Date Received: 2016-10-11
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have sent notification to this trustee who is attempting to wrongfully foreclose on my property. By their filing of instruments they are in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( codified at 15 U.S.C. 1691 et. Seq. ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( codified at 15 U.S.C. 1681 ). Trustor is exercising his/her right to conclude and inform you that your NOD Instrument does not constitute Notice and is invalid under California Gov't Code 27201 et. Seq. Specifically, the legal sufficiency of the Filed Instrument is disputed and denied by Trustor. Because of this discovery we have demanded that the trustee cancel TS # : XXXX. To this date, and to our knowledge, they have failed to cancel the Trustee 's Sale. I believe that if any attempt is made to execute the Trustee Sale identified above, they will be acting with Notice of invalid Filed Instruments and of debt disputed by the Trustor. They have been so advised that, because of and consequent to this Notice of invalid Filed Instruments, " XXXX '' is exposed to full liability, jointly and severally, along with the Beneficiary ( s ) and/or affiliated entities for any damages that may, in the future, be awarded for filing false instruments, breach of contract, or wrongful foreclosure. A material defect in the NOD, such as gross misstatement of the amount in default, voids the sale, and the trustee may refuse to convey the trustee deed. XXXX v. Superior Court ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. The court in City of XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) also stated that : " the purposes of the Recording Statute is to provide Notice ... whether valid or invalid ... if invalid instrument is filed, no Notice is given. '' The Trustors ' rights under both the deed of trust and statute are being violated by QLSC. XXXX was never properly and legally substituted as trustee of the subject deed of trust, therefore, you are statutorily prohibited from asserting any such authority. It is in criminal violation of Cal. Penal Code 115.5, Filing False Instruments. The Filed Instruments identified herein are statutorily defective and false. They were demanded to immediately remove them from the public record permanently and to cause Public Notice of such remediation to be effected immediately. After receiving no response from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, we mailed them a Notice of Default notifying the company that they were in default on their obligation to rescind the Notice of Default as demanded by the Trustor and were in breach of contract.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 95135
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-10-10
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: RE : U.S. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX HOME EQUITY PASSTHROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES XXXX. Wrongful Foreclosure. Violation of California Homeowner Bill Of Rights, Violation of California Civil Code 2923.55 ( b ) ( 2 ) and 2923.55 ( c ). False information filed under penalty of perjury on California Declaration Of Compliance dated XX/XX/2016 as part of the Notice Of Default. Specifically, homeowner, XXXX XXXX, received a phone call on her cell phone on XX/XX/2016 from a representative from XXXX XXXX XXXX. The representative inquired about homeowners plans for the property as payments were delinquent. The representative was advised that there had been a change in material and financial circumstances. That the co borrower spouse on the loan, XXXX XXXX, had been diagnosed with XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/2016 after having been ill but undiagnosed for one year. The XXXX representative was advised that XXXX XXXX 's illness had kept him from working full time in his small business and had caused a substantial drop in business income. The XXXX representative was advised that the homeowners needed a review for loan modification as the interest rate of 8.625 % was too high and made the mortgage payment too high. The XXXX representative advised the homeowner that a review for a loan modification was " not an option '' because a loan modification had been previously completed. It was not until I received a consultation with an attorney, that I learned that the bank and or assigned servicer were obligated by law to review for a loan modification if there had been a change in material or financial circumstances. The statements made by the XXXX representative discouraged the homeowner from pursuing a review for modification. The SPs Representative violated the homeowner 's rights by NOT fully exploring all the available options to avoid foreclosure. A California Declaration Of Compliance was filed XX/XX/2016 with the Notice Of Default, falsely stating that all options to avoid foreclosure had been explored with homeowner. My rights have been violated. My home is being sold without due process of law.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 93314
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-10
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have requested the following documents about my mortgage from SPS but the website keeps giving me an error message. Note Rider ( s ) Mortgage/Deed of Trust Truth in Lending Statement HUD-1 Settlement Statement Additionally, SPS has stuck me with a loan modification program that has a large balloon payment. I need help. Please remove the third installment of the principal that was forgiven and tell me if you can either remove additional principal or make the loan fully amortized. Additionally, I also wish to stop escrowing for taxes and insurance.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IL
