Date Received: 2017-07-03
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This has been an on going process since SPS chose to leave a ups/fed letter at my front door with my final loan modification papers to sign and return. Everything else they send they send 9 times under 3 different names and I get 18-24 pieces of mail at my primary address as well as my formal address. The attached letter as you can see has my work address and was never sent to either my primary or my formal address. This just goes to add to there unfortunate ways they do business. My loan modification that took 2 years to get approved and I continued to pay the agreed amount of {$1100.00} was put to a stop when I called in XXXX 2017 asking for my final papers. They did send them XXXX/XXXX and it states left at front door. I never obtained nor was a signature required on such an important document. I should not be penalized for something so careless on there behalf. Why would I not return it when I fought for 2 yrs and 2 mediations to get this done. Now with no justification they want to increase my modification over {$600.00} per month in which my income does not support. {$1700.00} plus per month is more than 50 % of my monthly income. This is not justified and I should not have to continue to fight to pay my agreed amount in which the mortgage company I believe purposely set me up to fail.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NV
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-07-03
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This is my 9th complaint Re : Select portfolio and their illegal unethical tactics- I filed my 7th complaint with CFPB re : SPS on XX/XX/XXXX COMP # XXXX and SPS never responded to me or to CFPB. I would like my complaint answered by SPS- My last complaint filed about SPS -COMP # XXXX was filed on XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX. In that complaint one of the many issues was the different foreclosure dates between Sps and the company they hired to foreclose XXXX XXXX. I also provided documentation of the inconsistency and how they notify me by sending numerous letters some by register mail an some not advising of the postponement of sale- however the last sale date of XX/XX/XXXX was postponed to XX/XX/XXXX and never was notified by Sps until 2 days after I filed COMP # XXXX. The notice dated XX/XX/XXXX stating sale date was postponed to XX/XX/XXXX- ( see attached documents ) Why a 3 day postponement? On XX/XX/XXXX approx XXXX XXXX XXXX ( SPS employee -Obudsmen Department ) called and left me a voicemail stating " his name -he was calling from sps ombudsman and to call him back at re : a very important call -call back @ is ( XXXX ) XXXX press # 3 XX/XX/XXXX apprx XXXX I called the number back and spoke with XXXX XXXX with obudmsman -I asked for XXXX XXXX she stated he was not available - I advised her of the message he left - she then asked to put me on hold- came back a few minutes late did not know what XXXX had called for I stated he said it was important -she did not see any notes on what he called for - asked if I had any questions re : the complaint that I made. the only question I asked was what date of sale did she have she stated XX/XX/XXXX I would like to know why the message about important call was made? was it to get me to call?? XX/XX/XXXX I received from sps another notice of sale postponement -new sale date XX/XX/XXXX Sps has still never answered many of the quality written repose requests- never addressed the falsifying documents -never addressed the hamp denial I have provided multiple evidence that they do not have the legal authority to do what they have done and are still trying to do. and again Provide an answer to complaint I filed with CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX as I never received a response nor was one provided to CFPB COMP # XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-07-02
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Subissue: Account information incorrect
Consumer Complaint: I was recently denied a mortgage loan due to Select Portfolio Servicing reporting 2 30 day lates on my credit report in XXXX and XXXX of 2016. I sent Select Portfolio Servicing an online transaction history showing there were no payment lates in 2016. Select Portfolio Servicing is notorious for reporting adverse and incorrect information on consumers. Even with undisputed evidence that was sent to them, they refuse to correct the information they are reporting to XXXX, XXXX and XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 34986
