Date Received: 2018-08-02
Issue: Getting a line of credit
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Complaint from Consumer 1 and 2, written by Consumer1 on XXXX Consumer1 and Consumer2 were and continue to be targets of PREDATORY LENDING business practices by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX investors, XXXX XXXX XXXX and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. 1. We are both XXXX but were intentionally classified as white in loan documentation XXXX of XXXX. 2. We found a home to purchase at XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX California early XXXX. 3. We were verbally pressured to use a PH PREFERRED lender which at the time consisted of XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. 4. I began working with XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX. After approximately 8 days of no communication, I called PH and they advised me to relax, XXXX was on vacation. 5. When XXXX communicated with me again, my application was now with XXXX XXXX XXXX and was in the middle of being processed. His assistant also followed him to XXXX. I was not asked if I granted permission for my application to move from XXXX XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, a XXXX XXXX XXXX employee unbeknownst to me, took our loan application and started a new application at his new place of employment XXXX XXXX XXXX I was deceived and mislead. 6. When I called XXXX XXXX XXXX to trace my application, they had no records of any communication. 7. I contacted XXXX to discuss the strange circumstances and they assured me that all was fine. That XXXX was indeed a preferred lender and if we used this lender, we would not pay closing costs. Their assurances indicated to us that what had just transpired was not unusual and we took their advice as implied approval of the event. 8. We never met XXXX XXXX or his assistant. Everything was handled by phone, e-mail and fax. Mostly by phone. 9. When our final loan documents were mailed to us for signature, there were 2 sets : 1 loan for $ XXXX and another for $ XXXX. I called XXXX XXXX for an explanation and he stated that by bundling the 2 loans vs. 1 Jumbo loan, I would have a lower interest rate, save money. XXXX did not disclose that by placing us into 2 loans, he would be eligible for 2 bonus commissions and did not disclose that we were about to allow XXXX to place 2 liens on our new home which was still being built. That we were about to walk into a very risky mortgage agreement serving only XXXX XXXX XXXX and the interest of their investors. 10. We did not know the HELOC of $ XXXX was classified as a subprime, high rate, equity line of credit. These details were not disclosed to us by XXXX XXXX, agent for XXXX XXXX XXXX. 11. Pressured by XXXX XXXX to close the deal OR give up our place, our opportunity to purchase our new home, we signed the documents after several phone calls and arguments. 12. We were functioning under the threat of XXXX XXXX to accept the deal and hurry to close the deal without asking any questions or give up our hold on the new home and our deposit so that the house could be sold to someone else. 13. XXXX did not disclose any of the risky terms until we felt it was too late to back out. We were not informed of our TILA rights but rather threatened to basically shut up and sign. 14. As a result, XXXX willfully violated TILA and according to the Federal Deposit of Insurance Corporation predatory lending is a crime in California when the lender manages the loan transaction to extract the maximum value for itself without regard for the borrowers ability to repay the loan. 15. Several months later when the housing market collapsed, I made every effort to modify our mortgage and HELOC which was not with XXXX XXXX XXXX. 16. I succeeded modifying the $ XXXX loan. 17. I was informed by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( verbally ) that the XXXX/XXXX - HELOC at $ XXXX was discharged/charged-off and that I was not required to make any payments at the time or ever. 18. At one point the $ XXXX HELOC note came under the services of XXXX XXXX. I received a notice from them about the XXXX and again was informed the same > > not an attempt to collect a debt, no payments due, the notice should not be considered an invoice or statement. 19. I sporadically received Consumer2ual notices and called to inquire about the mail, which looked like an unprofessional flier, and again received the same response as before > > not an attempt to collect a debt, no payments due, the notice should not be considered an invoice or statement. 20. I then received a notice from Specialized Loan Servicing stating exactly the same as Ive mentioned above > just a notice, no payment required. 21. Meanwhile I diligently checked my credit reports, recorded documents with the XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX California and NEVER discovered the XXXX Lien for {$64000.00}. I checked Consumer2ually and being that nothing was recorded I assumed this was a scam and ignored the notices. 22. I recently got divorced and again, I checked my credit and recorded documents with the XXXX XXXX County and found nothing. I was checking to be sure my ex-husband was off title. 23. Still not at ease, I asked a realtor friend to please order a clean-title report for me. It was only then that I discovered the XXXX XXXX XXXX Lien for $ XXXX plus $ XXXX in interest. 24. I called SLS, LLC to request historical details about the lien including the name of investor and they have refused. This occurred the week of XX/XX/XXXX. 25. They ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, SLS, LLC ) will not put anything in writing! 26. They would not provide me an invoice unless I agreed to pay {$25.00}. 27. They refused to reply to my e-mail inquiries. 28. I can call/phone them ( SLS, LLC ) and they can record me, but I cant record them. 29. I offered {$32000.00} to settle the matter ( if I sold my house ) but they declined and informed me that to make such as offer, I had to agree to have the home appraised by one of their contractors and complete a recovery application for their review. 30. I was NEVER offered this option while I was in bankruptcy or struggling with payments. 