Date Received: 2015-08-12
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SLS continues to request the same documents over and over again, even though they tell me over the phone they have them in their system. They have XXXX copies now of the complete short sale package. My property is in foreclosure and we have an active buyer that is ready to move on now. I feel SLS is not handling this manor in a professional way. They have called me names over the phone, asked me if I work at XXXX XXXX, while thinking they had the phone on mute. I have requested to speak to a supervisor.
Company Response:
State: SC
Zip: 29418
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-12
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2015-08-11
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Hello. My complaint is with SLS XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX co, XXXXthey are servicing my loan, in which i am in the midst of loan modification. They are in the habit of waiting an hour before my trustee sale to notify me of missing documents. I had a trustee sale date set for XXXX XXXX, and up until XXXX XXXX i was told that my package was complete. i was following up with them every 2 hours to make sure i had a complete package and on XXXX XXXX, i was notified a document was missing and if i sent that document to them, they would postpone the trustee sale. I did send that document 10 times, they received it and told me they wre postponing the trustee sale. at XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, one of their employees advised me that i was misinformed about postponign and the bank is proceeding with the trustee sale as planned. it was too late for me to take any action, even if i was to reinstate my acct, it was too late. I did a bankruptcy at XXXX XXXX that same day to postpone the trustee sale and schedule some kind of reppayment plan. the trustee sale was postponed bcuz of the bk and they started reviewing my loan modification it has been a month, no response, and i have trustee sale set on XXXX XXXX. i am asking them to postpone the sale since all the documents are in, and i am being reviewed. but they are not postponing. they are waiting as before to the last minute to deny me or advise me of documents missing. can you imagine, one whole month has passed and they are not doing anything with my file and waiting for the day of trustee sale to advise me of status. I am requesting for them to postpone the trustee sale since all documents are in and i am being reviewd. it is not fair for me to be notified of a denial decision the day before the trustee sale at XXXX XXXX. please review their procedures to see if they are within rules of the law.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 91364
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2015-08-11
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: Original Debt Collector XXXX XXXX XXXX signed a note with us for a reduced debt to be collected with the promise we pay back this debt monthly with no interest ( $ XXXX ). We 've paid this debt continually and on time for 3 yrs. until they sold the debt to Specialized Loan Servicing LLC ( SLS ). SLS claims they did not receive any paperwork of the reduced debt and are now trying to collect the whole sum. I 've sent them the note ( notarized ), I 've sent all my bank statements as proof of uninterrupted payments. THEY still do not believe me. I 'm exhausted with 7 months of this go around. They state XXXX will not communicate the debt to them. We are stuck in the middle. It is not our problem that XXXX sold them a debt that they did not confirm.
Company Response:
State: ID
Zip: 83616
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2015-08-11
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In XX/XX/XXXX I submitted a HAMP modification application. While XXXXmy application was pending, in XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted my SLS Point of Contact to inform SLS that my wife 's income source had changed. The SLS Point of Contact suggested that I re-send the income portion of the RMA to reflect the updated information. I followed his suggestion and re-submitted the RMA in XX/XX/XXXX. When I subsequently called to follow up, I was told by a different SLS representative that they did not accept the updated information, and that I needed to re-submit an entire new application. I then submitted a complete new application on XX/XX/XXXX. Yet another SLS representative confirmed receipt of my application, but told me that there was an outstanding issue regarding my ex-wife. I explained that I had been divorced for over five years, that the property was awarded to me in the divorce settlement, that my ex-wife had returned to XXXX permanently, and that I had already provided SLS with, on numerous occasions, the divorce decree and quitclaim deed executed by my ex-wife. When informed of this, the SLS representative told me that he would accelerate the case with my supervisors. When I called back to follow up two weeks later, I was told that the issue had not been resolved, and that I would need to re-submit an entirely new modification application, despite the fact that it had been less than a month from my previous complete submission. I sent yet another complete modification submission on XX/XX/XXXX, but my Point of Contact did not return repeated messages to confirm receipt. In XXXX I received a letter from SLS denying me for all programs because " you did not provide us with the documents requested '' and reference an alleged prior missing document letter that I never received. It seems as though SLS based their denial on the XX/XX/XXXX submission and never even reviewed the three XXXX 3 XXXX more recent