Date Received: 2020-12-18
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: We submitted a Qualified Written Request ( QWR ) to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ( SPS , Inc. ) on XX/XX/XXXX detailing three main questions regarding our ongoing principal balance dispute and to which we are owed a reasonable and correct explanation thereof, as per 12 C.F.R. 1024.35. SPS, Inc. acknowledged receipt of our QWR in writing on XX/XX/XXXX, but to date has failed in their obligation under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( a ) and 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) to respond to our XX/XX/XXXX QWR. As per 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( a ), a qualified written request that asserts an error relating to the servicing of a mortgage loan is a notice of error for purposes of this section ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( a ) ), and a servicer must comply with all requirements applicable to a notice of error with respect to such qualified written request. As per 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ( A ) and 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ( B ) Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. is required to correct the error or errors or conduct a reasonable investigation and ( provide ) the borrower with a written notification that includes a statement that the servicer has determined that no error occurred, a statement of the reason or reasons for this determination, a statement of the borrower 's right to request documents relied upon by the servicer in reaching its determination, information regarding how the borrower can request such documents, and contact information, including a telephone number, for further assistance. As of XX/XX/XXXX, we have not received a written or verbal response to our XX/XX/XXXX QWR which is in clear violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 3 ) ( i ) ( C ) which requires the servicer to comply with the requirements of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) not later than 30 days ( excluding legal public holidays, Saturdays, and Sundays ) after the servicer receives the applicable notice of error. SPS, Inc. acknowledged receipt on XX/XX/XXXX and subsequently responded to our Notice of Error on XX/XX/XXXX, but the company never responded to our XX/XX/XXXX QWR and the separate and distinct questions posed therein even though they acknowledged receipt of our QWR along with a separate acknowledgement of receipt on XX/XX/XXXX of our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error. The company 's subsequent response to our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error did not constitute an answer to or address the specific questions we posed to them in our XX/XX/XXXX QWR and the companys XX/XX/XXXX response to our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error is not a substitute, duplicative or simultaneous response to our XX/XX/XXXX QWR. Therefore, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( g ) ( 1 ) ( ii ) Overbroad notice of error does not apply in this case. Our XX/XX/XXXX QWR is a different set of inquiries than that of our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error, although both the QWR and Notice of Error are regarding the same ongoing dispute with SPS, Inc. Specifically, our XX/XX/XXXX QWR is in response to SPS, Inc.s XX/XX/XXXX reply to our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error, one of at least other Notices of Error and Qualified Written Requests we have submitted to SPS , Inc. since XX/XX/XXXX with respect to our ongoing and as yet unresolved unpaid principal balance dispute with the company. Therefore, the QWR we submitted on XX/XX/XXXX concerns different and additional errors from the errors we brought forth in our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error, and SPS, Inc. is required to provide a response under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( ii ). Furthermore, our QWR and Notice of Error are different and separate submissions which the company has acknowledged receipt of separately. As such, the companys XX/XX/XXXX response to our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error does not comport to 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( g ) ( 1 ) ( i ) as we have provided new and material information to support the asserted error in our XX/XX/XXXX QWR that was not brought forward in our XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Error. Since XX/XX/XXXX we have disputed ( in writing ) to SPS, Inc.s prior explanations to our previously submitted Qualified Written Requests or Notices of Error because their replies have not been in accord with the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust, or the company has not provided us with factual explanations, and they have used incorrect and falsified transaction records as supporting evidence and to which we have explained to them in writing and without subsequent rebuttal from the company. Since SPS, Inc. has not corrected their error in the unpaid principal balance or provided a correct and reasonable explanation that no error has occurred, as per 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ( B ), our dispute with SPS , Inc., remains unresolved. To date, the questions we posed to SPS, Inc. in the XX/XX/XXXX and previous QWRs and Notices of Errors remain unanswered and we still await a response from the company. A summary of the questions from the XX/XX/XXXX QWR are : 1. Explain how SPS, Inc. determined the unpaid principal balance while they and the prior servicers were under the Loan Agreement ( Note ) and Deed of Trust and by following the terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust, including the loan amortization schedule and other legal obligations that SPS, Inc. is legally obliged to comply with as the loan servicer of our mortgage. 