Date Received: 2020-11-30
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This is for a Select Portfolio Services ( SPS ) XXXX conventional second mortgage with original amount $ XXXX, and maturation date XX/XX/XXXX. I owe {$3500.00}. The loan has been sold twice. I became unemployed in XXXX due to COVID and am struggling financially. I applied for a COVID related mortgage forbearance or modification XX/XX/XXXX. SPS has not addressed my concerns adequately. Communication is non-existent, and they keep asking for more documentation. I have provided everything they have requested although my first mortgage servicer gave me a three month reprieve with no documentation at all. I am back to work at a much lower rate of pay XX/XX/XXXX. I can make payments but can not pay the balance of {$3500.00} by XX/XX/XXXX. SPS is not addressing my request for COVID related loan modification.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33619
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-12-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-30
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I mailed in a mortgage payment check which the lender 's sorting machine destroyed, I called in the payment, and the lender drafted the funds from my personal checking account which cleared without any issues, I received a letter telling me that the payment was returned without being honored, I faxed proof that it cleared, they said that the did not receive the fax, I uploaded the proof to the website that the payment had in fact cleared the check I did a 3 way call between the lender 's representative named XXXX and a representative XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( the bank that the funds were drawn from ) and she confirmed that the funds did clear without any glitches, I need assistance getting this situation resolved as the Mortgage Lender is not cooperating at all
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 34638
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-28
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS is the servicer of my loan I didn't have to pay my mortgage for three months due to covid-19 when I started back paying my mortgage I notice on my statements my escrow account and the principal account was in the negative and my principal balance was going backwards meaning every time I paid my mortgage my principal balance is going higher and everything else is going higher in the wrong direction in the negative. All I ask them for was a modification to lower my interest rate from 11.29 % especially now when the national interest rate is 2.29 % at this time. Also, why don, t I have a ( VOM ) verification of mortgage available to me?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30294
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-28
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX I submitted information to SPS ( Select Portfolio Servicing ) that my property had over paid XXXX XXXX XXXX for the following years : XXXX {$960.00}, XXXX - XXXX, & XXXX - XXXX. I requested that they send me a letter stating the following so that I could submit to the XXXX XXXX XXXX office for a refund. Please provide a complete copy of all XXXX XXXX History on my account. XXXX XXXX has overcharged my property because the XXXX XXXX deduction was not applied. Because ( SPS ) my mortgage company paid my taxes, the XXXX and XXXX XXXX Collector is requesting verification of payments. The letter must be on your letterhead and contain the following information : The letter must be on your letterhead and contain the following information : Homeowners Name : Property Address, Property Tax Account Number, Mortgage Company Account, Amount of XXXX XXXX Taxes Paid Year : XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX Physical Mailing Address of ( SPS ) Mortgage Company : ________ I contacted ( SPS ) XX/XX/XXXX, and they said they never received an over payment check for my escrow account. They requested I contact XXXX Taxes to request the USPS tracking number. On XX/XX/XXXX I contacted ( SPS ) provided them the XXXX XXXX Check #, the Amount {$2800.00}, again, and the USPS Tracking number. Once I provided this information, on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX, ( SPS ) said they had received the check, but XXXX XXXX Tax office did not include what account it should be applied to. Therefore, they were sending a letter to XXXX XXXX requesting additional information. I could not understand their rationale because I had provided ( SPS ) all the information pertaining to my mortgage account and that the refund amount that was coming. So, I contacted XXXX XXXX Tax office and they informed me that the check had all the proper attachments and apparently the ( SPS ) separated the information upon receiving it.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: LA
Zip: 711XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-24
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: For my residence of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, California XXXX I am completely current on my mortgage payments to date. however, my taxes and insurance escrow payments keep getting misapplied to forward paid mortgage payments thereby putting me about 1 year behind on my property taxes. the current mortgage, SPS financial, is doing this in order to adjust their portfolio and make it more attractive to investors. My concern is that there was will raise my mortgage payment in FY 2021. I need the cfpb 's help in resolving this issue to make sure that my monthly payments are applied appropriately to principal interest taxes and insurance.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91306
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-24
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-23
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: BACKGROUND On XX/XX/2020, Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) received an Assistance Review Application from borrower requesting a loan modification. On XX/XX/2020, SPS sent borrower a letter denying borrowers request for a loan modification. A true and correct copy of SPS XX/XX/2020 denial letter is attached. SPS explanation for denying borrowers request for a modification was that Under the servicing agreement governing this account, the requested assistance option is not available and SPS is unable to approve your request. On XX/XX/2020, borrower submitted an appeal of SPS denial of the modification application. The appeal requested that SPS provide the specific investor restriction precluding SPS from approving borrowers application for a modification. On XX/XX/2020, SPS denied borrowers appeal. A true and correct copy of SPS XX/XX/2020 denial of borrowers appeal is attached. In denying borrowers appeal, SPS repeated its initial response to borrowers request for a modification : Under the servicing agreement governing this account, the requested assistance option is not available and SPS is unable to approve your request. On XX/XX/2020 borrower sent SPS a Request for Information under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36. In the Request for Information, borrower asked SPS to provide the servicing agreement governing the