Consumer complaint received 2017-11-16
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: MD
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process

Complaint:
COMPLAINT OF FRAUD WITHIN THE ORDER TO DOCKET BY SELECT PORTFOLIO, ATTORNEYS, XXXX XXXX AND XXXX XXXX XXXX FACTS : My wife and I refinanced our house XXXX of XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The amount of the loan was for {$400000.00}. At an interest rate of 7.875 %. 
Sometime in XXXX we received notice to pay XXXX of which payments were made Sometime in XXXX we received notice to pay XXXX XXXX XXXX of which payments were made. 
Sometime in XXXX we received notice to pay Select Portfolio located in Utah of which payments were made. 
Complainant has never paid XXXX XXXX or had any contact with said bank until the foreclosure proceeding. 
XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX law XXXX located in XXXX XXXX filed an Order to Docket to foreclose on our home. 

DOCUMENT # 1 Discloses the notice to the court of the Order to Docket, with the purported required documentation attached. It also contain an Affidavit of notice to foreclose. Said affidavit contain statements, in part that the documents enclosed and sent by Select Portfolio are true and accurate copies of the originals. Also it discloses a Deed of Trust Affidavit that attest to the Deed of Trust being a true and accurate copy. 

DOCUMENT # 2 Discloses a purported Assignment of Deed of Trust that suggest that XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX assigned the Deed of Trust to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX located in XXXX Va. 
The agency should note that the document is actually not signed. 
Research of XXXX XXXX disclosed that the signature is fraudulent as well as the notary clause at the bottom of the page being omitted. 
The agency should also note that the Date Available in the left hand margin discloses a date of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and was printed XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Said date in the margin and the date of filing which discloses XXXX/XXXX/XXXX does not correspond as a normal practice of the recorder of deeds. 

The agency should also note that this document after a research was not found within the land records. 

Further the loan number on all of the assignments does not correspond with the loan number from argent on the deed of trust and the note. The loan number on the copy of the Assignments of Deed of Trust is the same account number assigned by XXXX and XXXX. 


DOCUMENT # 3 Discloses an Assignment of Deed of Trust from XXXX to XXXX XXXX. The date of the purported transfer was XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. The agency should note the space above the title on the document and the open space at the bottom of the document under the notary seal. 

DOCUMENT # 4 Discloses a copy of the same Assignment of Deed of Trust obtained from the recorder of deeds as Document # 3. However Document # 4 discloses a loan number at the top of the page and a barcode that was omitted from document # 3. Also it discloses that said document should be returned to XXXX XXXX XXXX as well as its initials coupled with XXXX and a barcode. 

DOCUMENT # 5 Discloses a copy of the Deed of trust obtained by the complainant on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. This is evident by said date contained in the left margin of said document. The agency should note the number XXXX appears on every page of the document. 

DOCUMENT # 6 Discloses a copy of the Deed of Trust contained in the Order to Docket. The agency should note that the numbers have been omitted on every page as well as a portion of the initials of the signatories. 

DOCUMENT # 7 Discloses an affidavit of the ownership of the note. It states XXXX XXXX to be the holder of the note. What it does not state or disclose is the chain of title of said note. Further the note that it refers to in said affidavit is the original note executed by XXXX. Commercial Law 3-203 cmt.2 discloses that a person not identified in a note who is seeking to enforce it as its owner or holder must prove the transfer by which he acquired the note. Said affidavit does not disclose how it obtained the note through transfer. 

DOCUMENT # 8 Discloses the notice of impending foreclosure from XXXX XXXX which has merged with XXXX XXXX XXXX the signatory of the Order to Docket. 

I have also included for your appraisal the original note and a copy of the note included in the order to Docket.  Also find enclosed documents evidencing the relationships with XXXX, XXXX and Select Port Folio. 

Senario : Research indicate that XXXX entered into a settlement agreement regarding illegal lending and predatory lending practice involving the prime mortgage market. Further in XXXX XXXX went out of business. 

XXXX followed by XXXX purportedly obtained the note and collected upon it. XXXX after merger or purchase of XXXX also entered into settlement agreements with various states and federal agencies concerning the same issues that plagued XXXX. 

XXXX agreed to a series of actions as part of the settlement. XXXX entered into an agreement with Select Portfolio to service the prime mortgages before reduce exposure and detection of non compliance of the  agreement. 

Upon default of the loan, Select Portfolio task was to provide the Attorneys with the required documentation for foreclosure. Select Portfolio in this matter needed to establish that XXXX had transferred the note and deed of trust to XXXX before becoming defunct. Hence the purpose of DOCUMENT # 2 was to attempt to establish an assignment to XXXX with XXXX ultimately assigning/transferring the rights or standing to XXXX XXXX. 

The purpose for omitting the loan numbers and identifying indicators were to eliminate detection for all the aforementioned parties with legal exposure and non compliance with the entered into settlement agreements. 

Noticeably missing is assignments to XXXX and XXXX. Therefore XXXX, XXXX and Select Portfolio illegally collected monies from the complainants since the note was never transferred to them. The fraudulent assignment evidence the criminality. If the documents were proper a clear path of assignments would have been included in the Order to Docket. 

As a result of the legal entanglements by XXXX and XXXX, there was a need for a third party which was fulfilled by XXXX XXXX. 

As the affidavit disclose, Select Port Folio was a active participant in this scheme from the onset. Therefore a request is made to investigate Select PortfoliXXXX in conjunction with all the aforementioned for financial crimes.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation