Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® Accredited Business Seal

Are you...?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

BBB Accredited Business since


Find a Location

Phone: (210) 525-1241 Fax: (210) 525-1240 View Additional Phone Numbers 9311 San Pedro Ave Ste 550, San Antonio, TX 78216

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

Request a Quote

Request a Quote from SWBC

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that SWBC meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Find a Location

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for SWBC include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 7 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

7 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 7
Total Closed Complaints 7

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

2 Customer Reviews on SWBC
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 1
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 1
Total Customer Reviews 2

Additional Information

BBB file opened: February 01, 1987 Business started: 04/01/1976 Business started locally: 04/01/1976 Business incorporated 05/11/1977 in TX
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Texas Department of Insurance
333 Guadalupe St, Austin TX 78701
Phone Number: (800) 252-3439

Texas Department of Savings & Mortgage Lending
2601 N Lamar Blvd # 201, Austin TX 78705
Phone Number: (877) 276-5550

Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Gary Dudley, Vice President Charles E Amato, Chairman C Jorgensen, CFO
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Gary Dudley, Vice President
Business Category

Financial Services Insurance - Employee Benefits Mortgage Bankers Employee Benefit Plans Insurance Companies Mortgage Lender

Alternate Business Names
Southwest Business Corporation SWBC Employee Benefits Consulting SWBC Insurance Services SWBC Investment Services, LLC SWBC Mortgage Corp SWBC PEO (Professional Employer Organization)
Industry Tips
Finding a financial planner Mortgage Choices Risks with reverse mortgages

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

SWBC has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of A+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

10/14/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I paid for one years flood insurance. Initially it was set to start on Sept 10 2014 upon closing. We didn't close til February 20 at which time I contacted them and they asked me to forward the deed. I do so, several times and they are refusing to change the policy start date.

Desired Settlement: Fix the policy initiation date to reflect February 20 2015 and send the renewal that that time! I am paid up for a full year not 8 months.

Business Response: Please note - this complaint is not regarding SWBC Mortgage Corporation - the consumer does not have and has not applied for a mortgage with SWBC Mortgage Corporation.  Please direct all inquiries regarding the status of this complaint to the Compliance Department for SWBC at so that they can respond accordingly.

Business Response:

Please find below the SWBC response to above referenced complaint.  Please let me know of anything further that is needed.  Thank you.


Resolution:  SWBC contacted the underlying carrier and was told to send in revised documentation and the change would be processed within 24 – 48 hours.  SWBC e-mailed the original application, along with a hand written note requesting the effective date change for both the 2014 – 15 and 2015 – 16 policies, and SWBC has subsequently confirmed that the policy dates have been changed and the revised policy was mailed to the insured on 10/2/15



*** ******

9/8/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I have a conventional 30 year fixed rate Mortgage with SWBC which clearly state there will be no prepayment penalties. There are no late fee or other situations which complicate this issue. I was charged a 10% fee for a prepayment which is against contract. The lender has chosen to call it a amortization fee. This is deceptive trade and illegal as far as I am concerned.

Desired Settlement: This company should be severely fined as I am sure they have unknowingly scammed other customers who have prepaid on their loans and unknowingly been charged this prepayment penalty against contract.

Business Response: According to the enclosed amortization schedule received from Mr. *****, the first payment date that was accounted for in the amortization of his home loan was February 1, 2012.  As a result, the balance reflecting on August 1, 2015 was $92,985.43.  However, Mr. *****’ loan closed on February 24, 2012 with a first payment due date of April 1, 2012.  We have enclosed a copy of Mr. *****’ HUD-1 Settlement Statement and Promissory Note that was signed at closing for your review.  
We have enclosed a standard amortization schedule reflecting the April 1, 2012 first payment date.  According to the standard amortization schedule, the principal balance as of August 1, 2015 would be $93,278.33; representing a $292.90 difference from the balance reflected on the amortization schedule that we received from Mr. *****.

Our records indicate that three principal payments, formally regarded to as principal curtailments, in the amount of $1,000 each were received on June 3, July 3, and July 31, 2015.  Enclosed is an amortization schedule accounting for the principal payments which is an accurate depiction of Mr. *****’ loan account.  After the application of principal payments, the balance as of August 1, 2015 was
$90,266.44, representing a $281.01 difference from the principal balance Mr. ***** listed in his correspondence.  Please note:  each of the monthly mortgage statements generated after the applications of Mr. *****’  monthly installments and principal payments indicates the entire amount that was received was applied to his loan correctly per the terms of the Note.