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-07-01
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: When I first bought my home it was through XXXX, and something happened to where XXXX went bankrupt but they never let me know anything, I had requested documents from them as to the note, the payments and how they were being applied the balance but yet never received anything, and due to all this I too ended up filing bankruptcy and then XXXX bought out XXXX and when I was calling I was told to talk to XXXX, but they too never let me know they had taken over til after the fact, and when XXXX talked to me they stated that they were escrowing the account and putting it at a 3.5 percent, and if I received anything from them it would be for information purposes only and that they were not going to reaffirm the loan so it had been discharged with the bankruptcy, I then asked for the documents that they had received from XXXX they never sent anything to me I was immediately again in the dark about what they were doing, and about all aspects of the loan, and it was questions after questions and left unanswered. And then as I kept calling XXXX it came to where they told me that they were no longer over the loan and that I needed to talk to SPS select portfolio servicing, Inc. @ XXXX XXXX XXXX@XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Utah XXXX - XXXX and here we go again no one told me that they were no longer over the loan and SPS did not contact me either, and here I had no documents, and I explained again the problem to SPS and I again received nothing, they are running with amounts and too have handled the loan at the level of information purposes because of bankrupt, but there has been no transparency other than what they say and that is a problem that has trickled down starting with XXXX who left me hanging when they filed bankruptcy, and here I am in this horrible situation of losing my home, and just like XXXX and then XXXX and now SPS this customer rep XXXX XXXX has advised me not to send in any payments, that finally they are sending some documents, what I gave learned unless if you are in this field or very savvy about what they are doing they take advantage of people, I owe more than my house is worth but still is my home and want to keep it that way. I have been in the XXXX XXXX for over 33 years so where else can I run to, I do not know what is or is n't true with these banks or mortgage companies, what I do know is that this mess started with XXXX and here this giant went bankrupt failing its customers, so what do they expect from the little guy. I need someone who knows about these things to look into this because want to lo my home, it is not my fault what happened to XXXX and this mess that has trickled down, thank you, and feel free to contact me @ XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 125XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-07-01
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Subissue: Seized or attempted to seize your property
Consumer Complaint: 1. This is a new complaint filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX for unlawful debt collection practices and unlawful non-Judicial foreclosure action taken by Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. ( hereafter SPS Inc. ), XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter XXXX ), where each of them, ( collectively Respondents ' ) are threatening to seize, attach, and sale our property in a unlawful non-judicial foreclosure sale scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX although Respondents ' holds " NO SECURED INTEREST '' in our property for the following REASONS : ( a ), The Transaction is rescinded effective by operation of law on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX nor its agents or representative filed a legal response within 20 days after service. thus, the note, deed and contract is void as a matter of law, see EX-D2 ; and ( b ) prior to the rescission, the Transaction was already a nullity from its INCEPTION in that the deed and other documents were SIGNED by an unauthorized agent for its principal, in violation of Georgia law which says, " Where an agent without authority to execute a sealed instrument signs a contract under seal for his principal, the later is not bound unless ratification thereof be also under seal. XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. '' See unauthorized signer at EX-S1 ; and ( c ) A permanent sale was made and not recorded, the ASSET was transferred out of the alleged TRUSS to XXXX XXXX XXXX on or before XX/XX/XXXX. See EX-D7.
