Product: Mortgage

Let 's start with just because this company responds to a complaint doesn't mean anything is resolved. I have tried for a modification because the one in XXXX which was supposed to be permanent is not. I get a letter every so often saying that my rates increased due to escrow shortage and my rate is well over {$800.00}. I asked for a modification and received no response. Even asked since they claim XXXX XXXX is the noteholder for their guidelines. I never received anything. I still have not received if my modification was denied or what my options were. I check my county 's records and see my house is set for a sheriff sale on XX/XX/XXXX. I know it's funny to you all because the HUD secretary even joked about it. This company is addicted to REOs and kicking people out of their homes. This single mother of XXXX  is not. I will no longer fight. I will however go for a deed in lieu or better yet, I'll file for bankruptcy the day of the sale. Since that seems to be what SPS wants. 
I had a company do a title search and I even paid a company to deal with SPS, and you can see attached. XXXX is still the bank of record on my title. I will fight this in court, and I will even show proof of forged documents by SPS and their attorneys. 

This settlement includes a statement of facts to which XXXX XXXX has agreed. That statement of facts describes how XXXX XXXX made false and misleading representations to prospective investors about the characteristics of the mortgage loans it securitized. ( The quotes in the following paragraphs are from that agreed-upon statement of facts, unless otherwise noted. ) : XXXX XXXX told investors in offering documents that the mortgage loans it securitized into RMBS were originated generally in accordance with applicable underwriting guidelines, except where sufficient compensating factors were demonstrated by a prospective borrower. It also told investors that the loans had been originated in compliance with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including all predatory and abusive lending laws. 
XXXX XXXX has now acknowledged that XXXX XXXX repeatedly received information indicating that many of the loans reviewed did not conform to the representations that would be made by XXXX XXXX to investors about the loans to be securitized. It has acknowledged that in many cases, it purchased and securitized loans into its RMBS  that did not comply with applicable underwriting guidelines and lacked sufficient factors and/or w [ ere ] not originated in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. XXXX XXXX employees even referred to some loans they securitized as bad loans, complete XXXX and [ u ] tter complete garbage. 
XXXX XXXX acquired some of the mortgage loans it securitized by buying, from other loan originators, Bulk packages containing numerous loans. For example, in XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX purchased a Bulk pool of approximately 10,000 loans originated by XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX selected fewer than 10 percent of these loans for due diligence review. Reports from XXXX XXXX due diligence vendors showed that approximately 85 percent of the loans in this sample violated XXXX underwriting guidelines and/or applicable law, but XXXX XXXX securitized over half of the loans into various RMBS  it then sold to investors. XXXX XXXX did not review the remaining unsampled 90 percent of the pool to determine whether those loans had similar problems. Instead, it securitized an additional {$1.00} XXXX worth of unsampledand therefore unreviewedloans from this pool into various RMBS it then sold to investors. A XXXX XXXX manager wrote to another manager who was reviewing these loans, Thanks for working thru this mess. If it helps, it looks like we will make a killing on this trade. 
XXXX XXXX acquired other mortgage loans for securitization through its XXXX   channel. Through this channel, XXXX XXXX bought loans from other lenders one-by-one or in small packages, and also itself extended loans to borrowers as Wholesale loans. Approximately 25-35 percent of the loans XXXX XXXX acquired from XXXX to XXXX were acquired through its mortgage XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX employees discussed in internal emails that for XXXX loans, the loan review and approval process was virtually unmonitored. For loans XXXX XXXX purchased through its XXXX, XXXX XXXX told investors, ratings agencies and others, XXXX XXXX senior underwriters make final loan decisions, not contracted due diligence firms. XXXX XXXX has now acknowledged, For XXXX loans, these representations were false. 
XXXX XXXX has acknowledged that [ a ] XX/XX/XXXX audit by XXXX XXXX audit department gave the XXXX a C rating on an A-D scale ( the second worst possible rating ) and a level 4 materiality score on a 1-4 scale ( the highest possible score ), and that a XX/XX/XXXX evaluation by XXXX XXXX of one of the third-party vendors it used to review XXXX loans similarly reported that There are serious concerns as to compliance [. ] Between XXXX and XXXX, XXXX XXXX managers made comments in emails about the quality of XXXX loans and its process for reviewing those loans. For example, a top XXXX XXXX manager wrote to senior traders, Of course we would like higher quality loans. Thats never been the identity of our [ mortgage ] XXXX, and were becoming less and less competitive in that space. A senior XXXX XXXX trader, discussing the fulfillment centers XXXX XXXX used to review XXXX loans, stated in an email : we make these underwriting exceptions and then we have liability down the road when the loans go bad and people point out that we violated our own guidelines.... The fulfillment process is a joke. 
