SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC

2016-09-13

Portland, OR

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

2016-09-13

Baldwin Hills, CA

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: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-13

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

2016-09-13

Hamburg, MN

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, MN XXXX Loan Account # : XXXX Hello, For over a year now I have been trying to get a loan modification on my mortgage with my mortgage servicing company, Select Portfolio Company. I went through some very hard times and could not afford my mortgage then. However I went back to work and things have gotten better for me financially and have since pleaded with the mortgage company to modify my mortgage. For over a year now they have not given me the modification and my home is now in foreclosure scheduled for a XX/XX/XXXX sale date. I have given them all my financial statements that were requested including my income which includes my child support. They are refusing to use my child support and threaten to go ahead with the foreclosure on my home because according to them the amount is not the same every month. My monthly child support is a little over a XXXX and I receive it on a master card. I gave them the court order that shows the amount and 18 months monthly statement from the child support department proving I have been and still receive this income. They are however refusing to use my child support income because again according to them the actual amount received is not the same every month. They claim that because the actual amount receive is sometimes slightly more and sometimes slightly less than the amount ordered by the court that I get a letter from the department of child support explaining why amount varies. I asked to the court for the letter but was told they can not tailor a letter explaining why the amount receive is sometimes slightly higher. According to them they can only give me the monthly statements and the court order but can not tailor a letter to my situation. I explain this to my mortgage serving company and ask them to at least use the medium amount for every month but they insist they will not use the income at all however if they do not use my child support income that will disqualify me for the modification that is currently in progress with them. I have lived in this home with my daughter since XX/XX/XXXX and I am terrified that they are going to take our home away from us. I barely sleep at night. I do n't understand why they are refusing to use the child support when I have given them statements from XX/XX/XXXX to now showing I received at least {$850.00} every month. I am asking this office to please intervene and help safe my home. Please ask them to use all of my income and not deny me the loan modification. My mortgage company information : Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc . XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX : Phone : XXXX Thank you XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-13

MD

False statements or representation

Debt collection: Mortgage

Attempted to collect wrong amount
Complaint: FULL DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT OF XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX attached fle fraud assignments in county land record use as prove of standing in county court, bankruptcy court house when its fraud assignments was discovered and challenged, XXXX XXXX move the serivicer to secondary services select portfolio servicing. why are the substitute trustee keep changing when fraud are discovered. there have being over XXXX debt collectors trying to collect on debt using fraud assignments upon fraud discovery the services select portfolio serving keep moving file to another fraud debt collectors to avoid detection of fraud and moves the files to one substitute trustee after another the original trustee wo n't have any part of this process which could produce liability disproportionate to any reward.And what point is the Trustee on the Deed of Trust, whether original or substituted, liable for subsequent misdeeds that amount to fraud? For example, if the original trustee has knowledge ( which all of them do now ) that the substitution is invalid then the original trustee is still the trustee on the deed of trust. Why wo n't they initiate the foreclosure process and fix the problem? Answer : Because they know they are dealing with fraudulent document, instructions and representations. The same rules probably apply to the substituted trustee. I think it might be important as it appears to be a widespread practice in the preparation of Appointments of Substitute Trustees by these debt collectors law firm 1. Defunct debt collector law firms of XXXX and " foreclosure mills '' including defunct law firm XXXX, ( file bankruptcy ) aka defunct debt collectors law firm of XXXX, ( file bankruptcy ) the sold to debt collector law firm XXXX, they abruptly shuts down without notice all of these debt collectors who and either shuts down as soon as the evidence of fraud is are being brought to light It concerns the Appointment of Substitute Trustee in my case .As pointed out by XXXX,
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-12

