Date Received: 2017-12-20
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I had a Home Loan with XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) for a home located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, GA XXXX. I notified XXXX that we would be moving in XXXX of this year ( XXXX ), which we did, and asked XXXX to consider a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure. XXXX claims to have contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX to obtain a Title Release on a Lien that was on the Property, that has been done away with/Avoided and excused in the Bankruptcy Approved Filing ( Attached ). At any rate the remaining amount left on the Loan was {$87000.00}. XXXX had the property appraised at XXXX XXXX, which was less than the Fair Market Value, and would pay me the difference. XXXX has dragged its feet for almost one year instead of foreclosing on the property, neither has XXXX provided me with proof from XXXX XXXX XXXX that is a Valid Lien, because they can not. Now, XXXX Sells the Mortgage to Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc., XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, Utah XXXX, and they start sending me letters & Mortgage Statements ( Last One Dated XX/XX/XXXX ) for that property that I do not own, which was Approved By a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Case Number : XXXX. Today, I get another letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, stating that they own the Mortgage, in any case, this is not my problem, that property was returned back to XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX changed the locks and took possession of its property. What is being done by XXXX, Select Portfolio and XXXX XXXX XXXX is pure outright harrassment.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 31907
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-20
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: We first fell behind on our mortgage payments when my husband became XXXX and could not work anymore. We had a substantial loss of income in the household. I have applied for home retention options with Select Portfolio servicing several times and they would automatically deny us for loan modification after us submitting hardship letter and the new income. The only option they were willing to offer us was a repayment plan with an unreasonable monthly payment of {$6500.00} which our family can not afford and I have communicated this to them many times. SPS is now taking this to foreclosure court stating that they have tried to offer us a reasonable workout, which they have not. The LTV on the property is at about 40 % and they are not taking into consieration our hardship.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IL
Zip: 60510
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-20
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-19
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: We have been working with XXXX on a short sale on this property since XX/XX/XXXX. Several times we have lost buyers due to counter offers and delays in reviewing our offers. We have had the same buyer on board since XX/XX/XXXX and have been pending review. On XX/XX/XXXX we sent in the latest RMA ( another stall tactic from XXXX to delay reviewing the file by constantly changing the forms that are needed to proceed ). I called on XX/XX/XXXX and was told we were pending the review of the RMA. I sent an updated HUD and purchase agreement on XX/XX/XXXX since the ones we had on file had expires on XX/XX/XXXX due to delays in review. I spoke with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and was advised that our file was being DECLINED due to a new buyer. There was no new buyer - the agent referenced XXXX XXXX as the buyer - which was one of the original buyers from back in XX/XX/XXXX. The current buyer has n't changed since XX/XX/XXXX. She said she would escalate this and I would have an update by Monday or Tuesday. She could see that I DID NOT send in the offer from XXXX XXXX and that it appeared that someone from XXXX just randomly re-saved the old documents, which is what created the issue. Called XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and there is no update. No one has reviewed our escalation from last week, I was told today just to " submit the new offer '' - there IS NO NEW OFFER. This is the same offer since XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted the Ombudsman department who refused to assist. They opened ANOTHER complaint and want me to wait ANOTHER 24-72 business hours for a reply.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MI
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-18
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Subissue: Seized or attempted to seize your property
Consumer Complaint: This complaint is filed so there will be a public record. I can not afford to wait 60 days for a full response. This complaint provides new information for both the debt collector and the creditor. I sent SPS a notice to cease and desist all communication ( see attached file : SPS Cease and Desist ). SPS is NOT a mortgage loan servicer. SPS is a debt collection agency that should have its license revoked. In response to the Notice of Default filed on XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( see attached file : Notice of Default ) and in accordance with paragraph four of the letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX ( see attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX ), I disputed the debt based upon court cases and court documents ( see attached file : Debt Disputed ). This included a decision from a CA Appeals Court in XX/XX/XXXXthat concluded the assignment of the deed of trust was hearsay, so the overall truthfulness of the assignment of the deed of trust remained subject to dispute as well. