Date Received: 2016-08-05
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing negligently misrepresented a short payoff transaction that resulted negatively on my credit and caused damages to me. In 2016, I contacted SPS as they sent me a letter informing me that my mortgage would significantly increase due to a rate increase. Therefore, I asked them what are my options to avoid a rate increase as I had just completed the HAMP program and was on a good track which I wanted to maintain. The rep stated that I had the option to submit an offer to the investor and if accepted would be accepted as payment in full. I had asked the representative if this option would negatively affect my credit and the agent stated no, it would reported as paid in full as this is not a short sale. Also, the representative stated that they would send me a letter stating that my loan would be paid in full, which they did and I have a copy of the letter. I was concerned about my credit as I spent the last 5 years working hard to repair it due to late payments from the mortgage crisis, which I had explained to the representative. Again, the representative assured me that it would be shown as paid in full and I would receive a letter stating that I could use as proof. Therefore, I proceeded with the negotiation and sourced the funds to payoff my loan. After the transaction was complete, I receive my letter stating that the loan was paid in full. Thereafter, I applied for credit and was denied due to a short sale. I had advise the creditor that I have never sold my property and I only paid off the loan. They stated that the creditor is not showing the loan was paid in full but settled and it is negative on my credit. My score had dropped significantly as a result, and I am having a hard time sourcing the approvals needed to take care of my family and lifestyle. In conclusion, had SPS been transparent, informal, and truthful about the transaction, I would not have accepted to move forward in order to protect my credit that I just spent the last 5 years rebuilding.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 93551
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-05
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-08-03
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have been off work with a broken heel and got behind on my account and these people send me a letter every day.They had a guy come to my house twice now after I told them it would be current by XXXX/XXXX/2016. And i called them again and they told me it will continue until current even though we have a arrangement. They call 4-6 times a day and send letters everyday. The guy handed a visitor at my house a letter yesterday and said will you give this to someone at home did n't ask who the person was or anything just handed her a letter not even in envolpe. it is nothing more than harrasment. I needs to stop .We have called and made arrangements but they just wont quit
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IN
Zip: 46237
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-03
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS is the Servicer XXXX is the Investor. It is possible SPS has purposefully impeded the short sale process so that they could get their monthly fee while allowing the home to head into Foreclosure which is currently scheduled for XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Home Listed For Sale : XXXX XXXX, XXXX Original List Price : {$450000.00} then home systematically reduced until offers received. Contract History : No Contracts until home listed at {$300000.00}. Original Contract XXXX XXXX, XXXX rejected by bank and the buyer was countered at nearly {$100000.00} above contract price. 2nd Contract XXXX XXXX, XXXX and bank rejected contract and countered buyer at nearly {$80000.00} above contract price. Offer History : In nearly 10 months and XXXX appointments, XXXX contracts and XXXX additional unaccepted offers were received when list price was reduced to {$300000.00}. According to Multiple List, only XXXX homes have sold in this community in the last 2 years. NOTE : Bank Appraisal from XXXX XXXX, XXXX came in at XXXX, which is lower than the bank keeps countering all contracts at ( Bank Counter {$370000.00} ). Distressed Sale : Not only is the home a Short Sale that is in need of repairs ( list attached ), the HOA is in default which makes it difficult to sell/transfer these homes. Supporting Documentation Attached
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MD
Zip: 211XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-02
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX, XXXX Director XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX, IA XXXX Headquarters address Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear XXXX XXXX ; RE : SPS ACCOUNT : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX : ( XXXX ) XXXX RE : ADDITIONAL CLARITY Please allow me to reintroduce myself. My name is XXXX XXXX. I purchased a home at XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX. I was returning back to the US after servicing my country not in the military but as being XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX based in XXXX XXXX. I invested my life savings of {$200000.00} on the home. Today I am exploring foreclosure options with Select Portfolio Servicing due to XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX. RATIONAL : I HAVE PAID OVER {$530000.00} ON THIS HOME TO SERVICERS ON AN ORIGINAL LOAN OF XXXX. AFTER 11 YEARS THE DEBT REMAINS AT {$910000.00}, {$730000.00} CURRENT AND {$150000.00} DEFERRED I HAVE PAID OF AND ADDITIONAL {$100000.00} TO SETTLED THE ORGINAL XXXX