Five Points, NC

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: FHA mortgage

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

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-12

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

2016-09-12

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

2016-09-12

Lake Monroe, FL

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

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

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-12

IL

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I phoned in my XX/XX/XXXX payment and I was told that I am still one payment behind when I questioned them about the statement still showing due for 2 payments and also accumulated late fees. The payment in question, is my XXXX XXXX payment, which was XXXX of the 3 month trial payments for the modification. This payment along with XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payment was phoned in on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I was asked to send in proof of this payment, which has been done numerous times, but I still sent my bank statement showing the money coming out on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Spservicing also responded to my complaint filed with you XX/XX/XXXX that my loan was current and only due for the XXXX/XXXX/XXXX payment. Refer to case # XXXX. They were also suppose to fix my credit report which they have not done as of today 's date. I was told they are reporting me a rolling 30 day with accumulated late fees which I am refusing to pay because I was never late and have never missed a payment. After they applied all of the payments received in XX/XX/XXXX, I had an excess of escrow payments which they did refund to me and I also have XXXX in unapplied payments. If I truly missed this payment, how could all of this be possible? Proof of this XX/XX/XXXX payment was faxed again on XX/XX/XXXX and I also followed up with a phone call that it was received and in their possession. It is sad, because when you speak with their representatives, they think that CFPB is a lender and NOT the consumer financial protection bureau. I never had a problem with them, when I was paying at a rate of 5.875 % on an adjustable rate mortgage. As soon as I was granted the modification, that is when all of these problems started for me. I feel that there is some discrimination going on here as well.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-12

Okc, OK

Disclosure verification of debt

Debt collection: Mortgage

Not given enough info to verify debt
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-11

TX

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: My husband and I have been trying for eight years to get our house payment lowered to as close to a 31 % debt-to-income ratio as possible. He lost his job in 2008 during the 2008 global recession. We have had nothing but the run around and have been lied to over and over again and now finally have proof of their lies and deception. We really wanted a HAMP loan and was given a chance twice when we could not pass the NPV. They even stopped us from making affordable payments plans so that they could review us for HAMP. When we could pass the NPV and filed a Request for Mortgage Assistance ( RMA ), they said the investor would not allow HAMP loans because of a pool servicing agreement restriction. They have done XXXX in-house modifications and each have resulted in our mortgage loan balance increasing because of rolling in the arrearages into our note. Our balance is now {$360000.00}, when the appraised value of our loan is {$200000.00}. The first in-house modification they did for us actually raised our house payment by {$10.00}. Our house payment was already more than our income. Finally, I sent a copy of an appeal letter to SPS 's denial of loss mitigation options to CFPB and SPS finally lowered our payments to {$1300.00} from {$2100.00}. However, we were so far in debt with high interest loans, loans from friends and neighbors that were patiently waiting on their money and our new house payment was 70 % of our income. We made partial payments to SPS and began paying our other debts and are once again behind. I sent a RESPA Qualified Written Request regarding why they had failed to really help us and about the pool servicing agreement ( PSA ). They answered the request with what they had done not why they had n't helped us and told us that the pool and servicing agreement was " proprietary and confidential. '' This was a lie because PSAs are public information located on the Securities Exchange Commission website. I had already located the PSA years before and knew they were lying, but I needed proof and now I finally have it in writing from them. The next time we talked to them we told them that we knew that PSAs were not proprietary and confidential and then they sent us a letter giving us the trust name by which we verified that the PSA we have previously was the correct XXXX. This is obvious deceptive trade practices and also need to be fined for filing false answers to a RESPA request. I have memorized the XXXX Handbook by now and the handbook says that they are to follow all federal and local laws in the servicing of the mortgages. According to our PSA, Article V, Administration and Servicing of the Mortgage Loans, Section 5.01 ( a ), SPS, as the servicer, " shall have full power and authority, acting alone, to do or cause to be done any and all things in connection with such servicing and administration which it may deem necessary or desirable. Since I found that SPS could make any decision they wanted I asked SPS XXXX questions ( XXXX ) is SPS using the HAMP program to put us into in-house modifications which increase our loan balance in order to increase their profits? and ( XXXX ) is SPS only using the " investor/guarantor not participating '' as a ploy not to help borrowers greatly in need of assistance? '' I read through the CFPB database last night and became ill as to what they are doing to people. I plan to do a blog with the worst cases as soon as I can. They have broken all kinds of laws and I am hoping that CFPB will go after them soon. I found out a long time ago that SPS used to be XXXX and the Federal Trade Commission had fined them heavily and they ended up restructuring and became SPS. Apparently they did not learn a lesson. I have also read that they have so much money that they are not worried about what they do because they believe they can get out of it so they continue to lie and destroy people 's lives. CFPB, please help us!!
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-10

