Caliber Home Loans, Inc Mortgage Complaint

Caliber Home Loans, Inc Mortgage department,

Other mortgage Loan modification,collection,foreclosure New York

The homeowner bought her home in -. In -, the homeowner executed a loan modification agreement with - - - Bank, and began to make payments under that new agreement. The note and mortgage were allegedly transferred to -, and then to the current lender ( Caliber, which we understand to be a later incarnation of - ). When the homeowner asked where the payments should be sent, - - and then Caliber refused to honor the existing loan modification. Caliber told her that she had to reapply if she wanted a modification and that she should stop making payments until such a modification was finalized. The homeowner thus stopped making payments and applied for a modification. However, Caliber then denied her modification application. The homeowner then tried multiple times to apply for a modification. Each time, she was required to repeatedly submit documents that had already been submitted, or instructed to start over with an entirely new packet. The homeowner believed she was current on the loan when -/Caliber took over the loan, refused to honor her existing agreement, and told her to stop paying. In -, Caliber brought a foreclosure suit based on the default that resulted from


stop payments and submit a new application. Further, Caliber has engaged in harassment and abusive conduct. A Caliber representative called the homeowner a lowlife, '' told her to get a job, '' and said that Caliber was not even going to speak with her unless she came up with $6000.00. On another occasion, a Caliber employee entered the home without the homeowner 's presence or consent and left a notice inside the home. The homeowner has been participating in settlement conferences as part of the foreclosure action, as required by NY state law. However, Caliber has not been cooperative. In - -, when the parties had already agreed to work towards completing a loan modification application, Caliber 's attorney stated that the application would be denied based on a denial from - -. There was no explanation given for why Caliber was already prepared to deny the application even before it was submitted. Later, counsel reversed course and the parties resumed work on the modification application. The homeowner submitted missing documents as requested in - -. Thereafter, Caliber failed to acknowledge that the packet was complete and mailed a letter directly to the homeowner in - - stating that the packet was incomplete but providing no further details. Caliber and Caliber 's counsel did not provide this correspondence to the homeowner 's attorney. In - - the homeowner was finally informed, via counsel, that Caliber required more recent documents in order to complete its review - that is, Caliber had taken so long to act on this file that the previously submitted documents were deemed stale. The homeowner complied and submitted all requested documents on -/-/-. Around -/-/-, the homeowner received a letter from the lender essentially requiring her to complete an entirely new packet. This was sent directly to the homeowner without any copy provided to the homeowner 's attorney. When the homeowner 's attorney learned of this letter, she wrote to Caliber 's attorney to inquire why the forms were being requested again. The homeowner 's attorney then received - different responses from different people at Caliber 's attorney 's firm ; - stating merely that the forms were necessary, and the other stating that she would investigate.