Date Received: 2016-04-18
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have been attempting a short sale on my property for about 6 months now. The BPO has come back higher than the relator has proved is market value for the house. We have had XXXX interior and exterior and XXXX exterior only BPO done. The XXXX was coincidentally the same amount that owed on the loan, the second that we requested was XXXX which was XXXX over the price that the condo next to me sold for. I asked that another BPO be done and they refused saying that they only do one every 90 days. How can a third party appraiser be able to make such claims when the real estate agent ca n't even find homes that compare?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: 23602
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-04-14
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: To Whom It May Concern : I am writing to formally request escalated assistance with my file. I do n't believe anyone thus far at SPS has properly handled my file. I became XXXX in XXXX as I was in an accident XXXX. I entrusted my brother to make my mortgage payments for me with my fixed income and he did not do that ; instead pocketed my money. If I had n't been XXXX, I would have never become behind at all. Seconly, I am disputing the erroneous information contained in SPS ' most recent denial letter dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, stating my property value is currently {$430000.00}. My property is nowhere near worth that amount and I have attached my own appraisal showing the true value of {$310000.00}, which I paid for from my own funds because I believe so highly that SPS is using an extremely inflated property valuation. I would truly appreciate it if somebody could formally re-review my package using the correct value of {$310000.00}. It should also be noted that I had sent this appraisal with my resubmission packet back in XXXX XXXX, but it seems that it was disregarded by SPS completely. I XXXX have spent money on this that I am trying to save for my mortgage if I get approved. It was hard for me to do so I would appreciate it being correctly reviewed. Please let my advocate team consisting of XXXX XXXX and/or XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX know if you need any further information. SPS has this information on file already, but just in case, I am again attaching my written authorization to speak with them regarding this matter. I am XXXX and it is sometimes hard for me to get out to a fax to send documents that they may already have on hand. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92653
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-04-15
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: The CFPB has failed to respond to our complaint regarding Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ). In response to our Qualified Written Request ( QWR ), under RESPA federal law, requesting an accounting of our mortgage payments and payoff, SPS responded to the CFPB that they are responding with an accounting payment history. However, no accounting payment history was attached. As requested by our QWR request, we requested a full accounting of our mortgage payments and payoff, and identification of the party to whom those payments and payoff were forwarded. Despite SPS response to the CFPB, XXXX, to date, as no record of us, our loan, receipt of payments, or payoff. This complaint against XXXX is outstanding within the CFPB. As this issue involves security investors, it is urgently requested that SPS immediately provide the accounting payment history -- that they claim was forwarded to the CFPB, and us, but that neither of us has received. This former complaint is located under file number -- XXXX In addition, see below as to SPS response to CFPB by which the CFPB, falsely, closed the case. It is requested that both SPS and the CFPB provide the accounting history that SPS claims to have been forwarded to both us, and the CFPB. SEE BELOW FOR SPS response. NOTE -- NO ACCOUNTING WAS ATTACHED TO THE response CFPB - or response to us. We expect an immediate response. Finally, note that we immediately telephoned SPS back within two hours -- but were told that it was too late to speak with them. What kind of processing is that?? Who was the account paid to?? Who were the security investors that received our payoff of the loan? Where is the accounting of our payments? Why is this accounting not attached to SPS letter to CFPB, and why does the CFPB close the case -- even though there is no accounting transaction attached?? Please explain. Case number : XXXX Related Case Number : Back STATUS Response disputed Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc said : Explanation of closure SPS attempted to contact you on XXXX XXXX, XXXX to discuss your inquiry ; however we were unable to reach you. We have completed a full review of your inquiry and the account and our response is below. A copy of this letter will be sent to the CFPB. Discharge of Mortgage and Noteholder We have thoroughly reviewed this matter multiple times, and we have sent you several written responses that informed you not only of our findings, but also of our position on this issue. While we regret that you remain dissatisfied, our position remains unchanged. For your reference, we have enclosed copies of the letters we sent to you on XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Payment History We have provided a Customer Account Activity Statement ( payment history ) along with a Transaction Code Listing to assist you in understanding the payment history. The payment history provides data for the period from XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX. We have reviewed your claims and find no merit regarding SPS violating the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ). SPS is confident that the servicing of this account by SPS has been compliant with state and federal regulations. The account was paid in full effective in XXXX, XXXX. Response In your inquiry you raised question ( s ) regarding : Discharge of Mortgage ( 2nd Lien ) Noteholder Payment History