For example, in one instance XXXX XXXX approved, through its XXXX, a purchase of over {$700.00} XXXX worth of loans originated by XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX senior traders referr [ ed ] to XXXX XXXX  loans as complete XXXX and [ u ] tter complete garbage. Despite this, XXXX XXXX provided XXXX XXXX with financial incentives in exchange for loan volume [ and ] securitized XXXX XXXX loans into various RMBS it then sold to investors. 
XXXX XXXX has acknowledged that it also received reports from vendors that it might have been acquiring and securitizing loans with inflated appraisals and that its approach for reviewing the property values associated with the mortgage loans could lead to the acceptance of inflated appraisals. In XX/XX/XXXX, a XXXX XXXX manager wrote to two senior traders, How would investors react if we say that 20 percent of the pool have values off by 15 percent? If we are comfortable buying these loans, we should be comfortable telling investors. 
XXXX XXXX used vendors to conduct quality control on a small subset of loans it acquired. XXXX XXXX has now acknowledged that its quality control review vendors reported that more than 25 percent of the loans that they reviewed for quality control were  designated ineligible because of credit, compliance, and/or property defects. 
XXXX XXXX has now acknowledged that its Co-Head of  Transaction Management expressed concern that the quality control results could serve as a written record of defects, and sought to avoid documented confirmation of these defects. In XX/XX/XXXX, a top XXXX XXXX manager met with others to discuss implementing this reduction of quality control review. XXXX XXXX Co-Head of Transaction Management wrote that this change was to avoid the previous approach by which a lot of loans were QCd... creating a record of possible rep/warrant breaches in deals.... 
In another example, in XX/XX/XXXX, a XXXX XXXX employee identified two wholesale loans XXXX XXXX itself had originated and wrote, I would think that we would want to see loans like these that seem to represent confirmed problems, especially on our own originations. Why do we have an appraisal watch list and broker oversight group if we arent going to review the bad ones and take action appropriately?... I just see so many of these cross my desk, fraud, value, etc., its hard to just let them go by and not do something. XXXX XXXX  Co-Head of Transaction Management  responded, I think the idea is that we dont want to spend a lot of $ to generate a lot of QC results that give us no recourse anyway but generate a lot of negative data, so no need to order QC on each of these loans. The employee then stated, I think the lack of interest in bad loans is scary. 
As another example, in XX/XX/XXXX, a XXXX XXXX employee identified 44 Wholesale loans XXXX XXXX had itself originated that had gone 60 days delinquent. XXXX XXXX Co-Head of Transaction Management wrote in response, if we already know : that the loans arent performing... the only thing QC will tell us is that there were compliance errors, occupancy misreps etc. I think we already know we have systemic problems in FC/UW [ fulfillment centers/underwriting ] re both compliance and credit. The downside of QCing these 44 loans is, after we get the QC results, we will be obligated to repurchase a fair chunk of the loans from deals, assuming the loans are securitized and the QC results look like the QC weve done in the past. So based on a wholesale QC historical fail rate of over 35 percent ( major rep defects ), the avg bal of wholesale loans and the loss severities, it is reasonable to expect this QC may cost us a few million dollars. XXXX XXXX has now acknowledged that it did not inform investors or ratings agencies that its Wholesale loan channel had a QC historical fail rate of over 35 percent ( major rep defects ). 
XXXX XXXX commented about the mortgage loans that accumulated in its inventory. For example, XXXX XXXX Co-Head of Transaction Management wrote to another XXXX XXXX manager that loans with potential defects pile up in inventory.... So my theory is : we own the risk 1 way or another.... I am inclined to securitize loans that are close calls or marginally non-compliant, and take the risk that well have to repurchase, if we cant put them back, rather than adding to sludge in inventory.... One of the senior traders responded, Agree.  In another instance, a XXXX XXXX senior trader commented in XXXX that we have almost $ XXXX of XXXX garbage to still distribute. In another instance, a XXXX XXXX trader wrote to a top manager,  discussing another bank to which XXXX XXXX was seeking to sell loans from its inventory, and stated, [ The other bank ] again came back with an embarrassing number of diligence kicks this month.... If their results are in any way representative of our compliance with our reps and warrants, we have major problems. But rather than holding these loans in its own inventory, XXXX XXXX securitized certain of these loans into its RMBS. 