2. Explain how deferred interest was added to the principal balance ( SPS, Inc.s XX/XX/XXXX explanation ) and how all accrued interest was deferred to the end of the loan ( SPS XXXX Inc.s XX/XX/XXXX explanation ) under the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust when : a. additions to the principal balance or deferrals from payment by the Borrowers ( us ) were not authorized by the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust b. no loan modification was agreed to or undertaken between us and SPS, Inc. or any prior loan servicer that authorized additions to the principal balance or payment deferrals until the end of the loan. This includes the temporary forbearance agreement that was agreed between us for the period between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX and which : i. we successfully completed on XX/XX/XXXX and ii. which the prior servicer ( a.k.a. the original lender XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX ) never recommenced foreclosure as was their obligation under the forbearance agreement if we did not fully comply with the forbearance agreement iii. did not include provisions for additions or increases to the principal balance or deferrals from payment of principal or accrued interest amounts until the end of the loan except the provision under Paragraph 4 of the forbearance agreement that described the deferral from payment to the end of the loan of the balance interest arrears that remained after the lender serviced all payments of the installments, escrow payments, legal fees and interest arrears that accrued in the suspense fund that the lender was obligated to establish under Paragraph 4 in order to hold such payments and expenses during and only during the period of the forbearance agreement and until either : 1. we successfully executed our payment obligations under the forbearance agreement at which point the lender was obligated under the Loan Agreement to service all the payments and expenses that they had accrued in the suspense fund and to reinstate the loan or 2. we failed in our obligations under the forbearance agreement at which point the lender was required to recommence foreclosure c. no amount was ever added to the principal and no record or evidence of an increase to the principal balance has been recorded in any periodic statement or transaction report by any of the loan servicers, including SPS, Inc. As of this writing, SPS, Inc. has never correctly explained, according to the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust between us and to which they have a fiduciary obligation, how they determined the unpaid principal balance on record with us and with the credit reporting agencies and federal and state agencies. As of this writing, SPS , Inc. incorrectly reports the unpaid principal balance on our mortgage loan as {$180000.00}. However, SPS , Inc. correctly reports the loan origination date as XX/XX/XXXX, the maturity date as XX/XX/XXXX, the interest rate fixed at $ 7.888 % and a Deferred Principal of {$0.00}. Furthermore, SPS , Inc.s correctly reported loan origination date, maturity date and interest rate are consistent with the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust provisions agreed to between us. However, the unpaid principal balance and explanation of Amount Due reported by SPS, Inc. are in error as they are not consistent with the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust and our payment history, which is current and on-time with respect to the Loan Agreements payment schedule. According to the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust and SPS , Inc.s loan amortization table generated by the same, and given our current on-time payment status with respect to the schedule, the correct unpaid principal balance is {$91000.00}. SPS, Inc. provided us a loan amortization table which correctly reported the Loan Agreement and Deed of Trust provisions agreed to between us and which we used to determine the correct unpaid principal balance we report herein. We have also attached copies of our XX/XX/XXXX QWR and Notice of Error, SPS, Inc.s acknowledgements of receipts of the same and the companys XX/XX/XXXX response to our Notice of Error, as well as other related documents we have previously submitted to SPS , Inc. in support of our case. Cc : California Department of Business Oversight
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92508
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-16
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Mortgage Servicer : Select Portfolio Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX UT, XXXX Earlier this year, we asked for forbearance. The terms of the forbearance were not explained well, but we accepted the help and delayed payment of our mortgage by TWO MORTGAGE PAYMENTS ONLY. We decided that we could then resume payments with the unemployment insurance money. Our mortgage payment went up by about XXXX XXXX dollars per month. My husband still does not have full time employment. Our account is still in good standing. One month ago, my husband applied for forbearance again. Legally, this is allowed under the CARES act, but my husband has been asked for extraordinary amounts of information and has spoken to several people at the servicer. They have notified my husband that my credit ( I am not listed on the mortgage ) may be adversely affected by asking for help from them. Each time my husband calls, he speaks to someone who has no idea what is happening with our account, and tells him that there ARE NO NOTATIONS OF applying for forbearance on the account. Twice, two representatives have told him to remit payment, and then when he calls back, different representatives say that he should not pay. We received a notice that the information on our application was incomplete, but an additional representative directed my husband to ignore the notice. Two weeks ago, we were told that information on our application, notices and important messages would be communicated to us through our online portal, but we have received ZERO messages there, even though we have received phone calls from them. Last week ( today is XX/XX/XXXX ) have even been told on the phone by a representative that we " can not trust the emails that we receive from them '' and that it is our responsibility to keep contacting them to make sure the process is going forward. Immediately after that, we called back and a representative named XXXX said that person was completely wrong, we should wait to pay and everything is proceeding as it should. We got a phone call today XX/XX/XXXX from them. We do not know what it was about. They did not leave a message. When we called back, they said that they did not know what the phone call was about -- they did not have a record of the call. We restructured our mortgage in XXXX through the HARP program and have never had a late payment ( we were in good standing when we restructured as well ), but we have since been informed that our mortgage is NO LONGER a federally backed mortgage. I'm not sure how this happened.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CT
