Date Received: 2019-12-05
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/2019 Certify Mail XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Washington, D.C. XXXX Taskforce on Federal Consumer Financial Law XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Washington, D.C. XXXX Cc : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVING INC. This complaint is brought to address CFPB misconduct and obstruction handling the following complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to help the company to avoid disclosure information that is needed to resolve the matter in the complaint. The following complaint were filed to CFPB : Complaint ID # XXXX dated XX/XX/2019 Complaint ID # XXXX dated XX/XX/2019 Those complaints Qualified Written Request pursuant to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( e ) against XXXX XXXX, the company has refused to respond, instead, according CFPB employee had said that XXXX XXXX responded under ground, leaving no trace of any written that the account do not belong to them. ( See Complaint ID # XXXX and XXXX ). Company responded the complaint does not belong to them on XX/XX/2019 Company responded the complaint does not belong to them on XX/XX/2019 XXXX XXXX, also, have failed to respond the previous complaint. We have notice that CFPB maliciously forward the complaint to SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING ( SPS ). We do not need any answer from SPS. We just a request a formal letter from XXXX XXXX saying what they saying underground, that the account do not belong to them, period. We request an investigation regarding this misconduct, to allow this matter of this account to be solved amicable and timely. Find the attached Complaints. Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Fl XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 335XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-12-04
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have Select Portfolio Servicing, inc. as my mortgage company. On XX/XX/XXXX I tried to make a payment online. It didn't go through, there was no notification on my side. I tried 3 different times on Saturday. So on Sunday, XX/XX/XXXX, I tried again so, my payment wouldn't be late or screw up the trial loan modification. The payment on XX/XX/XXXX I have a transaction id number. I do not have a transaction id number for XX/XX/XXXX. I checked my credit union account on XX/XX/XXXX, I found that the mortgage company had taken out 2 payments one on XX/XX/2019 and one on XX/XX/2019. I did get the mortgage company to refund the one payment, but not the extra {$30.00} to cover the payment for propane that I wrote a check for on XX/XX/XXXX. I believe that the mortgage company should pay for the {$30.00} to cover their mistake. I sent 2 different emails to alert the mortgage to this problem. No contact from the mortgage company.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MI
Zip: 494XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-04
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-12-03
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This complaint is in response to the complaint number XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, we sent an offer and HUD to SPS for a short sale review. SPS indicated the offer was too low, and sent us the appraisal which is for XXXX XXXX. We received a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX confirming the offer submitted was too low and we had a right to appeal. This property has been on the market over 400 days. If a higher offer could have been obtained, it would have happened. However, the buyer not only has to contend with the inferior condition of the property, but also MULTIPLE secondary liens, including a department of justice lien, and an execution that must be negotiated along with an order of conditions on the property. In the XX/XX/XXXX letter, acknowledging an offer from XX/XX/XXXXwas too low, it stated if we disagreed with the decision we had 30 days to appeal in writing. On XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX we sent three separate individual value information packets for dispute, each with their own cover letter identifying appeal information. The appeals included the buyers inspection report, our listing history information, sold comps, and much more. The following week XXXX XXXX called in and confirmed receipt of this package and we were told the information was in review. At the time we submitted the XX/XX/XXXX dispute packet, a complaint to the CFPB was initiated, outlining the flaws with the appraisal that was done in XX/XX/XXXX. With the CFPB complaint we included all of the value packets, which included comps, meaning SPS didnt review the attachments. XXXX called in again and confirmed the value information was in review. On XX/XX/XXXX, We received a response back from SPS via the CFPB. In this letter, they indicated an offer they received in XX/XX/XXXX was not high enough. They did not acknowledge the current offer sent to them in XX/XX/XXXX at all. They also further said they could not analyze the information we sent because it did not include comparables, however the XX/XX/XXXX information sent in DID include comparables. XXXX XXXX called in once again and spoke to the Ombudsmans office. She was told that because we didnt submit the comps necessary for a value dispute by XX/XX/XXXX, that the comps we did submit were not considered. Im not sure HOW we could submit value dispute comps on an offer we submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. Typically a servicer reviews all the