2. We also have evidence and good cause to believe that SPS Inc., & XXXX filed the present foreclosure action under a MODIFIED fictitious name instead of using it 's legal registered fictitious name as required by the State of NY Article 3 - 301 and state of GA Real estate Comm. Ch. 40 ( a ) and ( c ) ( 2 ). 3. The foreclosure Sale Under Power notice IS NOT BROUGHT by the party identified in the security deed neither is it brought by the party listed on the first and only DEED ASSIGNMENT as required by Georgia Real estate Comm. Ch. 40 ( a ), and ( c ) ( 2 ) which says : " The only person or financial institution allowed to sell the property of a borrower in default is the party identified in the security deed as the lender '' or " If the original lender sold the security deed, the power of sale rights transfers to this " successor. " It also says : " The published notice must contain the name of the Lender '' 4. XXXX, SPS Inc., and XXXX XXXX, XXXX, used Concealment and misrepresentation of a material fact, to disguise its true " descriptive '' fictitious name. 5. Under Chapter 40 ( a ) and ( c ) ( 2 ), XXXX and SPS Inc. and XXXX XXXX, XXXX always use the following legal fictitious name for non-judicial foreclosures actions, see EX D-2A, which is a XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Sale Under Power publication, where the following legal name is asserted as true under the statutory requirement of Georgia. ( d ) '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, As Trustee For The Certificateholders XXXX, XXXX, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series XXXX. 6. In the NEW Sale Under Power Notice, Respondents ' abandoned a key " descriptive '' term in its registered fictitious name they are require to use by the PSA. Note that Respondent, in the paragraph below, did not use the descriptive portion of its registered fictitious name that identifies XXXX as the trustee " For the Certificateholders ''. -- - Instead, Respondent used the following fictitious name omitting and disguising its legal fictitious name per the PSA requirement. See EX-S3, then see 6 ( e ) below, ( the MODIFIED fictitious name. ( e ) " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, As Trustee For XXXX, XXXX, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series XXXX ''. 7. The Respondents ' can not truthfully assert that it is the " Trustee for the certificateholder '' without misrepresenting a material fact. So XXXX avoided using its legal registered descriptive name when filing a action against us in Court which has now been dismissed. See EX-D4 pg.2,3. 8. See EX- ( D-5 ) which shows unsolicited documents sent to us by Respondents ' purported servicer, SPS Inc. which shows Respondent 's laying the foundation for the insertion of a modified or alternant version of the Truss legal fictitious name to be relied upon by us, the Court and CFPB as true and correct. See EX- ( D-5 ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of a material fact on behalf of XXXX by concealment of facts in response to The CFPB, and because it is a legal tribunal an if they use the key descriptive term, i.e. " for the certificateholder '' in referring to our purported loan account, it can be considered perjury. so Respondent used an alternant term in its place. 9. eight ( 8 ) foreclosure notices were served in XX/XX/XXXX, and now yet another one has been served. it amount to racketeering where senior citizens like ourselves are the target.Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30349
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-06-30
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Subissue: Seized or attempted to seize your property
Consumer Complaint: 1. This is a new complaint filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX for unlawful debt collection practices and unlawful non-Judicial foreclosure action taken by Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. ( hereafter SPS Inc. ), XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter XXXX ), where each of them, ( collectively Respondents ' ) are threatening to seize, attach, and sale our property in a unlawful non-judicial foreclosure sale scheduled for XXXX XXXX, XXXX although Respondents ' holds " NO SECURED INTEREST '' in our property for the following REASONS : ( a ), The Transaction is rescinded effective by operation of law on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX nor its agents or representative filed a legal response within 20 days after service. thus, the note, deed and contract is void as a matter of law, see XXXX ; and ( b ) prior to the rescission, the Transaction was already a nullity from its INCEPTION in that the deed and other documents were SIGNED by an unauthorized agent for its principal, in violation of Georgia law which says, " Where an agent without authority to execute a sealed instrument signs a contract under seal for his principal, the later is not bound unless ratification thereof be also under seal. XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX. '' See unauthorized signer at XXXX ; and ( c ) A permanent sale was made and not recorded, the ASSET was transferred out of the alleged TRUSS to XXXX XXXX XXXX on or before XXXX XXXX, XXXX. See XXXX.