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This was reaffirmed in XXXX XXXX after XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX was sued and further supported with deposition testimony. ( See attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). The debt collector is required to validate the debt before proceeding with collection as the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX referenced above from XXXX XXXX XXXX Insurance Company indicated. Consequently in order to validate the debt, the debt collector would have to overrule the CA Appeals court which the debt collector does not have the authority to do. Also to validate the debt, the debt collector must first determine if under the FDCPA, a mortgage is a debt and if foreclosure is debt collection. Since the courts are divided on these issues, it is not possible at this time to validate the debt. Although the courts are divided, XXXX XXXX which is the beneficiary under the deed of trust ( see attached file : Notice of Default ), obviously has no issue over this. The collection letter from XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX states it is sent in compliance with the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( see attached file : XXXX FDCPA ). Since the beneficiary under the deed of trust believes the FDCPA applies, the FDCPA would have to apply to SPS as well. Therefore SPS is not in any position to claim otherwise and neither is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX or XXXXXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. ( See attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ). As a result the Memorandum and Order from the lawsuit against SPS for violations of the FDCPA is applicable in my case. I have received collection letters that violate the FDCPA which makes a non-judicial foreclosure illegal as the court explained. ( See page 6 of attached file : Memorandum and Order ). In fact the court even states on page 12, ... a letter threatening foreclosure while also offering to discuss foreclosure alternatives qualified as a communication related to debt collection activity. I have received numerous such letters on a daily basis for over 3 years ( see attached file : Collection Letter ). As a result the California Declaration of Compliance is arguably made under perjury as it can not be true and correct when the options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as required under California law, are an attempt to collect a debt. ( See attached file : CA Declaration of Compliance ). The instructions for proceeding with non-judicial foreclosure proceedings are also a violation of the FDCPA as explained above. Page 16 of the Memorandum and Order explains : If the letter is not an attempt to collect a debt, then it can only be an attempt to defraud or extort money from a person with no obligation to pay it or solicitation of a gift. Again I have received numerous such letters. ( See attached file : SPS Attempt to Defraud ). This letter from SPS dated XX/XX/XXXX was sent to me in response to the dispute over the debt I sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Instead of responding to me directly, XXXX XXXX has forwarded my dispute to SPS who will only attempt to defraud me as the court explained. Therefore I sent SPS a notice to cease and desist all communication and notified XXXX XXXX of this. ( See attached file : Certified Letters ). However even the monthly mortgage statement SPS sends, states it is an attempt to collect a debt. ( See attached file : Mortgage Statement ). Therefore for SPS to cease and desist all communication would have to include the mortgage statement as well. A mortgage servicer is required to send a monthly mortgage statement. SPS can not both cease and desist all communication and send me mortgage statements. Thus SPS is not a mortgage loan servicer ; yet SPS acts as such to fraudulently foreclose on homes in tens of thousands of foreclosures nationwide as the court describes on page 12 of the attached Memorandum and Order. The fact the parties involved are aware of the courts position regarding the beneficiary of my deed of trust being XXXX XXXX, the fact the FDCPA applies to XXXX XXXX, and the courts position on the FDCPA, this amounts to fraud, oppression, malice. As foreclosure prevention has been used as an illegal method of debt collection, I have been continually deprived of my California Homeowner Bill of Rights to take away my property. Furthermore I was deprived of my privacy rights as my personal information was shared with a third party debt collector to foreclose on my home before and after I was allowed to restrict this. This is all responded to with collection letters that are an attempt to defraud. This is all preceded by more of the same as the Executive Office Analyst for XXXX ( XXXX ) /XXXX XXXX committed fraud, oppression, malice in XX/XX/XXXX by committing fraud to cover up the fact she violated the National Mortgage Settlement Consent Order while depriving me of my California Homeowner Bill of Rights and foreclosing on my home. To add insult to injury this same individual remains in control of the relentless, abusive, and illegal debt collection practices that have persisted to this day and consequently did the same exact thing a year later in XX/XX/XXXX ( See attached file : Fraud, Oppression, Malice ). I will not allow myself to be subjected to any further abuse. This ends here and it ends now.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92037
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-01-05
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-18
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Subissue: Seized or attempted to seize your property