XXXX XXXX MORTGAGE. THIS IS AFTER A XXXX MODIFICATION IN XX/XX/XXXX THAT HAVE NO RELIEF OR PRINCIPAL REDUCTION. ONE COULD ARGRUE THAT IF A MARKET REPRICING OF THE MORTGAGE HAD OCCURRED IN XX/XX/XXXX THE DBET WOULD HAVE BEEN RETIRED TODAY. THE MISREPRESENTATION OF THE ORIGINAL MORTGAGE BY XXXX DID NOT DISCLOSE : THE AMORTIZATION FEATURES THE MODIFICATION WAS DONE UNDER DIREST AND DID NOT DISCLOSE THE PRINCIPAL DEFERAL. FOR THE PAST 7 YEARS THE MORTAGE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN ABOVE THE PRE MODIFICATION. IT WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGINAL MORTGAGAE OR MODIFICATION THAT THE PROPERTY TAXES WERE HIGHER THAT THE MORTGAGE. THIS MORTGAGE UNDERWRITING IS UNECONOMIC. I believe that I was defrauded by XXXX at the time of my mortgage origination. An uneconomic and irrational payment structure. My mortgage principal and interest is less than my monthly property taxes and insurance. After a modification my monthly mortgage payments are higher than my original payments. This was a negative Home Affordable Mortgage Program experience. My Principal Balance today, XX/XX/XXXX, after 16 years is higher than it was in XX/XX/XXXX. Reccomendation Please conduct and audit and analysis of my mortgage modification and complete history with XXXX, XXXX and SPS. Please assist me in receiving a debt " cram down '' valuation base of my history for the mortgages. For example, my total payment from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX approximates my original principal debt or {$990000.00} in payments vs. XXXX in original debt. Thank You. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX SPS ACCOUNT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AMOUNT PRINCIPAL {$760000.00} DEFERRED {$140000.00} PRINCIPAL {$900000.00} MONTHLY PMT PRINCIPAL {$1100.00} INTEREST RATE {$1200.00} {$2400.00} ESCROW {$2500.00} TAXES INSURANCE
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30319
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-03
Issue: Credit decision / Underwriting
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Hi, I started to having issues financially to paying my mortgage and i contact the bank mortgage and begins the process to the retention program HAMP, from XXXX or XXXX last year 2015, I was sending all documents its required and always they asking for more documents, for any X or checkmark they refuse to continue the process inclusive calling me over the phone and interviewing me for the little mistakes did on the all forms, I reviewed and sent it back, I agreed to cooperate with all documents in order to complete the hole process, but i think they were waisting my time and wait until a year to send me to the foreclosure process, my financial issues were verify in my documents summited on time every time they requested but now they put my house in foreclosure even did not have my process completed and with no additional or alternative options, i have my rights to receive all help from this process and to get my options to determine the better option to keep my home. my family are working hard to make this help happens, the mortgage company is not showing nothing and then now i have to find a lawyer on my expenses to help me and interfere for my home. We have only 15 days to find a lawyer before bad news coming from the court .I think this is a one way to avoid help family to save their home. I want you help me to get the HAMP program completed and have the mortgage bank approved my modification loan or retention home program either way keep what i paying to them. They did n't let me to continuing paying my loan until they finalized the process, that i gave them my consent and intention to reinstall my payments.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33126
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-02
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My mortgage servicer ( SP Servicing ) has been doing everything they can to thwart all of my attempts to get a loan modification on my home. Lost documents, late mailings or notices sent that I did not ask for, discrepancies in information shared with me, etc. Most recently, I had to spend {$2000.00} to stop a foreclosure sale that the servicer postponed one day before the sale, but told me the sale would go forward. Someone needs to stop these people before someone loses their home for real.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NC
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-02
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: select port polio, our mortgage co or what ever they are now ( use to be XXXX ) kept going up on our payments to we could not make them any more. tried the XXXX, program. sent in forms to them over 6 times, each time they said they still needed this and that, the last several we just copyed and sent back, and after receiving the same application said they had what they needed. couple of weeks later we were turned down. was sent papers by local sheriff ; s dept, to be out by a certain date. later they offered us the cash for keys option which we had to take. because we had no other place to go. now were living in a small camper. I am XXXX, my wife is XXXX, and we have a adopted son that is XXXX. myself and wife are also XXXX and only draw a small amount each month.i know it 's useless to complain, but this company is going back to doing the same thing when they were XXXX capital. after being put out of our home for over 20yrs. I just they could have worked out something with me so I could keep my family in a home and not a camper. thank you.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 310XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-01
