Date Received: 2023-10-21
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue: Payment process
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/XXXX I sent in {$37.00}, XXXX to Select Portfolio Servicing to be applied towards my monthly payments which would have covered a total of 12 months, since I already had a partial credit on my account. That means my next monthly payment would have been due on XX/XX/XXXX. Since then I have had nothing but trouble. It began with a phone call from SPS Mortgage saying I was past due on my account for the XX/XX/XXXX payment. I let the representative know that the large payment was to be applied to my monthly payments, representative said okay and she would take care of it. Over the next several months I had several phone calls and letters saying I was past due. I had to continue explaining how the payment was to be applied to several representatives and managers since SPS Mortgage kept reporting me as past due. I was always reassured by Managers and representatives that this would be handled. When the calls continued and past due letters kept coming I finally requested my money back. SPS Mortgage stated they are unable to refund me my money nor can they apply the money towards my monthly payments and that I am now being reported to the credit reporting agencies as past due. I am also to resume my payments or my home will go into foreclosure! I didn't know what to do so I sent in 2 more payments in XXXX of XXXX to cover the past due months and SPS Mortgage is now expecting me to make my next payment on XX/XX/XXXX. My credit report is down by XXXX points because of the past due reporting which is now affecting my other credit accounts and I can not afford to keep making these double payments. SPS Mortgage didn't seem to care and let me know that if I don't then my home would be reporting as past due, continue getting late fees and added interest and go into foreclosure. Please Help!
Company Response: Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error
State: TX
Zip: 78254
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-21
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-20
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: I have sent several dispute letters to select portfolio servicing asking them to tell me what the advances are for they seem fraudulent. and since i got a loan modification in XXXX the principle balance seems increased substantially. payments have not been posted correctly mishandled not posted or if posted they have reversed the posting as if they never received the money. this is going back to approximately XXXX to present. I am aware of the FDCPA since they are a debt collector. collecting amounts not entitled to collect over my monthly payments We had a foreclosure moratorium from XXXX to XXXX but they did not offer to dismiss out of the case in court when covid was announced. They willfully continued court responses and continued speaking to me about my payments when they were not allowed to do so based on the moratorium. Any attorney fees they are trying to collect against my mortgage going back to XXXX to present are not legal. They have since XXXX to XXXX not fairly worked out a payment plan with me when I continue to seek one out and dispute amounts added to my balance that I know are not legal for them to collect. They have not told me what the advances are for and have not told me why they are mishandling my payments. The accounting for payments for the last three years does not show consistent postings.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NV
Zip: 89149
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-20
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue: Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing yo
Consumer Complaint: My monthly mortgage payment for Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) went from {$2600.00} to {$2900.00} on my XX/XX/XXXX statement. I was never told of this increase nor why it was happening. It is illegal for them to do that and I want them fined and my statements corrected. They should not be allowed to keep this increase in place and should be backdated to XX/XX/XXXX so I can continue to make my old payment amount until I catch up! Now, I am not a dummy. My guess is my escrow account was recalculated. I get that but they never notified me. It was a hardship for me to make the payment, never having been notified. Now, these bozos might argue that they put it in the previous month 's statement ( they did not ) so it was not conspicuous at the least. I have sent several emails to them and mailed a letter to them. Here is the unforgivable part : THEY SENT TWO LETTERS ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF MY EMAILS AND LETTER! Whoop de do! They have done nothing about it. No response addressing the issues! They have not called me ( And if they claim they have, they are clearly not calling from company lines or I would have picked up their call when I saw their name on their caller id ). Further, they will argue, " Oh, he is in bankruptcy. We can't call him. '' Not true. My case # XXXX was XXXX officially on or about XX/XX/XXXX - OVER ONE YEAR AGO!!! I am sick of this. I am trying to get caught up on my payments and should be able to do so within the next 3 weeks BUT I still do not know why my payment went up? Should I pay the increase?. Can you please help? No one is helping me and it is terrifying!
