Date Received: 2020-07-15
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/XXXX I called Select Portfolio and was offered Covid-19 Assistance for XXXX, XXXX and XXXX of XXXX. I was told that I would be offered 3 options Forebearance, Repayment Plan, Payment Deferral, once the 3 month period was up. I asked if they thought I could get it deferred and they said it was likely. I lost my part-time job and received my last check on XX/XX/XXXX. I was not eligible for unemployment and the part-time job that I was offered has not opened up for work to this date. Upon calling in to resume my payment for XXXX I was told that they would be sending out a new application to be filled out. I never received it. On XX/XX/XXXX I spoke with XXXX. I was told not to make the {$620.00} payment but asked if I could pay {$2400.00}. She read me 5 payment options and I asked if I could have the payments deferred. She said I didn't qualify and I asked why. She said that I could apply for Request for Mortgage Assistance on line or she could send application and Hardship Affidavit and maybe get deferral, loan modification or another plan. She said I would have to decline the 5 options she gave me in order to get to fill out the application for deferral. I asked if I do that and didn't get the deferral could I come back and get one of the 5 options. She said yes. I completed the application and faxed in the information regarding my present financial situation on XX/XX/XXXX. I also mailed in my XXXX payment of {$620.00} on the XXXX at the time they initially said they would resume. I received a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stating that they were pleased to inform me that I was approved a temporary repayment plan for {$820.00} a month for 12 months. On XX/XX/XXXX I called SPS and told them that the payment was too high and I couldn't pay it with my current income could I choose from the first options of repayment that I was given.. She said that the first repayment plan was no longer on the table that was only for the forbearance. My mortgage Servicing company had made the decision to offer me the {$820.00} and I was not eligible for SPS Trial Modification, SPS Unemployment Program, Modification In Good Standing because the account has been recently modified ( in XXXX after my husband died 12 years ago ) They are unable to offer the Deferral Plan based on the di delinquency of my account ( the 3 months forbearance that they gave to me ) as my XXXX payment had been made. I have been given conflicting information. I was told that I would likely get a deferral, and that I would be able to go back to one of the first 5 options if the application was not accepted. It seems to me that in lieu of trying to help me keep my home they are making certain that the payments are out of reach for me. I have a consistent history of payment over the last years as my payments have been deducted from my account at the same time each month. I am not a threat or a risk in anyway. I am XXXX years old and receive a disability check/social security monthly. I gave them all the necessary information regarding my current income and it is quite plain that those payments of {$200.00} more a month than I was paying are not feasible at this time.I am working with a HUd approved counselor at Homeowner 's Hope called XXXX XXXX that SPS recommended and they don't see why they couldn't try to work out a better payment plan with me, do another modification or even a deferral. In lieu of the times we are living in when jobs are not available and funds are low I feel that they could at least work with me. I was told by the person I spoke with today XX/XX/XXXX, FROM SPS that I could decline the offer and request another application but it would come back the same as those are my only options.. It's all been very misleading.and frustrating.