We respectfully disagree with Mr. *****’ claim that he was charged a 10% fee for prepayment.  At no time in his telephone interactions with our customer service department was he advised that a re-amortization fee or penalty will be charged.  We acknowledge that the Promissory Note signed at closing dictates that no prepayment penalties will be assessed and we have not assessed any re-amortization fees and or prepayment penalties on Mr. *****’ loan account.  The afore-mentioned loan account payment history will confirm this information.

8/8/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: They sent my $3600 escrow refund to a house that I sold and that they knew I sold despite the fact that I provided a different mailing address at closing. The remedy that they offer is to wait ten days to call them back so that they can cancel the check and issue another one which will take another 2-4 weeks from that point. I find this to be unacceptable because they are setting a double standard as I would have never been able to hold their money for 60 days without penalty when I owed them. I recommend they contact people to ask where they should send the money and offer electronic deposit if they aren't going to accept updated, notarized information at closing. At least they could cancel the check the moment the issue has been identified for them and re-issue it or offer electronic deposit. Withholding customers capital for 60 days without interest is un acceptable.

Desired Settlement: I would like my refund check in a timely manner.

Business Response:

According to our records, the loan was paid in full as of June 11, 2015.  Once the loan paid in full, a final reconciliation of the escrow account was initiated.  On July 3, 2015, the escrow balance was released to the address of record in the amount of $3,634.80.
We note in Mr. *****’s complaint that he no longer resided at the property address and that an alternate mailing address was provided at closing.  Please note: the alternate mailing address was provided to Mr. *****’s title company.  We have no record of the third party providing us with the updated address; as a result, the check was disbursed to the address on file.
Our records indicate on July 13, 2015, Mr. ***** contacted our Customer Service Department regarding the status of the refund request.  Our agent advised Mr. ***** that he had to wait two weeks before the check could be stopped and reissued.  This is not our process and we regret the misinformation Mr. ***** received. 
On July 19, 2015, we initiated the process to reissue the escrow check to the new mailing address provided by Mr. *****.  Please allow 7-10 business days for receipt of the payment. Since we were provided with a P.O. Box as Mr. *****’s preferred mailing address, we were unable to expedite the request via overnight mail.  Additionally, we do not offer electronic deposit as a method of refunding a borrower’s escrow balance at this time.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused Mr. *****. We have utilized this situation as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skills as his experience is not indicative of the level of service we strive to provide.