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MA
Zip: 019XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-20
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue: Paying off the loan
Consumer Complaint: I sent to the address for the cashier of the mortgage servicer ( SPS ) a check in the amount of {$100000.00} - It sent it XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. XXXX says it arrived at the cashier on XX/XX/28 at about XXXX. The check was made payable to me ( I endorsed it ) and them as the mortgage servicer. This check to fully pay off my mortgage. I have been calling them to find out the status with varying results. Today I spoke with XXXX who told me that their system showed that the check was there and was being researched. She then transferred me to their claims department where " XXXX '' told me that they didn't have the check ( including referencing that " XXXX '' told her that they didn't have it in XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and my best course of action was to get a new check. Getting a new check will be " difficult ' as it was the result of a lawsuit with an insurance company. I attach a XXXX receipt showing that they go the check. In my various contacts with SPS they have suggested that the check is there and they have escalated to have it applied to the account. Today after this they placed me on a long hold and then I was disconnected. The letter I attach is a copy of the one I sent in with the check. This one was addressed to the claims department.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33432
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-18
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Problem with personal statement of dispute
Consumer Complaint: I applied for a loan and the loan was denied because my mortgage statement indicates I deferred a loan payment, which I didn't request to be deferred and through discovery, the mortgage company stated I contacted them to request a payment deferral due to a financial hardship, which I never requested and later, it was stated in their response, my account was reviewed in XX/XX/XXXX, and an investor requested the payment be deferred and I was never notified of the decision that was made on my mortgage account by the mortgage company, which I had been pay my payments during the start of my loan modification with XXXX XXXX and the other mortgage serving companies, with no issues, until the moratorium that was put in place by the government on Rent and Mortgages, the company deferred my payment which I always paid within the same month, the payment was due and I was denied the loan I applied for with my bank. On XX/XX/XXXX, I XXXX a cashier 's check to XXXX in the Ombudsman Office attention from my XXXX XXXX account to pay the deferred payment, which a signature was requested and the confirmation of delivery shows the company received the payment on XX/XX/XXXX. I am requesting my account be updated to reflect the payment for the deferred payment, since I never requested to defer my payment and they agreed to remove the late fees as a courtesy, if I could show that I had PAID my XXXX, XXXX and XXXX mortgage payments, which I sent them and it was later stated I didn't defer my payment but the reviewer on my mortgage account in XX/XX/XXXX, deferred the payment. If Covid and the moratorium never happened, my payments would have continued as I was paying before the end of the month, prior to SPS Mortgage Servicing picking up my account from XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: DC
Zip: 20003
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-18
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue: Payment process
Consumer Complaint: Payment ( {$1200.00} ) sent via XXXX XXXX bill pay on XX/XX/XXXX and tracked that Select Portfolio servicing received payment on XX/XX/XXXX ... ..On XX/XX/XXXX I spoke with XXXX XXXX and confirmed check had been received by Select Portfolio Serv ... Spoke with mngr " XXXX '' at Select Portfolio on XX/XX/XXXX and he stated check had not been logged into system... ..I made another immediate payment of ( {$1200.00} ) on Select Portfolio 's website resulting in a {$5.00} charge ... .I requested a stop payment from XXXX XXXX on the XXXX but was informed it could take up to XXXX days to implement and was later informed that the original check was finally processed by Select Portfolio on the XXXX XXXX XXXX!!... Because of the check processing delay by Select Portfolio Serv. a double mortgage payment was made!!
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 34746
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-18
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue: Payment process
Consumer Complaint: Ilogged into the app end of XXXX and paid what was owed. Around {$500.00}. Mid XXXX I received notice about help with making my mortgage payment. I immediately logged into the app - shows payment for XXXX still owed. I logged into checking account. The payment never posted. I know I made my payment but attempted to make another payment through the app yesterday. Showed payment pending. This morning, I checked my banking account and nothing posted or is pending. Their app does not show payment pending Attempted to call. Phone disconnects after putting in last four of ssn. Attempted multiple times. Pressed pound, it disconnects. Called every other number I could find. Disconnects. I do not know how to speak with anyone, and I have not received any calls or voicemails from them either. Which, I would think they would be calling if my payment was missed. Ive worked too hard to raise my credit score for this nonsense to set me back. Paying my mortgage should not be an impossible process.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: PA
Zip: 18017
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-18
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue: An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation reli
Consumer Complaint: Sent modification paperwork since XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and no record see proof! Doulbe my payment for {$800.00} to {$1600.00} cant pay that went thru a divorce need help!
