Profile:
nadondavis

This is nadondavis's Profile page. Use it to view nadondavis's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments nadondavis has endorsed.

What's Happening Now

nadondavis
September 24, 2012 9:54 pm

24 CFR 3500.17(C) should be amended to explicitly prohibit collection of an amount greater than that needed to pay taxes and insurance. CHASE is demanding that the impound account balance equal a MINIMUM of the amounts needeed PLUS a two month impound account cushion AT ALL TIMES. This equates to an interest free loan to the servicer for the life of the loan. AND CHASE THREATENED TO FORECLOSE after admitting the money was not needed to pay the impounds. This is extortion. I would be happy to share my lenghthy correspondence with Chase over this. I then refinanced.

FAILURE TO PAY IMPOUND EXPENSES: A prior lender, Bank of America let my homeowners’ insurance lapse — despite collecting the money, and my forwarding 3 notices that the insurance would be, and then was being… more »

…cancelled for non-payment. After it was cancelled, B of A said that I would have to pay to reinstate, and they would eventually reimburse me. There needs to be a penalty for EVERY TIME this occurs. I refinanced. « less
Moderator
September 25, 2012 12:28 am

Welcome to Regulation Room, nadondavis, and thank you for your comment. The transparency of fees related to escrow accounts is not covered in this proposed rule, but you can use CFPB’s complaint form to tell them more about the problems you faced.

However, failing to pay insurance premiums on time through an escrow account would be covered under CFPB’s proposed list of errors. Do you think CFPB’s proposal does enough to address errors like this?


No comments