5/20/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: May 8, 2015My wife and I purchased our home in the summer of 2014. Our real estate agent, ******* ******, suggested we work with ******** ******** of SWBC Mortgage in order to expedite the purchase process. During the process in which we provided Ms. ******** with income statements, tax documents, and other pertinent information, Ms. ******** made some miscues. However, Ms. ********s errors were corrected, and my wife and I ultimately closed on the home in August 2014.Prior to finalizing our loan requirement/parameters, my wife and I clearly informed Ms. ******** that we wanted to enter into a bi-weekly payment plan, and the reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option. By making 2 payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the term of the loan. Each time my wife and I brought this topic up with her, Ms. ******** was clear that SWBC provides a bi-weekly payment plan. In December 2014, I submitted documents to SWBC, signing up for what I believed was SWBCs bi-weekly payment plan. After receiving subsequent statements, I realized that SWBC was withdrawing funds from our account twice each month, but only applying the funds to the loan one time per month.I contacted SWBCs customer service department and was informed that SWBC does not offer a true bi-weekly option. To this date, I question how SWBC can legally withdraw funds from someones account, hold the funds for approximately two weeks, withdraw the balance of the monthly payment, wait a few more days, then apply the entire amount to the loan. Under these policies, SWBC is preventing customers from paying down their mortgage early; and, for those that sign up for SWBCs auto-draft option, SWBC is earning interest on customer funds they are holding for weeks prior to applying to the loan. Because of the errors Ms. ******** made during the purchase process, I opted to contact Ms. ********s supervisor to convey my displeasure about Ms. ******** providing incorrect information. On February 19, 2015, I called and spoke with ***** ****, of SWBC. Ms. **** confirmed she was ******** ********s supervisor. During this conversation, I explained that my wife and I wanted to enroll in a bi-weekly payment plan, and that this desire was conveyed to Ms. ******** on multiple occasions. During this conversation, ***** **** was surprised to learn that SWBC, the company she works for, withdraws customer funds but does not apply the funds to the loan until weeks later. Ms. **** stated that she had been in the mortgage industry for quite some time, but, she was new to SWBC; and, she had never heard of a practice such as this. She said that she would speak with someone in her corporate office for details/clarification, and contact me once she had more information. Again, that was on February 19, 2015.Linda **** failed to contact me after our February 19, 2015 telephone conversation. As a result, I attempted to reach ***** **** by telephone on/about March 12. I left a message with the receptionist in Ms. ****s office. On the same day, I also called and spoke with ******** ********. I expressed my displeasure that she provided me with inaccurate information regarding a bi-weekly payment option. Ms. ******** informed me during this conversation that she did not know that SWBC does not offer a true bi-weekly payment option. As this conversation closed, Ms. ******** said she would speak with her supervisor, ***** ****, and call me right back. That was on/about March 12. Ms. ******** never called me back. Based on her lack of professionalism and poor attention to detail during the purchase process, Im not surprised that I have not heard from her. ***** **** never returned my call from March 12 either. As a result, I called and spoke with ***** **** on/about April 2, 2015.During my April 2 conversation with ***** ****, she essentially acted as if I were somehow the bad guy in this situation. As if my desire to be provided accurate information when making the largest purchase that I will ever make, is somehow ridiculous. I specifically asked Ms. **** if consumers should be provided accurate information. Ms. **** remained silent and would not provide a simple yes or no response. Instead, Ms. **** defended ******** ********, stating that Ms. ******** did not know that SWBC does not provide a true bi weekly payment option. Ms. ****s statement confirms that my wife and I were provided incorrect information by Ms. ********. As this conversation closed, Ms. **** asked me what is was that I wanted. I explained to her that I want a true bi-weekly payment plan, which we were told we would be able to enter into. Ms. **** said she would speak with her corporate office and call me back. Prior to ending the telephone call, I specifically asked Ms. **** if she will be calling me back. I even ensured that she had my telephone number. That was on/about April 2, 2015. As of the date of this complaint (May 8, 2015), I still have not been contacted by Ms. **** or Ms. ********. Please note, this matter cannot be remedied by simply issuing two checks each month. If that were that case, I would likely pursue this option. However, if I write a check for half the monthly payment and issue a second check for the balance prior to the date the full balance is due, SWBC has informed me that they will return both payments as a short payment. In closing, I would like to know - is a mortgage company held accountable for providing incorrect information to customers? In this situation, both the loan representative, as well as her supervisor have acknowledged that they did not know their own companys policies. They have even intimated their lack of knowledge is a viable excuse for the position my wife and I have been put in. Furthermore, is it legal/ethical for a mortgage company to withdraw a customers funds, but not apply the funds to a loan for weeks? Lastly, I would be curious to know what your agencys input is, regarding Ms. ****s and Ms

Desired Settlement: I would like the bi-weekly plan that was discussed with Ms. ******** during the loan application process. I would like to know why SWBC employees do not know SWBC policies, pertaining to bi-weekly plans. I would like to know why Ms. ******** and Ms. Comm have been unable to return my telephone calls.

Business Response: While we understand and regret the frustration Mr. ******** experienced due to the lack of communication from the branch manager, our research indicates that the documentation sent to Mr. ******** explained how the Budget Drafting program works and how his payments would be applied.  Since we do not offer a bi-weekly program that amortizes payments every 14 days, we cannot comply with his request to set up such a program.

Consumer Response: Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because:

The documentation SWBC's response references was not provided until after closing.  Therefore, I did not know SWBC does not provide a bi-weekly option until after I finalized the loan and closed on the property.  Again, the topic of a bi-weekly payment plan was discussed with Jennifer ******** on multiple occasions, during the loan application process.  The reason why we wanted a bi-weekly option was also discussed; that being to have two payments each month applied to the loan.  By making two payments each month, we would save thousands of dollars over the course of the loan.  SWBC's response to this complaint is irrelevant.  Jennifer ******** provided my wife and I with inaccurate information.  When this matter was discussed with Linda ****, Ms. ********'s supervisor, the excuse was that neither knew their own company's policies. 

Of lesser importance, but an accurate illustration of their professionalism...or lack thereof, Ms. ******** and Ms. **** failed to return my telephone calls regarding this matter.   


