Consumer complaint received 2017-07-24
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: MD
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Account status incorrect

Complaint:
Dear Sir or Madam, This is a follow up to a previous complaint that I filed with the CFPB on or around XX/XX/XXXX regarding my mortgage loans with Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( SPS ). SPS responded to my complaint on or around XX/XX/XXXX. SPS ' response mischaracterized part of my complaint and did not address certain other parts of my complaint. Below is bullet-point summary of my complaint followed by a more detailed background and explanation of the complaint. Summary -My first and second position mortgage loans on my home were sold to SPS several years  ago. I wanted to restructure my loan but was not in default of the loans. SPS unfairly declined to consider my HAMP loan modification application for my second position loan, although I applied for HAMP loan modification for both loans simultaneously.. -SPS then considered me for a loan modification through one of its own programs. I WAS NOT IN DEFAULT AT THE TIME AND WAS CURRENT ON BOTH LOANS. As mentioned before, I just wanted to restructure the loans. SPS representatives misled me to believe that by paying the loan modification trial payments on time, I would remain in current status on both loans. For my second position loan, the trial period began XX/XX/XXXX. Before I entered the trial, I spoke to an SPS representative ON A RECORDED CALL, and I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE REPRESENTATIVE WHETHER I WOULD REMAIN CURRENT ON MY CURRENT LOAN IF I MADE THE TRIAL PAYMENTS IN A TIMELY MANNER. THE REPRESENTATIVE SAID I WOULD INDEED REMAIN CURRENT ON THE CURRENT LOAN. Further, the representative said that I could make the first trial payment with the representative, and I would keep me current through XXXX. However, I was then reported 30 and then 60 days late on my credit that loan. Essentially the same thing happened with my first position loan, for which the trial period commenced on XX/XX/XXXX ( I made the first trial payment in XX/XX/XXXX and was told that I would remain current on my original loan through XXXX ). Further, MORTGAGE STATEMENTS SPS SENT TO ME DURING THE TRIAL PERIODS FOR BOTH LOANS STATE : " Our records indicate that you have entered into a Trial Modification Plan. This plan temporarily supersedes your original loan payment arrangements... Prior to your agreement your contractual monthly payment was {$2200.00}, however, please note that you are required to remit payments in the amounts and o the dates set forth in your Forbearance / Trial Plan Agreement. '' ( See the attached mortgage statement as an example ). SPS thereby clearly represented that each trial plan " supersedes [ my ] original loan payment arrangements, '' which was consistent with the representations that its representatives made to me prior to my entering the trial plans. I discovered I was reported late after making the first trial payments on both loans. I called SPS and the SPS representative said that he/she would initiate the process of removing those late payment marks. THEREAFTER, I PAID THE FULL ORIGINAL MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT ( NOT THE LOWER TRIAL PAYMENT ) THE REMAINDER OF THE TRIAL PERIOD FOR EACH LOAN, BUT WAS REPORTED LATE ON SOME OF THOSE PAYMENTS. Enclosed with this complaint are payment histories for both loans showing that I consistently made the full original monthly loan payments until the first trial payment on each loan, and then consistently made the full original monthly payments after those first trial payments. -As CFPB knows, SPS is responsible for representations its employees, agents, and representatives make on SPS ' behalf. SPS is responsible for the statements by its representatives that I would remain current on my loans during the trial plans as long as I made the trial payments in a timely manner. SPS is also responsible for the clear statements that each trial plan " supersedes [ my ] current original loan payment arrangements. '' And as mentioned, ( i ) I was current on both loans before I entered the trial plans ; ( ii ) SPS reported me to the credit bureaus as being late on loan payments after I made the first trial payments ; ( iii ) an SPS rep said that those late marks would be removed ; ( iv ) I made the full original monthly payments the remainder of the trial period ; and ( v ) SPS nonetheless reported me late on those latter payments. -After the trial periods, I received notices that SPS approved me for loan modifications. But the modified payment plan for the second position loan -- which was under an SPS loan modification program as opposed to the federal HAMP -- would result in me paying significantly more over the duration of the second position loan than under the current structure of that loan. While the interest rate for that loan would be lowered by two percentage points, the modification plan would add 480 months ( 40 years ) to my loan