account, including the specific investor restriction precluding a loan modification. On XX/XX/2020, SPS denied borrowers request for the servicing agreement and specific investor restriction precluding SPS from modifying the loan. A true and correct copy of SPS XX/XX/2020 response to borrowers RFI is attached. In denying borrowers request for the servicing agreement and specific investor restriction, SPS again repeated its initial response to borrowers first two requests for the specific investor restriction precluding modification. This time, SPS made the additional point that SPS is required to service its accounts according to the requirements of the noteholder, which may include limitations on modification characteristics. However, SPS did not provide borrower with the specific limitation which precluded loan modification in this case. SPS Failed to Provide Borrowers with the Specific Requirement set by the owner or guarantor which precluded SPS from modifying borrowers loan. SPS has an obligation after evaluating a loss mitigation application to give a borrower written notice of its decision to deny any trial or permanent loan modification available to the borrower. Reg. X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( d ). SPS must give a borrower notice in writing of its decision on the borrowers eligibility for all trial or permanent loan modification options available to the borrowers. Reg. X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( ii ), 1024.41 ( d ). This written denial portion of the 1024.41 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( ii ) evaluation notice must state the specific reasons for the servicers denial of any modification option and, if applicable, that the borrower was not evaluated on other criteria. Id. ( emphasis added ). If a reason for denial was a requirement set by an owner or assignee of the loan, the notice must identify the owner or assignee and the specific requirement that was the basis for the denial. See Official Interpretations to Reg. X, 41 ( d ) ( 1 ) -1. ( emphasis added ). A mere statement that a loan modification option is denied based on an investor requirement, without additional information specifically identifying the relevant investor or guarantor and the specific applicable requirement, is insufficient. Id. ( emphasis added XXXX. Here, borrower submitted a loss mitigation application which was denied on the grounds of investor restrictions. Borrower appealed the initial denial, and asked SPS to provide the specific investor restriction precluding a modification, as SPS is required to do under federal law. In denying borrowers appeal, SPS stated that it had not been provided any detail as to the specific error it had committed in denying the application. On the contrary, in the appeal, borrower had identified SPS specific error in denying the modification request : SPS failure to provide the name of the investor and specific investor restriction which precluded SPS from modifying borrowers loan. When borrower again asked SPS to provide the specific investor restriction through a formal Request for Information, SPS parroted its vague and perfunctory explanation that it was under a duty to enforce investor restrictions, leaving borrower without a concrete understanding as to why the request had been denied, other than that the investors did not want to approve it, and failed to provide borrower with a meaningful opportunity to evaluate the options moving forward.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 94607
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-21
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In 2004 I received a truth in lending statement that I would pay {$480000.00} over 30 years. Instead I paid {$700000.00} over 16 years.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MO
Zip: 64131
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-21
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-21
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS has purchased and serviced my two mortgages for MANY years now. The 1st mortgage was paid via auto deduction monthly. Never has a payment been missed. The 2nd mortgage was paid for monthly via a manual prices in the amount of $ XXXX $ XXXX monthly. Never has a monthly payment been missed. Recently attempted to refinance however was declined specifically for the condition of my second loan which currently doesnt show a clean payment history through to current and also doesnt appear on my credit report. Roughly six months ago received a re modification package from SPS on the second mortgage. I called to discuss the refinance process about to occur and asked about how to proceed considering. I was advised to not execute the modification and continue making my payments. About four months into the refinance process we switched lenders due to how long it was taken. It wasnt until this switch that we discovered that while SPS was still accepting and applying my payments, that they were actually accruing money and not applying. Of the last four months, the last months payment of {$220.00} was rejected and returned while the previous three months of {$720.00} were collected, half but not applied. No communication. No guidance. It wasnt until a phone call earlier this month that i I was advised the loan matured in 2017 ( still they accepted and applied my payments ) and until just recently, stopped. They have not been able to supply a reason and have not been willing to work with myself or my current lender. I have submitted a dispute, have applied for re modification with them and have submitted this complaint to you as well. Income and credit score are superb. The only thing preventing me from bettering my families mortgage position is the handling of this loan with SPS. I feel like Ive been misled, have not been communicated to with any true or clear effectiveness and am now stuck likely having a budget impact of a {$600.00} swing in the negative monthly.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33428
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-21
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-19
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XXXX XXXX, 2020, I requested a copy of the loan modification contract. Servicer 's are to comply with any servicing request, however Select portfolio Servicing has yet to comply. The request is quite simple, need copies to the loan modification contract i signed with previous lender. When a loan is sold or transfer to another servicing company, all contracts remain the same therefore Select Portfolio Servicing does have this information.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33012
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-11-18
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I took out a loan with XXXX XXXX dba XXXX which was sold and paid off by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in 2005. I keep receiving alleged payment stubs from a company called Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) which as nothing to do with this loan.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91505
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-11-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A