Company Response:
State: TX
Zip: 75232
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-15
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In early XXXX I applied for some deferral assistance while I was unemployed. The company granted this assistance and then in XXXX I got a notice that the difference between the interest payments I made was coming due, so I called the company and they gave me an amount which I paid on over the phone. Then I started receiving foreclosure notices sayin I owed them more. I requested a payment history report which took months to get and then went over it with an accountant and we determined that they may have given me the wrong amount so I made an additional payment which was a payment in full according to my XX/XX/XXXX statement. I then received my XXXX statement saying I still owed them more. I was unsuccessful in getting answers from the company so I filed a complaint with the State of California Office of the Attorney General. They also requested payment history information. When the company sent that information they copied me on this letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stating that they now haven't received my XXXX payment and after checking with my bank that payment cleared my account on XX/XX/XXXX, so they either failed to do their due diligence or falsely reported information to the Attorney general. I did much research finding that this company has had many class action lawsuits and complaints with a private consumer affairs site. Since then every month when I make payments if they do not get to them by the first of the month XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX they are calling these payments late and charging me an {$82.00} late fee. I have made numerous attempts to talk to them and get absolutely nowhere. I feel this company needs to be looked into. I have since singed a deferral agreement for approximately {$3500.00} which I do not think I owe but have no other recourse at this time. I have also spoken with HUD.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91367
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-15
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: There is a charge on my mortgage statement for {$83000.00}. This charge is identified as " deferred interest ''. I have disputed this charge, and solicited legal advice, at considerable expense, to advise me on the legitimacy of this charge for deferred interest. My lawyer informs me that he sees no basis for the charge. He has written two letters with extensive legal citations to persuade SPS Servicing that this is not a valid charge. Responses from SPS have been insufficient and pro-forma. I will attach extensive record of written communication to document this.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 94117
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-14
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My mortgage was transferred to Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) earlier this year. At the time we were behind a month, maybe two, but we had continued to make payments to keep it from falling further behind. During that time payments were applied within 24 hours. During the pandemic we asked per federal guidelines and from XXXX XXXX ( who guarantees our mortgage ) for a forbearance as our business had slowed drastically. SPS then sent us a letter stating we would have a balloon payment, in contradictions with guidance from the CARES Act and XXXX XXXX. During the forbearance period we continued to make payments to catch up our loan. In XX/XX/2020 we made two mortgage payments at one time, this is when problems began as it took numerous contacts to have SPS apply the payments. On XX/XX/XXXX we made another payment which has yet to be applied to our account. We have also made an additional payment on our account as of XX/XX/2020 which also still has not been applied. If all payments were applied we would be current in our mortgage at this point, we have made contact with SPS a minimum of 6 times via phone call or email to get this resolved. We continue to get excuses. SPS is also beginning to add inspection fees and other fees to our mortgage which is in violation of our mortgage agreement that was transferred to them this year. They can not change our legally signed loan document without our consent which they did not get. SPS also settled with the US Attorney 's office of Maryland and the FTC for this similar behavior but continues to abuse the people with the same tactics.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: AZ
Zip: 85742
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I was taken out of work on XXXX XXXX and requested financial assistance from Select Portfolio Servicing. I was approved for Principle and Interest Payments for up to 12 mos. I then set up automatic payments with XXXX XXXX to be taken out of my account each month. Apparently, there was some fraudulent activity that occurred and the bank froze my account. Once this was corrected payment from the bank went out. Unfortunately, it was not accepted and I was kicked out of the program. I offered to get a letter from the Branch Manager who would clarify the error made was on their behalf but it was declined by SPS. Due to my decrease in income I was unable to make the full payment until I was released back to work in XX/XX/XXXX. It was then that I was able to start making full payments again. I went to make my in XX/XX/XXXX and was told by the rep at SPS that they stopped taking all payments from me and demanded that I pay all the arrears ( {$30000.00} + ) in order to reinstate my mortgage. I have applied for assistance several times, especially because I am now furloughed from my job due to Covid 19 yet still have been continuously denied. I had no choice but to file Chapter XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX just to stop the foreclosure on my home. They are raising my interest rate on XX/XX/XXXX and the new payment is considerably higher and unaffordable due to being furloughed and not having my normal income. SPS is working with other homeowners in regards to payment assistance but refuse to help me for what I believe is due to the fact that I have equity in my home and they would make a substantial amount of money if they were able to obtain through foreclosure. Whats really upsetting about all this is I was a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX back in XXXX when the market crashed and lost my job due to all the predatory lenders that were extending loans to unqualified people and the banks were given high bail outs. Now here I am needing financial assistance during a Nationwide Pandemic and I cant get it.