PHH Mortgage Relief Options: What's Actually Available to You

PHH Mortgage Corporation rebranded to Onity Mortgage Corporation on March 23, 2026 — the second phase of a multi-year transformation that began on June 10, 2024 when parent company Ocwen Financial Corporation became Onity Group Inc. (NYSE: ONIT). Your loan number, payment terms, and investor are unchanged. What did change is the name on your statement and correspondence. The federal regulatory framework — Regulation X loss mitigation under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41, FHA servicer obligations under 24 C.F.R. § 203.605, VA loan obligations under 38 C.F.R. § 36.4350 et seq., and pooling and servicing agreement (PSA) terms for private-label loans — applies to PHH/Onity exactly as before. If you are behind on your PHH/Onity mortgage and evaluating relief options, the rebrand is irrelevant to your eligibility. What determines eligibility is the investor who owns your loan and the programs that investor requires PHH/Onity to evaluate under § 1024.41.

PHH Mortgage Is Now Onity Mortgage Under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41: What This Means for Your Relief Options

Ocwen Financial Corporation acquired PHH Corporation in 2018, making PHH Mortgage Corporation its primary servicing subsidiary (PHH Mortgage became successor by merger to Ocwen Loan Servicing as of June 1, 2019). Ocwen Financial rebranded to Onity Group Inc. on June 10, 2024, beginning trading under NYSE ticker "ONIT." Onity Group then completed the consumer-facing subsidiary rebrand to Onity Mortgage Corporation on March 23, 2026 (Glen A. Messina remains Chair, President, and CEO of Onity Group throughout the transition). For loss mitigation purposes, the rebrand changes nothing. The federal Regulation X framework codified at 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41 governs the modification process; FHA servicer obligations under 24 C.F.R. § 203.605 (waterfall), § 203.604 (face-to-face requirement), and § 203.371 (partial claim) apply to FHA borrowers; VA servicer obligations under 38 C.F.R. § 36.4350 et seq. apply to VA borrowers; and PSA terms continue to govern private-label trust loans. A borrower entitled to FHA partial claim evaluation from PHH before March 23 remains entitled to it from Onity after. What matters is the investor, the loan type, and the applicable program — not the company name on the monthly statement.

PHH/Onity Forbearance Under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.39: Entry and Exit

PHH/Onity offers forbearance under each investor's guidelines, with the entry process governed by the federal early intervention framework at 12 C.F.R. § 1024.39 (requiring servicer live contact within 36 days of delinquency and written notice within 45 days). For Fannie and Freddie loans, forbearance is available in defined increments under Fannie Mae Servicing Guide D2-3.2 and Freddie Mac Servicing Guide Chapter 9203. For FHA loans, federal forbearance provisions under 24 C.F.R. § 203.605 apply with specific maximum periods and exit requirements. For VA loans, 38 C.F.R. § 36.4350 et seq. governs servicer obligations. For USDA loans, USDA Rural Development workout provisions apply. The forbearance entry decision requires less planning than the exit. Deferred payments must be resolved when the forbearance period ends. PHH/Onity's exit options vary by investor — lump sum reinstatement, repayment plan, or modification. For FHA borrowers, the forbearance exit plan should account for partial claim evaluation under 24 C.F.R. § 203.371: the partial claim can resolve all accumulated deferred amounts through a zero-interest subordinate lien at zero out-of-pocket cost, which is materially better than a repayment plan adding to a monthly payment that was already unaffordable. Understanding which exit option applies before entering forbearance — rather than accepting whatever PHH/Onity presents at exit — is the planning that professional guidance provides.

PHH/Onity Loan Modification by Investor Type Under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41

Modification permanently changes mortgage terms to produce a sustainable long-term payment. The federal Regulation X framework at 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41 governs the modification process across all investor types, requiring PHH/Onity to formally designate applications as complete under § 1024.41(b)(2)(i)(B), complete evaluation within the § 1024.41(c) 30-day window, provide § 1024.41(d)-compliant denial reasons, and respect the § 1024.41(g) 37-day pre-sale dual tracking protection plus the § 1024.41(h) 14-day appeal window. For Fannie and Freddie loans, the Flex Modification under Fannie Mae Servicing Guide D2-3.2 and Freddie Mac Servicing Guide Chapter 9203 applies — targeting approximately a 20% reduction in monthly principal and interest payment through interest rate reduction, term extension up to 480 months, and principal forbearance where necessary. For FHA loans, the 24 C.F.R. § 203.605 federal loss mitigation waterfall applies, including the 24 C.F.R. § 203.604 face-to-face requirement and the 24 C.F.R. § 203.371 partial claim. For VA loans, 38 C.F.R. § 36.4350 et seq. governs PHH/Onity's servicer obligations, with VA regional loan center oversight authority. For USDA Rural Development loans, USDA-specific workout options apply. For private-label loans — a significant portion of the legacy PHH/Onity (formerly Ocwen) portfolio — the pooling and servicing agreement governing the specific securitization trust determines which modification terms are available and what PHH/Onity can offer.