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MA
Zip: 015XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-17
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue: Foreclosure
Consumer Complaint: XXXX I want the following concerns addressed as soon as possible : Refrain from foreclosures proceedings Message email from XXXX XXXX Void repayment plan paying XXXX a month I only bring home XXXX. Ignoring my financial and health hardship ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Messages from Doctors ' Please refrain from starting any foreclosure proceedings, I have been working hard as sick as I am trying to come up with a resolution. Frist of all, I am writing again to XXXX to file another complaint with SPS and mail the complaint to the owner of my mortgage which is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I want SPS to look at the repayment plan, the monthly payments are too high and i simply can not afford them right now because I a being impacted by the new XXXX virus and a XXXX XXXX XXXX such as XXXX XXXX XXXX. I am writing to the Department of Housing and Urban Development to find out how I can get help in taking care of my mortgage. I am XXXX XXXX XXXX and facing serious financial and health hardship, I feel that there was error were made and I want to appeal the decision of SPS. I think it is wrong to charge me a large monthly payment when I am struggling. Your letter asks to understand my financial situation so you can possibly request an exception. What exactly does this mean? I sent you a new income and expense worksheet explaining my financial situation, I don't believe none of you even looked at it. Finally, your letter states that XXXX is my assigned Relationship Manager, she is yet to reach me, I have emailed her several times and I have not received any response.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MI
Zip: 493XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-10-16
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue: Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbe
Consumer Complaint: In summary, Select Portfolio Servicing is attempting to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, despite me applying for mortgage assistance. On XX/XX/XXXX I applied for Deed in Lieu with a complete application. SPS responded by telling me I was not eligible for any assistance but gave absolutely no explanation why they could not even review it. They also responded with a new noteholder, without giving me any info on who this new noteholder is. Actually, they recorded a substutee trustee, who has scheduled the foreclosure sale, but under the old noteholder name, when the name has changed. I am in receipt of the XX/XX/XXXX, mortgage statement that reflects {$7500.00} for other charges and fees. As Im sure SPS is aware, RESPA prohibits charging borrowers 3rd party fees if the work if not actually performed or if the fees/costs are not allowed pursuant to the mortgage documents. Specifically, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) ( 5 ) requires that the servicer may only charge bona fide fees ; fees that the servicer determined it had a reasonable basis to impose which are fees where the servicer actually made the payment and fees that are allowed pursuant to the Deed of Trust. However, a servicer may not charge a for service that a service provider did not actually provide or that it did not pay or is prohibited from being assessed pursuant to state/federal law or the Deed of Trust . Therefore, I request SPS provide me an itemization of the {$7500.00} in other charges and fees as well as documentation to support that this is a bona fide fee pursuant to RESPA. SPS, in your XX/XX/XXXX, letter you claim that the owner/secured party of my loan is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee, as successor-in-interest to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, as trustee , on behalf of the holders of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Asset-Backed Certificates XXXX XXXX XXXX. However, the Note that you included with your XX/XX/XXXX, letter contains no endorsements which means only the originator of the loan, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, has the legal authority to enforce the Note pursuant to the UCC. The claimed owner/investor does not have the authority to enforce the Note via a foreclosure action. SPS you claim via your recent letter and the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, that we were not eligible for home retention options/loan modification. SPS claims we do not qualify for a SPS Trial Modification because you could not reduce the principal and interest payment, or the payment reduction achieved did not meet the payment reduction required for the account. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 ( the Dodd-Frank Act ) transferred rulemaking authority for RESPA to the United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) ( the Bureau ). The Dodd-Frank Act also added a section to RESPA giving the Bureau the authority to establish prohibitions on servicers of federally-related mortgage loans for the purpose of carrying out the consumer protection goals of RESPA. In XX/XX/XXXX, the Bureau issued several final rules to address the systemic problems in the mortgage servicing industry described above and to implement protections for borrowers with regard to mortgage servicing. These new rules amended 12 C.F.R. Part 1024, RESPA ( Regulation X ), and became effective on XX/XX/XXXX. Specifically, the Bureau enacted a rule requiring early intervention and communication with delinquent borrowers. Servicers must establish or make good faith efforts to establish live contact with borrowers by the 36th day of their delinquency and promptly inform such borrowers, where appropriate, that loss mitigation options may be available. See 12 U.S.C. 1024.39. A delinquency is defined as beginning on the day on which a payment sufficient to cover principal, interest and escrow, if applicable, is due and unpaid. The new rules clearly implemented procedural protections for borrowers with regard to the process of obtaining an evaluation for loss mitigation options and restrictions on the foreclosure process while borrowers are being evaluated for a loss mitigation option. See 12 C.F.R. 1024.41. Notably, under RESPA, [ l ] oss mitigation option means any alternative to foreclosure offered by the owner or assignee of a mortgage loan that is made available through the servicer to the borrower. 