Consumer Complaint: This complaint is filed so there will be a public record. I can not afford to wait XXXX days for a full response. This complaint provides new information for both the debt collector and the creditor. I sent XXXX a notice to cease and desist all communication ( see attached file : XXXX Cease and Desist ). XXXX is NOT a mortgage loan servicer. XXXX is a debt collection agency that should have its license revoked. In response to the Notice of Default filed on XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX see attached file : Notice of Default ) and in accordance with paragraph XXXX of the letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX see attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, I disputed the debt based upon court cases and court documents ( see attached file : Debt Disputed ). This included a decision from a CA XXXX XXXX in XXXX that concluded the assignment of the deed of trust was hearsay, so the overall truthfulness of the assignment of the deed of trust remained subject to dispute as well. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank, XXXX. ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This was reaffirmed in XXXX XXXX after XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX was sued and further supported with deposition testimony. XXXX See attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). The debt collector is required to validate the debt before proceeding with collection as the letter dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX referenced above from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX indicated. Consequently in order to validate the debt, the debt collector would have to overrule the CA XXXX court which the debt collector does not have the authority to do. Also to validate the debt, the debt collector must first determine if under the FDCPA, a mortgage is a debt and if foreclosure is debt collection. Since the courts are divided on these issues, it is not possible at this time to validate the debt. Although the courts are divided, Washington XXXX which is the beneficiary under the deed of trust ( see attached file : Notice of Default XXXX, obviously has no issue over this. The collection letter from Washington XXXX dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX states it is sent in compliance with the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( see attached file : XXXX FDCPA XXXX. Since the beneficiary under the deed of trust believes the FDCPA applies, the FDCPA would have to apply to XXXX as well. Therefore XXXX is not in any position to claim otherwise and neither is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX or XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX attached file : XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. As a result the Memorandum and Order from the lawsuit against XXXX for violations of the FDCPA is applicable in my case. I have received collection letters that violate the FDCPA which makes a non-judicial foreclosure illegal as the court explained. XXXX XXXX page XXXX of attached file : Memorandum and Order XXXX. In fact the court even states on page XXXX, ... a letter threatening foreclosure while also offering to discuss foreclosure alternatives qualified as a communication related to debt collection activity. I have received numerous such letters on a daily basis for over XXXX years ( see attached file : Collection Letter XXXX. As a result the California Declaration of Compliance is arguably made under perjury as it can not be true and correct when the options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as required under California law, are an attempt to collect a debt. ( See attached file : CA Declaration of Compliance XXXX. The instructions for proceeding with non-judicial foreclosure proceedings are also a violation of the FDCPA as explained above. Page XXXX of the Memorandum and Order explains : If the letter is not an attempt to collect a debt, then it can only be an attempt to defraud or extort money from a person with no obligation to pay it or solicitation of a gift. Again I have received numerous such letters. ( See attached file : XXXX Attempt to Defraud ). This letter from XXXX dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX was sent to me in response to the dispute over the debt I sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Instead of responding to me directly, XXXX XXXX has forwarded my dispute to XXXX who will only attempt to defraud me as the court explained. Therefore I sent XXXX a notice to cease and desist all communication and notified XXXX XXXX of this. ( See attached file : Certified Letters ). However even the monthly mortgage statement XXXX sends, states it is an attempt to collect a debt. ( See attached file : Mortgage Statement XXXX. Therefore for XXXX to cease and desist all communication would have to include the mortgage statement as well. A mortgage servicer is required to send a monthly mortgage statement. XXXX can not both cease and desist all communication and send me mortgage statements. Thus XXXX is not a mortgage loan servicer ; yet XXXX acts as such to fraudulently foreclose on homes in tens of thousands of foreclosures nationwide as the court describes on page XXXX of the attached Memorandum and Order. The fact the parties involved are aware of the courts position regarding the beneficiary of my deed of trust being Washington XXXX, the fact the FDCPA applies to Washington XXXX, and the courts position on the FDCPA, this amounts to fraud, oppression, malice. As foreclosure prevention has been used as an illegal method of debt collection, I have been continually deprived of my California Homeowner Bill of Rights to take away my property. Furthermore I was deprived of my privacy rights as my personal information was shared with a third party debt collector to foreclose on my home before and after I was allowed to restrict this. This is all responded to with collection letters that are an attempt to defraud. This is all preceded by more of the same as the XXXX Office Analyst for XXXX XXXX XXXX ) /XXXX XXXX committed fraud, oppression, malice in XXXX XXXX by committing fraud to cover up the fact she violated the XXXX XXXX Settlement Consent Order while depriving me of my California Homeowner Bill of Rights and foreclosing on my home. To add insult to injury this same individual remains in control of the relentless, abusive, and illegal debt collection practices that have persisted to this day and consequently did the same exact thing a year later in XXXX of XXXX. ( See attached file : Fraud, Oppression, Malice ). I will not allow myself to be subjected to any further abuse. This ends here and it ends now.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92037
