Complaint Review: U. S. Loss Mitigation Services - Poquoson Virginia
Ripoff Report on CBS 19
Ripoff Report on CBS 19 - Global Marketing Alliance
Ripoff Report on ABC 15 - Smart Shopper
Ripoff Report - Girls Gone Wild
Ripoff Report on Fox 11 - Car Repair
- Author Confirmed
- U. S. Loss Mitigation Services 360 Wythe Creed Road, Suite E Poquoson, Virginia U.S.A.
- Phone: 757-868-8600
- Web:
- Category: Consumer Services
U. S. Loss Mitigation Services Ripoff kept money in the amount of $1,350 paid for services that they were not entitled to due to not completing their end of the contract and working out a deal with the mortgage company that they knew wasn't possible for me Bad Faith Attorneys and lawyers Poquoson Virginia
*UPDATE Employee: THIS IS MISLEADING
Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
Ripoff Report
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
US LOSS MITIGATION CLAIMS TO BE ABLE TO KEEP YOUR HOME FROM FORECLOSURE WITH A 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE IF THEY DO NOT. AS THE PROCESS BEGAN, I WAS ASKED IF I HAD ANY EXTRA MONEY FOR A DOWN PAYMENT, IF THE MORTGAGE COMPANY REQUIRED IT. I RESPONDED TO THAT QUESTION WITH A DEFINITE "NO". I WAS REQUIRED TO FORWARD ONE COMPLETE HOUSE NOTE TO THEM AS THEIR FEE WHICH WAS ACTUALLY IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,318.00, BUT I FORWARDED EXTRA TO SHOW MY GOOD FAITH IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,350.00 TOWARDS GETTING THIS DEAL ACCOMPLISHED.
AS SUCH, THE DAY BEFORE MY FORECLOSURE DATE, THEY WORKED OUT A DEAL WITH MY MORTGAGE COMPANY IN WHICH I HAD TO HAVE A $1,600.00 DOWN PAYMENT TO CONSUMATE THE DEAL. THIS IS CONSIDERED A BAD FAITH NEGOTIATION, WHEREIN THEY WORKED OUT A DEAL WITH THE MORTGAGE COMPANY AND THEY ALREADY WERE AWARE THAT IT WASN'T WORKABLE FOR ME.
THEY THEN REFUSED TO RETURN MY MONEY, STATING THAT THEY HAD DONE THEIR JOB AND THAT IT WASN'T THEIR FAULT THAT I COULD NOT PROVIDE THE EXTRA MONEY.
SINCE THAT TIME, THE PROCESSOR OF THE CLAIM HAS NOT BEEN PAID HER FEE FOR THE WORK SHE DID. SHE AGREED TO WAIVE HER FEE OF APPROXIMATELY $850.00 TO HAVE THEM SEND IT TO ME SO THAT I WOULD AT LEAST GET SOME OF THE MONEY BACK THAT THEY TOOK FROM ME. SHE SIGNED A WAIVER TO THAT EFFECT.
IN SUM, US LOSS MITIGATION IS KEEPING MONEY THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO. FIRST DUE TO THEIR BAD FAITH NEGOTIATION WITH MY MORTGAGE COMPANY AND SECONDLY THE RETURN OF THE FEE THAT THE PROCESSOR SIGNED A WAIVER FOR THE RETURN OF.
Kimberly
League City, Texas
U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 01/26/2005 09:33 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/u-s-loss-mitigation-services/poquoson-virginia-23662/u-s-loss-mitigation-services-ripoff-kept-money-in-the-amount-of-1350-paid-for-services-128945. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
#1 UPDATE Employee
THIS IS MISLEADING
AUTHOR: Stan - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, January 15, 2009
Hi, this is a staff member of the subject organization. Please be aware, after 14 years working for the US Loss Mitigation I have never had the displeasure to work with a difficult client as this one. All information supplied was misleading and/or intentionally not disclosed by the client. This behavior set up the account to provide an outcome that was outside of the original assessment when the client applied and was preapproved for our help.
The investor, Fannie Mae and lender, both indicated that a credit profile produced more information than what was disclosed by he client. The impact of the missing information caused a result that was not accepted by the client. I explained our position and why it was imperative to provide accurate and truthful information as it could cause difficulties.
There was no satisfactory answer by the client other than to argue her position that the lender or our office could provide her the best result based on information she provided.
The problem, she failed to comprehend, was she provided false information causing an outcome, although approved, not to her satisfaction and she wanted to blame everyone but took no responsibility for her actions and misleading behavior to attempt to fool our office, lender and the investor. That behavior did not work and resulted in a fair outcome based on the information discovered on her credit profile by her lender.
Sometimes it does not matter how you try and help those who have tried to help themselves directly with their lender and later failed. They inform you it was all their lender's fault and blamed them for their situation. Then they hire our office only to attempt the same behavior of dishonesty and justifiably receive a similar outcome. Based on her complaint poste - who do you think she is blaming now? Obviously not herself!
Just thought all readers should be aware of the missing side of this story. I'm sure she'll add something just as misleading to the readers as she did with us on her rebuttal.
Thank you,
Kf, Mitigation Specialist
Related Reports
12:55 AM
07:17 AM
New Updated Rebuttal 
Photo 
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
