the entire premium once they provided us proof of their own insurance coverage in place with the effective date of coverage beginning at least July 2, They provided a copy of the insurance pol icy to the credit union on November J 8'h The cred I t union provided a full refund as a courtesy to the complainant's however, I t was explained that the third party insurance company would need to verify the fact that coverage was secured back to July 2°dIfthere was a lapse in the coverage a portion of the premium would be added back to their loan and their payment increasedThey left our office with a clear understandi ng of this factThe credit union at no time made a verbal agreement or promise to ignore a lapse in their insurance coverage for their loanIt was detennined by our third party that there was a lapse in coverage from July 2, through November 17, and $was added back to their loan and in turn paid to our third party insurance carrierThis is not a discretionary chargeThe time period from March to July 1, has already been forgiven to our complainant's by our insurance can'ier All regul ations were followed and the complainants were in default of their loan agreement for this lapse of insurance coverageTheir loan is now in good standing and the credit union has not reported any negative information to the cred it bureaus regarding this matter Regards, Brenda B [redacted] VP of Lending, Waterfront Federal Credit Union

Thank you for the opportunity to fully explain the two listed complaints that were submitted by Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] individually. I will address them both in this letter as it is the same situation.
The complainant's refinanced their truck loan with our credit union for the purpose of repairi ng...

the truck. The loan was secured on 11/5/2015 and documents signed including an agreement to maintain full coverage insurance on the truck for the duration of the loan. Deductibles were not to exceed $1,000 on the insurance policy.
 
The credit union hires a third party insurance carrier to monitor the existence of insurance for all our members with vehicle and home loans. Approximately July 2016, this thi rd party conducted an audit of the truck loan of the complai nant's. It was discovered they were no longer insured with their original auto insurance company as it had been canceled for non-payment in March 2016.
 
The third party began sending a series of letters indicating that the credit union required proof of who they were insured with, deductibles of no more than $1 ,000 and to name the credit union as the loss payee on the policy. The first letter was mailed by US Post on September 10, 2016. The second letter was mailed October 4, 2016. A final letter was sent certified mail to the complainants on November 1, 2016. The final letter stated; if proof of insurance was not received, the credit union would be adding an insurance premium of $3,139.00 to their loan to protect the security interest of the credit union. Unfortunately, our borrower did not respond to the certified letter until November 17, 2016 by which time the cred it union had force placed the insurance for the amount stated in the final letter.
 
It was explained to the complainant's that we could remove the entire premium once they provided us proof of their own insurance coverage in place with the effective date of coverage beginning at least July 2, 2016.
They provided a copy of the insurance pol icy to the credit union on November J 8'h The cred I t union provided a full refund as a courtesy to the complainant's however, I t was explained that the third party insurance company would need to verify the fact that coverage was secured back to July 2°d. Ifthere was a lapse in the coverage a portion of the premium would be added back to their loan and their payment increased. They left our office with a clear understandi ng of this fact. The credit union at no time made a verbal agreement or promise to ignore a lapse in their insurance coverage for their loan. It was detennined by our third party that there was a lapse in coverage from July 2, through November 17, 2016 and $942 was added back to their loan and in turn paid to our third party insurance carrier. This is not a discretionary charge. The time period from March to July 1, 2016 has already been forgiven to our complainant's by our insurance can'ier.
All regul ations were followed and the complainants were in default of their loan agreement for this lapse of insurance coverage. Their loan is now in good standing and the credit union has not reported any negative information to the cred it bureaus regarding this matter.
 
Regards,
Brenda B[redacted] VP of Lending,
Waterfront Federal Credit Union