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 93021
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I had for {$5000.00} on XXXX {$2200.00} on XX/XX/20 Although they took my payment for XXXX already and I was going to pay thus amount against pay principle but they took it for my XXXX payment. I called on XX/XX/20 and asked XXXX ( the representative ) to apply this to my principle which she said she did. again I called on XX/XX/20 and talked to XXXX why still pay payment is not corrected she said give us more time. I called again on XX/XX/20 talked to XXXX and she said the other two representative never asked for correction. I even talked to the supervisor but useless.They are charging me for future interest although I have already paid most of my loan. Their site is suppose to show bar ck down of customers payment when they pay but this service r doesn't. I had loan all my life I have not seen company like this company super greedy.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92612
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/2020, I submitted a request to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., regarding the cancellation of my private mortgage insurance. My request included the required fee for a Broker Price Opinion. Since then, SPS has given me the runaround, claiming I never sent the fee, that I never applied, then finally admitting they had received the application and fee but generally just stalling on taking action.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: 20176
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I had a XXXX XXXX for 14 years with no issue. Paid my mortgage monthly every month without fail that entire time. I also paid extra for the principles with no problem. They sold my mortgage to Select Profile Servicing, SPS, and since then, it has been nothing short of horrible. Whenever I paid extra they applied it to the next months, sometime three months ahead. I had to call them everyday for the past 2 weeks as they keep my money in un applied account for free and charging me interest they do not deserve. For every single transaction such as paying online they chafe {$15.00}, no matter what you want or ask you pay for it.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92612
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: After a long battle, a modification was proposed in XXXX. Beginning XXXX, XXXX, three payments in the amount of {$1600.00} were required. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. DID NOT APPLY THE THIRD PAYMENT. SPS altered the agreement and stated we will be required to make a fourth trial payment, and still did not apply the third payment. I stopped making payments, as technically SPS violated the contract and Judge XXXX 's order : From XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, et al, XXXX XXXX writes : UNITED STATES DISTRTCT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Civil No. XXXX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVIClNG, INC. ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX ), a Utah XXXX, SPS HOLDING CORP. ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), a Delaware corporation, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, Defendants. Modifled Order ; INJUNCTIVE RELIEF I. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants, and each of them, their officers, employees, agents, representatives, and all other persons or entities in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Modified Order by personal service or otherwise, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division, or other device, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined, in connection with the servicing of any loan, from : A. Failing to apply all amounts accepted in connection with a loan against interest and principal due, before crediting taxes, insurance or fees, pravided thai : ( I ) with respect to loans using uniform loan instruments with a " revision date '' prior to XX/XX/XXXX, Defendants may apply payments received in accordance with the provisions thereof, and ( 2 ) this requirement shall not apply to loans which have been referred to foreclosure in accordance with the requirements of 'this B. Failing to ( l ) accept as of the date of receipt, or to credit effective as of the date of receipt, amounts paid in connection with a loan that are equal to the scheduled monthly principal and interest amount or are short of that amount by {$25.00} or less ; and ( 2 ) advance the borrower 's due date, provided that this requirement shall not apply to loans which have been referred to foreclosure in accordance with the requirements of this Modified Order ; C. Failing, in the event that Defendants do not credit a payment, to send within five ( 5 ) business days of receipt of that payment a written notice to the consumer, at no cost to the consumer, that : ( 1 ) Encloses the payment being returned ( if the payment is being returned ) ; and ( 2 ) States in a clear and conspicuous manner : ( a ) that Defendants have not credited the