Zip: 60174
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-10
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-09
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX transferred my mortgage to SPS ( Select Portfolio Servicing ). when the transferred what on process SPS sent a letter stating that they will honored all the payment, escrow account etc. However, the first thing they did they recalculated my escrow projection account increasing my payment in XXXX dollars even though the taxes this year in XXXX XXXX count went down XXXX dollars and my Insurance went down XXXX dollars. I contacted them requesting for me paying my taxes and insurance but I have n't received ant replied from them. Second that all the way they are reporting XXXX and XXXX made my score goes down XXXX points. I have sent letter and faxed as well but it seems like they are ignoring my requests.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: 20155
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-09
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-10-08
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX XXXX and Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) were the mortgage holders for my loan. I have a previous complaint against SPS ( Case number : XXXX ) with CFPB about the elongated sale that caused additional payments and delay in the closing of the escrow of my home. Now, I am unable to obtain an optimal loan because these XXXX companies are reporting late in my loan payments. The attached credit report pageXXXX of XXXX ( which is a part of a full Mortgage XXXX ) number XXXX show that I had XXXX 60 day lates on this mortgage which are erroneous. Firstly, enclosed is a mortgage statement for XX/XX/2014 that shows that there are no late mortgage payments and no late fees due, payment confirmation XXXX/XXXX/2014 no late fees, statement of XXXX/XXXX/14 showing no lates, XXXX/XXXX/14 payment confirmation no outstanding late charges. Therefore there are no late mortgage issues. Therefore : there could not be a 60 day late for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/2014. I have applied for a mortgage and have been told the above error in my credit report is preventing me from obtaining a loan.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92806
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-08
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-08
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Wrongful foreclosure. Violation of CA bill of rights. Violation of California Civil Code 2923.55 ( b ) ( 2 ) and 2923.55 ( c ) and other mortgage laws by Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) acting as servicer for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, as trustee on behalf of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Home Equity Pass Through Certificates, XXXX XXXX. False CA. Declaration under penalty of perjury on California Declaration Of Compliance dated XX/XX/XXXX included with Notice Of Default by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX contact was made with me on my cell phone be a representative of SPS regarding delinquency in payments. I advised her that I and co borrower sopuse had a significantchange of circumstance as my husband, XXXX XXXX, the co borrower, was diagnosed with XXXX XXXX on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX after being ill but undiagnosed for one year. I advised her that our business income had significantly dropped. I advised her that our mortgage interest rate of 8.625 % was still too high and we needed a modification review. The representative falsely and unlawfully advised me that a review for modification was " NOT AN OPTION '' because we had just received a modification XX/XX/XXXX. It was not until I received a free consultation with an attorney that I learned that if there is a change of circumstance, the mortgage company/servicer/bank Must by Law review the loan for possible modification. Select Portfolio Servicing and XXXX XXXX XXXX in direct violation of California Civil Code 2923.55 ( b ) ( 2 ) and 2923.55 ( c ). a Sale Date is scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX assigned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX I am requesting a postponement of the sale date. A Notice of Error has been sent to Select Portfolio Servicing via overnight mail.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 93314
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-08
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My Complaint is with Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. and Me. XXXX XXXX the Manager of the Ombusman Dept., I have been for ( 9 ) months sending documents to SPS to get a answer on if they will accept a buyers offer on the Condo, I 'm trying to Short sale for ( 9 ) months and can not get a answer XXXX XXXX said on XX/XX/XXXX that he would have an answer with in 24 to 48 hours it is now XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, I have left message and I 'm always told he is in a meeting. I have received as of today a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, requesting a profit and loss for ( 3 ) months they have almost a years of them, but I did send them. also asking again for Social Security awards letter I have given them one for the year, I have tried to explain that the XX/XX/XXXX awards letter will not be out until XX/XX/XXXX Taxes have been done and then I will get and give them XX/XX/XXXX, award letter!!!! ( the Soc Security comes goes auto into my bank, and SPS has all statements for ( 9 ) months ) which matches my XX/XX/XXXX award letter they have. the other documents is a PRE HUD that the title company has redone ( 4 times all different times ) goes back and forth takes weeks changes