Date Received: 2023-02-01
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Specialty Loan Servicing is my mortgage servicing company. They insist that my escrow account is negative over XXXX XXXX dollars from XXXX month to the other. Spent many hours with them over the phone trying to resolve this issue. Just received a notice of default/intent to foreclose letter in the mail, but I dont understand why I always make my payment on or before due date. I have prove of all my payments. Property taxes are being paid, home insurance is being paid. The most I could get out of them is an employee saying they paid an extra payment for 2013 property taxes but I have 20 year tax bill history saying all taxes have been paid before, and on time. I sent them a notice of error/ request for information letter. Waiting on response but am afraid of getting foreclosed on like the letter they sent me said.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: IL
Zip: 60402
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-01
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-31
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Greetings, The problem company is Specialized Loan Servicing LLC. The problem goes back for years right now I am not in liberty with the exact dates but I do have current dates. In XXXX of XXXX, I mailed a payment of {$1300.00} to SLS. They claim that they never received the payment. So I stopped payment on the check. On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted an electronic payment to SLS and I was current afterwards. In XX/XX/XXXX everything was fine with the payment but my wife had panicked and mailed SLS a payment for XX/XX/XXXX and I also paid SLS Loan servicing electronically in XXXX, With XXXX 's payment ( XXXX ) check already cleared by my bank of XXXX XXXX, that meant that my wife 's payment was for XX/XX/XXXX, this current mortgage payment. SLS only applied {$500.00} to the XXXX payment. My wife mailed 3 money orders to Specialize Loan Servicing. Two {$500.00} money orders and 1 money order for {$360.00}. 74, when we spoke to SLS about a week ago they told us that they didn't receive any payments. After a heated discussion on my behalf they finally told my wife and I that they have a {$500.00} money order payment and the other {$500.00} money order plus the additional {$360.00} dollar money order had not been applied to the account for the month of XX/XX/XXXX. We were told that only one money order was scanned and that the other money orders were not scanned. In which I personally believe that fraud is involved with the additional money orders. It makes no sense to receive three money orders in an envelope for a mortgage payment and only apply one of them to the mortgage payment. Specialized Loan Servicing holds our mortgage payments in order to get money from late charges. I had been using Priority Mail from the USPS in order to track the mortgage payments through the mail. I have much more details about SLS but the character input on this website are limited. Please help. I'm sure I am not the only SLS customer to be defrauded in this manner.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: FL
Zip: 34953
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-31
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-31
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: A loan was originated on XX/XX/2022 by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Hereinafter XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX. A week later I was contacted by Specialized Loan Servicing ( Hereinafter SLS ) and they ask for my consent to contact me an I DID NOT give consent for SLS to contact me. I delivered payment directly to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX notified me they received payment and stated they wired the payments to SLS. SLS stated that I sent payment to the OLD LENDER. A Notice of Errors was sent to XXXX XXXX of SLS and received on XX/XX/2022, XX/XX/2022, and XX/XX/2022. SLS failed to properly respond. A request for the FULL ACCOUNTING was sent on XX/XX/2022, SLS and successors and assigns have failed to provide the FULL ACCOUNTING. On XX/XX/2022 SLS sent correspondence stating XXXX XXXX was the original creditor and that XXXX XXXX XXXX I Trust was now the current Creditor. I mailed payment to XXXX XXXX XXXX to the address SLS provided and it was returned to sender. I do not have a contract with SLS and they continue to harass me with phone calls and posted cards on my door. XXXX XXXX has mailed a XXXX XXXX form that didn't apply the payments that they received? Who is the actual XXXX and where did the payments go?