payment ; ( b ) the reason ( s ) for declining to credit the payment ; ( c ) the amount the consumer must pay to ensure that Defendants will accept and credit a future payment ; and ( d ) a loll-free phone number for the consumer to call for assistance ; Provided that if a forbearance is being actively pursued or negotiated on a loan at the time of receipt of a payment, such notice may be sent within 7 Fifteen ( 15 ) business days of receipt. D. Misrepresenting, expressly or by implication, any amount that a consumer owes ; E. Misrepresenting, expressly or by implication, that any fee is allowed under the loan instruments, permitted by law, Or imposed for services actually rendered ; F. Misrepresenting, expressly or by implication, the amount, nature, or terms of any fee or other condition or requirement of any loan ; and G. Failing to make disbursements of escrow funds for insurance, taxes and other charges with respect.to the property in a timely manner. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVTClNG, INC. ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX ), a Utah corporation, SPS HOLDll ''! G CORP. ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), a Delaware corporation, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. XXXX MODIFIED STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER Plaintiff, the United States of America, acting upon notification and authorization to the Attorney General by the Federal Trade Commission ( " FTC '' or " Commission '' ) and the Secretary oftheDepartment ofHousingandUrbanDevelopment ( ''HUO '' ), has filed a.Motion toModify Order Preliminarily Approving Stipulated Final Judgment and Order as to XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( " Motion '' ). The Motion alleges that justice requires modification ofthis Court 's XXXX, XXXX Order Preliminarily Approving Stipulated Final Judgment and Order as to XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " StipUlated Order '' ). The parties request that several provisions of the Stipulated Order be modified. Plaintiff and Defendants SPS Holding Corp. and Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( collectively, " SPS '' or " Defendants '' ), formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, by and through their respective counsel, have agreed to entry ofthis Modified Stipulated Final Judgment and Order ( " Modified Order '' ) by this Court, without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law. The parties having requested the Court to enter thisModified Order '' it is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AN1 ) DECREED as follows : FlNDINGS 1. This Court has jurisdiction over Defendants and the subject matter ofthis action. Venue in the District ofMassachusetts is proper. 2. The complaint, filed on XXXX XXXX, states a claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendants under Sections 5 ( a ), 5 ( m ) ( 1XA ), and 13 ( b ) of the FTC Act, 15 U.s.c. 45 ( a ), 45 ( m ) ( 1 ) ( A ), and 53 ( b ) ; the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq., as amended ; the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., asamended ; Sections6and16 oftheRESPA,12U.S.C. 2605and2614 ; andSection3500.21 ofRegulationX,24C.F.R. Pt.3500.21. 1. The activities ofDefendants are in or affecting commerce, as " commerce '' is defined in Section 4 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 44. 2. Defendantshavenotadmittedany oftheallegations ofwrongdoingsetforth in the complaint or the Motion, and entry ofthe Modified Order is not an admission ofany such allegations ofwrongdoing or violation oflaw, Nonetheless, Defendants stipulate and agree to entry of the Modified Order in order to settle and resolve these disputes. 3. Since the Stipulated Order was entered, the FTC and Defendants have consulted concerning implementation of its requirements. In light of these developments, the circumstances in this case have changed such that modification ofthe Stipulated Order is 2 necessaryandappropriate, andrelieffromcertainprovisions oftheStipulatedOrderisjustified. 6. Plaintiffand Defendants waive all rights to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of the Modified Order, and Defendants waive any right that may arise under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.c. 2412. 7. Entry ofthe Modified Order is in the public interest. ORDER DEFINITIONS The letter from XXXX XXXX is highlighted to show you the " factual circumstances '' which he alleges are disproved, are in fact, supported. Why would a third payment of {$1600.00} made in XXXX, XXXX, which was not applied at that time, continue through XXXX to show on the attached Mortgage Statements as a " TOTAL UNAPPLIED BALANCE in two places and as an Unapplied Payment in yet a third area?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33594
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-07-13
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Hi SPS informed me that they will not delete the fees of {$990.00}. It is not interest or principal. It is a fee that XXXX had on it books for a foreclosure case that was dismissed .see attached. IF it was dismissed they are not entitled to any fees because the loan documents XXXX can only collect fees if they were the prevailing party. XXXX sold the loan to SPS. For many years XXXX never collected this fee. The statute of limitations to collect his fee has expired. Moreover, the attorney for XXXX AT THAT TIME WAS CONVICTED FOR FRAUD. XXXX CAN XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX .his FEES WERE OUTRAGEOUS. Neither SPS OR XXXX CAN PROVE WHY THEY are entitled to to the {$990.00}. Please help!!! Thank you. XXXX XXXX CELL # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX -- MAILING ADDRESS XXXX NY XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 115XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A