
    Edward K. NEWMAN, Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Appellee.
    No. 2D14-1953.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 30, 2016.
    Rehearing Denied May 25, 2016.
    Michael E. Rodriguez of the Foreclosure Defense Law Firm; PL, Tampa, for Appellant.
    Michael , W. Smith of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Orlando, for Appellee.
   SLEET, Judge.

Edward Newman appeals the final summary judgment of foreclosure in favor of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The parties agree that Ocwen failed to present sufficient evidence to support the trial count’s award of $2036.49 in late charges, However, .Newman claims that this deficiency created a,genuine issue of material fact and that the trial court’s entry of summary judgment was therefore fundamental error. We disagree.. : .

Newman’s' issue with the lack of evidence to support the awarded total for late charges alone does not warrant reversal of the entire foreclosure judgment. See, e.g., Freiman v. Nat’l City Mortg. Co., 183 So.3d 1111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (affirming foreclosure judgment in part and reversing the unsupported award of attorney fees); Peuguero v. Bank of Am., N.A., 169 So.3d 1198, 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (affirming foreclosure judgment in part and reversing and remanding for a hearing on the unsupported amount of the judgment). In its cohcession of error, Ocwen does not request an opportunity to correct the eviden-tiary shortcomings with regard to its alleged late charges and instead asks that this court remand for remittitur to reduce the amount of the final judgment by $2036.49." This solution is appropriate. Therefore, we affirm the final summary judgment but réverse the trial court’s award of $2036.49 for late charges. And we remand for remittitur of the final judg: ment in that amount.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

KHOUZAM and LUCAS, JJ., Concur. '  