Warren, OH

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. continues to evade simple, basic questions I have posed to them regarding the validity of my mortgage debt, and instead, is relying on twisted words, half-truths, incomplete answers and non-answers in a desperate attempt to hide the truth. Specifically, I sent via Certified Mail, and SPS rec 'd on XXXX XXXX, a formal 'Dispute of Validation of Debt ' and in short, the reply from SPS was wholly inadequate. As XXXX case in point, federal law requires that the debt collector ( SPS ) provide the true identity of the 'creditor ', and yet, all I rec 'd was a jumbled mess of a paragraph that tries to say that XXXX is the 'noteholder ' - a claim that XXXX Bank has formally denied - and that SPS is the 'servicer ', and that my note is 'secured with other notes traded on XXXX XXXX ''. Nowhere in that reply is specific information as to who the actual 'creditor ' is as defined by XXXX XXXX. Additionally, another requirement in a reply regarding a dispute of debt is for the debt collector to clearly identify who the original creditor is ( or was ). SPS also failed to make clear the simple answer to that question. In response to an earlier complaint to XXXX Bank, SPS wrote on XXXX XXXX, XXXX that " the 'owner ', sometimes also referred to as 'investor ', 'creditor ', and/or 'note holder ' '' is in fact XXXX Bank. In their XXXX XXXX, XXXX reply, SPS clearly implies that all of those terms mean the same thing ( see attached ). However, in clear contrast to that assertion, XXXX Bank says it in fact is NOT the owner ( which also according to SPS means it is not the 'creditor ' nor the 'note holder ' ), and that instead, some unnamed 'Trust ' is the actual 'owner of the mortgage and note ' ( see attached ). Accordingly, I still do n't have a clear answer as to who the actual 'owner/creditor ' is, despite filing a formal dispute of the Validation of Debt with the debt collector. In addition, SPS failed to answer the vast majority of the questions I asked relative to the origination of the debt, and who was in fact the actual creditor ( or lender ) to begin with ( see attached list of questions contained in the 'Dispute of Validation of Debt and Qualified Written Request '. All I rec 'd was another copy of the Mortgage and Note, which shows XXXX XXXX XXXX as the 'Lender ', but without further detail regarding whose money Encore was actually lending, there is no evidence whatsoever that Encore was actually a 'true creditor ' in the first place. The information is needed to determine if this case fits the same fact pattern as XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX WL XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ), and all indications are that it does.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-09

Decatur, GA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: VA mortgage

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

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-09

Ferryville, WI

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

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

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-09

San Diego, CA

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

2016-09-09

San Jose, CA

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ( SPS ) took over my loan from XXXX XXXX, XXXX. SPS told me that my last payment was make on XXXX XXXX, XXXX in the amount of {$1500.00} and my next payment is due on XXXX XXXX, XXXX my next payment amount is XXXX. SPS gave me the incorrect amount the bank say that I own them, {$1500.00} for at lear 15 months, the total payment SPS did not add to my account is {$22000.00}. Base on this dispute and the servicer to prepare the loan modification for me said that they did submit the loan modification on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I did call in to check the status for my loan modification on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I did talk to XXXX XXXX, she said that they do not have my loan modification on their system. She request me to go to police department to report for Identify Theft Victims ' Complaint and Affidavit. Today XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I call in again request for the postpone my house and he said I need to sign the for Identify Theft Victims ' Complaint and Affidavit they did send it to me but I never received it, I do not think I need to sign Identify Theft Victims ' Complaint and Affidavit for them to stop postpone my sale date because this is a complaint about the fraud the bank foreclose my house not for Identify Theft Victims ' Complaint. I am so confuse the way SPS treated as their customer. " The subprime debacle, which I would define as loans that should n't have been made andpackaged that originated between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, was probably the biggest Ponzi scheme in thehistory of mankind. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, opening speaker, " The Subprime Mortgage Fallout, '' State Bar of California XXXX Annual Real Property Law Section Retreat, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX the subprime meltdown, banks abandoned traditional underwriting practices and caused a frenzy of real estate speculation by issning predatory loans that ultimately lowered property values in the United States by XXXX-XXXX %. Banks reaped an unprecedented harvest. XXXX XXXX, CEO of XXXX XXXX, took home more than XXXX during the seven years.Banks issued XXXX predatory loans knowing that the borrowers would default and lose their homes, and then committed perjury and fraud to fabricate documents in the foreclosure process. As a direct, foreseeable, proximate result, XXXX families are now in danger of foreclosure, and i am facing illegal foreclosure of my home at a Trustee 's Sale scheduled for XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX responding to the foreclosure crisis in California, the City and County of XXXX XXXX 's Office of The Assessor-Recorder of XXXX XXXX had retained XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX ( " XXXX '' ) to review XXXX residential mortgage loan transactions ( " Subject Loans '' ) that resulted in foreclosure sales that occurred from XXXX XXXX through XXXX XXXX. Over This period, XXXX analyzed the Subject Loans to determine the mortgage industry 's compliance with applicable laws. Specially, XXXX focused its analysis on important topics relating to XXXX subject areas such as Assignments, Notice of Default, Substitution of Trustee, Notice of Trustee Sale, Suspicious Activities Indicative of Potential Fraud, and Conflicts Relating to XXXX. In its report, XXXX stated that the subject areas and the topics it explored may not be exhaustive. Nonetheless, it believed the analysis presents an accurate picture of the nature and frequency of the mortgage industry 's performance respecting compliance with important aspect of California 's non judicial foreclosure laws. Overall, it identified one or more regularities in XXXX % of the subject loans. In XXXX % of the loans, it identified what appeared to be one or more clear violation of law. In gathering the facts, researching the facts, reviewing the documents set forth in the Exhibits, and reviewing XXXX ' report ( Exhibit " G '' ),
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-09