paperwork and offer and lets you know what is missing or what else is needed. That did not happen. The moment we found out the offer was too low we submitted the necessary information to dispute it. In the XX/XX/XXXX letter it stated if we wanted to appeal we had to do it in 30 days which we did on XX/XX/XXXX -XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX called in once we received the XX/XX/XXXX letter via the CFPB. On XX/XX/XXXX she spoke to the Ombudsmans office again, who at that time said they needed 3 SOLD comps within 1 mile of the subject property and dated within the last 6 months. On XX/XX/XXXX we sent them 3 comps. The were outside of the 1 mile area because even their own appraiser used comps almost 2 miles away from subject property, which is what we had to do, and we sent comps dated within 6 months of the original appraisal. We are now waiting for a decision. None of the above is proper servicing. We still have had no acknowledgement of the current buyers ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) offer. It is absolutely faulty servicing that an offer from XX/XX/XXXX still has not been acknowledged or responded too. They have also sat on value information for three weeks and have not responded, however managed to reset an auction date for XX/XX/XXXX while a file has been in review since XX/XX/XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MA
Zip: 01945
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-12-03
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX, we purchased our current home. Our mortgage broker provided us an 80/20 loan. The 80 % portion was financed through XXXX XXXX, and is current. The 20 % portion was originally through XXXX, which was provided at 9.9 % interest for 15 years. Approximately XXXX, that portion was sold/transferred not sure which, to SPS Servicing. My account information with them shows that my loan Maturity date is XX/XX/XXXX. I called on XX/XX/XXXX and was informed that on XX/XX/XXXX, I would need to pay the remaining balance, of which would be near {$37000.00}. My concern is that I have made to date 154 payments at {$370.00} per, or roughly {$58000.00} on what was originally a {$43000.00} loan. I find this highly suspect, as I was informed that of the {$370.00} payment, Im still paying near {$300.00} in interest after 13+ years. How can companies get away with this?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MN
Zip: 55016
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-12-02
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: URGENT Foreclosure Sales Date is 10 Days Away XX/XX/2019 To Whom It May Concern : This is a complaint. SPS has set a foreclosure sale date on our home for XX/XX/2019 and this is a request to STOP the sale date immediately as SPS has not serviced our loan properly. We were in the process of a short sale and during this process SPS continuously requested the same information over and over again stating in their letters that information is still missing ( attached most recent dated XX/XX/2019 ), yet each time they asked for it we submitted the requested information via email. In addition SPS has continued to set a sale date each month since XX/XX/2019 while we were in a short sale process, which is dual tracking. They continued to delay our short sale approval by continuing to request this same information over and over and each time we have provided what they have requested. Now they suddenly deny our short sale in letter dated XX/XX/2019 stating it is due to information not received ( attached ). We called SPS on XX/XX/2019 to discuss the denial. We spoke with XXXX XXXX who stated the short sale was closed due to relocation fees not entered on the Estimated HUD1 as {$10000.00} and instead read {$20000.00}, according to their guidelines. We told Mr. XXXX that SPS has never requested this change to be made on the HUD1, hence how are we supposed to change something we are not aware of. He stated, That amount was required according to SPS guidelines. We also told Mr. XXXX that during these last few months of trying to complete a short sale, SPS has not called us instructing us of the relocation fees to be changed. He agreed and said Its been awhile since SPS called us, but wouldnt provide any dates of how long it has been. We asked if he would please reopen the short sale and allow us to make this change on the HUD1. He stated he would escalate it to his manager to see if they can reopen the short sale, so we made the change and submitted it the next day XX/XX/2019. Mr. XXXX also stated they may not be able to reopen the short sale due to the sale date being less than 30 days away. The following day after we submitted the changes on the HUD1 as instructed by Mr. XXXX, SPS sent us the XX/XX/19 letter ( see attached ) stating there are no further loss mitigation options available to us due to the sale date being within the next 27 business days away. This time-frame is not our fault. It is SPS error in not contacting us nor notifying us of the required change within a timely manner. The short sale denial letter is dated XX/XX/2019, plus 2-3 days mailing time, the sale date of the property is XX/XX/2019. How is this sufficient time for one to call in and request help when they purposely set the denial date and sale date so close together so that once one calls to request help, they say it's too close to the sale date to offer any help. This is unfair lending practice and dual tracking, it is their error in not providing the proper communication in their letters to us nor verbally. Only now that they close the short sale they inform us of this specific information. We request the foreclosure sale date be canceled due to servicing errors, unfair lending practices and dual tracking. We request they allow us sufficient time to apply for a different loss mitigation option or reopen the short sale. We request a fair opportunity to prevent foreclosure.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91352