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 77346
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-31
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-01
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Consumer Complaint: Despite multiple written requests, the unverified account listed below continue to report on my credit report, in violation of federal law. I included a date on the last letter I submitted to the 3 credit bureaus XX/XX/XXXX, but no answer was received. This account must be validated under Sections 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and 611 ( a ) ( 1 ). ( A ). If you do not authenticate this account, I will take legal action against you. Please abide with the law in order for this matter to be resolved promptly. SPECIALIZED LOAN SER XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00}
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: 93021
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-01
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-30
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: In regards to the original complaint # XXXX that was closed before the appropriate feedback response that I attached was provided. The appropriate requested resolution has not been reached under HUD XXXX. In response to the XX/XX/XXXX SLS response on complaint # XXXX please note below. XXXX ) The Agreement ( offer ) that was sent on XX/XX/XXXX was invalid as the FHA loan was still in CARES ACT Forbearance period. 2 ) As Forbearance was ending XX/XX/XXXX, there was a need to come to an agreement with Mortgage relief options established in the CARES Act which fall under FHA XXXX XXXX waterfall for FHA-insured Loans XXXX The appropriate XXXX Recovery options were never sent in compliance with the FHA XXXX XXXX Loss Mitigation Options before the XX/XX/XXXX Letter. XXXX ) Therefore, Letter that was sent on XX/XX/XXXX, was a form of illegal discrimination under the Fair Housing Act and did not comply with the CARES ACT and/or HUD Law Recovery requirements. XXXX ) SLS claims they responded appropriately to inquiries when in fact XXXX ( HUD ) had an outstanding inquiry we were awaiting response to the on the XX/XX/XXXX letter that were never responded to by SLS. There was an inquiry made by XXXX XXXX HUD ) regarding the if the interest rate could be adjusted to be in line with a previous interest rate offered of 3 % for XXXX Months. XXXX ) The letter on XX/XX/XXXX, saying no longer being reviewed should have not been sent at this time as the SLS did not provide the appropriate response to the outstanding inquiry prior, and a good faith payment was made. XXXX ) The Letter from XX/XX/XXXX was not another modification agreement that complied with HUD XXXX it was a Stand-Alone partial claim. XXXX ) Again, the SLS letter from XX/XX/XXXX was not modification agreement that complied with HUD XXXX it was a Stand-Alone partial claim. XXXX ) In the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX SLS said they left a message with my authorized party XXXX ( HUD ) on XX/XX/XXXX in which I was never notified by the HUD office by phone or email. In addition, I never gave SLS the authority to contact XXXX ( HUD ) by outbound call if that is the case. She was added to call inbound for information on the account. They should be calling me on the number listed on the account unless directed otherwise. I also sent this follow up request to SLS Fax which they received on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) Please have SLS send the appropriate Modification in compliance with FHA HUD XXXX ( Includes Modified Payment + Partial Claim ) not a Stand-Alone Partial claim. A XXXX XXXX XXXX Modification would establish an affordable monthly payment, resolve the outstanding mortgage payment arrearages, and permanently modify the first mortgage monthly payment so the Partial Claim can eventually be paid off.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: LA
Zip: 70122
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-30
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I own a home in XXXXXXXX XXXX, and the mortgage is serviced by Specialized Loan Servicing LLC since XXXX. I have maintained homeowners property insurance without an escrow since XXXX. In XXXX, I purchased homeowners property insurance from XXXX XXXX with a expiration date of XX/XX/XXXX. Prior to XX/XX/XXXX, I did not receive a renewal reminder from XXXX XXXX Specialized Loan Servicing LLC or Insurance broker/Agent XXXX XXXX XXXX However, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX for the purpose of renewing the policy. On XX/XX/XXXX, the policy agreement was signed and payment or the insurance premium was given to XXXX XXXX. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received a mailed notice and a robocall from Specialized Loan Servicing LLC requesting verification of homeowners insurance. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received a mailed copy of the homeowners insurance binder from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, with an issue date of XX/XX/XXXX and an expiration date of XX/XX/XXXX but the declarations page contained a policy period of XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. I also discovered that the policy period dates were already uploaded to the Specialized Loan Servicing LLC insurance verification website. I subsequently called and spoke with a Specialized Loan Servicing LLC customer service representative, who indicated that unless I have the insurance coverage issue date backdated from to XX/XX/XXXX, I would be billed for a lender placed insurance policy covering an 8 day lapse period. I contacted XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX to request a change of the issue date to XX/XX/XXXX. However, XXXX XXXX explained that the insurance issue date could not be backdated because additional days were required to produce the above insurance policy due to a change of insurance carriers. XXXX XXXX also indicated that there are no insurance carriers that would agree to cover an 8 day period lapse and a grace period should be offered due to the above circumstances. Contact was established with Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, customer service representatives on two separate occasions. However, the customer service representatives were adamant that a force placed insurance policy would be obtained from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for the 8 day lapse in coverage in the form of escrow on the mortgage account. This policy could not be paid out of pocket. Additionally, Specialized Loan Servicing LLC did not have a grace period policy and there was not a complaint resolution desk to resolve to the above matter. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC arbitrarily and capriciously, assessed my mortgage account an additional fee, which they determined was owed for an homeowners insurance lapse from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. However, Specialized Loan Servicing , LLC has yet to produce a valid insurance binder for above period and their action appears contrary to a court settlement from court complaint, XXXX XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX filed on XX/XX/XXXX, involving the same issues.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: MI