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NJ
Zip: 07470
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-04-14
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Florida Attorney General Office of Attorney General State of Florida The Capitol XXXX XXXX, Fl XXXX Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission XXXX, Florida XXXX Consumer Finance Protection Bureau ( Sent Via Email ) Florida Bar Association ( Sent Via Email ) I am writing to you with a formal complaint against, Florida Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Attorney ID # XXXX ), Judge XXXX XXXX of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX and US Bank. Although, I believe my Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX bares some responsibility, especially when it comes to his duty as a professional lawyer to be prompt, diligent and to maintain communications with me as his client concerning representation. The most important part of this complaint is against XXXX XXXX XXXX, of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, The XXXX and US Bank. The right to a fair trial is an essential right in all countries respecting the rule of law. The right to a fair trial applies to all types of judicial proceedings, whether civil or criminal. When it came to Judicial proceedings throughout the last several years that I have been fighting my Home Foreclosure case, Judge XXXX XXXX has solely and willfully ignored my rights to a fair trial and the rule of law. When I inquired about Judge XXXX XXXX with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, I was told that he is a RETIRED Judge who is only brought in when a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is out sick or on a short term leave. The reason that I inquired about his position was because every time a hearing was scheduled on the court file, it would show a different Judge that would be over/or assigned to the Judicial proceedings. Yet, every time over the past several years that I attended a hearing, it was always before XXXX XXXX XXXX rather than the Judge listed on the court file. It was of interest to me after I had read an article about our Florida State Governor / States Attorney General giving a directive to all Civil Courts to " Clear out '' all outstanding or " Older '' Home Foreclosure cases in their systems. It had become obvious to me that he was following this directive even if it meant completely ignoring the rule of Law. There was no other obvious reason for his rulings. In the last hearing conducted on XXXX/XXXX/2015, it was made more than apparent to myself, my Attorney, and friends who I brought with to the hearing that there was not a chance of a fair hearing or trial. I do intend to acquire a copy of the court transcript as proof of his complete lack of integrity, appearance of Impropriety, his total lack of impartiality, and his failure to follow the rule of Law. In the hearing, the Plaintiff failed to prove " chain of title '' in several areas. The Lawyer for the Plaintiff had prepared for a " blank endorsed note case ''. She only realized during the Trial that the original note was endorsed to the original lender, " XXXX ''. That specific endorsement required them to show a written transfer from " XXXX to XXXX. We had an admission by them that they had never received such assignment and that admission was placed in the evidence in the form of their answers to admissions to our discovery sent to them in the Trial. It should have been required by the Judge for them to show that they owned the Note or had a blank endorsed Note at the time that they filed the Lawsuit. Also, the Plaintiff failed to prove or tender into the record ANY evidence whatsoever concerning the alleged transfer by merger from XXXX XXXX XXXX to US BANK. US BANK is the named Plaintiff and NOT XXXX. They failed to show standing in the named Plaintiff, US BANK.The party that appeared in court XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 34741
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-04-13
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: Dear Sir/Madam For nearly 5 years, Select Portfolio Servicing and its agents, attorneys and principles have attempted to extort monies from me to the point of physically making me and my family sick. Eventually, they falsified a notice of trustee sale and forced me in bankruptcy ( chapter XXXX ) when there is no money due to them whatsoever. As the declaration of ex police officer and currently private investigator shows which is attached, there is no default whatsoever and all payments on a non existing loan has been received by these group of money launderers and ponzi schemers. 