12 C.F.R. 1024.31. This definition was intended to be expansive, encompassing not just loan modifications, but also forbearance plans, short sale agreements, and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure programs. Loss mitigation application means any oral or written request for a loss mitigation option that is accompanied by any information required by a servicer for evaluation for a loss mitigation option. Id. Under RESPA, [ s ] ervicer means a person responsible for servicing a federally related mortgage loan ( including the person who makes or holds such loan if such person also services the loan ). Id. Servicing means receiving any scheduled periodic payments from a borrower pursuant to the terms of any federally related mortgage loan, including amounts for escrow accounts... and making the payments to the owner of the loan or other third parties of principal and interest and such other payments with respect to the amounts received from the borrower as may be required pursuant to the terms of the mortgage servicing loan documents or contract. Id. The servicer is required to promptly review the application and determine whether it is complete. If a borrower submits a complete application for a loss mitigation option at least 45 days before a foreclosure sale, the servicer must acknowledge receipt in writing within 5 days ( excluding legal public holidays, Saturdays and Sundays ) and must inform the borrower whether the application is complete and what information is required to complete the application. See 12 U.S.C. 1024.41 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ). A complete loss mitigation application means an application in connection with which a servicer has received all the information that the servicer requires from a borrower in evaluating applications for the loss mitigation options available to the borrower. See 12 U.S.C. 1024.41 ( b ) ( 1 ). If a servicer receives a complete loss mitigation application more than 37 days before a foreclosure sale for the borrowers property, then within 30 days of receiving the borrowers loss mitigation application the servicer must : ( i ) Evaluate the borrower for all loss mitigation options available to the borrower; and ( ii ) Provide the borrower with a notice in writing stating the servicers determination of which loss mitigation options, if any, it will offer to the borrower on behalf of the owner or assignee of the mortgage loan. Id. at 1024.41 ( c ) ( 1 ). The NPV Data Input Field Values provided by SPS failed to include all of the inputs including income. The only input included is that of property value. SPS declined to approve me for a SPS Trial Modification claiming that a payment reduction could not be achieved however no explanation was provided as to the required payment reduction. Pursuant to 12 C.F.R 1024.41 ( d ) if the servicer denies the homeowner a loan modification, the servicer must state the specific reason each modification option was denied. Supplement I to 12 C.F.R. Part 1024, Official Bureau Interpretations, provides the degree of specificity required of the servicer in denying a borrower for a loan modification. For example, if the denial is based on investor requirements, the servicer must identify the owner or assignee of the loan and the requirement that is the basis of the denial. Additionally, if a loan modification is denied because of a net present value calculation, the servicer must provide the borrower with the inputs used in the calculation. In its letter, SPS declined me for a loan modification claiming a payment reduction could not be achieved, yet SPS failed to provide the NPV inputs other than the value of the property. SPS failed to state the program guidelines to include Debt to Income Ratio ( DTI ), availability to extend the term, lower the interest rate, etc. I can not effectively appeal a denial if I do not know the parameters and the inputs utilized. SPS failed to name the purported investor of my loan as required by 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( g ) ( 1 ). A denial for a loan modification ostensibly based on an investor restriction that does not name the investor or explain the restriction has been held to be insufficient. Nash v. PNC Bank, N.A. Civ. No 16-2910, 2017 WF 1424317, at *3 ( D. Md. April 20, 2017 ). SPS, you must provide the name of the purported investor of my loan as well as the specific investor restriction that prohibits the loan from being modified. Using the criteria from RESPA, Regulation X, and the CFPB, SPS had to do three things to properly deny my clients loan application. First, it had to identify the owner or assignee of the loan, which it did not do. Second, it had to identify the specific requirement that I did not meet, which SPS also failed to do. Third, it had to provide information and detail supporting its claim that my loan could not be modified, which SPS failed to do. SPS had to provide any underwriting guidelines or requirements or restrictions as well as the specifics utilized in calculating eligibility such as interest rate, term and DTI. Nash v. PNC Bank, N.A., CV TDC-16-2910, 2017 WL 1424317, at *4 ( D. Md. Apr. 20, 2017 ) ( denying defendants motion to dismiss RESPA Claim because the specific applicable requirement that was not met, the Court concludes that XXXX has adequately alleged that the Denial Letter 's explanation for denying his HAMP loan modification may lack the specificity required by 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( d ). ) SPS is obfuscating the reason for the denial by failing to provide to me any useful information that can be appealed. In XX/XX/XXXX, the Bureau issued several final rules to address the systemic problems in the mortgage servicing industry to implement protections for borrowers with regard to mortgage servicing. These new rules amended 12 C.F.R. Part 1024, RESPA ( Regulation X ), and became effective on XX/XX/XXXX. Notably, under RESPA, [ l ] oss mitigation option means any alternative to foreclosure offered by the owner or assignee of a mortgage loan that is made available through the servicer to the borrower. 