SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC

2015-06-23

New Britain, CT

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

2015-06-23

Phila, PA

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

2015-06-23

Bohemia, NY

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-23

Hollywood, FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-23

Alden Manor, NY

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

2015-06-23

Arco, CA

Application, originator, mortgage broker

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: My loan is with XXXX. Once the banks were forced to re-finance people with the HARP extension, etc. XXXX turned my loan over to a servicing company called SPS who did n't have to follow the same rules of behavior because they were not a bank/mortgage company. I have been in a battle with SPS going on 3 years now stuck on a continuous carousel of them asking for ever more paperwork, paperwork they already had, asking for irrelevant paperwork and even deciding in a few circumstances to arbitrarily close my application for reasons claiming " insufficient paperwork '' when the person on the phone told me 2 days earlier that they had in fact received everything. This forced me to have to start all over again - sometimes - 2 months into the process.. I then filed a complaint with the FTC a couple of years back and their " investigation '' was a joke. They simply contacted SPS who then said I simply never finished the application. With that - they simply took SPS ' word for it and closed the complaint. During the entire process - SPS then assured me that as long as the application process was proceeding that they would not begin foreclosure proceedings on the house. Well in the latter half of 2014 that 's exactly what they did, while denying it to me when I called. It was only when I showed them actual foreclosure paperwork that was nailed to the door on the property that they in fact admitted that they did start the foreclosure process while I was in the middle of the app process once more. Now - in regards to the " never completing the application '' SPS is simply playing a well organized game to keep the applicant from ever completing an application. They maintain that all paperwork must be no more than 90 days old. But they string out their paperwork requests over months so that at a certain point, there will always be something that is over 90 days old that you will continually have to resubmit. The worst part is that you never know and they will never tell you when you have completed the application because there is never a comprehensive list of exactly what you need to send them. So you never know whether you have sent them all the paperwork they need. I have literally been submitting the same paperwork over and over to them for almost 3 years now. To make matters worse, I have actually involved an attorney because I wanted an objective XXXX party to be witness to what was going on. To date, the attorney has admitted to me that what SPS is doing is completely insane, insidious and is the textbook case of acting in bad faith. Unfortunately, due to the way the law is structured SPS is not technically doing anything wrong. So - to date, even though I know I qualify for a re-finance, even having worked with the SPS Ombudsman ( who was useless by the way ) and then an attorney - SPS is continuing to play games with us by continually asking for endless paperwork over and over. And now the property is in foreclosure limbo, which means I ca n't live in it or put anyone else in it. But am still responsible for the tangential costs ( HOA, insurance, etc. ) which is now adding additional thousands of dollars to my debt. SPS has lied to me at just about every turn from the first day I had dealt with them. Acted in bad faith in preventing me from completing the application so that I can refinance the property under HARP/HAMP and is moving to foreclose on the property while lying to me telling me that as long as the application process is occurring that the home will not be foreclosed on. I dont know what your organization considers an abuse of power in an economically disadvantageous situation, or what you consider a good example of corporate misbehavior. But if this is not it, then I do n't know what is. You are the consumer protection agency - here is a customer that needs protecting. Please read this and do the right thing. Thank youXXXX XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-23

FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: Our firm, XXXX XXXX, XXXX has been monitoring our client 's request for mortgage assistance to SPS to ensure SPS 's compliance with Regulation X. Despite having received a complete package from the Borrower, SPS has continued to make burdensome and duplicative requests for documents in an attempt to stall the Borrower 's request for mortgage assistance. For over a year now, the Borrower has continued to cooperate in every way possible and has continued to respond to all of SPS and opposing counsel 's document requests. Since our client has retained our services, we have submitted every document, explanation, and break down that has been requested. More specifically, we have provided the Borrower 's bank statements, your request for an explanation for deposits on the Borrower 's bank statements, and now a breakdown of each deposit by property. Each request has been in response to our production of the previous requested document. The piece meal requests are inappropriate and a violation of SPS 's responsibility to act diligently in their processing and review of the Borrower 's application. Furthermore, it is our contention that opposing counsel has hijacked the process from the mortgage servicer and has inappropriately hindered the review of our clients ' application. In addition, on these facts we would contend that SPS has received a complete package and opposing counsel has continued to move forward with the trial in violation of XXXX CFR XXXX. Since our client had in fact submitted a complete application to SPS at least 37 days before a foreclosure sale date was scheduled, they should not have taken any affirmative action that could cause or result in a judgment of foreclosure or a foreclosure sale. Even though opposing counsel is attempting to continue to move forward with trial, SPS is responsible for promptly instructing counsel not to proceed in such a manner once a package is received.
Company Response: Company chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-23

Royal Palm Beach, 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: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-23