1. To get on with my life and to close the chapter on this criminal racket aided and abetted by some people who are entrusted to dispense justice and since i : have significant amount of equity in this property, i : put up my property for sale and within about 10 days, we were offered an offer and accepted that offer. i : then contacted Select Portfolio Servicing ( " SPS '' ) and its agents, attorney XXXX XXXX ( Tel : XXXX XXXX, email XXXXXXXXXXXX ) and requested a pay off amount. SPS and its agent supplied an amount which is not only contradictory with what they have been provided to me before which varies quite a lot than what was provided but also this amount is more than $ XXXX than what the expert witness who was an ex police officer and currently private investigator has provided ( which is about {$830000.00} as of XXXX 2015 ), see attached. In addition, the expert witness explicitly indicates that the amount he indicates excludes the insurance payouts and all other incentives ( such as TARP et al ) that SPS has received on behalf of my note and security that i : rescinded and for my note and security that i : rescinded. Moreover, when you see the note ( see attached ), SPS prefer to side-step the basic rules of pleading by creatively attempting to get relief to ignore the statute and its effects AND the fact that the alleged contract is void in fact and in law, Code of Federal Regulations 617.7010 Title 12 - Banks and Banking Title PART 617 - BORROWERS RIGHTS Subpart A - General Item ( c ). In practice, CFPB should reject and/or strike, XXXX XXXX, the pleadings offered by SPS/Countrywide here because the alleged contract ( the forged note ) is void and not voidable. The alleged note, which is bearing forged signatures violates legislative act, specifically it violates 12 CFR 617.7010 ( c ) which requires, " ..the borrower 's written waiver must contain a statement that the borrower was represented by legal counsel in connection with execution of the waiver. '' XXXX. added, 12 CFR 617.7010 ( c ), see attached paragraph XXXX " WAIVERS ''. Since i : was not " represented by legal counsel '', the alleged note and security is void in fact and in law and no rights arise from a void contract, 12 CFR 617.7010 ( c ). Because per Code of Federal Regulations 617.7010 Title 12 - Banks and Banking Title PART 617 - BORROWERS RIGHTS Subpart A - General Item ( c ), the borrower 's written waiver must contain a statement that the borrower was represented by legal counsel in connection with execution of the waiver and i : was not represented by legal counsel in connection with the execution of said waiver involving the property specifically addressed and identified as XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, State of California XXXX and known by legal description stated in the attached exhibit and pertaining to alleged account # XXXX allegedly serviced by Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( " SPS '' ), the alleged note and security is void, 12 CFR 617.7010 ( c ). SPS and its attorneys are attempting to extort monies and property from me, even when in good faith i : am selling my property, they still falsify amounts to continue to extort monies from me on an unsubstantiated debt. In fact, the previous attorney offered the home to me with a bit of money and for them to just walk away.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 95070
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-04-12
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Dear Sir/Madam Our FHA loan originated on XXXX XXXX, XXXX with XXXX XXXX and was immediately reassigned to XXXX XXXX on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( please see attachment # XXXX ). At settlement we provided an upfront premium payment of {$2100.00} ( Please see Document # XXXX Line XXXX plus another {$110.00} of mortgage insurance was paid by the seller at settlement ( Line # XXXX ). Additionally, we paid {$61.00} monthly until the loan was reassigned to XXXX XXXX and placed in a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX. Later after applying for multiple modifications, we were informed that our loan was conventional. We submitted several qualified written statements to XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and again to the current servicer SPS without adequate response. In the qualified written statement we requested a complete history of the loan from origination because we disputed the amount and the type of Mortgage. After being given the run around, we secured the services of a Housing Counselor who also submitted a qualified written statement of complete loan history, loan type and applied for several modifications which were all denied. Again, we were told that the loan was conventional but no one could produce the note that supported this information. Once the loan changed servicer in XXXX to SPS, we immediately applied for several modifications and were each time denied. SPS also informed us that the loan was conventional. In XXXX, SPS secured counsel and started foreclosure procedures which prompted us to file the first complaint with your organization. In SPS 's response to our complaint, they, again, instructed us that the loan was conventional ( Please see attached response ) and that we did not qualify for a modification. Once the actual papers for the foreclosure complaint were filed, the true and certified copy of the complaint, filed by SPS 's counsel, indicated that the loan was an FHA Mortgage XXXX Please see attached document ). Once this occurred, we secured counsel to assist us in uncovering the layers of deceit and impropriety associated with our loan. We are now requesting a complete investigation into our loan history as the current documents indicate that they were not only changed but our loan was changed without our knowledge or consent. In addition, we are requesting the note indicating that we consented to change our loan from FHA to conventional. We are requesting a complete investigation into the monies paid to the servicer XXXX and XXXX as well as the amount from loan origination that was set aside for PMI. In addition, we are requesting an investigation into the whereabouts of monies paid on PMI from Loan origination to