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-12-02
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: We are submitting this complaint as a follow-up complaint to our discrimination complaint submitted on XX/XX/2019 regarding Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. account # XXXX. On XX/XX/2019, I returned a phone call at the request from a Select Portfolio Servicing Representatives ( Ms. XXXX XXXX ) voicemail that I had received from the Select Portfolio Servicing Consumer Onbuzzment Department. The customer service representative that I spoke with informed me that Select Portfolio Servicing has a foreclosure sale date of XX/XX/2019 and that our account Reinstatement Good To Date is : XX/XX/2019. I asked the representative if the Reinstatement Good To Date could possibly be extended, as we are still just a little shy of obtaining the full amount of money quoted me over the phone to bring our account current. The representative begrudgingly stated that, it is uncertain whether or not your home will be foreclosed on, on XX/XX/2019, because you filed a complaint with the Consumer Federal Protection Bureau ( XXXX-XXXX ) on XX/XX/2019, and Select Portfolio Servicing Management is still trying to decide how they are going to respond to your complaint, and whether or not Select Portfolio Servicing will foreclose on your on XX/XX/2019 is a day-to-day Select Portfolio Servicing Management decision. The representative also stated that we can expect to receive resolution regarding the recent inquiry ( CFPB complaint ) by 10 XX/XX/2019. Next, the Select Portfolio Servicing Customer Service Representative stated that three documents ( 1 ) regarding our CFPB complaint ( # XXXX-XXXX ), ( 2 ) a Relocation Assistance Agreement, and ( 3 ) an Account Reinstatement Quote was mailed out to us on XX/XX/2019, and asked if were in receipt of these documents. I informed the Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. rep that we have not received any documents from Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc . It is now XX/XX/2019 and we still have not received the documents that Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. alleges to have mailed to us back on the date of XX/XX/2019. However, this kind of consumer intimidation and stonewalling is indicative of the quality of customer service that weve received throughout our experience with our exotic predatory loan with Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc . Prior to our loan being sold by XXXX XXXX XXXX to Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc., our attorney had identified various violations of the Real Estate Standards and Procedures Act and the Truth in Lending Act was also violated when our XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX contract loan was originated. We believe that the findings of our forensics audit could give us recourse up to and including the hypothetical invalidation of our loan. We believe that the findings of our forensics audit could give us recourse up to and including the hypothetical invalidation of our loan. In addition, on numerous occasions, we respectfully requested Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. and the investor ( s ) : XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Trust 2007-3, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, and Series 2007-3 provide us a copy of the investor 's Pooling and Servicing Agreement ; however, Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. refused to provide that requested documentation as well. Our questions and concerns are : Is Select Portfolio Servicing allowed to lawlessly make up rules as they go and make decisions based on whatever works to Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc.s advantage? Are there any laws, rules, or standards by which this unlawful mortgage broker is required to operate? Clearly we should have had all of those documents for review before Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. could legally be allowed to proceed with any adverse action regarding our property. We believe Select Portfolio Servicings primary goal set forth by XXXX XXXX XXXX was to foreclose on our home all along. Select Portfolio Servicing will not even allow us to Short Sale our home instead of foreclosure because theyre only looking forward to reaping the benefit of the home equity while also collecting the government insurance funds too. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. should not be allowed to deny our requests for mortgage assistance simply because of race and the color of our skin. My wife is also a XXXX XXXX survivor and I am a retired, XXXX veteran and I honorably served this great country for 22 years. Please do not allow these disingenuous predatory lenders to do what they have intended to do all along, and that is carry out XXXX XXXX XXXX dirty work by foreclosing on our home and getting away with taking advantage of us by reaping the benefit of seizing our home equity and collecting the government insurance. Very Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX VETERAN
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: 201XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-11-28