***** ********

Consumer Response: Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because:

I do not know how to be any more clear than this- SWBC provided information about their Budget Draft option in November or December 2014.  My wife and I closed on our home in August 2014.  ******** ******** of SWBC informed us during the loan application process...during the Summer of 2014 that SWBC provides customers with a bi-weekly option.  That point SWBC is making about providing documents regarding their Budget Draft process is irrelevant.  We were told on multiple occasions prior to finalizing our loan, that SWBC offers a bi-weekly option. 

I fail to understand their response; yes, I have been informed of SWBC's Budget Draft procedures...IN DECEMBER 2014.  Closing took place in August 2014 and the loan process began in June/July 2014.  We should not have been told, during the summer of 2014, that SWBC provides a bi-weekly option when the do not.  

 I find it unacceptable for SWBC's representative, ******** ********, to not know her company's policies.  Even more so, her supervisor, ***** ****, was surprised to learn of SWBC's policies.   


***** ********

12/31/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: In july 2013 when I financed my home through this company my credit score was 740. Over the last year this company has dropped it to 596!! The first error was charging me for their insurance for $400, despite having insurance. Showing that I was behind in my monthly payments. The second was that the july and august payments were applied to escrow and not towards my monthly payments. They reported this to the credit bureaus and my score has steadily dropped. When I went to get a lease vehicle I was told that my scale was 611 due to all of this. I could not get the car I wanted because of this. SWBC then sent me a cheque for $2,000. When I presented it to the bank it was in my checking and so I wrote several checks. SWBC then put a stop payment on the cheque and they would not issue the cheque stating that it should not have been written in the first place. Due to this ***** has now sent me a letter denying me my loan, due to the first cheque bouncing. I can honestly say that this company has ruined my life. ***** ***** as soon as they saw the 2 missed payments and the drop in credit score halved my credit limit and I went to but groceries and my card was denied. They will not increase the limit. I could not believe what power a company could have on someones life. I have never missed a payment and even although they have apologized my life is ruined!!!! AND MY CREDIT

Desired Settlement: I would like my credit score to be repaired of all negative effects.

Business Response:

December 11, 2014

Better Business Bureau
**** ** ****** ***** ******* ** *****

Re:          Case Number ********: ******** *******
Loan Number: **********

Dear Sirs:

This letter is in response to your correspondence received in our office on December 1,2014.

First, we would like to apologize to Ms. ******* for the errors that occurred in the handling of her loan and the subsequent inconvenience she experienced as a result. This does not reflect the level of service we strive to provide. This situation has been utilized as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skills.

The loan documents Ms. *******, then known as ******** *****, signed at closing require that she furnish evidence of active insurance policies on an annual basis for all insurance coverage required by the Lender. When evidence of insurance is not received timely, the borrower is notified that a lender-placed insurance policy will be purchased to protect the Lender's interests and that she is responsible for the payment of the lender-placed insurance premium disbursed from the escrow account.

Our records indicate that on September 10, 2013, we received a notice of cancellation from ******** Insurance Company dated August 22, 2013, indicating the hazard insurance policy was cancelled effective August 20, 2013 (copy enclosed). The policy number on the cancellation notice did not match the hazard insurance policy information on our system. This discrepancy went unnoticed and resulted in our system being updated to reflect the hazard insurance policy cancellation. A letter was sent to Ms. ******* that same day informing her of the cancellation notice and requesting that she provide evidence of a current hazard insurance policy. A copy of the text of the letter is enclosed.

When we were not in receipt of her evidence of a current hazard insurance policy, letters were sent on October 4 and November 5, 2013, again requesting that she provide evidence of an active hazard insurance policy (copy enclosed). When we did not receive evidence that a hazard insurance policy was in effect, on December 10, 2013, a lender-placed flood insurance policy was purchased for $2,880.83, effective August 20, 2013 to August 20, 2014. A notice dated December 27, 2013, was sent to Ms. ******* informing her that a lender-placed flood insurance policy had been purchased; a copy of the policy was provided (copy enclosed).

The annual escrow analysis was completed on March 26, 2014 (copy enclosed) which resulted in a new monthly payment amount of $1,631.23 effective with the May 1, 2014 installment. Although Ms. ******'s payment was $1,631.23, she continued to remit payments in the amount of $1,200.00. The payments of $1,200.00 received on May 5 and June 3, 2014 were applied to satisfy the May and June 2014 monthly installments. Letters were


sent to the borrower upon the receipt of each payment informing her we received a payment for less than the amount due and we could not continue to accept payments for less than the amount due (copies enclosed).

