SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC

2016-10-22

Chicago, IL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) is a predatory lender and will not allow me to refinance my home even with excellent credit. I should be able to get a modification or refinance my present loan and move to a fixed rate mortgage. SPS does everything it can to prevent people from modification or refinancing at a lower rate. Operators answering the phone insist they are not a mortgage company yet they hold mortgages on homes.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-22

Beverly Hills, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: Dear SPS, Please respond to actual question regarding regarding payments NOT applied to account. Confirm Debt is due by who is investor, and provide original creditor documents. Provide evidence payments were applied in XX/XX/XXXX to account - payments XXXX Select Portfolio Servicing received account XX/XX/XXXX. I am disputing the debt. KEEP FOCUS ON DEBT OWED ETC. NO OTHER MATTER AS THE REQUEST IS NOT RELATED TO KYHC AT THIS TIME.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-21

65th Infantry, PR

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-21

Tucson, AZ

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: I have been working on a short sale with Select Portfoio Servicing since XXXX/XXXX/XXXX this loan was issued a HAFA program approval letter on XXXX XXXX, XXXX valid through XXXX XXXX, XXXX with a sales price based on a value of {$160000.00}. An offer was submitted to SPS at {$160000.00} along with the required documents as outlined in section XXXX of their letter. SPS has delayed the review of the file and continued to request documents over and over again even after approving this file. I filed a complaint with Making Home Affordiable and in retaliation SPS canceled file as they said the buyers offer was to low, this property had a value of {$160000.00} and a HAFA approval letter issued in XXXX. SPS updated their values on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and increased the value to {$170000.00} after they had already issues an approval letter based off of the {$160000.00} value not an updated value of {$170000.00}. SPS has failed to follow the HAFA guidelines and has caused harm to the borrower and the buyer. Please see the below timeline as it relates to the buyers offer. XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - VALUE {$160000.00} ( This was the BPO value provided by SPS ) XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - SPS Issues HAFA Approval letter good through XXXX/XXXX/XXXX XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - {$160000.00} Offer Submitted XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - SPS requested all seller financials ( After HAFA approval letter had already been issued ) XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - {$160000.00} buyer increased offer to {$160000.00} submitted to SPS XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Requested addtional seller & Buyer documents XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Requested addtional seller documents XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Requested more information on buyers down payment XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Esicated issue with SPS XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - New value of {$170000.00} ( HAFA APPROVAL LETTER AND BUYER OFFER ALREADY SUBMITTED ) XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Submitted Utilitie Bills XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Still reviewing documents XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Escilated with Ombudsman department XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Reviewing MHA dispute XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - File cancled for offer being to low.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-21

Chestnut, NJ

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-20

Kendall, FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-20

Magnolia, TX

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: My lender refuses to work with me. Initially Select Portfolio Services made me an offer for loan modification but once I received the offer, my wife had an accident and injured herself. My wife fell at home and XXXX. She is XXXX now and unable to work. We have lost her income and fear her XXXX will be permanent at her age. We are simply asking SPS send us a new application for modification due to the fact we have experienced this new, unexpected change in circumstance. Also, the reduction off our household income is greater than 30 %. SPS ignores our requests for help and refuse to help.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Elk Grove, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Clayton, MO

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Battle Creek, MI

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Flower Mound, TX

Settlement process and costs

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Kendall, FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-19

Elk Grove, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-18

Baltimore, MD

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-18

Jamaica, NY

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-18

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-17

Baltimore, MD

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: FHA mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-17

Florence, SC

Other

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-17

Country Club, MO

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-17

Santa Barbara, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Home equity loan or line of credit

Complaint: My prior loan servicer, Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ), is reporting my account as " foreclosure started. '' However, foreclosure proceedings were never initiated. On XX/XX/2012, my account was transferred from XXXX to SPS. Prior to that, I entered into an agreement with XXXX under XXXX 's Cooperative Short Sale Program. The loan was not referred to foreclosure by XXXX. SPS informed me that they did not participate in the " Cooperative Short Sale Program, '' but instead invited me to participate in " Cash For Cooperation ''. I accepted the invitation and the account was settled in a short sale. Thus, SPS is incorrectly reporting my account as " foreclosure started ''. This is damaging my credit score and causing me to pay significantly higher interest rates on financing.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-17

Oxford, GA

Settlement process and costs

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: I completed paperwork to finalize a deed in lieu with Select Portfolio Servicing XX/XX/2016. regarding the property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX Georgia XXXX. I requested a copy of the deed in lieu documents I signed XX/XX/XXXX and was told by XXXX XXXX of XXXX ( the third party used by Select Portfolio ) that I could not have a copy but I could take a picture of the documents. I then requested a copy of my signed deed in lieu documents from S.P.S but never received them. Instead, I was told that I will receive a copy of them after everything is completed. I am still waiting on the final walk through of the property. Select Portfolio said an inspector came by the property and and deemed some one was living in it. In the past, I had people to oversee and watch out for the property to keep it from being vandalized. I have removed any and all security measures as having a parked car in the driveway and a sign on the fence to give the appearance that some one is living there. I will not be responsible for any damage to this property. I still had to have some one come around to maintain the yard etc. If not, I will receive a fine from the county. This puts me in a slight dilema because S.P.S said no one should be in or around the property. If the person is there to cut the grass, pick up trash or perform a safety check is that allowed? The final walk through needs to be done ASAP because the XXXX lien approval expires XX/XX/2016. This will be the 3rd time the XXXX lien approval has expired. I have requested the name of the 3rd party company who will contact me for the final walk through. Today I was told that I do not need to be contacted or present for the final walk through. ( by XXXX XXXX ext XXXX. Which one is correct? Will I or will I not be contacted regarding a final walk through?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-17