12 C.F.R. 1024.31. This definition was intended to be expansive, encompassing not just loan modifications, but also forbearance plans, short sale agreements, and deed-in-lieu of foreclosure programs. Loss mitigation application means any oral or written request for a loss mitigation option that is accompanied by any information required by a servicer for evaluation for a loss mitigation option. Id. Under RESPA, [ s ] ervicer means a person responsible for servicing a federally related mortgage loan ( including the person who makes or holds such loan if such person also services the loan ). Id. Servicing means receiving any scheduled periodic payments from a borrower pursuant to the terms of any federally related mortgage loan, including amounts for escrow accounts... and making the payments to the owner of the loan or other third parties of principal and interest and such other payments with respect to the amounts received from the borrower as may be required pursuant to the terms of the mortgage servicing loan documents or contract. Id. SPS is a servicer pursuant to RESPA. CFPB regulations effective XX/XX/XXXX, as well as RESPA itself, require servicers, through amendments made by the Dodd-Frank Act, to take timely action to correct errors relating to avoiding foreclosure, suggesting that borrowers should be able to assert under RESPA errors related to loss mitigation. See 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( k ) ( 1 ) ( C ). Thus, CFPBs new provisions are relevant to this this Notice of Error, and pursuant to these new provisions, I request SPS process this Notice of Error as follows : The servicer must acknowledge receipt of a notice of error within five days ( excluding holidays, Saturdays, and Sundays ) after receiving the notice, rather than the twenty business day period under the former law. See Reg. X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( d ) ( effective Jan. 10, 2014 ). Alternatively, the servicer need not provide this acknowledgment or otherwise satisfy the compliance requirements if it corrects the error or errors asserted by the borrower, and notifies the borrower in writing of the correction, within the five business day period. See Reg. X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( d ) - ( f ) ( effective Jan. 10, 2014 ) Under RESPA, [ s ] ervicer means a person responsible for servicing a federally related mortgage loan ( including the person who makes or holds such loan if such person also services the loan ). 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( i ). Servicing means receiving any scheduled periodic payments from a borrower pursuant to the terms of any federally related mortgage loan, including amounts for escrow accounts... and making the payments to the owner of the loan or other third parties of principal and interest and such other payments with respect to the amounts received from the borrower as may be required pursuant to the terms of the mortgage servicing loan documents or contract. Id. Based on the representations made to me and the foregoing definitions, it is clear that SPS holds itself out as the servicer of my loan and that its activities with respect to the loan meet the definition of servicing. SPS is required to respond to and correct the above noted errors as it is a standard servicer duty. Under 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( k ) ( 1 ) ( C ) a servicer shall not fail to take timely action to respond to a borrowers requests to correct errors relating to allocation of payments, final balances for purposes of paying off the loan, or avoiding foreclosure, or other standard servicers duties. These errors on SPSs part must be addressed and reconciled immediately, specifically, pursuant to Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( d ) and ( e ), SPS has 5 days within which to acknowledge receipt of this request and must respond no later than 7 days. Until these errors are properly addressed and corrected by SPS, there can be no sale scheduled on our property ; the currently scheduled sale for XX/XX/XXXX, must be canceled if the errors are not corrected. See Reg. X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 3 ) ( i ) ( B ) and 1024.35 ( f ) ( 2 ) ; Official Bureau Interpretation, Supplement 1 to Part 1024, 35 ( e ) ( 3 ) ( i ) ( B ) -1. Therefore, we are requesting that you cancel the sale so that our concerns can be properly addressed. Be advised that RESPA and Regulation X provide a private right of action if a servicer fails to comply with the statute or regulation. 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( f ) ; 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( a ). I am a borrower entitled to the protections codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 2605 and 12 C.F.R. 1024.41. The mortgage loan subject to this action is a federally related mortgage as defined in 12 C.F.R.1024.2 and involves a consumer transaction at the time the loan was taken out by me. SPS is a mortgage servicer subject to the mandatory requirements of 12 U.S.C.A. 2605 and 12 C.F.R. 1024.41. I trust that SPS will comply with RESPA in responding to this letter.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-10-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A