Date Received: 2016-08-19
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: SPS Servicing is the Servicer on my mortgage. XXXX XXXX is the lender of my mortgage. XXXX has held homeowner in extending processing for over 16 months. SPS the servicer is not evaluating documents properly. Homeowner has submitted the XXXX requesting modification over three times and the same results : lost paperwork, or denied without explanation. The most recent denial was on XXXX. Homeowner has generated a XXXX Report, data collection date of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and shows homeowner can possibly qualify got a modification. Homeowner has been in default since XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Homeowner is formally appealing the denial based on errors in home value, income and comparable recent sales : recent comp is {$430000.00}, sold in XXXX, XXXX. The income, DTI and LTV Loan to Values used by the services in the denial of the RMA application are in error. I have provided a recent XXXX Report dated XXXX XXXX to show more than XXXX errors on the processors side : 1. The estimated homeowners value is overstated ; off by {$130000.00} 2. Current street value of the home is {$430000.00} as of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. The servicer has commenced double tracking while homeowner was acting in good faith under the XXXX States Attorney Generals Agreement : the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement. The servicer ' is discriminating against homeowner claims, in a form of reverse discrimination ; holding the mortgage in extended processing, denying a loan modification while homeowner is qualified, lost documents when homeowner has already provided. This homeowner, feels that their case has been unfairly treated for the following reasons : 1. No active single point of contact, constantly changing, when calls made to the single point of contact, routine routed to the collection department, never the same contact person. 2. A Single point of contact was assigned ; calls were made to the point of contact : the calls were never returned by the contact. Calls returned were from the collection department and never the same so called : " relationship manager ''. 3. The servicer has held the homeowner in extended process in bad faith, during which the value of property has increased and fallen for 940 days from XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 4. On the last XXXX application : all requested documents were provided as requested. Homeowner has confirmation via fax that documents were received by the service, bank claims that documents lost. 5. Homeowner has made numerous calls ( XXXX ) inquiring on status of application, as a foreclosure date has been set and reset ; calls were routed to next available collection department agent, comments were : A ) wrongfully advised that documents were not submitted, or B ) documents were submitted, or C ) resubmit documents because documents lost, or D ) the foreclosure date is set and homeowner is responsible for not providing the requested documents : these XXXX points are causing a state of confusion and terror to the homeowner. 6. Servicer started a double tracking procedure upon the notice of default. The foreclosure agent was aware of the loan modification in process, and moved forward with the double tracking anyway. This is a clear violation under the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement ; specifically double tracking while homeowner provided all documents under good faith. 7. Homeowner has contacted the foreclosure agent before the foreclosure sale : that the sale was extended to another 30 days. Servicer never advised homeowner of the extended sale date. XXXX. As of the above CFPB complaint date above, servicer has not advised or confirmation that the foreclosure date of sale is on hold. XXXX. Homeowner is in a state of fear created by the collection tactics by Servicer and or the foreclosure agent. XXXX. Homeowner was not advised of their HAMP/Department of Justice modification guidelines or options.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92592
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-09-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-18
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Director XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Headquarters address Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear XXXX XXXX ; Please help and intervene and take over this process. SPS has placed my mortgage resolution in to a cookie cutting process that does not appear to be sensitive to my unique circumstances. The fraud in XXXX mortgage origination and XXXX modification. Origination : XXXX did not disclose that the mortgage was not economic ; The P & I is less than the taxes. Who buys a house to pay taxes? A home is purchased as an investment and not expense. I was given XXXX mortgage to conceal the true leverage for XXXX. I thought one was a credit card. Modification The XXXX XXXX XXXX modification did not provide a reduction in principal and interest. The P & I after modification was higher that at the origination. The modification did not provide a principal reduction. I purchased a home at XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX. I was returning back to the US after servicing my country not in the military but as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX based in XXXX XXXX. I invested my life savings of {$200000.00} on the home. Today I am exploring foreclosure options with Select Portfolio Servicing due to a major cardio arrest in XXXX. XXXX. I believe that I was defrauded by XXXX at the time of my mortgage origination. An uneconomic and irrational payment structure. My mortgage principal and interest is less than my monthly property taxes and insurance. After a modification my monthly mortgage payments are higher than my original payments. This was a negative Home Affordable Mortgage Program experience. My Principal Balance today, XXXX, after 16 years is higher than it was in XXXX. Reccomendation Please conduct and audit and analysis of my mortgage modification and complete history with XXXX, XXXX and SPS. Please assist me in receiving a debt " cram down '' valuation base of my history for the mortgages. For example, my total payment from XXXX to XXXX approximates my original principal debt or {$990000.00} in payments vs. XXXX in original debt.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30319