2. We also have evidence and good cause to believe that SPS Inc., & XXXX filed the present foreclosure action under a MODIFIED fictitious name instead of using it 's legal registered fictitious name as required by the State of NY Article 3 - 301 and state of XXXX Real estate Comm. Ch. 40 ( a ) and ( c ) ( 2 ). 3. The foreclosure Sale Under Power notice IS NOT BROUGHT by the party identified in the security deed neither is it brought by the party listed on the first and only DEED ASSIGNMENT as required by XXXX Real estate Comm. Ch. 40 ( a ), and ( c ) ( 2 ) which says : " The only person or financial institution allowed to sell the property of a borrower in default is the party identified in the security deed as the lender '' or " If the original lender sold the security deed, the power of sale rights transfers to this " successor. " It also says : " The published notice must contain the name of the Lender '' 4. XXXX, SPS Inc., and XXXX XXXX, XXXX, used Concealment and misrepresentation of a material fact, to disguise its true " descriptive '' fictitious name. 5. Under Chapter 40 ( a ) and ( c ) ( 2 ), XXXX and SPS Inc. and XXXX XXXX, XXXX always use the following legal fictitious name for non-judicial foreclosures actions, see XXXX XXXX, which is a XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Sale Under Power publication, where the following legal name is asserted as true under the statutory requirement of Georgia. ( d ) '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, As Trustee For The Certificateholders XXXX, XXXX, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series XXXX. 6. In the NEW Sale Under Power Notice, Respondents ' abandoned a key " descriptive '' term in its registered fictitious name they are require to use by the PSA. Note that Respondent, in the paragraph below, did not use the descriptive portion of its registered fictitious name that identifies XXXX as the trustee " For the Certificateholders ''. -- - Instead, Respondent used the following fictitious name omitting and disguising its legal fictitious name per the PSA requirement. See XXXX, then see 6 ( e ) below, ( the MODIFIED fictitious name. ( e ) " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX f/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, As Trustee For XXXX, XXXX, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series XXXX ''. 7. The Respondents ' can not truthfully assert that it is the " Trustee for the certificateholder '' without misrepresenting a material fact. So XXXX avoided using its legal registered descriptive name when filing a action against us in Court which has now been dismissed. See EX-D4 pg.2,3. 8. See EX- ( D-5 ) which shows unsolicited documents sent to us by Respondents ' purported servicer, SPS IncXXXX which shows Respondent 's laying the foundation for the insertion of a modified or alternant version of the Truss legal fictitious name to be relied upon by us, the Court and CFPB as true and correct. See EX- ( D-5 ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX misrepresentation of a material fact on behalf of XXXX by concealment of facts in response to The CFPB, and because it is a legal tribunal an if they use the key descriptive term, i.e. " for the certificateholder '' in referring to our purported loan account, it can be considered perjury. so Respondent used an alternant term in its place. 9. eight ( 8 ) foreclosure notices were served in XX/XX/XXXX, and now yet another one has been served. it amount to racketeering where senior citizens like ourselves are the target.Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30349
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-07-01
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-06-29
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Dear Sir or Madame, in XXXX of 2016 I applied for a loan Modification upon approval of a Trail Modification Loan Modification the very next day the Servicer SPS Inc directed the Trustee to proceed with Foreclosure. They were clearly Dual Tracking which violates both Federal and State laws in California. Upon Notifying the Trustee and SPS Inc I received a response from SPS that the believed that they were within their Rights, Dual Tracking is not within their rights and they have added foreclosure charges that I would have not incurred had they followed the law. This is clearly not true for any Company to violate any Federal or State Law. I have attached the letters sent to both the Trustee and Servicer which indicate the dates when the laws were violated.The response that they have come up with is we have not set a sale date which does not adequately answer why they Dual Tracked in the first place.
