Date Received: 2016-09-15
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In XXXX of 2014 I was provided a trial payment of 3 months in which I did pay the 3 months. At the end of the XXXX month I was never provided with the final modification to fulfill the terms. I then resubmitted for another loan modification as I was told by an SPS representative that I do qualify for the HAMP program and provided all required documents on time and was then denied. I still have never received a clear answer as to why my trial modification was never finalized and am now facing another upcoming foreclosure sale due to this matter. I also am not receiving any responses to my written or oral requests.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 95687
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-14
Issue: Settlement process and costs
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: 2016 - SPS stated XXXX was denied due to approximately XXXX dollars over the XXXX XXXX that was approved. I filed a complaint with CFPB. Thereafter SPS agreed to except the tender over the XXXX directly from me. SPS encourage me to re-apply with XXXX - I was approved a second time - SPS denied the tender again due as the reinstatement amount was over - SPS stated once XXXX funds are received I would have 7 days to tender the difference - I am and was prepared. SPS after a long conversation apologized for the error and stated to re-apply as your file will be flagged this time to avoid errors XXXX re-vampped application as the prior approval was less than 30 days old. XXXX approved within a week. SPS then stated I was misinformed and SPS would need to receive the funds as a whole. SPS on a XXXX way ( SPS/Myself ) recorded conference with a third party to confirm the instructions once XXXX release tender of XXXX SPS denies this ever happened and refuse to put XXXX representatives on the phone As the note holder in due course requesting- SPS a third party collection company - to establish relationship with master servicer Provide - actual INVOICE, who is the lender, who is the investor, a statement with a balance due, reinstatement information, payoff demand, a complete break down of all cost of postage including fed ex, XXXX and USPS XXXX Real Estate Review on property. Under the Freedom Of Information Act the information is not proprietary. A credit letter was sent to SPS to confirm tender of difference with more than enough funds in the account. SPS is denying tender to bring my account current.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-14
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing Inc ( SPS ) sent a letter stating " Your Mortgage Has Been Referred For Legal Action ''. Further, the letter stated, " Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ( SPS ) the mortgage servicer on the above referenced account, has referred your account for legal action. However, you may still be able to avoid foreclosure. '' It goes on to outline " alternatives '' to foreclosure. Specifically on XXXX XXXX, 2016 we sent a RESPA Qualified Written Request for information demanding " Proof of authority from XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX to conduct business on their behalf. '' Previously SPS had stated in correspondence the alleged involvement of the aforementioned entities in the subject mortgage. SPS has indicated that, in regard to the mortgage, " The Note Holder for XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, as Trustee, Successor in interest to XXXX Bank, XXXX XXXX, as trustee for XXXX XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX. '' We have previously questioned SPS 's authority in the matter and have rejected and denied the profession of their role as servicer. SPS has not fully and properly responded to the RESPA request of XXXX XXXX, 2016 - there has been no detailed response to the inquiry. SPS now threatens us with legal action. We allege that their handing of this matter is in violation of FDCPA.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 105XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-09-14
Issue: Settlement process and costs
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX XXXX - provide order that bears XXXX name. - XXXX XXXX XXXX attach the schedule stating this debt is secured or unsecured? XXXX XXXX XXXX - is a third party collection company whom appears to have paid a debt during a open bankruptcy that was not owed in attempt to collect from me. XXXX XXXX XXXX did not communicate with the attorney of record. XXXX stated : Please allow this letter to serve as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 's ( " XXXX '' ) response to the complaint submitted to your office by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( the " Complaint '' ). XXXX is committed to customer service and we hope that this response addresses the concerns raised in the Complaint. In the Complaint, XXXX XXXX states that XXXX 's documents contain multiple non-corresponding dates ; that the transaction history appears to show that the debt has been paid ; and that XXXX has not confirmed how a lien remains on the property. XXXX will address each statement below. First, XXXX is unclear as to which documents XXXX XXXX is referring. XXXX 's records indicate that XXXX XXXX received a discharge of her personal obligation to repay the debt through her Chapter XXXX bankruptcy proceedings. Prior to that date, XXXX 's records indicate that the account was due for the installment payment for the month of XXXX XXXX. Due to the bankruptcy discharge, no payments on the underlying debt have been made since XXXX and XXXX 's transaction history indicates as much. A copy of the transaction history was provided to XXXX XXXX upon her request. This document shows a " due date '' in XXXX and a " trans date '' [ transfer date ] in XXXX, which is the year that XXXX obtained the right to collect payments on the account. XXXX hopes that this explanation helps to clarify some of the confusion concerning non-corresponding dates. Otherwise, XXXX denies that its transaction history or other documentation demonstrate that the debt has been paid in full or paid at all since XXXX. Finally, XXXX XXXX states that XXXX has not demonstrated how a lien remains on her property. On this point, XXXX believes that XXXX XXXX should seek the counsel of her bankruptcy attorney. It appears as if XXXX XXXX file a motion to avoid the subject lien within her bankruptcy proceedings, and that this motion was denied with prejudice. Otherwise, XXXX is unable to advise as to the legal reasons underlying the denial of this motion. XXXX hopes that this response was helpful. If XXXX XXXX has any further questions or desires any clarification concerning this response, she should not hesitate to contact XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-09-14
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX my mortgage company received my XXXX/XXXX/XXXX mortgage payment. They reversed the payment and applied to the principal because as they explained I could not be ahead due to my bankruptcy. They never notified me of their actions. I continued to pay every month. At the end of XXXX when my bankruptcy was over I get this call asking for the XXXX XXXX payment which I had just paid. As we argued the gentleman stated I had bounced my payment for XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. After investigating the matter they found they had not serviced the account correctly however they refused to correct their error. I was not ahead I was on time. I have been charged late fees which they collected from the extra amount I was sending to apply to the principal. Instead of reversing the payment that they applied incorrectly and making current, they now are offering to accept a short sale or I can sign my house to them in lieu of foreclosure. The bank in question is Select Portfolio.