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-17
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I am facing a foreclosure and, despite many attempts, have been unable to speak with anyone at the mortgage servicer who can be helpful in what is a complicated situation - I am a first mortgagor but do n't hold title to the condo, having been foreclosed on by the second mortgagee, who took title.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 10031
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-08-16
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I am so discouraged. I am a licensed mortgage lender. When I tell a client that they will get their mortgage refund in 2-3 weeks, they get their escrow refund. We on the other hand paid off our mortgage XXXX XXXX, 2016 and still XXXX XXXX, 2016 are still being told the check is in the mail.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IA
Zip: 523XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-19
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-16
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have been attempting for several years for my mortgage servicing company ( SPServicing ) to remove the private mortgage insurance from my loan. Several years ago they were provided an appraisal from a licensed appraiser that also showed the loan to current value below 80 %. I have also made sufficient extra payments to have the loan at 65 % of the original loan value and they still refuse to remove the PMI. Multiple attempts to correct this have been made in writing, to which SPServicing only responds with a form letter advising they are following company policy.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 77006
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-16
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XXXX/XXXX/2008 XXXX XXXX XXXX paid {$350000.00} on my account, XXXX. All that was remaining due on the account was some accrued interest in the sum of {$1700.00}, but it was enough to bring the account current, reinstate the mortgage, and the balance should have been adjusted. Instead, U.S. BANK N.A., AS TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, XXXX XXXX, filed a foreclosure action, case number XXXX. It was dismissed for want of prosecution. XXXX attached. Then, ignoring payment was made AGAIN, U.S. BANK XXXX, AS TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE XXXX XXXX MORTGAGE XXXX XXXX XXXX ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, XXXX XXXX filed suit XXXX. Again, U.S. BANK N.A., AS TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, XXXX XXXX filed suit. After we filed our answer and affirmative defenses, showing it was paid as stated above, they dismissed the case voluntarily. See the attached. If that were not bad enough, then U.S. BANK N.A., AS TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE XXXX XXXX MORTGAGE XXXX XXXX XXXX ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, XXXX XXXX sued US AGAIN, claiming the amount that was paid as shown above, was STILL DUE, violating the federal and state fair debt collection practices act, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, and civil conspiracy. This time, the bank got a foreclosure judgment BECAUSE I COULD NOT AFFORD AN ATTORNEY AND HAD TO REPRESENT MYSELF. I did not know what I was doing. XXXX lied about getting the money and did not tell the court they got paid. XXXX lied about having received the money and filed an affidavit claiming it was still due. The XXXX believed XXXX and granted a judgment. See attached. I requested an affidavit from customer service showing the payment was received, but XXXX is now claiming they do not have any information. They are concealing the receipt of the money. See the attached affidavit from the XXXX employees. I want the bank investigated, and either require them to return the money I paid, or vacate the foreclosure judgment, and give me a release of the mortgage, AS THEY HAVE BEEN PAID AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE ATTACHED. If I had stolen money from a bank, I would be in JAIL. They stole {$350000.00} AND they are STEALING MY HOME. I was just served with eviction notice after the fraudulent foreclosure judgment. I NEED URGENT HELP. PLEASE HELP ME.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33178
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-25
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-08-15
Issue: Taking/threatening an illegal action
Subissue: Seized/Attempted to seize property
Consumer Complaint: This is a Claim of XXXX violations pursuant to FDCPA 15 U.S. Code 1692e - False or misleading representations, 15 U.S. Code 1692f - Unfair Practices, and O.C.G.A. XXXX GA statute of limitation. 1. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, the foreclosing attorney hereafter referred to as ( XXXX . ) and Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. hereafter ( SPS Inc. ) is threatening to seize, attach, or sale our property in a unlawful non-judicial foreclosure sale scheduled for XXXX XXXX, XXXX if a loan modification, short sale or surrender of our property is not agree too by us. The unlawful seizure of our property is now imminent. See EXHIBIT-L, SPS Inc. and XXXX. ( sale under power notice ). 2 SPS Inc. and XXXX. failed to record the XXXX assignment made by XXXX to SPS Inc. in the office of the clerk of the superior court of XXXX County GA where the land referred to in the purported instrument is located. 3. Instead of recording the assignment pursuant to XXXX XXXX as required by law, SPS Inc. and XXXX. chose to violate the law by avoiding recording of the assignment to the new lender in County records. 4. The new lender is none other than " SPS Inc. '' according to XXXX 's statement of fact. See EXHIBIT XXXX at XXXX where is says " Account transferred to another lender ''. 