Campbell, CA

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: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-09

Lk Buena Vis, FL

Disclosure verification of debt

Debt collection: Mortgage

Right to dispute notice not received
Complaint: The CFPB, F.B.I., OCC.HUD, making HOME ADORABLE AND MY CONGRESSMAN US D.O.J. NEED TO REOPEN A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AGAIN AGAINST CHOICE LEGAL GROUP IS A COLLECTION AGENCY AND THE LAW NEEDS TO BE AUDIT THE AUDIT WILL REVEAL ALL THE FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS ACTIVITY GOING ST THIS FORECLOSURE MILL 'S ALL IS FRAUDULENT POA, XXXX ENDORMENTS, NON ORIGINAL PROMESORY NOTE LOOK CASE # XXXX AT XXXX FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS TO OBTAIN A FAVORABLE ILLEGAL JUDGMENT FOR ALMOST {$140000.00}, THIS FRAUDULENT ACTIVITY
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

2016-09-09

Madison, WI

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: Almost two years ago, I modified my mortgage with Select Portfolio Servicing. At the time I applied for the modification, the principal on the loan was roughly $ XXXX. After modification, the balance rose to $ XXXX and I was told that the monthly payment would be {$1300.00}. Recently, I noticed however that my monthly payment as crept up to {$1600.00}. per month, the same amount that it was prior to the modification. I am at a loss as to why the monthly payment would increase since the interest rate on my mortgage is fixed. Also, the loan amount seems to be growing, not shrinking.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-09

Bellaire, TX

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: FHA mortgage

Complaint: I own a property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. The loan is serviced by Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( SPS ) XXXX of XXXX. I have had XXXX claims on this property in which the insurance company sent at least XXXX checks to SPS for the repairs and SPS has misappropriated the funds. Despite all repairs being complete ; and despite independent verification by SPS 's inspector and the Insurance claims adjuster that all repairs have been satisfactorily completed, SPS has failed to pay the contractor and reimburse the expenses that I paid out of pocket. SPS is engaging in a criminal act by misappropriating construction funds in violation of XXXX Law as well as engaging in insurance fraud. SPS should not be allowed to hold a mortgage lender license.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2016-09-09

Waupun, WI

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

2016-09-09

Charlottesville, VA

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

2016-09-09

IL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: I am in the process of negotiating a short sale with my first lender SPS, and they already issued approval once before, and after we requested an extension on the appproval since the XXXX lender did not approve the short sale until after SPS ' approval expired, SPS did a new BPO on the property. The XXXX value came back substantially higher than the already approved price that Buyer agreed to, and the BPO had many glaring errors- the valuation used properties more than XXXX mile away, in different school districts, more desirable neighborhoods, comps that were not even sold, etc. This is the 2nd time SPS has done this on this same exact file. Their first BPO had the same exact glaring errors and they sat on it and did nothing until a prior CFPB complaint was filed. They need to be fined as this repetitive action is becoming malicious and affecting the lives of the Seller and Buyer extremely negatively.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2016-09-08

Three Bridges, NJ

Credit decision / Underwriting

Mortgage: Other mortgage

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

Disputed: No Timely Response