31. I had ALWAYS been told the HELOC was discharged/Written-off and no payments were expected. 32. I have done an enormous amount of work tracing the path of this HELOC and I believe its IMPOSSIBLE for me to learn the truth, and I am intentionally kept away from the facts so that the predatory lender/predatory investor can ambush me and take any hard-earned equity or eventually foreclose and take my familys home. Destroy me financially AGAIN. a. HELOC originated with XXXX XXXX XXXX. b. XXXX XXXX XXXX purchased XXXX. c. XXXX XXXX begins to service the HELOC. XXXX XXXX disbands. d. SLS, LLC begins to service the HELOC. e. Somehow the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is in the picture. f. XXXX refers me back to XXXX XXXX XXXX as the Master servicer. g. In a call to XXXX XXXX XXXX I am told the HELOC was a mandatory discharge, mandatory charge-off and that they would send me a letter so that SLS will leave me alone. h. Instead I received a letter stating that the HELOC was now with XXXX ; SLS, LLC is owned by XXXX. 33. It is IMPOSSIBLE for me to easily obtain the facts about this HELOC. 34. Further XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and SLS, LLC willfully violate California Civil Code Section 2923.5 to act with and practice due diligence and be sure I am contacted with all the facts of the situation, the deadlines, the options, the demand, etc. 35. There have been numerous class action lawsuits assembled and settled. I was NOT contacted by anyone to participate nor was Consumer2. 36. There have been numerous lawsuits set on behalf of XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX XXXX that have long been settled. According to several law reviews, investors received restitution from XXXX XXXX XXXX. WHY are these investors seeking a 2nd round of restitution from the Consumer2? 37. In addition, it is assumed that by now, 11 years after the HELOC was originated, that investors have already listed the investment as a loss and taken income tax credits for such a loss. You cant chase recoupment after youve already accept the loss and tax credits. What do Consumer1 and Consumer2 want? 1. Send by certified mail satisfaction of XXXX HELOC, approximately {$64000.00}, 2nd lien as paid in full. 100 % satisfied. 2. Strip this lien, referenced above by XX/XX/XXXX Here are a few headlines : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX willfully violated TILA and according to the Federal Deposit of Insurance Corporation predatory lending is a crime in California when the lender manages the loan transaction to extract the maximum value for itself without regard for the borrowers ability to repay the loan. XXXX XXXX XXXX Relief for Mortgage Borrowers Is Questioned - By XXXX XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX5 US Dept of Justice web site : Justice Department Reaches {$330.00} XXXX Settlement to Resolve Allegations of Lending Discrimination by XXXX XXXX XXXX - More than 200,000 XXXX and Hispanic Borrowers who Qualified for Loans were Charged Higher Fees or Placed into Subprime Loans United States Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to Pay {$16.00} XXXX in Historic Justice Department Settlement for Financial Fraud Leading up to and During the Financial Crisis After 5 years, XXXX investors are paid {$8.00} XXXX settlement by XXXX XXXX | XX/XX/XXXX Mortgage bond investors are finally getting paid the {$8.00} XXXX settlement theyre owed in an agreement involving XXXX mortgage bonds. Mortgage bond investors sued over shoddy mortgages originated by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX unit. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the trustee for the bond investors, originally agreed to accept an {$8.00} XXXX settlement five years ago. But in the ensuing years, a legal battle raged over whether XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX acted within its authority when it agreed to settle, according to a XXXX report. XXXX XXXX Refunds Go Out to Abused Homeowners The Federal Trade Commission Consumer2ounced last month that it is mailing out refund checks to XXXX XXXX homeowners who were charged excessive fees in their mortgages by XXXX XXXX XXXX. Recoupment : This is a legal theory that allows someone to raise defenses against a bank or other business even if the statute of limitations for those claims has passed. Recoupment is an equitable doctrine that allows you set off your claims against what someone is trying to recover from you. In this case, it is used against banks who foreclose. For instance, one case in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, states that even though foreclosure might be non-judicial, and there is no actual lawsuit filed against the homeowner, the homeowner can still file a lawsuit in recoupment to stop a predatory lender. Another case from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court called XXXX v. XXXX implies that homeowners may be able to assert claims against predatory lenders in recoupment. The Court writes that the right of recoupment contains no time limitations on assertion of the right. This accords with the common-law understanding of recoupment as a defensive mechanism whereby a defendant may, at any time, assert claims against the plaintiff in reduction of the plaintiffs claims when those claims arise out of the same transaction ; it is an offsetting of liabilities within a transaction. In other words, Massachusetts law allows a defendant ( a homeowner ) to assert claims against the plaintiff ( the bank ) for predatory lending, at least to the extent that the claims offset the defendants ( homeowners ) liability.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 94513
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-08-02