to lines XXXX, and XXXX,XXXX,XXXX, now on line XXXX they wanted to know what the exhibit is so the title company broke it down it is from the association dues, ( which do not have anything to do with the acceptance of the Buyers offer to purchase the condo, and to give me a answer if they will except the offer. SPS has told me to have line XXXX removed off the Pre Hud, the Title Company can not just take off lines??? I hope this answered your request for more documents, and now you can do the job of reviewing my Short sale request! There is one Document I have been asking for, as you know this property has a XXXX lien it is with XXXX, they need from SPS the approval letter this needs to be " the full payoff '' they need it for there Calculations, they also can only keep the file open for 30days. so I 'm asking again for this document, or XXXX XXXX can not complete the approval for the short sale. Thank you
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IL
Zip: 60185
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-08
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-08
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My foreclosure trial case was postponed on XX/XX/2016 waiting for a Loan modification appeal response. Select Portfolio Services failed to use the correct and undisputed monthly gross income figure twice after receiving notification of their mistake. In writing on XX/XX/2016, and alerting them to yet of a worst mistake by phone on XX/XX/2016. This prompted to agreed motion to postpone court trial. See attachments. I contacted SPS on XX/XX/2016 to find out the status of the review only to be told that there was no review in progress since their decision dated XX/XX/2016 was their final and if I wanted further consideration I would have to start all over. After it took over 7 months for SPS to be satisfied that I had provided all the documentation needed, I feel SPS is not acting in good faith by demanding the process to start all over. I demand their mistake corrected without having to go through the whole process since a new trial date has been set for XX/XX/2016 where I can lose my home. It is obvious that SPS is failing in correcting and reviewing submitted and accepted information time and time again. On their letter dated XX/XX/2016, the loss Mitigation review determined that they incorrectly used the figure of {$3500.00} and updated with the " correct '' amount of {$2800.00}. The correct figure is {$4700.00} plus {$480.00} a month projected Estate distribution from XXXX XXXX once his mother 's Estate is settled. This information and supporting documents were furnished and accepted by SPS as part of the modification application package. So our monthly gross income should have reflected at least {$4700.00} or {$5100.00} not {$2800.00}. Upset that my Trial date was on XX/XX/2016 I called them to alert them yet AGAIN that they used the wrong amount. The representative then, reviewed my file and realized of the mistake and submitted the file for review again. I asked them to alert my attorney and their attorney that a final review would not be possible before my trial date of XX/XX/2016. XXXX XXXX XXXX of SPS Document Control Officer advised me that as of XX/XX/2016 a Motion to Continue would be filed to postpone trial on those grounds. It was done and accepted by the court. Unfortunately nothing was done since. Now I am told the review was completed as of XX/XX/2016 which by their motion presented on XX/XX/2016 makes no sense. Under the above circumstances I feel that SPS is not acting in good faith, by requesting us to do it all over with information that has been submitted, verified, accepted and completed under their own terms. Please help.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33181
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-08
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-10-07
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SELECT PORTFOLIO RECOVERY SERVICING claim they want to foreclose on my property. To date they have yet to show that they are the originator on my mortgage. The original refinance was with XXXX XXXX XXXX who closed my account and the insurance paid for the loan. To my knowledge XXXX XXXX XXXX sold the mortgage as stock. XXXX XXXX XXXX also sold the collection to SELECT PORTFOLIO RECOVERY SERVICING -How can they sell my property as stock and mortgage at the same time??? -If it 's sold as XXXX and SELECT PORTFOLIO RECOVERY SERVICING claim to hold the mortgage on my property?? -SELECT PORTFOLIO RECOVERY SERVICING also has not answer my letters proving they hold right to force me to pay a mortgage. -In addition, SELECT PORTFOLIO RECOVERY SERVICING made back payment to themselves from my escrow account. I would like to know if it 's legal for them to use my escrow account to back pay themselves for collection payment on my mortgage. This happen while I was was renegotiating my loan with XXXX XXXX XXXX. From 2009 to date.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NJ
Zip: 07203
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-10-07
Issue: Taking/threatening an illegal action
Subissue: Seized/Attempted to seize property
Consumer Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing , inc, employee XXXX XXXX has threatened to seize Property at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, PA XXXX without cause. This company has also failed to validate any debt owed on the property. I XXXX XXXX, President of XXXX XXXX settled Debt and Civil claim of the Property with the original servicer XXXX, terms settled under the Mines and Minerals Act.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: PA
Zip: 17110
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-10-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No