term, even though I am 12 years into my current loan term. In SPS ' response to my original complaint filed with the CFPB, SPS mischaracterized this aspect of my complaint by indicating that I was asserting that the monthly payment amount would be more under the loan modification as compared to the current loan terms. My complaint is that the total amount that would be paid over the course of the modified loan would be exorbitantly higher ( well-night usurious ) than the total amount paid under the current loan structure. -There are numerous online consumer complaints about SPS that are similar to mine, and many consumers have stated that SPS is trying to drive consumers into default and loan modifications that result in significantly higher total payments by consumers over the course of the loan. -SPSs is engaging in deceptive and unfair acts and practices in violation of the Dodd-Frank Act, and SPS is in violation of the Truth in Lending Act. Detailed Background : I have first and second position mortgage loans on my home that were sold to SPS several years ago. In XX/XX/XXXX, I applied for a loan modification under the federal HAMP. I was not in default on either loan ( see the enclosed bank statements showing my consistent payments to SPS ), but simply wanted to restructure my loan for more affordable payments. In early XX/XX/XXXX, I received a notice from SPS claiming that my application was incomplete for a bogus reason ; specifically, it was either that I needed to provide home owners association fee information or the property was ineligible because its a rental ( I do not pay HOA fees, the property is not a rental property, and nothing on my application indicated either ). I contacted SPS to explain and to ask the basis for determining that I needed to provide HOA info or that my property was a rental. I was given a no valid reason. But by then, the federal HAMP had expired. I believe SPS intentionally delayed my application. I called the federal HAMP line to complain, and after a few days a representative reached out to SPS by phone while I was on the phone with the federal HAMP representative. We spoke with an SPS representative, who said that SPS has comparable loan modification programs and that SPS would consider me for those. Relying on that statement, I decided not to proceed with a complaint and to proceed with being considered for SPSs loan modification programs. Ultimately, SPS considered me for a HAMP loan modification for the first position loan, but not for the second position loan, although my loan modification applications for both loans were virtually identical and filed simultaneously. SPS has no valid basis for not considering my second position loan for modification under HAMP. In XX/XX/XXXX, SPS sent a notice stating that I had been approved for a trial payment period on my second position loan starting XX/XX/XXXX, and that if I make all trial payments in a timely manner, my account would remain in current status and SPS would then propose a loan modification. In XX/XX/XXXX, I accepted the trial payment terms and made the first payment, and was told that the payment would go towards the XX/XX/XXXX payment. In XX/XX/XXXX, SPS sent a notice of approval for a trial payment plan on my first position loan, to start on XX/XX/XXXX. As with my second position loan, I was told that my account would remain in current status as long as I made the trial payments in a time manner. I accepted the trial payment plan and made the first trial payment. At some point in XXXX, I noticed that my both my first position loan was reported as 30 days late to the credit bureaus. I contacted SPS, and eventually a representative stated that he/she would open an internal inquiry / request to remove the derogatory reports from my credit profile. FROM THEM ON, I MADE THE FULL, ORIGINAL ( PRE-TRIAL ) MONTHLY PAYMENT AMOUNTS ON BOTH LOANS TO BE SAFE. However, SPS subsequently reported me as 60 days late for some of those payments on both loans, although I consistently paid the full original monthly amounts due. In addition, after the trial periods, SPS sent notices that I was approved for loan modification programs. However, each loan modification would result in my paying significantly higher total amount over the course of the modified loans than under the current loan terms. Ive looked online at consumer complaints about SPS, and there are numerous complaints that consumers encountered similar deceptive and unfair acts and practices by SPS. As many other consumers have complained, I believe that SPS is deliberately trying to drive consumers into default and loan modifications that result in higher total costs over the course of the loan. XXXX I kindly request that the CFPB inquiry into SPSs practices not only with respect to my mortgage loans, but also SPSs practices with respect to loan modifications in general. I greatly appreciate your consideration of my complaint and request. Best regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX

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