Zip: 06611
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-16
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I accepted a " deferral '' of payments on my account which was, according to law, the help a mortgage servicer is supposed to provide during the pandemic. After a couple of months I received what they call an " annual activity statement '' showing some adjustments in my principal balance resulting in an increase of about the equivalent to the 3 moths that were being deferred. The statement was followed by a letter that according to them explained the terms of this " helpful program '' confirming that the principal balance had increased and that the total amount equal to the payments for 3 moths would be due upon maturity or payoff of the account date. I never agreed to these terms and never was clearly informed of these additional charges. This is in no way helping me. Again! Additional charges that aren't supposed to help the consumer during a worldwide pandemic. After a couple of attempts to get a clear explanation from SPServicing, I still don't understand how can they increase the principal amount by $ XXXX and just suggesting to try to file a complaint because they can't do anything after they discussed it a couple of times with me over the phone. The way I see it, they're just trying to make money from its customers out of the very particular and difficult situation thousand of people are going trough. Deferred to my knowledge, means " postponed '' and to any regular individual this means making those 3 or 4 payment at a later date ... not making them twice! This is illegal and they just claimed I accepted it. Not the case.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 11580
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-16
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I received a Cares Act Grant for {$5000.00} which was mailed directly to SPS Mortgage in Utah by XXXX XXXX XXXX in Florida with my name and account number on the check. This was mailed XXXX and would have covered 2 home payments. I have sent copies of the award letter and the paid receipt the date it was mailed to SPS. I still have not seen the payments posted on my mortgage for XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. I have called three times and the customer service staff will not put me into a cue to talk to someone who has the ability to search by my name or amount of the check being deposited in a holding account. They refuse to do the research until I provide more details, which have been requested on XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX office in Florida. There is a escalation in process to provide details, but in the meantime SPS should do their part and look for the check also. Thank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX SPSXX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX UT XXXX Phone XXXX Loan # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 32708
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2021-01-05
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-16
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: See lawsuit Almanzar et al v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc, US District Court for the Southern District which included details on the internet regarding SPS and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and reported " kickbacks ''. Numerous complaints on web including with XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding both SPS and XXXX XXXX XXXX. Numerous complaints on not receiving refunds. This complaint is regarding Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and their force-placed insurance charged to my loan on XX/XX/XXXX for {$970.00} a certificate of insurance stating issued on XX/XX/XXXX certification period showing XX/XX/XXXX and expiration date XX/XX/XXXX. How can this be retroactive? What actual months should such a fee cover? In a letter from SPS dated XX/XX/XXXX it stated " it was not a requirement for you to be escrowed at the time of servicing transfer ''. XXXX XXXX who financed my home equity loan had told me no escrow/no insurance required. My small PRINCIPAL BALANCE SHOWN ON STATEMENT DATED XX/XX/XXXX WAS IN AMOUNT OF {$330.00}. NO INTEREST REMAINING. Is there a percentage or formula involved in determining force-placed insurance coverage and the principal, even if in other cases when legal and ethical? I made another payment in XXXX. And in XXXX MARKED A PAYMENT TO BE APPLIED TO THE REMAINING PRINCIPAL BALANCE OF {$69.00}. And, as stated above, no interest due ( actually a credit shown of {$4.00} for interest. ) SPS refuses to apply to the principal and they have charged additional fees for my not making my payment in XXXX when no interest remained. Instead they since applied the {$69.00} to the extorted insurance payment. IS IT LEGAL FOR SPS -- TO NOT APPLY -- MY MONTHLY PAYMENT DESIGNATED FOR THE PRINCIPAL? I would like a copy of service transfer agreement or contract between XXXX XXXX and SPS. And a copy of the home equity loan. I would like to know what credentials, certificates, and licenses that the owners and companies of SPS and XXXX XXXX XXXX must have. I will include my questions to the Texas Attorney General office. Thank you.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 75501