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-17
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS, as the Transferee Servicer, is not adhering to terms and conditions of the original mortgage instrument. XXXX Bank notified me by mail that my mortgage assistance package was complete as of XXXX XXXX, XXXX. That letter was sent to me on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. The first paragraph states that they will let me know the results of the review of my completed application by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This letter stated that I was entitled to Foreclosure Protection and no foreclosure actions would not be taken while my application was being reviewed. This letter also stated that I may also be entitled to additional protections based on state and federal laws. I am currently looking into these protections. 2. ) SPS was in receipt of ( at the least ) A Facially Complete Application ( 12 CFR 1024.41 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( iv ). On XXXX XXXX, XXXX SPS sent me two letters stating they believed my application to be incomplete. However, according to 12 CFR 1024.41 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( iv ) my Mortgage Assistance application was, at the very least, Facially Complete and SPS is in error of not affording me the protections that having a Facially Complete Application should afford me. SPS stated in the letters that The Action Required was : Customers Tax Return E-File is missing signature. XXXX was in receipt of the required signature and it was faxed to them on XXXX XXXX, XXXX at XXXX am. The receipt ID for that fax is : XXXX XXXX. Although SPS is required to maintain policies and procedures to receive all documents accurately, they claim to have not received the signed e-file document. I obliged SPS and upon receiving that request from them, I immediately called SPS, made arrangements to get that page to SPS ( again ) and I emailed SPS what was requested of me. I have that email and the email from SPS stating they received the email from me on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 3. ) Not maintaining policies and procedures for borrowers to accurately submit documents when requested by servicer, AND, Not Accessing and Providing Timely and Accurate Information to the Borrower, and, Errors regarding Calculating Time Periods and Determining Protections and Failure to exercise reasonable diligence in obtaining documents. XXXX XXXX, XXXX I received a letter accusing me of not supplying the requested information. I called SPS and spoke to XXXX XXXX who said that SPS was unable to open my PDF document that I sent to them on XXXX XXXX ( which they acknowledged receiving on XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX also told me that SPS was going to contact a foreclosure attorney on/ or around XXXX XXXX, XXXX. SPS waited 46 days to tell me they could not open a PDF with the information they required of me. Between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, SPS sent me numerous other letters concerning privacy notices, annual escrow account, and letter ( s ) stating that they received correspondence from me and stating that SPS is committed to Home Retention. Without an explanation that their system was unable to open my PDF, they sent me a Notice of Default. Hence the Calculating Time Periods and Determining Protections according to 12 CFR XXXX ( b ) ( 3 ) for borrowers are not being afforded me and I am not being protected as I should be. The tardy explanation of telling me that an email PDF could not be opened, combined with ignoring the Complete Mortgage Assistance Application Letter XXXX that I received on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and by also Ignoring the XXXX XXXX, XXXX deadline date set forth in that letter by XXXX, to inform me of my results of the Completed Mortgage Assistance Application, along with refusing to acknowledge and review a Facially Complete Application led to XXXX XXXX ignoring my foreclosure action protections ( which I should have been afforded when SPS assumed my Mortgage Servicing on XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and threatening me with the deadline of XXXX XXXX, XXXX for SPS to call their Foreclosure Attorney. SPS was untimely and incorrect when notifying me that my mortgage assistance application was incomplete, untimely when telling me they could not open an email with the required information. Premature in sending me the default letter on XXXX XXXX, XXXX and in error with threatening me of SPS contacting the foreclosure attorney to pursue options against me if I do not cure the default by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 4. ) Failure to provide accurate information to a borrower regarding loss mitigation options and foreclosure, as required by 12 CFR 1024.39. SPSs XXXX XXXX refused to state what mortgage assistance options SPS would consider me for. XXXX XXXX specifically omitted, and would not state, that SPS would be considering me for a Loan Mod. I am still unclear on what SPS is going to review me for if they are even going to consider my completed application that was considered complete by XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX before SPS assumed the servicing of my loan on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 5. ) Making the first notice or filing for a judicial or non judicial foreclosure process before the time periods allowed by 12 CFR 1024.41 ( f ) and ( j ). I believe that XXXX XXXX telling me that I had to correct them default or SPS would contact the foreclosure attorney is an error according to the information above. 