Zip: 48228
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-30
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-26
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: After the last trouble paying these people not much has changed. I contact this company earlier this month, a representative looks up my account accepted a full payment from me and thanked me and gave me a confirmation # .the funds where payed to them from my bank. Now today my account shows the funds have been sent back to my account. This company has no intentions on working with me to pay this dept. They are a terrible run company that is preying on homeowners like myself. Any help with this Company would be appreciated.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: LA
Zip: 712XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-25
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Specialized Loan Servicing on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX My mom 's mortgage has fallen into default and we are trying to work out a repayment plan or a deferment plan or modification that could help us keep our home and not have it be foreclosed on. At the SLS agent 's request we applied for XXXX XXXX Assistance but were only given the same options as listed in the last complaint a short-sale or deed-in-lieu to resolve the financial hardship and deferred payments created by XXXX. Additionally I spoke with an agent who suggested applying for mortgage assistance through the state which we did apply for but due to my mom being on a fixed income through social security XXXX we were denied mortgage and utility assistance which could have helped to bring the account current through the state of Georgia where we reside and where the property is. We believe firmly that we have an avoidable foreclosure and that the financial hardship we suffered during the pandemic should qualify us for additional retention options but when I ask the customer resolution agents they say they can't share information with us about the decision. Me and my XXXX mother don't have good credit, don't have much money now, and have been trying to get the mortgage in good standing but SLS has made it very hard at every turn. Additionally we were contacted by XXXX XXXX XXXX to have them represent us for their Hardship Compliance Program. I asked an SLS agent today if that would help and they said that it wouldn't help us and that those companies typically take the money and run. This complaint is for the reconsideration of loss prevention options and to escalate our request since there was no option to do so with SLS and resolve this to our mutual satisfaction through contacting SLS directly.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: GA
Zip: 30213
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-25
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-23
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: This relates to CFPB Complaint XXXX and Specialized Loan Servicing falsely claiming that they are waiting on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) to remit the {$1500.00} payment that I am owed from the cancelled upfront PMI policy. I called XXXX today, XX/XX/2023 at XXXX XXXX XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX who told me that the refund payment was already issued and that SLS should have already received the payment. SLS stated as recently as XX/XX/2023 through a phone call from their executive office that they had not received the payment from XXXX and that SLS has no estimate whatsoever of when I should receive the payment. SLS has been deflecting blame onto XXXX, which XXXX has asserted is unwarranted. I think it is very plausible that SLS already has this payment but is too negligent to actually remit this to the borrower. In addition SLS charged me a {$100.00} fee for the XXXX, which I paid on XX/XX/2023, but their system keeps showing that payment as unallocated and past due. I have contacted SLS through their portal asking them to properly apply the payment to the amount due, and they have yet to do so. At this point I have had to file countless CFPB complaints to get SLS to do their job. They need to actually take ownership over issues.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: FL
Zip: 32216
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-01-23
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CO XXXX Specialized Loan Servicing LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CO XXXX Re : Request to Review Basis for Denial of Loan Modification Account Number : # XXXX Subject Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CO XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear CFPB : I am writing to you because I am trying to seek a loan modification, and I believe that the loan servicer ( SLS ), is refusing to follow the guidelines pursuant to XXXX. I am asking the CFPB to please conduct a review of my account to determine if my suspicions are correct. I have owned the subject property since XXXX. Although SLS is my loan servicer, I am unaware of the present lender, which is allegedly a governmental organization. I have tried to obtain a loan modification through their loss mitigation program. I have not been advised of the status of my loan modification/RMA packet aside from a denial based on ( 1 ) lack of documents ; BUT ; ( 2 ) I was informed in writing and telephonically that my application was complete. ) This can not be reconciled. Therefore, because SLS has been the designated loan servicer, I am asking that you look into the following issues :
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-01-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A