approximately XXXX XXXX when loan was reassigned to XXXX XXXX. Since we have never received any correspondence in regards to this we are requesting all documentation that was sent to us in regards to a change in loan type as indicated in the current response from SPS ( Please see attached response ). We are requesting an investigation into monies paid XXXX Mortgage from XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX. We are requesting an investigation into the denial of approximately XXXX Modifications over the course of the loan to include XXXX modification request to the current servicer. We are citing a host of violations of fair housing practices, servicer, sub-servicer violations, unfair and deceptive practices, Improper conduct of lending and brokering and a multitude of other violations. Please assist us in obtaining the proper documentation and discovery.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: PA
Zip: 19050
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-04-12
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS Loan Number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX, XXXX XXXX CA XXXX This short sale was started XXXX/XXXX/2016 with SPS. SPS has been repeatedly obstructive to the short sale process since the beginning. There have been other issues to which I should have filed a CFPB complaint in XXXX, but did not. However, their obstruction of this short sale has not ceased and I am compelled to file this complaint. SPS 's 'new issue ' with this short sale is claiming that they must have an authorization that matches the listing agreement, the addendum, and XXXX TD approval. Requiring an addendum that matches the listing agreement is not only NOT a valid requirement for a short sale, but this has ALREADY been sent to them. It was sent to them on XXXX. We have since confirmed FOUR TIMES with the negotiator that the authorization IS IN FACT in their system. SEVEN times we have confirmed with the negotiators at SPS that they have received the addendum. Then we follow-up three days later, and EACH OF THE SEVEN TIMES we are told that the underwriters are STILL missing the addendum. SPS claims they will move the XXXX XXXX approval requirement to a prior-to-close condition. I have no faith they will do this without further obstruction. SPS will continue to behave in an obstructive and fraudulent manner in this short sale process until someone makes them stop. To the CPFB I request that you PLEASE do something about this.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92021
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-04-12
Issue: Settlement process and costs
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In case # XXXX, SPS still insists that XXXX made a " protective advance '' in paying off my XXXX mortgage, and I still maintain that I was in no danger of foreclosure by XXXX XXXX ( in fact, I had arrangements to bring the mortgage current ; XXXX was very helpful when I was dealing with the financial impact of XXXX XXXX ) so that what SPS calls a " protective advance '' was in fact a payoff that was not in keeping with the terms of my note. SPS offered to discuss a tender amount required to complete a rescission transaction, which I would be willing to discuss except for one point that SPS points out that a rescinded transaction is designed to bring both parties to a state as if the rescinded transaction had not occurred. My question is how do you plan on reinstating my mortgage with XXXX or how do you plan on bringing me back to that state? You ( actually XXXX ) created this situation by arbitrarily paying off XXXX, so how do you plan on bringing me back to my original state? If XXXX had done the transaction legally with a right to rescind ( and also, by the way, if they had provided TIL and RESPA documents to make the transaction legal as far as paperwork although it would still be in violation of the terms of the note ) I would not be asking this question. In other words, your offer is really not an offer at all, unless you can do what appears to be impossible.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TN
Zip: 37129
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-04-07
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS claims to be a recipient of disputes received from XXXX XXXX and stands firmly holding on to their position. XXXX XXXX does not agree with SPS : She is not missing 46 payments and can prove it. The comment about XXXX XXXX being " dissatisfied with SPS proceedings '' is unprofessional and child like. SPS, now sued in class action, must comprehend the consequence of their mistakes ( s ) by putting XXXX XXXX in fraudulent foreclosure and more, without any surplus or moral awareness, claims XXXX XXXX is at fault by missing 46 payments. This position taken by SPS calls to do a court proceeding. XXXX XXXX received XXXX offers and XXXX sets of modification documents dated : XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( paid fees for modification - and made payments but modification never took place due to the bank 's error, XXXX XXXX, XXXX made payments to the bank based on the modification agreement and bank 's requests modification never took place due to the bank 's error and final one in XXXX XXXX that XXXX also made all the payments ) .In XXXX XXXX took over XXXX during the time their accounting was inconsistent and chaotic and a total mess. Still, XXXX XXXX was making payments in XXXX but never got documents from the bank confirming modification was legal. It was illegal modifications, investor decided to back -up and there was no investor but modification that was never signed by the bank and although I paid as per modification