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I was XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. I bought a land lot and built my home. XXXX never put me on bank loan financed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. After XXXX XXXX XXXX refused to accept me a rightful owner despite having home assigned to me by XXXX court, and having a Quit Claim Deed on it. I originally owed {$170.00}, but after XXXX years of XXXX XXXX refusing to allow me to Assume the mortgage they now claim I owe them {$400000.00}. as they enforced the costliest Insurances and the highest compound interests. I was forced to file Bankruptcy in order to prevent XXXX bank to take home. Now in XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX sold my loan to Specialized Loan Servicing and I am having the same difficulties with them. They have refused to allow me to Assume the mortgage, or to give me a trial payment plan of a year, which they state they could do. My interest is in saving my home, rectifying the paperwork and putting this account back on track. SLS has not been willing to modify the mortgage despite the fact I make sufficient salary to pay. I have lived with my sons, and who have medical problems, and my mother with end-stage XXXX XXXX in this home since XXXX XXXX.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: FL
Zip: 33027
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-08-02
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Specialized Loan Servicing ( SLS ) services my mortgage which is owned by XXXX. I had a temporary interruption of my income ( lost my job ) in XX/XX/2018 which rendered me unable to make my mortgage payment in XX/XX/2018 to SLS. On XX/XX/2018 I submitted a request for mortgage relief ( RMA ) to SLS, requesting that the missed payments be added to my loan principal and that my account to be re-aged in anticipation of regaining the lost income ( which I have now ). Subsequently, I received from SLS a notice of default and their intention to foreclose. SLS requested additional documentation, beyond that which was submitted with the original application, from me which I submitted per their instructions on XX/XX/2018 and XX/XX/2018. On XX/XX/2018 I received a notice from SLS admitting that they had not evaluated my application claiming they did not receive the documentation I provided. On XX/XX/2018 I requested escalation and reconsideration of my application from the Customer Care Manager ( XXXX XXXX ) ; to date I have received no response. On XX/XX/2018 I requested escalation and reconsideration of my application from the Vice President Customer Experience and Executive Services ( XXXX XXXX ) ; to date I have received no response. Finally, On XX/XX/2018 I requested escalation and reconsideration of my application from the Chief Operating Officer ( XXXX XXXX ) ; to date I have received no response. I assume that they are still in process of foreclosing on my property. We would like to stay in our house and have been attempting to negotiate with SLS in good faith in order to resolve our situation, but they have not responded in kind. Thank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 30319
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-08-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-31
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: The property was damaged in a flood. FEMA provided assistance in the recovery. The amount of assistance provided by FEMA was not enough to get the home back to a livable condition so it could once again be occupied. When the mortgage company was contacted about the condition of the property they offered disaster relief. This relief came in the form of freezing payments with the promise to add any missed payments to the back end of the loan. At this time the household accepted this assistance and began using the money that was once designated for mortgage payments to now start rebuilding the home properly and to cover living expenses elsewhere while property rehab continued. Once the property was rehabbed to a livable standard the mortgage company was contacted and advised that the household would begin sending monthly payments immediately. At that time the mortgage company refused to accept payments. For over a year the mortgage company continued to refuse payments stating that no payments could be made until there was a loan modification. The mortgage company continued to use delay tactics and refuse payments until the loan was moved to a different company completely. The new company, Specialized Loan Servicing, also refused monthly payments from the household while continuing to promise all missed payments would be tacked onto the back end of the loan and advised the household to continue to use monthly payments to further rehab the property. Suddenly the household was mailed a letter saying the property was in severe default and payment was expected on all missed payments, including the time the family had evacuated the home, immediately or the property would go into foreclosure. SLS also decided to charge interest on the payments that the mortgage company refused to accept from the household. The household owed {$200000.00} on the house before the flood. Now SLS is stating the household owes {$230000.00}. Most of the debt added to the loan is from the interest charged during this time of payment refusal. The mortgage company manipulated a situation where the household now owes more on the property today than they owed when they first moved into the house four years ago. The mortgage company is also stating that {$30000.00} is owed immediately not to enter the foreclosure process. The family firmly believes they have become victims of a predatory company looking to take advantage of the positive equity the family owns in the property by using tactics to create a debt that would eventually become too overwhelming for the family to recover from in hopes to create an environment of hopelessness and helplessness that the family would eventually beg to walk away from. Because the family was promised payments missed would be added to the back end of the loan they continued to take all money to rehab the property. Now that this promise has been broken the family is being forced out of the home. If SLS had not been deceptive in their approach the family could have easily continued to make their monthly payments. It is believed SLS purposefully misled and delayed during this process so it could profit from forcing the family out of home and take advantage of the positive equity this family worked hard to gain.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: LA
Zip: 70503
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-31