Original review : XX/XX/XXXX We asked for help with our payments. They said, " No problem. Send us paperwork to fill out. '' Sent in. Was told not filled out right. So went over all the paperwork with lady at the co. She said it was right and everything was there. That was in XXXX XXXX. It is now XX/XX/XXXX. Every time we called to check on the paperwork the lady was not there. Off that day. Always. Finally got hold of someone today and they said all of the paperwork was not there. They said they sent us info about it, never received. They told us they tried to call. Never did. Now they say we have to start all over again. They have our address and we never received anything from them. We have requested several times a history report of our mortgage because they say we took a XXXX loan against our mortgage years ago. We did not never. All we ask is a copy of the canceled check. They said they have sent all that. Never received it. They just say what they want you to hear. 

I am going to call around and see if it is possible to have them investigated. People please call around and have this happen. I pay enough. Sometimes I can't go to the store for food. I can't pay my medical and my health has suffered. No co. should have this power. I am sure no one will read this because they will take it down. 

Representatives ill-informed and don't really have any idea what they're talking about. Keep sending me unwanted and unsolicited info I have not requested. They do not send statements in a timely manner. Utterly clueless and out of touch with customers. Not helpful and at times can be very rude. Who told them they give excellent customer service as stated on their website? 

Original review : XX/XX/XXXX Like many other complaints, my mortgage was sold by XXXX XXXX to this company several months ago. It has been nothing but trouble since. They recalculated my escrow account and sent me a check for {$940.00}. I did my calculations and realized it would leave me short when it came time to pay my insurance and taxes. So I called, was instructed to send it back, and told they would recalculate. Here we are almost a month later, they have no record of receiving the check back, have not adjusted my account, have not recalculated. NOTHING. They tell me they will put it in for " deep research ''. After reading these reviews, I am SO worried. 

Original review : XX/XX/XXXX This company is so behind in current mortgage practices. They are completely corrupt and incompetent. The excuses they make for their inaccurate account history is beyond belief. Turn and run from these numbnuts. You'll waste an incredible amount of time hand holding them through banking and mortgages 101. Just turn and run. 

Original review : XXXX XXXX, XXXX This company is notorious for losing paperwork, raising interest rates for no reason and ludicrous excuses to not work with you. Paperwork was faxed numerous times with return receipt, and still lost. Why are they still in business? SPS evades any complaints against them. Worse mortgage company in industry. 

Original review : XXXX XXXX, XXXX My loan was transferred from XXXX ... I had 3 payments total to paying off the loan. I tried to have them take the pay off balance via phone from a registered account. After being told online they would take it they didn't. Leaving me a late payment because they lied and didn't take the payment. 2nd call they proceeded to tell me A. They couldn't take the payment for pay off over the phone or online nor could they tell me what the pay off balance was. It's straight up fraud! In order to collect late fees and more interest. I never agreed to having my loan transferred to this company. They informed me the only way to send payoff is thru XXXX XXXX. Another large fee! 

Where in XXXX XXXX name did America allow such businesses to rake customers thru the coals like this? It seems to me it's outside of any laws I've ever dealt with. We customers should be compensated for the inconvenience of having to deal with such XXXX! I just want to pay the loan off. Not be tread all over and told, " No you can't. '' I think they'd like to take my house for the {$160.00} I currently owe. Ridiculous and complete insanity! No customer service that helped. 

Just a few other consumer complaint and even the Justice Department 's statements, but yet, nothing is done w/ this corrupt company. They still steal homes and that is OK with the United States Government.