agreement : there was no modification! XXXX agreed to a XXXX modification offered to her, along with and apologies for previous ill failed modifications of badly handled accounting and other mistakes. [ XXXX XXXX spoke with XXXX XXXX ( got a letter from him XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ) a rep. from XXXX in XXXX and agreed to modification with a new principle balance of {$940000.00} and XXXX making adjustments adding {$17000.00} and {$20000.00} that brought the balance up to a high sum of {$940000.00} with the first payment due XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Modification did not state in the document that escrow account was created although XXXX claims to make an escrow account in XXXX due to a lack of insurance. It is false claim and XXXX credits back money to the account ( see payment history XXXX. XXXX XXXX told XXXX XXXX to be getting her own insurance while he will collecting money up front for future taxes the bank was going to pay .Bank took XXXX for taxes alone but not insurance. Insurance, he said, was optional. SPS claims that during the time from XXXX to XXXX there are 46 payments missed. SPS is wrong. XXXX XXXX XXXX responded through their legal counsel : XXXX XXXX, XXXX that XXXX XXXX defaulted Loan Modification Agreement on XXXX XXXX [ a copy that they enclosed ] ... and the Loan was due for XXXX XXXX, XXXX installment and all installments thereafter at the time of the transfer of servicing. XXXX denies allegation of defaulting the loan due for XX/XX/XXXX.She made all the payments from XXXX XXXX until XXXX XXXX and thereafter until put in fraudulent default status in XXXX and band from making her payments to the XXXX ( see attached ). SPS, on the other hand, claims that modification in XXXX was updated in XXXX XXXX and the loan was brought current, however, as per court ordering and courts ratification the loan was modified with new principle as of XXXX XXXX with the first payment on XXXX XXXX. ( see attached XXXX XXXX XXXX never missed any of her payments but was put in default and therefore not able to make payments. XXXX XXXX made all the payments since modification with due date of XXXX XXXX XXXX until she was stopped by the bank that claimed she missed her payments .In XXXX she, XXXX XXXX was in default, according to the bank, and was not allowed to make her payments as of XX/XX/XXXX while in a default.She sued the bank and the bank offered her money and went forward with fouclousure.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91101
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-04-07
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have been trying to come to a resolution for loan XXXX since it was transferred to Select Portfolio Servicing from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. It is now XXXX XXXX and I still can not come to a resolution with my servicer. My main complaints are ignored each and every time. I have sent several Qualified Written Requests and Letters of Explanation to Select Portfolio regarding the following disputes and the responses are vague. The servicer has a trustee sale date scheduled for XXXX XXXX, XXXX and they are not legally bind to foreclose. Disputes : 1. I was approved by Keeping Home California / Hardest Hits Funds for the Principal Reduction Program that Select Portfolio participates in. The agency has sent several notices to Select and all have been ignored. I have stated this approval in all written documents to my servicer and all attempts to get an answer is ignored. 2. I am repeatedly told by my servicer that the investor on my loan ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) will not approve loan modifications on the account. The servicer advised that the loan is owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I checked the trust and my loan is not shown in the list of loans and loan amounts. After further research, I find my home loan in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with a completely different investor shown. I provide this proof to my servicer in written document and all attempts have been ignored. 3. I have not been offered alternative programs to avoid foreclosure. 4. Single point of contacts at the servicer has been changed practically every month. XXXX representatives on file, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX have tried to talk me into allowing the servicer to foreclose on the property. My last phone conversation with XXXX XXXX resulted in her offering me a cash payout. 5. The current mortgage loan is not the same loan before it was sold to my servicer. The servicer advised that the loan was modified but the modification was canceled by my previous servicer. Select Portfolio will not recognization nor assist with a resolution on this matter. The due diligence on my file has not been done and I am outraged that my numerous requests have not been correctly answered. I am seeking assistance from OCC to have the upcoming sale date of XXXX XXXX, XXXX to be halted and an investigation done on my account. I received a Notice of Rescission of Declaration of Default and Election to Sell from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX stating that the loan is indeed questionable and wrongful foreclosure was attempted. I have tried to get Select Portfolio Servicing to assist me with this research but all attempts by mail, fax, and email have been ignored. I have every intention of keeping my home. Your assistance with this matter is greatly appreciated.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92620
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-04-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes