Struggling to pay mortgage

First pertinent / highly relevant background information, then the complaint : I have been in mediation through the XXXX of CT since +/- XX/XX/XXXX . At that time – and through +/- XX/XX/XXXX , the note was held by XXXX XXXX , then sold to its current holder : XXXX , XXXX .

Throughout the first several months of the mediation process and through +/- XX/XX/XXXX , the mortgage was serviced by XXXX which yielded servicing to Shellpoint at that time ( though the file transfer process had commenced well in advance of that date ).

Additionall y re : my mortgage : ( though it changed its name via merger in XX/XX/XXXX ), the same law firm ( th en, XXXX XXXX now XXXX XXXX ) ha s performed all legal services on behalf of the XXXX above-referenced noteholders and servicers including representation during scheduled mediation sessions with CT State Mediator XXXX XXXX and me. * *On XX/XX/XXXX 2 days prior to our XX/XX/XXXX State of CT mediation session, I forwarded the last of the requested pre-modification documents** via email to : A ) Mediator XXXX , B ) XXXX XXXX and C ) XXXX as confirmed via copy of attached letter from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX and received XX/XX/XXXX .

**The last requested document was a was a pre-employment offer letter from my future employer ( a landscape / snow removal contractor ). Since he was smack-dab in the midst of snow removal s eason and extremely busy as a result, in lieu of the letter, on XX/XX/XXXX I forwarded a copy of my job acceptance email to all 3 afor ementioned mediation parties. At the mediation session, I was told by the XXXX XXXX representative that the email wasnt ideal but that it should suffice. Again : this was confirmed via the letter from XXXX to me dated XX/XX/XXXX and received XX/XX/XXXX which included a promise of a review and response ( i.e. modification ) withi n +/- 30 days a promise that was never fulfilled.

As referenced above, the file transfer proce ss ( fr om XXXX to Shellpoint ) ha d commenced well in advance of any servicer-imposed modification processing deadline. As such, Shellpoint was or should have been well aware of the fact that I had a modification pending.

Additionally, XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX most-definitely was aware of my pending modification having received emailed copies of 100 % of the requested documents AND via attendance at the State of CT Mediation sessions. Yet not only did XXXX XXXX fail to inform/remind Shellpoint of its inherited/inherent obligation to follow through with my pending modification, even worse – XXXX XXXX filed a Motion For Strict Foreclosure against me on behalf of Shellpoint 11 days prior to Shellpoint having EVER contacted me.

Had it not been for a separate complaint filed with the CFPB against Shellpoint + my innate desire to fight for my legal rights via th e State of CT, I w ould have lost my home.

In addition – as evidenced via the attached documents, Shellpoint and/or its attorneys and/or its predecessor has/have ( ALREADY ) : 1. Assigned at least 2 different attorneys to my case + 2. Assigned at least 3 different single points of contact to my file + 3. Requested for, to date – now the 4TH time : the SAME set of pre-modification documents from me + 4. Continue to delay the start date of my employment*** via the above, completely unnecessary redundancies + 5. Attempted to circumvent the State of CT Mediation process via contacting me outside of the scope of the mediation process via the attached letter requesting a 4TH set of the SAME documents – of which its already should have had knowledge and/or had in its possessi on for +/- 6 MONTHS.

**The original start date of my employment was initially set for XX/XX/XXXX , with the employers stipulation that the mediation process has successfully completed including my anticipated/expected modification. As a result of these completely avoidable, Shellpoint-induced delays, I have already lo st 4+ mon ths income ( and counting ).

While any of the above XXXX line items, in and o f itself/ themselves, may n ot be of great significance and/or consequence, collectively, they have resulted in a serious lack of communication and follow-through resulting in these unacceptable delays and worse : the previously mentioned bad-faith ( at best ), FAR-too premature + completely unnecessary filing of th e Motion For Stri ct Foreclosure of my home.

In summation : Shellpoint must be held accountable + adhere to its after the fact promise to allow the mediation process to draw to its natural, uninterrupted conclusion via a REASONABLE + AFFOIRDABLE modification offer start date of XX/XX/XXXX + eliminate any further direct and/or indirect additional unnecessary requests for information ).

Thank you.

Leave a Reply