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-30
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SLS is in violation of debt collections practices act, acting with malicious intent and in violation of CA HBOR. At issue is the new policy at SLS which affects short sales. This is a policy that no other lender has as it's in violation of debt collections practices act. This specific policy is specifically for 2nd liens owned by SLS which requires the removal of fees which have been approved by senior lien holder on a short sale. These fees do not in anyway impact the amount SLS is receiving on their short sale and the senior lien holder is the lender that dictates which fees will be allowed since they are the one who is entitled the most proceeds of the sale. When SLS demands fees to be removed, in the case loss mitigation fee of XXXX which was approved by 1st lien holder, they are pushing that fee onto seller which is illegal on short sale and in violation of CA HBOR. SLS can not in anyway demand the removal of fees which are approved by 1st lien holder. This egregious and malicious illegal tactics must immediately cease and desist. SLS must adopt the policy they had before and every single lender has and focus on what they want to net from the short sale and not remove fees approved by 1st lien holder. Trying to remove fees in negotiation that are approved and being paid for by 1st lien holder is in fact acting in bad faith and is something SLS can be sued for.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 92707
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-30
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My mortgage was sold three times in the short time that I have owned my home. I purchased my home in XX/XX/2016. The latest mortgage company is SLS Loan Servicing ( Company ) whose principal place of business is somewhere in Colorado ( they keep changing mailing addresses ). I have been trying for a year and a half to have PMI removed from my mortgage payment. I have spoken to them countless times and sent a few letters. I have met all of the criteria for having PMI removed from my account including authorizing ( and incurring the cost of ) an appraisal ( even though the original appraisal was only a year and a half old ). That I have to pay for an appraisal is doubly outrageous as I have provided a appraisals of properties in my neighborhood which clearly demonstrate an increase of $ XXXX over what I paid for my house. I have been waiting for the results of the appraisal for over XXXX months. I despise this Company. All it has does is jerk me around and delay, delay, delay. Please tell me if there is some entity other than CFPB that has jurisdiction over this matter. I am at the point where I am contemplating filing a lawsuit against this Company, but again I'm already being XXXX financially by having to pay for PMI which shouldn't be on my account to begin with, and an appraisal that isn't necessary.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: VA
Zip: 201XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-30
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Subissue: Debt was paid
Consumer Complaint: Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC ( SLS ) is holding a lien on my property ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, PA XXXX ) that was paid off by a third party investor without my knowledge. In addition, SLS is demanding that I pay them $ 43,000+ when they never provided nor forwarded information addressing my concerns of the originator 's Power of Attorney and the trail of mortgage assignments.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NC
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-29
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX was my original mortgage company. The ownership of my mortgage was transferred over to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. But they are not the servicer of my loan. The servicer is Specialized Loan Servicing LLC. The Loan was transferred XX/XX/2018. Since the transfer, I have not received a detailed statement ( escrow balance, payments made on my behalf, verification of homeowners insurance and property taxes paid ) or ANY statement for that matter. I have called several times only to be promised a statement to no avail. Not only do I not have any way to pay my mortgage without a statement, they want to charge me a service fee to pay over the phone! I have escalated this issue to the managerial level several times and have been promised I will receive a statement. I have NOT received one to date. I am concerned that there may be some sort of fraudulent activity with this company.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NY
Zip: 11704
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-28
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SLS never did anything other than attempt to take my home force foreclouser on me they are thief Disunest and crock They have law suites against them for doing the same thing they doing with me sale peoples home Cfpb too easy do some thing SLS send creeps to my property to take picture they hid in the bushes and around my property when I go outside they ran away I cant leave my home
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 92656
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-07-27
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Specialized Loan Servicing will not give us an accurate principal balance on our loan. The took over our loan in XX/XX/XXXX and the payment history report we received shows the loan balance is going up and not down. We have asked several times for assistance and we continue to get documents that are not helpful. Our loan is currently underwater and it could be due to this issue. The original loan was {$72000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX and now the Servicer states that we owe {$76000.00}. SLS is not reporting our loan to the credit reporting agency either. We have never modified or refinanced this loan. The property value is currently only {$40000.00}.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 31404
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-07-27
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A