modification applications that they themselves requested and they did so despite numerous telephone conversations discussing the new information that was provided, and confirmation from their representatives that the requested documents were received. I again spoke with an SLS rep ( " XXXX '' ) on XX/XX/XXXX, who told me that it was my fault that I submitted the wrong documents to SLS, and that my updated documents could not replace the original RMA submitted in XXXX. She told me that once again I needed to submit an entirely new application for modification. I submitted an updated, complete, new package once again on XX/XX/XXXX via XXXX. Three days later, I received a letter from SLS ( attached ) confirming documents received, but incredibly, the letter references the documents I submitted back in XXXX instead of the updated documents! I have complied with four separate requests for complete new packages since XX/XX/XXXX and yet, apparently, SLS has not updated their system to reflect all the new information provided. Instead, they cause needless delay while the foreclosure moves forward. Please help.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 11229
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2015-08-10
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This is an addendum to claim # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXSLS purchased my loan from XXXX on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Once again they will not speak with me regarding my loan - My daughter and I went on a XXXX party call to SLS and we weretold unless they receive XXXX party authorization form signed we can not do anything. My daughter who is a Real Estate Agent went online and printed another formand we faxed to SLS - during our brief conversation with SLS I stated all thepayment information they have on file is incorrect - they say I paid no paymentsand I paid every payment due SLS - the only payment unpaid is on XXXX would not speak to me and I paid XXXX extra on my additional paymentsto make up for the XXXX XXXX payment. On Friday, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I received aletter from SLS stating on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX MY HOUSE IS GOING INTO FORECLOSUREBECAUSE MY PAYMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID SINCE XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - I PAIDevery one due to SLS - where is all my money going? How do I fight somethinglike this??? I am going to XXXX XXXX XXXX and getting copies of all of my paymentsbut I am afraid they are trying to take my condo from me - this has been going onfor 8 years and it is not fair to do this to seniors. I have made all payments, I havecalled XXXX times and left messages - no response - I have sent every form theyrequested plus additional correspondence I had. I sent copy of Certified letterto XXXX in XXXX with my Assumption Package - no response - I would liketo post this for others to see how XXXX and its subsidiary SLS handle customers. If I do n't have a XXXX, it will be a miracle. I asked the Ombudsman to please look into this mess - hopefully we can get a resolutionon both sides.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 92629
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-10
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2015-08-10
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My current lender, SLS, took over my mortgage. They now claim that my townhouse is in a flood zone, even though the other XXXX units do not have flood coverage either. A neighbor recently refinanced, and also did not need flood insurance. Out of curiosity, I did contact a few insurance agents for flood insurance quotes, and these agents questioned why I would need flood insurance, and they should be wanting to sell me business! I then obtained documentation from FEMA saying that our structures were not in the flood zone, the parking lot is actually adjacent to the flood zone. I provided this documentation to SLS, and they said they were still going to go forward and purchase flood insurance on my behalf, and of course charge me. This is outrageous, as I mentioned, as my FEMA documentation ( pulled XXXX/XXXX/15 ) clearly indicates that none of our complex 's units are actually in a flood zone. They also indicated that I would have to contact FEMA to dispute this- but FEMA already indicated that our units were not in the flood zone. Each time I call SLS to talk about this situation, I get a different story from different representatives. They are not receptive at all, and actually make the customer feel inferior.
Company Response:
State: NJ
Zip: 088XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2015-08-08
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My mortgage is currently being handled by SLS beginning on XXXX 2015, prior to this it was being handled by XXXX. On XXXX XXXX, 2015, I sent XXXX a letter requesting to remove my escrow ( homeowners insurance and property taxes ) from my mortgage. They refuse to do this and claim that I need a professional appraisal and state that my loan to value on my home is 91.15 % which is erroneous. I will be attaching proof ( Comparative Market Analysis done recently on XXXX XXXX, 2015 on the neighbor 's home and a Comparable Properties Report including my home ) both of which show that all the homes in my immediate area are in the $ XXXX value range. I currently owe less then $ XXXX on my home, therefore making the stated LTV by SLS incorrect. I am asking for your assistance in removing my escrow account from my mortgage since my numerous attempts with SLS have been unsuccessful. I am going to attach all correspondence with SLS and the escrow account disclosure statement.