Company Response: Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error
State: IL
Zip: 60085
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-13
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, MN XXXX Loan Account # : XXXX Hello, For over a year now I have been trying to get a loan modification on my mortgage with my mortgage servicing company, Select Portfolio Company. I went through some very hard times and could not afford my mortgage then. However I went back to work and things have gotten better for me financially and have since pleaded with the mortgage company to modify my mortgage. For over a year now they have not given me the modification and my home is now in foreclosure scheduled for a XX/XX/XXXX sale date. I have given them all my financial statements that were requested including my income which includes my child support. They are refusing to use my child support and threaten to go ahead with the foreclosure on my home because according to them the amount is not the same every month. My monthly child support is a little over a XXXX and I receive it on a master card. I gave them the court order that shows the amount and 18 months monthly statement from the child support department proving I have been and still receive this income. They are however refusing to use my child support income because again according to them the actual amount received is not the same every month. They claim that because the actual amount receive is sometimes slightly more and sometimes slightly less than the amount ordered by the court that I get a letter from the department of child support explaining why amount varies. I asked to the court for the letter but was told they can not tailor a letter explaining why the amount receive is sometimes slightly higher. According to them they can only give me the monthly statements and the court order but can not tailor a letter to my situation. I explain this to my mortgage serving company and ask them to at least use the medium amount for every month but they insist they will not use the income at all however if they do not use my child support income that will disqualify me for the modification that is currently in progress with them. I have lived in this home with my daughter since XX/XX/XXXX and I am terrified that they are going to take our home away from us. I barely sleep at night. I do n't understand why they are refusing to use the child support when I have given them statements from XX/XX/XXXX to now showing I received at least {$850.00} every month. I am asking this office to please intervene and help safe my home. Please ask them to use all of my income and not deny me the loan modification. My mortgage company information : Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc . XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX : Phone : XXXX Thank you XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MN
Zip: 55378
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-14
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Following Select Portfolio Servicing ( lender ) subsequent denial of the loan modification for the subject property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX MN XXXX, and select portfolio servicings letter dated XXXX XXXX 2016 explaining XXXX date values of the subject property. I applied to Select Portfolio Servicing on XXXX XXXX, 2016 for approval of a short sale. My request has yet to be reviewed by Select Portfolio Servicing, no relationship manager has been assigned to the file and I have not received a single correspondence from the lender regarding my application.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MN
Zip: 55422
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-13
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: FULL DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT OF XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX attached fle fraud assignments in county land record use as prove of standing in county court, bankruptcy court house when its fraud assignments was discovered and challenged, XXXX XXXX move the serivicer to secondary services select portfolio servicing. why are the substitute trustee keep changing when fraud are discovered. there have being over XXXX debt collectors trying to collect on debt using fraud assignments upon fraud discovery the services select portfolio serving keep moving file to another fraud debt collectors to avoid detection of fraud and moves the files to one substitute trustee after another the original trustee wo n't have any part of this process which could produce liability disproportionate to any reward.And what point is the Trustee on the Deed of Trust, whether original or substituted, liable for subsequent misdeeds that amount to fraud? For example, if the original trustee has knowledge ( which all of them do now ) that the substitution is invalid then the original trustee is still the trustee on the deed of trust. Why wo n't they initiate the foreclosure process and fix the problem? Answer : Because they know they are dealing with fraudulent document, instructions and representations. The same rules probably apply to the substituted trustee. I think it might be important as it appears to be a widespread practice in the preparation of Appointments of Substitute Trustees by these debt collectors law firm 1. Defunct debt collector law firms of XXXX and " foreclosure mills '' including defunct law firm XXXX, ( file bankruptcy ) aka defunct debt collectors law firm of XXXX, ( file bankruptcy ) the sold to debt collector law firm XXXX, they abruptly shuts down without notice all of these debt collectors who and either shuts down as soon as the evidence of fraud is are being brought to light It concerns the Appointment of Substitute Trustee in my case .As pointed out by XXXX,
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MD
Zip: 210XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-09-12
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I phoned in my XX/XX/XXXX payment and I was told that I am still one payment behind when I questioned them about the statement still showing due for 2 payments and also accumulated late fees. The payment in question, is my XXXX XXXX payment, which was XXXX of the 3 month trial payments for the modification. This payment along with XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payment was phoned in on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I was asked to send in proof of this payment, which has been done numerous times, but I still sent my bank statement showing the money coming out on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Spservicing also responded to my complaint filed with you XX/XX/XXXX that my loan was current and only due for the XXXX/XXXX/XXXX payment. Refer to case # XXXX. They were also suppose to fix my credit report which they have not done as of today 's date. I was told they are reporting me a rolling 30 day with accumulated late fees which I am refusing to pay because I was never late and have never missed a payment. After they applied all of the payments received in XX/XX/XXXX, I had an excess of escrow payments which they did refund to me and I also have XXXX in unapplied payments. If I truly missed this payment, how could all of this be possible? Proof of this XX/XX/XXXX payment was faxed again on XX/XX/XXXX and I also followed up with a phone call that it was received and in their possession. It is sad, because when you speak with their representatives, they think that CFPB is a lender and NOT the consumer financial protection bureau. I never had a problem with them, when I was paying at a rate of 5.875 % on an adjustable rate mortgage. As soon as I was granted the modification, that is when all of these problems started for me. I feel that there is some discrimination going on here as well.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IL
Zip: 604XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-09-11
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My husband and I have been trying for eight years to get our house payment lowered to as close to a 31 % debt-to-income ratio as possible. He lost his job in 2008 during the 2008 global recession. We have had nothing but the run around and have been lied to over and over again and now finally have proof of their lies and deception. We really wanted a HAMP loan and was given a chance twice when we could not pass the NPV. They even stopped us from making affordable payments plans so that they could review us for HAMP. When we could pass the NPV and filed a Request for Mortgage Assistance ( RMA ), they said the investor would not allow HAMP loans because of a pool servicing agreement restriction. They have done XXXX in-house modifications and each have resulted in our mortgage loan balance increasing because of rolling in the arrearages into our note. Our balance is now {$360000.00}, when the appraised value of our loan is {$200000.00}. The first in-house modification they did for us actually raised our house payment by {$10.00}. Our house payment was already more than our income. Finally, I sent a copy of an appeal letter to SPS 's denial of loss mitigation options to CFPB and SPS finally lowered our payments to {$1300.00} from {$2100.00}. However, we were so far in debt with high interest loans, loans from friends and neighbors that were patiently waiting on their money and our new house payment was 70 % of our income. We made partial payments to SPS and began paying our other debts and are once again behind. I sent a RESPA Qualified Written Request regarding why they had failed to really help us and about the pool servicing agreement ( PSA ). They answered the request with what they had done not why they had n't helped us and told us that the pool and servicing agreement was " proprietary and confidential. '' This was a lie because PSAs are public information located on the Securities Exchange Commission website. I had already located the PSA years before and knew they were lying, but I needed proof and now I finally have it in writing from them. The next time we talked to them we told them that we knew that PSAs were not proprietary and confidential and then they sent us a letter giving us the trust name by which we verified that the PSA we have previously was the correct XXXX. This is obvious deceptive trade practices and also need to be fined for filing false answers to a RESPA request. I have memorized the XXXX Handbook by now and the handbook says that they are to follow all federal and local laws in the servicing of the mortgages. According to our PSA, Article V, Administration and Servicing of the Mortgage Loans, Section 5.01 ( a ), SPS, as the servicer, " shall have full power and authority, acting alone, to do or cause to be done any and all things in connection with such servicing and administration which it may deem necessary or desirable. Since I found that SPS could make any decision they wanted I asked SPS XXXX questions ( XXXX ) is SPS using the HAMP program to put us into in-house modifications which increase our loan balance in order to increase their profits? and ( XXXX ) is SPS only using the " investor/guarantor not participating '' as a ploy not to help borrowers greatly in need of assistance? '' I read through the CFPB database last night and became ill as to what they are doing to people. I plan to do a blog with the worst cases as soon as I can. They have broken all kinds of laws and I am hoping that CFPB will go after them soon. I found out a long time ago that SPS used to be XXXX and the Federal Trade Commission had fined them heavily and they ended up restructuring and became SPS. Apparently they did not learn a lesson. I have also read that they have so much money that they are not worried about what they do because they believe they can get out of it so they continue to lie and destroy people 's lives. CFPB, please help us!!
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 751XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No