On Several Occasions I have written by certified letters, emailed, and called to speak with my point of contact which is also a provision of the Federal MSA and California HBOR. To date I have not been given the opportunity to speak with him or the original point of contact that I requested to speak to and keep being passed to customer service reps who are reading an incomplete file not knowing what is going on and being told to email into a group email box that is not for the specific point of contact. This has been over a 10 month period. I want to speak directly to the Relationship manager XXXX XXXX and I want an appointment scheduled and I need him to know every detail of my file as he is required to. While processing my HAMP application there were several errors that SPS included in their results and denials yet they have not been willing to do anything but recently tell me to submit more documentation when they know the HAMP period has expired. I should not have to submit any more documentation because they let it expire. If they can not keep up with the records that they are supposed to then that is their internal issue. On the first modification that was sent I wanted to know the terms of the modification. it was an In house Trial Modification and when I would not sign because I was not provided the terms they allowed the modification to expire and then within a 2 months sent me another that had increased payments in excess of 800.00/ month and then told me I was not qualified for HAMP based on their calculations which did not include accurate information.They included wrong insurance payments, wrong income, and an association dues which I do not even have to calculate if I was qualified and then stated it was not in the investors best interest. I worked for XXXX as a XXXX XXXX so I have seen this strategy many times. I was very specific in the information I attached with the application and that is the information that should have been used not made up assumptions. When I notified SPS they did nothing. I want something done about this so either I can move on with a Chapter XXXX or they can provide an adequate modification using the correct information. And becuase they were not within their right to file the NOD at the time they did, it needs to be rescinded need them to address how a modification goes from XXXX in 2 month time frame with no explanation.Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92506
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-06-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-06-30
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: X/XX/2017 I received a response to the last complaint that I submitted. The response was that the bank will lose too much money to sell it at market value with the liens, closing costs and commission. I asked for a counter offer, or an amount that the bank is willing to accept so I can list the property at that value. The bank refused to give a counter offer or a number that they are willing to accept. -The banks reasoning is that market values, closing costs, and commission changes regularly. -There has to be a number that they are willing to accept or they will accept anything. There is a threshold and refusing to tell me that has seriously hampered my ability to short sale the home in a timely manner. -This has forced me to do a deed in lieu instead of a short sale. -I will be watch this property closely and if it sells for less than 68k I will be bringing a suit for Tortious Interference and Deceptive business practices. -I have tried to short sale the home with this handicap for 22 months. - I was very hopeful that the offer matching the market value would be accepted.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-06-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-06-30
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX I lost my job. I was not able to find another job before my note was due in XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX came and went and still was not able to find a job. XX/XX/XXXX I was force to file chapter XXXX. At the time of filing Chapter XXXX I was due for XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. My payments was XXXX due to the loan modification XX/XX/XXXX. My arrearage was {$1100.00} at the time of filing Chapter XXXX. The amount I paid to my prior and current servicer was {$9500.00}. In my proof of claim that was filed it stated I was {$1100.00} arrears ( included ). I want to know what is the pre-petition payment, plus fees and costs that total arrearage of {$9500.00}? In my loan modification that was complete XX/XX/XXXX page 2 parg. 3 B it states The modified principal balance of my note will include all amounts and arrearages that will be past due a of the modification effective date ( including unpaid and deferred interest, fees, escrow advances and other costs, but excluding unpaid late charges, collectively, unpaid amounts ) less any amount paid to the lender but not previously credited to my Loan. With this being say anything that I was in the arrearage for prior to XX/XX/XXXX was modified. I want to know where was this money was applied? I want a break down of the pre-petition payment, plus fees and costs that total arrearage of {$9500.00}? I want a copy of there proof of claim. I will enclose the Loan modification, Chapter XXXX filing I have circle the arrears amount, letter fro XXXX that my loan was modifiedXX/XX/XXXX. Also a break down fee sheet from XXXX on my account from the prior modification to XX/XX/XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: LA
Zip: 711XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-06-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2017-06-30
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: The loan servicing was transferred from XXXX XXXX XXXX to Select Portfolio Servicing in XX/XX/XXXX , but no notifications were ever sent out. Payments continued to be sent to XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX wh en a letter was received that payments were going to wrong company. Violatio ns under12 CFR 1024.33. XXXX No one from Select Portfolio Servicing ever called to see what was going on and to counsel as to what should be done. Violations under 12 CFR 1024.39 and 12 CFR 1024.40. XXXX Had the servicers done their job the home would not be at risk of foreclosure.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30152
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2017-06-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A