PHH/Onity presents options according to its standard workflow, which may not always surface the most favorable program. The investor-servicer distinction is critical: PHH/Onity services the loan but does not own it. The owner — the investor — governs what PHH/Onity must evaluate. A homeowner who knows which investor owns their loan and what programs that investor requires PHH/Onity to consider is positioned to demand the correct evaluation rather than accepting whatever the first representative presents.

The 24 C.F.R. § 203.371 FHA Partial Claim at PHH/Onity

For PHH/Onity FHA borrowers, the partial claim under 24 C.F.R. § 203.371 deserves specific attention. The 24 C.F.R. § 203.605 federal loss mitigation waterfall requires PHH/Onity to evaluate qualifying FHA borrowers for the partial claim before issuing a modification denial and before initiating foreclosure (a separate threshold limit on first-legal foreclosure action also applies under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.41(f), which prohibits foreclosure referral until the borrower is more than 120 days delinquent). A borrower who qualifies can have all outstanding arrears covered by a zero-interest subordinate lien owed only when the property is sold or the first mortgage is paid off. During that entire period, the borrower pays nothing on the partial claim and their regular monthly payment is unchanged. PHH/Onity is required to evaluate for this option but does not always proactively offer it. Professional demand for the evaluation — typically delivered as a written § 1024.41(b)(2)(i)(B) complete-application package — is what ensures FHA borrowers receive the consideration the federal loss mitigation waterfall requires.

PHH/Onity's Legacy Regulatory History (Now Largely Resolved) and the Escalation Infrastructure It Created

PHH/Onity's servicing operation inherited a documented regulatory history from its Ocwen Financial predecessor that produced specific compliance infrastructure relevant to current borrowers. In December 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, authorities in 49 states, and the District of Columbia filed a proposed court order requiring Ocwen Financial Corporation and its subsidiary Ocwen Loan Servicing to provide $2 billion in principal reduction to underwater borrowers, refund $125 million to approximately 185,000 borrowers who had already been foreclosed upon, and contribute $127.3 million to a consumer relief fund — a total settlement valued at $2.1 billion. CFPB Director Richard Cordray stated at the time that "Ocwen took advantage of borrowers at every stage of the process," and the consent judgment imposed servicing standards on Ocwen identical to those required of the five largest banks under the 2012 National Mortgage Settlement.

The 2013 consent judgment's three-year compliance period expired in 2017. Shortly thereafter, the CFPB filed a second lawsuit alleging Ocwen violated consumer protection laws between January 2014 and February 2017. While the district court initially granted summary judgment to Ocwen on res judicata grounds, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling in 2022, allowing the CFPB second lawsuit to proceed. A separate 2017 multistate cease-and-desist order against Ocwen Loan Servicing prohibited acquisition of new mortgage servicing rights and origination of mortgage loans until the company demonstrated proper escrow management. In 2018, a multistate consent order with 32 of 33 attorneys general resolved disputes over PHH's payment processing fees.

For current PHH/Onity borrowers, this regulatory history produced a documented internal escalation infrastructure under § 1024.36 (request for information) and § 1024.41 (loss mitigation) that did not exist before the consent judgments. Internal compliance review processes, structured escalation channels for disputed loss mitigation determinations, and external escalation pathways to federal regulators provide avenues to challenge inadequate responses, dispute incorrect calculations, and demand reconsideration. A professional who works regularly with PHH/Onity (and legacy Ocwen) loss mitigation cases knows which escalation channels exist and how to invoke them effectively. Most borrowers receiving an unfavorable determination accept it as final; PHH/Onity's formal escalation infrastructure means a denial is often the beginning of the process, not the end.

PHH/Onity's Private Label Portfolio Under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36: What PSA Review Means for You

Legacy Ocwen — the predecessor entity to Onity Group — built one of the largest private label mortgage servicing portfolios in the United States. A significant portion of loans now serviced by PHH/Onity under the Onity name are private label loans held in non-agency securitization trusts. The investor on a specific loan can be identified through a written request for information under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36, which PHH/Onity must respond to within statutory timelines. The modification terms for these loans are governed by the specific pooling and servicing agreement for each trust — not by GSE or federal agency guidelines. PSAs vary dramatically: some allow aggressive modification terms; others impose restrictions on interest rate reduction, term extension, or principal forbearance. PHH/Onity's standard loss mitigation workflow applies a generic investor-category determination rather than a PSA-specific analysis in many cases. This creates a category of PHH/Onity modification outcomes — denials citing investor restrictions, offers below the PSA maximum — that professional PSA review frequently identifies as incorrect or suboptimal under § 1024.41(d) (which requires servicers to provide specific reasons for denial).

For private label borrowers at PHH/Onity, professional review of the applicable PSA before engaging PHH/Onity's loss mitigation process establishes what terms PHH/Onity can and must offer. A professional who prepares the application with a PSA compliance demand — identifying specific trust provisions that require modification evaluation under § 1024.41(b)(2)(i)(B) — creates a documented record PHH/Onity must respond to, rather than relying on PHH/Onity's standard workflow to arrive at the correct PSA-specific result independently.