Our records indicate that on June 27, 2014, Ms. ******* rented a payment for the full amount due of $1,631.23 for the July 2014 installment. On July 25, 2014, we received the borrower's payment of $1,200.00; however, since the funds were not sufficient to satisfy the monthly installment shown on our system, on July 28, 2014, the funds were manually applied to the escrow account as there was an existing escrow shortage.

Subsequently, on August 11, 2014, the borrower spoke with a representative in our Customer Service Department who informed her that we were not in receipt of the evidence of insurance. The representative contacted the borrower's insurance carrier the same day to request evidence of insurance. The representative with ******** Insurance, *******, stated that ********'s records did not reflect SWBC as the mortgagee; as a result, ******** did not forward the evidence of insurance to us. This information proved to be incorrect. Nonetheless, our Customer Service Representative provided the correct mortgagee clause and the ******** representative stated evidence of the hazard insurance policy would be sent to us via facsimile.

According to our records, on August 11, 2014] evidence of insurance was received for the period of September 4, 2013 to September 4, 2014. Our system was updated to reflect this information and the lender-placed insurance policy was cancelled effective September 4, 2013. A full premium refund in the amount of $2,880.83 was applied to the borrower's escrow account.

An escrow analysis was completed on August 21, 2014, and revealed an escrow surplus of $2,144.87 (copy enclosed). Our check number 271473 for the escrow surplus was mailed to the borrower along with the escrow analysis. Please note: the escrow surplus was calculated based on the current escrow balance at the time of the analysis, which included the payment of $1,200.00 applied to escrow on July 28, 2014.

On September 9, 2014, the borrower spoke to a representative in our Customer Service Department regarding the past-due August 2014 monthly installment. The representative informed the borrower that she would stop payment on our check number ****** for the purpose of applying the funds to the August 2014 monthly installment; the representative stated that any surplus, which was estimated to be $944.87, would be released to Ms. *******. Due to a processing error, the stop-payment request was not processed.

Our records indicate that on September 23, 2014, Ms. ******* contacted our Customer Service Department stating she was not in receipt of the adjusted escrow surplus check, which she approximated to be $900.00. The representative identified the processing error, informed the borrower that our check number 271473 was still outstanding and at the request of the borrower, payment was stopped on our check number ****** in the amount of $2,144.87. It is our process to re-apply the funds to the account from which they came and issue a replacement check payable to the borrower, as appropriate. On October 23, 2014, $2,144.87 was applied to the escrow account; the replacement check number 488857 in the amount of $2,144.87 was not issued until November 17, 2014, when it was then stopped and the funds wired to the borrower's bank account.

On December 9, 2014, we attempted to reach Ms. ******* to confirm her receipt of the escrow refund of $2,144.87 check and inquire whether she wants to apply the funds to the December 1,2014 monthly installment. We were unsuccessful in reaching her and left a message requesting that she return our call.

On December 11, 2014, we spoke with Ms. *******, confirmed her receipt of the funds and discussed that the December 1, 2014 monthly installment was due. Ms. ******* stated that she spent the escrow refund, which included funds intended for a monthly payment, and is not able to satisfy the December 2014 monthly installment. Ms. ******* was informed that the loan would become delinquent if the December 2014 installment was not satisfied before the end of the month.


We note the borrower's statement that she located the original check number ****** and attempted to deposit the check. As indicated above, payment on that check was stopped at Ms. *******' the request.

With respect to the credit bureau reporting:

The borrower's request for a credit bureau correction was reviewed on October 27, 2014, and it was determined that it was necessary to update the credit bureau reporting for the August 2014 monthly installment. An update was submitted to the credit bureaus the same day to reflect the August 2014 monthly installment was paid as agreed. Generally, the credit bureaus recommend that consumers allow 30 days for updates to be reflected on the credit reports.

On December 11, 2014, we confirmed with Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax that the loan is reported as current and "paid as agreed."

At this time, the loan is due for the December 1, 2014, monthly installment of $1,130.07. Should you have questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 866-********.