Keyport, WA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Complaint: problem is XXXX reporting what select portfolio servicing, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are sending them. I have disputed several times with all XXXX agencies and XXXX or XXXX with this cfpb. my wife and I were in a mortgage that was an A R M and before it started to change we tried to refi with no success we later ended up filing chapter XXXX bankruptcy in 2006. we still tried to keep the house and get a modification from the bank with no success ended up rolling the house in to the bankruptcy thru a modification approved and passed thru by the trustees office mortgage company was XXXX XXXX then XXXX XXXX then XXXX to now select portfolio servicing is reporting improperly to credit agencies reporting late pays 120 days or more on an account number we never had XXXX tried to say we excepting a modification and started reporting late pays on that account that was never excepted or approved if any report it should say house was surrendered back to bank in a chapter XXXX bankruptcynow we are trying to buy a new house for us butt have this big issue to fix
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-22

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-22

Macclenny, 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

2015-06-22

Salisbury, MD

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

2015-06-22

Fred, VA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: We refinanced our home in XX/XX/XXXX. The mortgage broker committed fraud. Upon discovering the fraud we worked with XXXX fraud department to prove that, we were successful. Attempt after attempt was made to modify the loan. The mortgage meltdown happened and then the XXXX settlement. We had a XXXX and XXXX trust. XXXX did a trial mod on the XXXX. When we made the last payment on the trial mod, they then violated the XXXX settlement and gave servicing rights to SPS on the XXXX trust. After a year they then transferred the XXXX to SPS. There is no proper chain of title. The banks have further committed fraud and then filed for foreclosure and now are starting eviction process rather than waiting for determination on finding from CFPB on allegations. This agency is supposed to be XXXX that is here to help the consumers. I 've watched the video by XXXX XXXX, saying you are here to help. I have further documents, which I was told I have to file a new complaint rather than add to the existing complaint. That does not seem very efficient, but I 'm going to do whatever I have to make this story heard. The banks have waited for the " news '' to quiet down about the frauds and stealing people 's homes, and then they have gone back to business as usual. It 's time for someone to step up and stop them. These loans were securitized in XXXX. The notes have been lost or destroyed. The assignments were not done at the courthouse until XX/XX/XXXX, which is six years after the trust had closed. The Trust law states it must be done within 90 days of that closing date in order to be traded on XXXX XXXX. Then they claim XXXX is the keepers of the Record. XXXX as of today is still showing XXXX XXXX XXXX and inactive. They are not keeping the records concurrently which is yet another violation. These banks are just stealing people 's homes, and it must be stopped. I will say that we had diligently tried to work with XXXX and XXXX to modify these loans. By the time XXXX violated the XXXX Settlement, we knew they were not going to do the lawful thing. In going over my documents to send in, I note that they claim XXXX as the keepers of the record and Trustee, but on my loan documents it has XXXX with a specific address in Virginia, not XXXX. This whole thing has been fraud after fraud. I implore you to thoroughly investigate this case and STOP them.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-21

San Francisco, CA

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

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

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-20

Orlando, FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Company Response: Company chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-20

Woburn, MA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-19

Fort Macarthur, 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

2015-06-19

Foothill Ranch, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Company Response: Company chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-19

Lake Balboa, 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

2015-06-19

Portland, OR

Settlement process and costs

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

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

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-19

Foothill Ranch, CA

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Complaint: We are writing this in hopes of finding a way to resolve our past due account with SPS and XXXX, which was originally obtained through XXXX. It is our understanding that SPS is the current servicer for XXXX - and still the owner/lender/beneficiary for this loan. We also have a XXXX on the property ( XXXX ) with a pretty big balance. We have kept this loan current. We have been working to try to come to an amicable resolution for the past 28 months, making efforts to pay the mortgage as well as some toward the arrears. However, all our efforts have been rejected by SPS. SPS claims they are committed to home retention, but on-line reviews and my own personal experiences with them could n't be further from the truth. Prior to XX/XX/XXXX, we have had a spotless 10+ year payment record with our mortgage and equity line accounts with XXXX XXXX Unfortunately, the XXXX some 15 years experienced a significant slow down, due to the economic and real estate conditions. I began XXXX for another business. I made a financial arrangement for my services and held up my end of the deal. I was owed over {$160000.00} in commissions when I was asked to accept a full-time position in XX/XX/XXXX. I accepted a salary with an amortization of my consulting fees in the hope of creating a lasting income opportunity, while my wife focused on our business. Due to no fault of my own, the company lost the account I was managing and I was terminated XX/XX/XXXX- the main reason for our financial crisis. I was forced into unemployment, our business was down and I was diagnosed with a XXXX, which required XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. While laid up recovering, we began receiving a few projects with existing clients. At that point, we decided to devote all of our time to the business we started, 15 years earlier. We were in the process of finalizing our loan mod with XXXX. My Customer Assistance Specialist and I had many calls and she was engaged in the process with me. Suddenly, it was difficult to get in touch with her and the process slowed down. I finally was able to reach a live person who informed me the only thing missing was an appraisal. XXXX scheduled and sent an appraiser to our home, days after the account was already transferred to SPS. We were never told anything and could not believe what was happening. At the verge of getting the modification, the loan was transferred and SPS as servicer has been very difficult to communicate with. Now the entire process was starting from scratch. I tried numerous times to get a hold of my assigned Relationship Manager at SPS, however every call I made I ended up with a different agent with more of the same. I was told multiple times, either by phone or in letters that we were approved for a payment plan and the information would be forthcoming. We never received anything from SPS. After legal actions were taken, we were recently approved by SPS with a Forbearance / Repayment Plan at {$19000.00} per month, even though my income is less than this amount ( which SPS reviewed ). They are unwilling to modify terms or allow a reasonable time frame for repayment. I am willing and able to make the current mortgage payment and also some toward the arrears each month. The past 15 months, SPS has wasted, we could have made most of the payments to Chase/SPS by now. We now have a pending foreclosure sale date of XXXX XXXX. We feel that SPS has not done their best efforts to help keep us in our home. XXXX AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR:1. PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL ; 2. NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION ; 3. VIOLATION OF DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING ; 4. VIOLATION OF HOMEOWNER BILL OF RIGHTS ; 5. VIOLATION OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17200 ; 6. WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE ; 7. CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS.
Company Response: Company chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response

