Consumer complaint received 2017-07-29
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: NJ
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
I have already submitted a complaint to the CFPB ( XXXX ). After doing so, SPS decided onXX/XX/XXXX to outright deny the offer they 've had for 6 months instead of requesting the correct adjustments. They responded to my inquiry on XX/XX/XXXX.
All of the information placed on the HUD was entered as a result of misinformation given by SPS. I am not only dissatisfied with the decision to deny the offer, but I feel that this entire process has been dishonest. At this point, I am requesting additional assistance with the process as I have no trust for the company I am involuntarily dealing with ( XXXX turned my loan over to SPS ). SPS employees have lied and provided incorrect information for months from the time they became the servicer of the loan. Phone records will indicate that they have not provided the correct information and would like access to the review of those records. Do I need to obtain a lawyer in order to have those records reviewed?
The letter attached to the CFPB inquiry response further indicates dishonesty on behalf of SPS. The letter indicates that SPS spoke with me with regards to my inquiry - I never mentioned the CFPB inquiry to any SPS employee. I called SPS on XX/XX/XXXX for an update on my account and was informed at that time that the offer was denied. I then requested to speak with a manager. I was transferred to XXXX XXXX ( for over 90 minutes ) who indicated that the offer was not denied but the HUD needed to be corrected. The information is conflicting. The letter explains changes that need to be made on the current offer, but indicates that the offer is denied and that I can submit another offer. This is unclear. Is the current offer still on the table as long as the changes are made?
SPS has indicated the following : 1. Remove {$6000.00} seller 's concession - it has been there since the original offer was submitted and was never mentioned in any of the document corrections.
2. Line XXXX - SPS agents indicated on more than one occasion that {$8500.00} was the amount to place on that line. Misinformation.
3. Reduce title fees - why was that never mentioned before? It 's not a problem for the attorney to reduce them - but the fees have been there for several versions of the HUD, including those that were " approved '' except for one outstanding change.
Further, after six months ( and my CFPB inquiry was submitted ), on XXXX/XXXX/17 an SPS manager indicated that this particular " investor '' does not offer relocation assistance and that someone there should have told me that. Instead, various SPS agents had previously instructed me to enter an amount ( {$10000.00} ), then reduce ( to {$5600.00} ), then raise ( to {$10000.00} ), then reduce ( to {$0.00} ) the amount for relocation assistance. My attorney did n't initially include any amount until first directed to do so by SPS. At this point, this update seems retaliatory as it came after the complaint to CFPB was filed.
The letter from the Ombudsman does not address my concerns about process and honesty. The " I 'm sorry you 're not satisfied with our service '' letter indicates how much control this bank has over its customers. The letter reduces my concerns to the length of time this process has taken which is a trivial misrepresentation of my initial inquiry. There is not just a denial, but a gross ( and potentially illegal ) injustice at play. Short sales are stressful, fine - but the process should be honest, legal, and fair every step of the way. This one has not been. The retaliatory decision to reject the offer is indicative of that.
It should also be noted that SPS creatively ran down the clock when the loan was transferred to them last fall. The result of this : I had to submit a new application after XX/XX/XXXX, the sunset date of the HAMP program. XXXX had already provided an approval to do a short sale and yet, SPS took untilXX/XX/XXXX to provide the same approval. They lied and said I did not allow an appraiser into my home and closed my original application with XXXX. Again, I would be happy to review phone records to prove the absolute dishonesty of their claims.
Once again, SPS has run down the clock. This decision comes with just 30 days to submit an offer, go through an unreasonable process and sell the property. There is no way this can by done by XX/XX/XXXX, based on SPS ' performance thus far. While I certainly intend to try get an approval and close in just 30 days, I am skeptical about the servicer handling a new or revised offer with the integrity, efficiency, or expedience that will be needed to do so.
CFPB, consumers like me need help. Please help.

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