****** ********


******* ********** *************


cc:          ******** ***** ******* **** ******* ***** Plano, TX *****

Text Box:

Consumer Response: Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because: SWBC is responsible for misappropriating funds from July and August 2013 and reporting this to the credit bureau. instead of applying my payment to regular payment it was sent to escrow. This has offset my entire account. I was then told that there was an escrow cheque for $2100 going to be sent. However when it was not found they told me they were sending another one. I was NEVER told that I would have to send anything back. That makes no sense at all. I then got a statement on 11/17/14 showing that I owed $2,229. I called 11/24/14 at 8.10 am an was told that everything was fine I just need to continue making my regular payments. 

This ******* is lying and the first time I was ever told that I need to pay two house payments for December was 12/10/14. I told him that I was going to sue SWBC if they reported me to the credit bureau. I agreed to pay $1,130 a month. I have kept my side but they have not kept there side not even keeping up with insurance.
I signed up so that I did not have to worry about anything and this has ruined my life. 

******** *******

Business Response:

****** ******

BBB Corporate Office
**** ** ****** ***** ******* ** *****

Re:                         Case Number: ********: ******** *******
Loan Number: **********

Dear *** ******:

This letter is in response to your correspondence dated December 15, 2014 and an email received from Ms. ******* on December 13, 2014 (copy enclosed).

We respectfully disagree with Ms. *******' statement that "[she] was never told that [she] would have to send anything back." Our records indicate Ms. ******* was informed the funds she intended for the August 2014 monthly installment were applied to the escrow account and refunded with the escrow surplus. Ms. ******* was provided this information and was informed that the monthly installment would need to be remitted using a portion of the funds from the escrow surplus on September 9, September 23 and November 24, 2014. While we are unable to release a recording of the telephone conversations, attached please find a detailed synopsis of the telephonic communication with the borrower in reference to the escrow surplus.

Although the payment received July 25, 2014 was not applied to the monthly installment as the borrower intended, Ms. ******* received benefit of the funds upon her receipt of the escrow

Surplus.  Multiple attempts were made to reach the borrower, but were unsuccessful. Additionally, loan statements as well as delinquent notices were sent to the borrower which reflected the application of funds and current status of the loan. Copies of each loan statement and delinquent notice sent to the borrower is enclosed for your reference. At this time the loan is due for the December 1, 2014 monthly installment. The borrower has been informed that the loan will become delinquent if the December 2014 installment is not satisfied before the end of the month.

We note Ms. *******' statement that she "agreed to pay $1,130 a month." The loan note she executed at closing established a fixed principal and interest amount of $703.34; however, the total monthly payment may fluctuate based on changes to the escrowed items. The payment amount of $1,130.07 consists of the principal and interest of $703.34, $216.85 for County Taxes, $76.97 for Hazard Insurance and $132.91 for Private Mortgage Insurance.

Ms. ******* contacted our office on December 16, 2014 to request we discontinue contacting her regarding the loan payments. We are able to limit telephone communication regarding only certain aspects of the loan servicing. If the borrower wishes to discontinue telephonic communication she must send a written request to cease communication. For her convenience she may fax the request to my attention at ************.

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at ************. Sincerely,

****** ********

Service Excellence Administrator


cc:         ******** ***** *******

  **** ******* *****     Plano, TX *****

Consumer Response: Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because: This company have misappropriated funds since July 2014. Now they are back tracking and trying to find a way to fix their mistakes. In the meantime it has ruined my credit and my life. They have lied to me and after sending me a escrow check, they then realized that they should not have and then wanted their money back. They then lied about what was said to me on the notes. Nobody ever told me that they check sent to me was supposed to be sent back. Which makes no sense at all, if that was the case I would have saved the money.
The last few weeks they have been harassing me with regard to this, stating that I have to pay two December payments. I agreed to make monthly payments and not two monthly payments. I am a single Mom and cannot afford this, they have threatened to report me to the credit bureau.
This is very unfair practice.


******** *******

10/1/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: SWBC has failed many times to pay-out on an insurance check that was issued to them and my name. It has been two months in their possession and I fulfilled all paperwork asked of me. I have been hung up on by there claims department several of times. The claims department has been giving me false information about the funds dispersement process and have failed to give me direct yes or no answers. I am unable to fix my home which in the process has been getting more damages as I wait for their departments poor customer service to respond or give me appropriate answers. My claim check funds have been in their possession, I can't sell my home or rent it in the condition it is in. I have even been told to foreclose on my home if I can't move out of it. I have to move for the military and have no choice in the matter. The problem can be fixed if I could get the insurance funds to repair my home. But, the claims department continues to give me false dates and no direct answers.