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Earlier this year, I was approved for a loan modification, however, I was contacted by XXXX XXXX XXXX and was advised that the proposal I was provided by Select Portfolio Servicing was inaccurate. Based on the advice given by XXXX, I was in fear of losing my home even after receiving the proposal as they lead me to further believe I was losing my home. I understand I did not respond to the trial period I was initially offered because I was taking the advice of a law firm who lead me to believe I was being taken advantage of my the servicer, Select Portfolio Servicing, and I've now come to realize I was being taken advantage of by XXXX at the most vulnerable state of my hardship. I am requesting that I be considered once more to retain my home, as I am able to afford my mortgage payments, however, Select Portfolio is stating I am not eligible because I did not accept the initial offer. I would like to retain my property and not lose it to foreclosure. I made the mistake in trusting a Law Firm who contacted me, only to be scammed.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 78239
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-11-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-11-26
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XXXX XXXX and XXXX of 2019, we mailed letters to Select Portfolio Servicing Inc for account information. SPS has sent response letters each time without providing the account information requested. SPS has offered a loan modification to reset our mortgage. We are delinquent due to medical and employment. Before signing a new modification that does not include previous equity we need account reconciliation on past payments that span our current loan. However, SPS will not provide the account information instead it repeatedly sends the new loan modification in multiple copies and refers us to their website. We are not savvy with compiling the information we request and demand that SPS provides us the information we seek to make an informed decision. It is our position that SPS has unjustly enriched itself based on our current loan. Therefore, SPS refuses to send us the account information. We seek CFPB to facilitate our consumer rights to obtain account information from SPS. SPS must send the following : - copies of mortgage loan origination documents with terms - all loan modification documents signed and presented -notification documents of previous loan holders and loan transfer documents -Mortgage itemization of : -- # of payments made on the loan from origination to Present -- total # of payments and figures ( $ ) for mort. loan from origination to Present for : -- -Principal -- -Interest ( bearing / non bearing ) -- -Late fees -- -escrow -- -how much of principal is deferred payment
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-12-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-11-25
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Our mortgage loan was on auto draft with my previous mortgage company. The mortgage transferred in XX/XX/2019 to this mortgage company and hasnt been auto drafted correctly since. I have had to call once or twice every month to make my payment. I have had nothing but problems since my loan has been with them. They also try to charge me a service fee for calling in to make the payment they should have auto drafted. Now they say I am behind on my payments but I have been calling every month since XXXX to make my payment. They now wants me to make a payment and a half so that the auto draft will start working correctly. This company is a nightmare.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: AR
Zip: 72206
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-11-25
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2019-11-25
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX I recieved a letter of denial for modification. in that letter it stated i had 30 from that date of that letter to appeal there decision. The letter also stated no sale will be conducted until during the appeal process. I called SPS after recieving the letter in the mail at least 12 days after the date. Asking them to provide with certain documents that i would need in order to prove my appeal. On XXXX XXXX i recieved a call from a Mr . he advised me to send my appeal letter to " XXXX '' XXXXso i did just that he gave instructions on what to put on the letter ie in the subject box appea lwith loan number. i followed his instructions. after recieving the documents i requested i began my appeal On XX/XX/XXXX i sent it over I have attached the proof. On XXXX XXXX i recieved a letter stating the recieved my request for an appeal and they would get back to me within 30 days. WEll The set a sale date for XX/XX/2019, clearly im within my 30 day review period. no sale should take place, I have been calling the odsbudman dept. i spoke with XXXX XXXX.She told me that they would not postpone my sale because i was not within the time limit for appeal. I told her i was and di send it in so she looked it up and oh ok i will escalate to see if we can postphone sale date. I adviced her that we had very limited time has the XXXX holiday is approaching and the sale date is thje Monday after. She said call back MOnday XXXX, 2019 si i diid this morning only to be told to call back tomorrow There is no time left Tuesday, wensday thats it holiday come MOnday morning it goes to sale.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92673
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2019-11-25
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A