5. Since there is a new lender then SPS Inc. and XXXX. is required by law to foreclose in the ( new ) lenders name, not the previous lender 's name. If they proceed with the foreclose they are committing a felony and violating state and federal law. See Exhibit XXXX ( new lender ), then see EXHIBITXXXX ( Sale under Power ) and EXHIBIT XXXX. Note that the previous lender, not the new lender is listed as the foreclosing party - THAT IS AN UNLAWFUL ACT. 6. There is no present right to possession of the property claimed as collateral for the following reasons : 7. This is a case where SPS Inc. bought collection rights to an account that both SPS Inc. and XXXX knew or should have known were charged-off and closed on or before XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 8. Both SPS Inc. and XXXX knew or should have known that the account was charge-off/closed 3 years before it was sold. 9. Both SPS Inc. and XXXX. have personal knowledge that the loan they are attempting to foreclosure on is dead because the account was charged-off and closed by XXXX on or before XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 10. See evidence of account charge-off at EXHIBIT XXXX at XXXX, and XXXX at XXXX 11. See evidence that the account was closed and charged off as of XXXX XXXX At EXHIBIT XXXX & XXXX. 12 See EXHIBIT XXXX ( account closed ), then see EXHIBIT XXXX where the account was fraudulently modified in XXXX XXXX to make it appear that the sale of account # XXXX happened before it was charged-off and closed. 13. As to any unsecured debt please be advised that the account is now time barred under XXXX XXXX Georgia statute of limitation. See relevant date at EXHIBIT XXXX, XXXX. The statute lapsed on XXXX XXXX. 14 AND, even if there were ever a secured interest in our property, foreclosure would be time barred as to any written contracts. 15 According to XXXX the property was harmed, and the contract or agreement was violated ( breached ) XXXX XXXX ; the account was accelerated XXXX XXXX which started the statute of limitation to run ; XXXX initiated foreclosure in XXXX XXXX. The Statute lapsed on XXXX XXXX. See EXHIBIT XXXX then see EXHIBIT XXXX thru Exp XXXX, XXXX collection rights was sold to XXXX XXXX in XXXX, years after the loan had been charge-off and CLOSED in XXXX, see EXHIBIT XXXX. 17. When a original subprime predatory loan is charged off and closed, the loan and note no longer exist ( according to UCC requirements ). All that remained is collection rights to possible default debt. AND, those rights c
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30349
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-08-15
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Director XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Headquarters address Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear XXXX XXXX ; This is XXXX XXXX 's SECOND response to following SPS compliant responses : I suspect that I would not be in default of my mortgage today if XXXX XXXX XXXX had execute a market principal reduction in engineering my XXXX modification. I need a review of what maximum principal reduction that have been in XX/XX/XXXX. I received no principal reduction in XX/XX/XXXX. Why did n't I receive a principal reduction in XX/XX/XXXX when the house was on the market and would not sale? Why have a had to pay a mortgage based on an above market value for 8 years? We should have sold the house short in XX/XX/XXXX for {$650000.00} or modified the house for XX/XX/XXXX. SPS appears to lack the capacity of willingness to remedy this situation. I was defrauded by XXXX at the origination and manipulated into an uneconomic modification by XXXX XXXX XXXX. The original Mortgage would not have been underwritten if the fact that the taxes were higher than the P & I. This was also compounded by including XXXX-XXXX mortgages. I have resolved the XXXX-XXXX mortgages. XXXX from XXXX and XXXX from XXXX. I was living in XXXX XXXX at the time. The XX/XX/XXXX modification by XXXX XXXX XXXX did not offer a market principal reduction And once again did not disclose the uneconomic engineering of the mortgage. That is that the P & I was lower than taxes. Please review the attached proposal from SPS HAMP competition. Recommendations : I receive my original down payment of {$200000.00} plus interest. I receive {$200000.00} second mortgages payoffs. Plus interest. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX, XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30319
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-15
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Select Port Folio is my mortgage company, I have submitted financials and request for mortgage modification several time over the past few years. SPS has n't assisted me with my modification request. I 've spoken with Client services several times. I 'm informed I 've been mailed correspondence regarding the modification and I have n't received any correspondence. I do receive the property foreclosure sale notices. Please assist me with obtaining obtaining a mortgage modification. Received foreclosure letters from attorney Per the statue Tennessee code annotated homeowner is suppose to receive proper notice 30 days prior to foreclosure. prior to foreclosure sale date.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TN
Zip: 38017
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-08-13
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I have received a response from SPS they have asked again for updated BPO Hud-1 settlement with buyers name ( XXXX ) bank statements tax return 2015 need second BPO Value, Description, Condition, color Photos, and a minimum of XXXX comparable. they had and have all these document 's, what I need is for SPS to read all the above and all the many more document 's that they have asked for complete the review, for the lasts 8 months. does is make any sense for me to keep making complaints, to a company to complete my short sale if I were not sending what was ask for to complete it. and why would I not what them to complete it, why would the realtor not provide all the document 's to complete, the purchase for her buyer for over 8 months, should make you wonder what SPS has been doing with all the document 's, if these short sale review was only just started I can see the request for additional document 's still being asked for over 8 months??? again I feel SPS I not capable of doing a Short sale by any government standard, and are internality, keeping my property from completing the short sale, CFPB needs to do more then process complaints which is more then SPS can do. Thank you
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: IL
Zip: 60185
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-08-13
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No