Company Response:
State: FL
Zip: 33157
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-08
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2015-08-07
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX was in foreclosure with a high 10 percent interest on her XXXX mortgage. There was no sale date on the home XX/XX/2015. No one from her servicer contacted her with regards to seeking assistance with the loan to retain the property. XXXX XXXX sent in a modification over two weeks before her sale date which was plenty of time for a review to start per SLS employees. On XX/XX/2015 the single point of contact XXXX XXXX stated that she has the modification package and reviewed the information while on the phone. ( Calls are recorded, this conversation took place. ) XXXX stated the file is being reviewed. She stated that the contributor section needed to be filled out completely on the RMA form. On XX/XX/2015 XXXX said there was no new update on the account. On XX/XX/2015 Supervisor XXXX ID XXXX came to the phone. Not only was XXXX rude, she had bad customer service. XXXX stated that per federal law and according to the consumer financial protection bureau, they were not reviewing the file for assistance. We asked if the calls are being recorded and she said yes. She again stated that they will not review the file for assistance because the sale date is less than 37 days from the date they received the request, therefore they will not review the file nor postpone the sale date. This complaint is with regards to how SLS is conducting business. Supervisor XXXX ID XXXX and underwriting are quoting XXXX " guidelines. '' However, per the foreclosure attorney/trustee The Mortgage Law Firm employee XXXX XXXX, they were authorized to move forward with the sale on XX/XX/2015, which is less than 37 days ' time to even get the package in. California has different guidelines in general. And in this case, SLS is in clear violation of these laws and is misinterpreting " Federal Law. '' It is apparent that SLS is not only in clear violation pertaining to federal guidelines, but they are discriminating against XXXX XXXX based on her age, sex, marital status, race. There are numerous reason why SLS behavior Is unacceptable. The number of times that SLS was contacted regarding status of the file should extinguish any opportunity to excuse SLS 's behavior. Rude employees only validate the issue of discrimination. There is no tangible reason for SLS to have treated the homeowner and file in this manner. SLS is refusing to consider XXXX XXXX request for assistance negating any opportunity for her to save her home. The events described above are just a sample of the practices that are taking place at SLS. SLS appears to be more interested in foreclosing on the home and selling it at auction to make a profit. It appears that SLS lack of participation in a meaningful modification review of the file indicates a preference to profit directly from XXXX XXXX 's hardship. At this time we are demanding that SLS provide XXXX XXXX with a work out solution or she will assert her legal rights and name both SLS and The Mortgage Law Firm as defendants in a civil complaint.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 95603
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-07
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2015-08-06
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Over the past 8 months that SLS has had my XXXX mortgage That BAC sold to them. They have always sent a monthly bill for the interest only portion of the loan. We caught on early and always sent an additional XXXX above the required XXXX there is a line to add to the principle X amount. This has been done every time we paid a note. In almost every month they would apply the additional money to the interest for the up and coming month and what ever was left would go to the principle XXXX. We would get the next month bill say XXXX XXXX and it would say that our next payment is due by XXXX XXXX. My wife is a wonderful women but did n't realize that was going on until I recently paid a bill while she was out of town. I have sent a Error Resolution letter with the needed documentation XXXX pages of it by fax as directed, as of 48 hrs they have n't responded and may have lost it who no 's. They have corrected the last months paperwork. I had printed out the statement history and was making notes to what the Acronyms where. While doing so my page refreshed and the statement history changed in no longer was what I had printed out. ( It was like they were making changes to cover something up ) Hence the XXXX pages of paperwork that I Faxed to them Print copy 1 and # 2Is there anything that I came expect them to do for the lost payments toward my Principle loan or am I just another person that got screwed by the big guy? Any Idea how long I have to wait for them to get in touch with me? The very least I should get credited for the interest on my load for 2 months or more.
Company Response:
State: MS
Zip: 38632
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2015-08-04
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I, XXXX XXXX have tried many times to work with the bank to get a loanModification but they always declined the case with no reason sometimesThey said is because there were incomplete documents when I have theProof of the fax confirmation that I send & they have received the docs. At this time I need your help there is a sale date on my property tomorrowXXXXXX/XX/XXXX. Please at this time I just requesting more time so they can continue reviewing my case ( I submitted an updated package since XX/XX/XXXX. ) Last time that I spoke with them & request updated docs was onXXXX XX/XX/XXXX & were send the same day. When I call back on XX/XX/XXXX find out the status they said there is not enough time to review the filebecause they need at least XXXX days, when my file has been under review & requesting documents since XXXX, thru XXXX. According to article that you posted on XXXX XXXX, XXXXThis bank Specialized Loan Servicing , LLC Is doing the same thing on myMy case. Closed borrower applications due to its own excessive delays : XXXX took excessive time to review loss mitigation applications, often causing application documents to expire. To move its backlog, XXXX would close applications due to expired documents, even though the documents had expired because of XXXX delay. Delayed approving or denying borrower applications : Under the new CFPB mortgage servicing rules, XXXX must evaluate a complete loss mitigation application within XXXX days, if it receives the complete application more than XXXX days before a foreclosure sale. XXXX also failed to adhere to these timelines. Failed to alert borrowers about incomplete applications : XXXX is responsible for reviewing borrowers ' initial loss mitigation applications to determine what documents are missing. It must then tell borrowers what documents are missing, usually by sending a " missing document '' letter. XXXX failed to send, or delayed sending, missing document letters to borrowers. Miscalculated incomes : Eligibility for some loss mitigation programs, such as a loan modification, is highly dependent on borrower income. If borrowers have too much or too little income, they do not qualify. XXXX routinely miscalculated borrower income and wrongfully denied loan modifications. Denied applications for unspecified reasons : Under the CFPB 's new rules, mortgage servicers must provide the specific reason a complete loan modification application is rejected. XXXX policy was to say only " not approved for loss mitigation options by the investor/owner of the loan, '' even though XXXX internal systems contained the true reason for the denial. Misinformed borrowers about their appeal rights : Under the CFPB 's new rules, XXXX must provide certain borrowers the right to appeal the denial of a loan modification. But XXXX failed to provide this notice, and it wrongly stated that borrowers have an appeal right only if they reside in certain states. Please I need your help I do n't want to lose my house I have no place to go with my children and wife. Thank you. I really appreciate your time.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2015-08-06
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No