Issue: Settlement process and costs
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Paid off mortgage with SPS Select Portfolio, Account number XXXX. Loan was paid and closed on property, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IA XXXX, loan paid off as of XX/XX/2016. Escrow funds have not been returned. We have not been able to get anywhere with calling their customer service. We since then, have purchased another home, and will be moving again and just want our funds back that they owe us.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IA
Zip: 523XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-01
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-08-01
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have been the victim of a fraudulent foreclosure effort for the past 11 years. While I have managed to stop the sale to date, the alleged bank has now taken steps to sell my house after the Ohio Supreme Court refused to hear my last appeal. However, thanks to the efforts of the CFPB, it 's clear that help is finally here. In a recent " Administrative Proceeding '' involving File No. XXXX-CFPB - XXXX In the Matter of XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, the CFPB issued a " Consent Order '' which prohibits specific activities in the collection of mortgage debt, specifically the use of 'deceptive affidavits '. In the Consent Order, the CFPB lists at least five activities that XXXX & XXXX are restrained and enjoined from using in future collection activities including : a. Submitting to a court any affidavit in which it knows or should know an affiant represents, expressly or by implication, having personal knowledge of the validity, truth, or accuracy of the character, amount, or legal status of any Debt where that is not the case ; XXXX submitting any affidavit it knows or should know contains an inaccurate statement, including but not limited to a statement that attached documentation relates to the specific Consumer being sued when that is not the case ; XXXX submitting any affidavit in which it knows or should know that the affiant misrepresents the XXXX 's review of any Original Account-Level Documentation or any other documentation that would support the Debt that is the subject of the Collection Suit ; XXXX submitting any affidavit in which the affiant represents, expressly or by implication, that the XXXX has personally reviewed the affidavit, when it knows or should know that is not the case ; In my case, the Affidavit originally submitted to support the " Plaintiff 's Motion For Summary Judgment '' contains the exact same violations that the CFPB ordered XXXX XXXX XXXX to stop using. Specifically, the XXXX in my case : 1. Contains multiple inaccurate statements including that my wife, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and I have a 'loan account ' with the Plaintiff when my the facts clearly show otherwise -- my wife was not a signer on the Note. In the " Administrative Proceeding ' cited above, the CFPB said that even one 'inaccurate ' statement was impermissible. 2. As a result of the inaccurate statement involving XXXX XXXX XXXX, and failing to prove it in any other manner, the XXXX clearly did not have 'personal knowledge ' of the loan account, which creates a second inaccurate statement. 3. The XXXX also failed to ever state that the Plaintiff owned the loan. In fact, since the copy of Note that was attached to an Amended Complaint was not endorsed at all, there is no way the XXXX could have known if and when the Note was actually sold to the Plaintiff. 4. It 's also clear that the Affiant was not familiar with the 'Account-level documentation ' because had she been, she would have clearly seen that the Trustee could not have ever owned the loan in question since it was required to be sold to the Seller ( XXXX ), then to the Depositor, ( XXXX XXXX ) and then assigned to the Trustee per the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement which governs the Trust she claims the Plaintiff represents. But since the note was not assigned/transferred according to the XXXX, the Trustee had no power to do anything according to New York Trust Law, the law governing the operation of the XXXX. 5. The XXXX makes yet another inaccurate statement when she states that the loan is 'in default ' because since she does not have 'personal knowledge ' of the loan account, and she does not know the 'Account-level Documentation ', she is not qualified to attest as to the payment status of the loan. Given the above, it 's clear that for justice to be applied equally, U.S. Bank must not be allowed to proceed with a foreclosure sale on my home.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: OH
Zip: 44406
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-07-29
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS has dropped the ball on this foreclosure avoidance program. Seller has been trying to do a short sale and SPS never ordered an interior value. They ordered an exterior drive by only which is NOT VALID when trying to do a short sale for establishing actual value of a property. We were told on XXXX/XXXX/16 that an interior value was ordered and expedited and then on XXXX/XXXX/16 we were advised that they do n't know where their interior value order is. SPS is confused and displaying incompetence regarding a financial matter. Sellers are trying to avoid foreclosure and negligence on behalf of SPS is not a valid reason for seller 's home going to foreclosure.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 95111
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-07-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No