Desired Settlement: Quick check turn around without withholding funds for repairs on my home. A payment for holding funds without any reason and an apology for intentionally lying to me about sending checks and misinformation about policies.

Business Response:

We are working with our sub-servicer to form a response as quickly as possible.



***** ******

******** ********** *******             

**** ******** ***********

**** *** ***** **** *** ***

*** ******** ** *****

***** ******** * ******

(800) 527-0066 - Toll free

(210) 581-1665 - Fax

Consumer Response: Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because: I have already waited an additional month for any kind of response from any of your departments. Collections gave me a call to try and collect on a debt i didn't owe, collections even said they didnt know why the were calling me. I ended up going with another financial institute to resolve the poor service and long wait times with SWBC. I hope nobody tries to continue to do business with SWBC because they are terrible at what they do. Im sure they will collect the insurance money from me before i transfer my loan to the new company. Stay away from SWBC they are weasels with money.


****** *****

Business Response: First, we would like to apologize for any unnecessary delays the consumer experienced in the handling of the loss draft claim as this does not reflect the level of service we strive to provide.  We appreciate that he brought this matter to our attention so that we can utilize it as a coaching opportunity to enhance our customer service skills.  According to our records, on August 4, 2014, the consumer contacted our office to notify us that the mortgaged property had sustained damage as a result of a wind storm on May 26, 2014.  Since the estimated cost of the damage exceeded $10,000.00, the representative informed him that we considered the claim to be a “monitored claim.”

On August 6, 2014, we received claim documents that included the Conditional Waiver of Lien and the W-9 form, however, the Conditional Waiver of Lien was rejected since it was missing the contractor’s signature.  We note the consumer’s statement that the insurance claim check has been “in [our] possession” for two months and we respectfully disagree.  Our records indicate that on August 8, 2014, we received the insurance claim check for less than $10,000.00 from the insurance company, payable to the consumers and SWBC Mortgage Corporation.  According to our records, the consumer contacted our claims department on August 11, 2014, and requested an exception be made to the monitored-claim process to allow for the release of the full amount of the claim funds.  The exception request was reviewed and approved the same day.  A call was placed to the consumer and he was informed that he claim funds would be released to him and his contractor.  On August 12, 2014, the claim check was deposited into the restricted escrow account. Unfortunately, a processing error occurred and the claim funds were not released promptly.  Further, there was confusion surrounding the requirement for completed claim documents and a letter dated August 14, 2014, was erroneously mailed to the address of record informing the consumer of the missing documents.  On August 18, 2014, the consumer contacted our claims department to request the status of the check and was erroneously informed that in order to release the funds the missing documents were required. Additionally, since funds are generally released in both borrowers’ names, the consumer was informed that a power of attorney would be needed to ensure the second consumer could endorse any additional checks that may be released in the original consumer's name while he is deployed.   According to our records, on August 21, 2014, we released the funds from the restricted escrow account and on August 26, 2014, our check number payable to the consumer and his contractor, was sent via regular mail to the borrower’s address of record. Our records indicate that our check was negotiated on September 4, 2014.   We received a second insurance claim check  on September 2, 2014, for less than $10,000.00 from the insurance company, payable to the consumers and SWBC Mortgage Corporation.  The funds were deposited to restricted escrow on September 4, 2014.  Although no updated claim information has been received to date, on September 24, 2014, we made a second exception and released the balance of the funds in the restricted escrow account to the borrowers.  We will contact the insurance adjustor to obtain any updated claim documents.  Once the claim check has been issued, we will send the funds to the mailing address of record via FedEx overnight delivery.  A call was placed to the consumer today to apprise him of the status of the claim and to inform him that an inspection is required to confirm completion of the repairs. The consumer stated that it would be approximately 30 days before the repairs would be completed. 