Woodland, WA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: I am making a compliant on Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc., regarding my loss mitigation process. Back on XX/XX/XXXX, I requested for a loan modification and since then, all SPS has offered was giving me the runaround with request of the very same documents they have already received. And I ca n't began to tell you how many times I had to start the loss mitigation process over again as SPS would let the requested documents submitted age out and then put the blame on me stating they did n't receive them. I never got a call nor did SPS send me a letter describing what additional documents they needed to move forward with review of my loss mitigation. And they did not ever send me any updates on the status of my review for loss mitigation. The date I last submitted documents requested by SPS was on XX/XX/XXXX and I still have n't received any outcome of that loss mitigation, not to mention these were the same documents I have sent in multiple times so I feel that SPS has intentionally prolonged the review process. However, SPS did n't have a problem sending me a default letter dated XX/XX/XXXX wherein it 's stated there are options available for me to stay in my home, one of which is loan modification. This is not only confusing but it is deceptive, abusive and unfair. I have diligently provided any and all documents requested by SPS yet without completing my latest review, XXXX XXXX from SPS in a phone call on XX/XX/XXXX, stated that my account has been referred to a foreclosing attorney. How can they be reviewing me for loan modification at the same time they are initiating foreclosure? As I understand it, this is Dual Tracking and it is illegal. My hardship started when my husband XXXX got ill and since, he has unexpectedly passed away. This has been devastating for me and my son this past year. I am doing my best to cope with each day without the additional heartache of having to deal with SPS on a matter which should be pretty cut and dried. They are grossly negligent in their process of reviewing me for loss mitigation and I feel they have no system in place to follow the rules and regulations of CFPB or they just do n't care. SPS seems to take no accountability for their actions and I feel how they treat borrowers like me is of no importance to them ; that they are completely insensitive to the chaos they cause in one 's life by all the misinformation and the runaround from the account representatives. I kindly request that I be awarded a loan modification as SPS has failed to review me in a timely manner and they did not follow the process of loss mitigation by following the Making Home Affordable guidelines.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-17

Ehrhardt, SC

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: This is a continuing problem from my last complaint. My home was foreclosed on by XXXX, but it is being actually pursued by SPS, a servicing company that inherited it ( although there are no documents to support this ) from XXXX. I continue to be jerked around in their loss mitigation process. I submitted the final documents in my application for home retention on XX/XX/XXXX. Since that time, I have followed up with their customer service numerous times, most recently being Friday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Even though their website status continued to indicate that I still owed them documents, every conversation with their customer service reps indicated that they had all the documents necessary and were moving my package into status to be reviewed. However, there is a foreclosure sale set for this property for XXXX XXXX, XXXX. As of XXXX XXXX, there was no indication that the lawyer representing SPS had been requested to submit a motion to stay the sale. I called again today, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and went to the Ombudsman 's office instead of regular customer service. I was told that because a XXXX tax return was missing signatures ( my first time hearing this, and they 've had that document since XXXX ), my package had been closed and denied. When I informed her that I recognized this as yet another runaround, she indicated that the package had " expired on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. '' I asked what that meant, since I had submitted all documents before that date, but they continued to erroneously indicate that some were still missing, and she said that the notes do indicate that I called in and SPS located the documents. She then told me that the lawyer had been notified to file the motion to stay the sale on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, and that as soon as they got notified that the sale had been stopped, they could reopen my file and actually evaluate it for options. In the past, the attorney has waited until the last minute to file stay motions, and even then, they only ask for 30 days, even though it clearly takes more like 90 days to work through the loss mitigation options, any necessary appeals by me, etc. I 'm about to crack under the stress and pressure. It 's affecting my work, my job and my home life. How can these servicing companies get away with treating customers so poorly and illegally? Will you please intervene as you have before, and insist that they request the stay of the sale, and postpone it for at least 90 to 120 days to give us time to work out any loss mitigation options?
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-10-17

Kawaihae, HI

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Complaint: I have been trying to get my loan modified with Select Portfolio Servicing. It has been going on for over 3 years. I have XXXX feet thick of repetitive documents being submitted and it is never right and ever enough to them. They are auctioning my home off on Friday and I am scared. I am XXXX and this is my retirement home and my investment. They have broken into my home, they have taken locks off and walked off and left the property unsecured for vermin and vandals. When I approach them they do n't respond except with a double speak response and never resolve or correct. Please help me here so I am will not lose my home on XX/XX/XXXX. they call and I pick up and no one is there. I understand they are preditors. Help me please. they send info to tenants and scare them away so they do n't pay rent. I have put {$100000.00} into the house so far. My phone is XXXX the auction is on XX/XX/XXXX. HELP!! I have also lost substantial reveinue for threats and personal information sent to tenants. 12 months of lost revenue so far at XXXX a month. This would well pay for the adjusted mortgage that I am entitled to. Again, Help. Please e-mail if phone access is not available. Thank you. XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-10-16

Penn, PA

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: My mortgage just got sold to another servicing company as of XXXX/XXXX/2016, the first letter I received stated this fact and said for the transfer should be complete in sixty days, that during this time no service fees or late charges would be assessed. I had to reset my ACH with my bank and the new ACH would start on XXXX/XXXX/16, after that date I would make XX/XX/XXXX payment directly. What a nightmare, I have received twelve letters and six phone calls as of today XXXX/XXXX/16. The latest being my payment would go up from {$400.00} per month to {$450.00} due to them being able to keep a two month reserve in the escrow account. I am retired, was on XXXX, now on social security with a fixed income and coming up with this added payment will be dificult. By my understanding I have until XXXX/XXXX/16 to have my ACH set up and the XXXX payment made without all this harrassment with letters and phone calls.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response