2015-06-19

CT

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage: Other mortgage

Complaint: I started the modification ( RMA ) process with XXXX in XXXX of XXXX After processing reams of paperwork, all of which were redundant items asked for over and over again, a modification was given in XXXX of XXXX. I was put into a 3 month payment trial which I lived up to. In XXXX regular modified payments began. I was sent the modification agreement to be signed and notarized in duplicate. I signed and had notarized both and sent it in, but put a note on the bottom stating I was signing under duress as I was told this would be a principal reduction. It was a standard modification. They called and told me they could not accept this with the note and would not do the mod with the note. They said they would send XXXX more forms for the original mod agreement. After 5 days I called and they said they had sent it. The woman I spoke with, XXXX XXXX on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX asked me if she could fax it to me. I agreed, she faxed the form, I made a copy of said form and proceeded to have both notarized and placed my original signature on both. Sent it in through regular mail and they in turn called to say they do not accept fax copies! The form itself was a fax sent by them! The signature and notarized RAISED stamp were original. I said you people sent the fax. What are you talking about? Well, the person faxing should have told you we did n't accept faxes. Why would she have faxed me then? Here we are after being told they were OVERNIGHTING another mod agreement XXXX, said which never came. Called again and was informed I have been put back into foreclosure!! Something untoward is going on here. The only explanation that makes any sense to me is they are attempting to get out of doing the mod already offered and payments accepted until the last XXXX I sent and they received on XXXX XXXX. They refused the XXXX XXXX payment ( of which I have proof of them receiving on time through XXXX XXXX ) so now they can claim I have n't paid, I guess. After nearly three years of being put through a ringer when I qualified from the very beginning and to now have them pull this kind of under-handed game with the roof over my head is reprehensible and unconscionable.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with non-monetary relief

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-18

Compton, 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

2015-06-18

FL

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)

Company Response: Company chooses not to provide a public response Closed with explanation

Disputed: No Timely Response

2015-06-18

Gilbert, AZ

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage: Conventional fixed mortgage

Complaint: Due to financial hardships I fell behind in my mortgage and defaulted on my mortgage on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and was referred to a foreclosure attorney on or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX without a foreclosure sale date scheduled. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I completed and submitted a request for a modification. I included the following required documentation : - XXXX current paystubs- Complete Request for Mortgage Assistance form- Signed and completed XXXX formThey documented receiving my request on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. On or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I received XXXX letters from my mortgage servicer requesting me to provide income information. Since I already provided this information I called them and they told me that they did n't need income information, but I needed to provide a hardship affidavit. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I faxed a hardship affidavit. On or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I received another XXXX letters from my mortgage servicer requesting me to provide income information. Since I already provided this information I called them and they told me that they did n't need income information, but I needed to provide my full tax returns and to date my hardship affidavit. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I faxed my XXXX and XXXX tax returns and the dated hardship affidavit. On or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I received another letter from my mortgage servicer requesting me to again provide income documentation. At this time my father-in-law had, had a XXXX and I was unable to follow up within a timely manner. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, a notice of trustee sale was filed and a foreclosure sale date was set for XXXX XXXX, XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I received a registered letter notifying me of the notice of trustee sale filing and called my mortgage servicer immediately. I was then told that I needed to provide a copy of a quit claim deed. I expressed to them that I had already provided a copy XXXX, once for my previous request for mortgage assistance in XXXX and when I requested they change my surname in XXXX. I was then told that, 'that was too much paperwork to look through and to provide another copy '. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I faxed my quit claim deed. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I emailed my mortgage servicer a request to confirm they received all my documentation and never received a response. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I called my mortgage servicer to again confirm a full package was submitted. I was then told that they received the quit claim deed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( which is amazing, considering my previous faxes took XXXX hours to post to my account records ) and then they confirmed the was recording of the quit claim on or about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Then the package was submitted to underwriting on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX for review. My issues are ; I provided a full package according the HAMP guidelines on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and then provided all the additional documentation on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, but they still scheduled a foreclosure sale because they could n't bother to review their document library to find the document they were 'missing '. Also they are now past the XXXX day deadline for providing approval or decline for the modification since receiving a full package on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law Closed with explanation

Disputed: Yes Timely Response