6. ) Moving for foreclosure judgment or order of sale in violation of 12 CFR 1024.41 ( g ) or ( j ). I believe that SPS is moving closer to a foreclosure judgement, rather that working with me to maintain my home. I believe they are not moving forward with intent to review my ( already completed ) mortgage assistance application with XXXX, and at the ( very least Facially ) completed application with SPS.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92649
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-16
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Refuses to provide access as client to mortgage and escrow information regarding my mortgage which was recently transferred from XXXX XXXX to XXXX. I asked for Escrow and Legal Department to contact me with correct tax and escrow figures and every customer service representative refused to arrange.a call. My letter informing me of transfer of my mortgage loan specifically states that my mortgage will not change and XXXX is changing payment amount and date of payment.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NJ
Zip: 08109
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-16
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In XX/XX/XXXX, I was granted a divorce from my ex. In the decree, it stated that she had 90 days to refinance the home in her name. It has been four years since then and now I have learned that there has n't been a payment made since XXXX of XXXX. This has greatly decreased my credit score in such a manner that I can not qualify for loans for autos or a home. The current mortgage lender handling the loan is XXXX XXXX XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: OK
Zip: 73110
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-15
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My wife had a XXXX back at end of XXXX and has finally returned to work full time at end of XXXX. I reached out to XXXX and asked about assistance with out payments and tried to work out something since we fell behind from XXXX to XXXX - due to wifes medical problems. I submitted all of the docs required by XXXX and they reviewed the account. They sent me multiple payment plans to try to get caught up. However, my normal payment is XXXX. They new payments proposed by XXXX were over {$1900.00}. If I was having an issue paying XXXX how can I afford over XXXX. I had asked about even doing a interest only payment for a few months and they denied this as well. I was asked on XXXX to resubmit new docs for assistance. I have submitted these docs 3 times over the last 3 months. I need help to get caught up. I would like to pay interest only for 3-4 months starting in XXXX or would like to have the missed payments added to the end of my loan and start paying the XXXX beginning in XXXX or XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: OH
Zip: 430XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-12-15
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I am a first time home buyer and I went under contract to purchase a property services by Select Portfolio Servicing on XX/XX/XXXX. As part of my due diligence, I ordered an Inspection ( {$400.00} ), Termite Inspection ( {$50.00} ), Structural Engineer Report ( {$500.00} ), and Appraisal ( {$450.00} ). I also placed earnest money deposit of {$1500.00}. After all inspections, damage was found on the electrical system, foundation, and plumbing as well as active termite infestation and a number a non-working issues with several items in the house. I provided the seller with a copy of the inspection, termite report, and structural engineer report. Seller advised they would have their own termite inspection performed which would take 10 days. On the 30th day, seller indicated they have not received results of their own termite inspection. After proposing to the seller to reduce the price to account for damages but to address the active termites, seller declined and countered to reduce the price by $ XXXX and leave the active termite infestation for me to address. I agreed due to the amount of money I was already out on this transaction. My closing date was scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX. A tax lien was discovered on XX/XX/XXXX, and it was communicated to me by my agent on XX/XX/XXXX that the property had been acquired through XXXX and that the foreclosure had never been done to wipe out the lien. I was left having spent {$1400.00} on a property I could n't purchase due to the sellers lack of due diligence prior to placing the property on the market. I requested to have earnest money and expenses refunded to me, seller declined to pay for expenses incurred due to their error stating the contract does not require them to reimburse me even though the sale fall through was due to their error and lack of due diligence. I am requesting assistance in getting my {$1400.00} refunded for inspections on a property that the seller had no right to market as available for purchase prior to having performed a foreclosure. This Company has extreme responsiveness issues and is setting consumers up to fail by not adequately overseeing their inventory. I now do not have the money to pursue another first time home purchase since I have now lost {$1400.00} due to the seller 's error.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 75287
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-12-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A