10/1/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: My wife and I purchased a house (*** ********* **) back in Feb 14. There was a hail storm in May 14. I filed through my insurance. Everything happened that was suppose to. I recieved a check from the insurance for repairs to my house. I picked a contractor out to repair everything needed. Now I also contacted SWBC because they have to co sign the check for the funds to be released. Now the issue is my wifes name is on the account, mine is not. Yet to over come this I submitted to thier request of providing a power attorney etc.. I sent in this power of attorney, I also sent in a copy of the estimated damages. The check was even sent in to SWBC. Now they are saying they never recieved my power of attorney and they don't have the check. Then when I called again they said they sent the check back... Then when they finally would talk to me they said I needed another peice of paperwork, I called my contractor got this paperwork filled out and sent to them.. Yet some how some way they are saying my case is still imcomplete that they need more paperwork and they can't talk to me. Mind you, my wife is in Afghanistan and I being active duty we are extremely busy. So my wife stays up late to call them to tell them they can talk to me. When they do talk to me, they seem reluctant to help. Granted this has been going now for two months.. Wonder what actions they would take if I missed a mortgage payment.. Oh they would call then, everyday till they got thier money. And yes yet again I will send another POA.

Desired Settlement: I want to get the check endorsed, so I can pay the contractor and get my roof fixed.. That would be awesome..

Business Response:

Re:       ***** ******* on behalf of ******* **** *******: ** ********

Dear *** ******:

This letter is in response to your correspondence received in our office on September 3, 2014.

According to our records, Mr. ******* contacted our office on April 18, 2014, to notify us that the mortgaged property had sustained damage as a result of a hail storm. At that time, Ms. ******* provided a verbal authorization to discuss the loan account with Mr. *******. It is our policy that a verbal authorization is in effect for the day it is granted. The insurance claim specialist offered to establish a life-of-loan authorization, but Mr. ******* cleaned.

Although we do not have a record of having received the Power of Attorney Mr. ******* references in his correspondence, we have confirmed that he is a co-signer on the Deed of Trust, and is therefore an interested party to the real estate. Our records have been documented accordingly so that he will have access to ban account information.

The insurance claim specialist with whom Mr. ******* spoke informed him if the total amount of the claim was below $10,000.00, the claim would be considered "non-monitored," and we would endorse the check upon its receipt and return the check to the borrower's address of record. The specialist also informed Mr. ******* of our monitored-claim process when the loss exceeds $10,000.00, which is a result of investor guidelines designed to protect both the consumer as well as the loan investor.

According to our records, on June 12, 2014, we received an unendorsed claim check for $6,355.84 along with claim documentation, including a statement of loss, indicating the total claim amount was $12,055.50. An outbound call was placed to the insurance carrier, ******** ******* **** ****** ********* ***********, on June 16, 2014, requesting a copy of the adjustor's estimate to confirm the total amount of the claim.

The estimate was received on June 19, 2014 and confirmed the total claim amount exceeded the endorse-and-release threshold of $10,000.00. The claim check was returned to the borrower requesting that it be endorsed.

The insurance adjustors worksheet was received on June 25, 2014, and manually reviewed by an insurance claim specialist on June 30, 2014. Since the total amount of the insurance claim as indicated on the worksheet exceeded $10,000.00, a monitored-claim package was mailed to the borrower on July 7, 2014.


As of today's date, we are in receipt of a complete monitored-claim package; however, we do not have a record of the borrower having returned the endorsed insurance claim check to our office. We will endorse the claim proceeds check and send the funds to the borrower's address of record once it is received in our office.

On September 12, 2014, we contacted the insurance carrier and confirmed that the claim check has not been negotiated. Should Mr. ******* not be in receipt of the claim check we returned on June 18, 2014, he may wish to contact the insurance carrier, to discuss his options.

At this time, we are not in receipt of any claim proceeds.

Once the repairs are complete, we will order an inspection. Upon receipt of evidence that the repairs are complete, we will endorse and release the depreciation check if it is in our possession at that time.

We understand that the insurance claim process can be stressful and frustrating and apologize for any unnecessary delays the *******s experienced as this does not reflect the level of service we strive to provide.

Should you have questions with regard to this matter, please contact me at ************. Sincerely,

******* ****

******* ********** *************

cc:       ***** *******

*** ********* *****

****** ******** ** *****

Customer Review(s)

The customer review(s) below are un-filtered. These positive and negative reviews are not used in the calculation of the BBB Rating. If you wish to file a complaint and request a resolution to your issue please click here. This customer review section is not BBBs complaint resolution system. Customer Reviews are the subjective opinion of the individual who posted the review and not of Better Business Bureau. A customer review is not posted on a business if a BBB complaint on the same issue(s) is also filed. BBB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any customer review and is not responsible for the content of any customer review. Public comments are not customer reviews.

Customer Reviews Summary

2 Customer Reviews on SWBC
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Fusion Chart
Fusion Chart