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-15
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: ILLEGAL LOCK OUT, EVICTION AND CONSTRUCTIVE EVICTION HAVING CAUSED HARM AND INJURY DUE TO LOSS OF USE OF OUR HOME, LOSS OF ALL PERSONAL FURNISHINGS AND PERSONAL PROPERTY, DAMAGE TO OTHER PROPERTY VEHICLES. IRREPLACEABLE AND VALUABLE PERSONAL BELONGINGS THAT WAS REMOVED FROM THE HOME. MISSING NUMEROUS ITEMS THAT WERE NOT FOUND IN THE HOME NOR IN THE YARD WITH BELONGINGS AND FURNISHINGS THAT WERE DISCARDED. FORECLOSURE AND REMEDY IMMEDIATELY! After being away from home for a while due to family medical, we arrived at the property in XXXX XXXX, PA on XX/XX/2020 and realized that we were Locked out from entering our home. Our home was not abandoned. We have loss of use and loss of our personal belongings and no response from the bank, ombudsman, or the law group except to give the new lock box code after we have changed the locks on the home. I AM NOW LOCK OUT AGAIN! The photos, and emails that are attached and are filed with the complaints, have been forwarded to all the parties involved Select Portfolio, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX /Foreclosure/Eviction and the Ombudsman of Select Portfolio as is noted on the emails.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: PA
Zip: 182XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-14
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Select portfolio servicing : XXXX XXXX XXXXforeclosed on a loan I paid off in 1998 after I sold the house for them. They did this by taking my down payment and paying off a 1998 loan recorded on my neighbors lot.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MO
Zip: 64114
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-14
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX XXXX my mother the previous trustee on the account passed away on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX I notified Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) via mail, email, and fax of my mothers death and informed them that I am know the trustee on the account. From XX/XX/XXXX to present date XX/XX/XXXX I have called countless of times trying to get a hold of a single point of contact that could help me sort this out but no one could help me. During this period I have notified SPS that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX an unauthorized person has somehow started an online account with SPS and on XXXX she has authorized herself on the account from the online portal. During this time I have asked SPS countless of times to suspend online activity on the account and have been told they are unable to help me until I am authorized. I have explained that I am the trustee on the account and have not authorized this person to enter into a repayment plan yet SPS has allowed a repayment plan on the account without my knowledge. I spoke with a supervisor at extension XXXX she stated that the trust is invalid because it list the property zip code as XXXX and there records is XXXX. I immediately contacted the estate attorney XXXX XXXX who confirmed that some records show XXXX and other show XXXX but the APN # XXXX matches all country, mortgage, and Trust records. I received a phone call from XXXX on XXXX but was unable to answer her call. I called back today Monday XX/XX/XXXX spoke to a representative who read notes saying that SPS needs additional information. I immediately requested a supervisor and spoke with XXXX who advised me that SPSs audit department needs tax documents or a XXXX postal service document validating the address. I explained to the manager that if the mortgage company states that the zip code is XXXX thats fine but that the APN # is the true identification of the property and that remains the same. The manger confirmed that an audit rep would call me to discuss further and advised her that I would be submitting a CFPB complaint. Was told that there was no complaint department. I am hoping this reaches SPSs and the resolution I am seeking is for the company to validate me as the trustee and an authorized party just like the second mortgage company XXXX XXXX has so I can move forward with administering the account. I would also like to stop all online activity until I am authorized on the account. Thank you XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 93065
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-14
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Re.- Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc . To Whom It May Concern : The purpose of this letter is to file a formal complaint against Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( SPS ). My current interest rate is 3.50000 %. SPS has now unilaterally changed the terms of my rate limit and has announced that my interest rate will be raised to 6.5000 % as of XX/XX/XXXX. Currently the bottom of my rate limit is 2.75 %. In fact, for years I have been receiving written documentation stating : Rate Limit : Your rate can not go lower than 2.75000 % over the life of your loan. Your rate can decrease each adjustment by no more than 2.00000 %. ( see attached XXXX change of interest rate letters from XXXX through XXXX EXHIBIT A ). LOAN HISTORY *On XX/XX/XXXX I entered into a mortgage agreement with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( lender ). I signed an adjustable rate note. It appears that XXXX XXXX XXXX also serviced the loan. XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX this loan to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( see attached letter EXHIBIT B ). XXXX XXXX XXXX serviced the loan. XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX began servicing the loan ( see attached letter - EXHIBIT C ). On several occasions, a XXXX representative has told me over the phone that the loan was backed by XXXX XXXX. XXXX XX/XX/XXXX SPS became my new loan servicer ( see attached letter EXHIBIT D ). SPS has informed me that my loan is backed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX see attached letter EXHIBIT E ). THE NOTE It is my understanding, that at some point, the original note on my mortgage was