On Oct. 25, the servicer filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing the plaintiff, Gary Ventling, did not attempt to resolve his dispute prior to the lawsuit "which he was required to do under both contractual and statutory pre-suit notice-and-cure-requirements."

RoundPoint also does not want the suit to be certified as a class action, even if Ventling's individual claims are permitted to proceed, it said.

Ventling sued the mortgage servicer, a subsidiary of Two Harbors Investment Corp., three months prior claiming it failed to record payments when received, improperly charged fees and mishandled corrections.

He also alleged RoundPoint "does not have proper procedures" to handle Qualified Written Requests, a formal process for submitting servicing inquiries under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. RoundPoint disagrees with the claim in its motion to throw out the complaint.

The South Carolina-based servicer points out that Ventling's wife is absent from the suit, which could "prejudice her interests, and RoundPoint could be subject to multiple or inconsistent liabilities for the same conduct if [the] wife were to later bring the same claims against RoundPoint."

Regarding class certification, RoundPoint said that should be stricken because there are "a significant number of uninjured members, rendering certification wholly improper." A Better Business Bureau listing notes other recent payment-related complaints at RoundPoint.

RoundPoint did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Attorneys representing Ventling could not be reached.

The case centers on a mortgage Ventling and his spouse obtained from Pinnacle Bank in 2016. RoundPoint began managing the loan in 2023, according to court documents. Ventling said he typically overpays his $2,805.12 monthly obligation by $4.88 and obtains receipts for it.

Those receipts show mailed delivery of payments within the grace period, but RoundPoint recorded them with a lag time of several days in crediting payments such that they ended up being recorded as late, generating a $140.26 fee, the lawsuit alleges.  

While the company made efforts to correct the issue, credits in that effort were misapplied, with such errors made repeatedly over a span of multiple months, Ventling claimed.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has actively criticized 'pay to pay' fees, has also expressed concern over mortgage contracts that require borrowers to notify the company of any violations before pursuing legal action.

"While these contract terms may sound innocent, they allow companies to silence or buy-off anyone who complains and sidestep broader accountability or the need to fix problems company-wide," the watchdog wrote in a blog earlier this year.