found to be a predatory loan. Therefore, it was modified by XXXX and/or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. My belief stems from the fact that, although the note states that I must make monthly principal and interest payments at a minimum interest rate of 6.500 %, I have never paid this. I have never been required to make principal and interest payments at an interest rate of 6.500 %. In fact, my interest rate from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX fluctuated between 3.25000 % and 4.12500 %, but the interest rate never reached 6.500 %. ( see attached XXXX letters EXHIBIT F ). Also, between XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, I received a series of letters from XXXX stating : Your rate can not go lower than 2.75000 % over the life of the loan ( see attached XXXX letters EXHIBIT A ). Therefore, even though the Note may reflect a minimum interest rate of 6.5 %, the minimum interest rate was evidently modified to 2.75000 % at one point during the life of the loan. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC. ( SPS XXXX SPS began servicing my loan on XX/XX/XXXX. The statements I have received from SPS for XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX have all had an interest rate of 3.5000 % ( see attached SPS statements EXHIBIT G ). On or about XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from SPS entitled : CHANGES TO YOUR MORTGAGE INTEREST RATE AND PAYMENTS ON XX/XX/XXXX ( see attached SPS letter EXHIBIT H ). This letter stated that beginning XX/XX/XXXX my interest rate was going to be increased from 3.50000 % to 6.50000 %. I called SPS on XX/XX/XXXX and spoke to a representative named XXXX, at extension XXXX. I explained to him the situation. The representative acknowledged he had a XXXX letter that clearly stated that my rate can not go lower than 2.75000 % over the life of my loan. The representative also noted that the interest rate I was currently receiving from SPS was 3.5000 %. Based on these discrepancies the representative said this matter would be sent to a special department to be reviewed. On or about XX/XX/XXXX I received the response from SPS special department ( see attached SPS letter EXHIBIT I ). SPS responded that they had completed a full review of my complaint and that : the interest rate of 3.5 % was given by your prior servicer. Upon review of the account, an addendum to the Adjustable Rate Note you signed specified your interest rate would never be below 6.5 %. With this SPS has made it clear they intend to require me to make principal and interest payments at a rate of 6.5 %, despite evidence that the minimum interest rate was changed at some point to 2.75000 % and the fact that I have never previously been required to pay principal and interest at a rate of 6.5 % throughout the life of this loan. CONCLUSION I have never, at any point, throughout the life of this loan, been required to make principal and interest payments at a rate of 6.50 %. My interest rate from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX fluctuated between 3.25000 % and 4.12500 %, but the interest rate never reached 6.500 %. My current interest rate is 3.5 %. Furthermore, from XX/XX/XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX I received a series of letters from XXXX stating : Your rate can not go lower than 2.75000 % over the life of the loan. It is my understanding that when a new institution acquires the rights to service a loan from a previous institution, that new institution acquires those rights subject to whatever the previous institution had in place and was enforcing. It is clear that the previous institution XXXX, for years, had communicated to me that my interest rate can not go lower than 2.7500 %. So, this was the minimum interest rate. For years these have been the terms of my interest rate. Upon acquiring the right to service my loan from XXXX, SPS took subject to XXXX written and documented determination that my interest rate can not go lower than 2.7500 %. It is ironic that prior to my loan being transferred to SPS I received letters of assurance from XXXX and SPS stating : This transfer doesnt affect any of the terms of your loan, other than the terms directly related to the servicing of your loan ( see attached SPS and XXXX letters EXHIBIT D & EXHIBIT J ). Well, an interest increase of 3 % and changing the bottom of my interest from 2.7500 % to 6.5 %, IS A HUGE CHANGE TO THE TERMS OF MY LOAN. SPS is now, over 13 years later, requiring me to make payments I have never been required to make. It is shameful what SPS is doing to me, specially, at a time when an epidemic is plaguing our country. I hope SPS is not allowed to get away with this. Thank you for taking the time to review this complaint against SPS. EXHIBITS LIST EXHIBIT A XXXX Interest Rate Change Letters : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX. EXHIBIT B XXXX XXXX XXXX letter advising of new service provider XXXX. EXHIBIT C XXXX XXXX letter advising that XXXX XXXX which is serviced by XXXX will change to XXXX systems. EXHIBIT D XXXX XXXX letter advising that servicing of the loan is being transferred to SPS. EXHIBIT E XXXX SPS letter advising that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is backing the loan. EXHIBIT F XXXX Interest Rate Change Letters : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX. EXHIBIT G SPS Statements : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX. EXHIBIT H SPS Interest Change Letter : XX/XX/XXXX. EXHIBIT I SPS Response to Complaint letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. EXHIBIT J XXXX SPS letter advising that servicing of the loan will be with SPS.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33326
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-12-14
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Subissue: Debt was paid
Consumer Complaint: Part 2 of ID FOR COMPLAINT SENT TO SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING , INC . XXXX Prevention of timing out of system
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MO
Zip: 64081
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A