Consumer complaint received 2019-09-17
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: CA
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Sub-issue: Investigation took more than 30 days

Complaint:
I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX/XXXX XXXX XXXX after waiting almost 60 business days and still not receiving a response to my Error Resolution Letter. XXXX XXXX stated he would have a supervisor contact me within 24 hours to discuss the issues. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call from XXXX XXXX ( not a supervisor, ) who is in the Ombudsman Dispute Department, in the Executive Office at Select Portfolio Servicing, asking about my issues. 
Before I had a chance to talk I was reprimanded for calling their investor, XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. I was told all communication must go through SPS. I explained to the representative, I had made many attempts to work with SPS, and even called the Consumer Ombudsman department twice, whos representatives discounted the call twice. Either these employees are not trained to answer my specific questions, or just plain rude. 

I almost did not answer XXXX call because the was no caller ID naming SPS, and because I get so many Scam calls, I usually do not answer the phone for unanimous callers. Today I received another call from XXXX, this time letting me know SPS is working on my Error Letter. 
On XX/XX/XXXX ( attached ) SPS sent a letter, which I received on Monday the XXXX, answering my error resolution letter. XXXX call did not make sense until she said the reason for her call was new information was received, and she was calling to state it was being reviewed in the Dispute Department. When I asked, " Where did the information come from ''? She stated it was the information I just sent in. Again, I am working with someone who did not know what they were talking about. After a few more questions I realized, the " new '' information she spoke of was the complaint I had filed with the CFPB # XXXX. 

I explained, this is the same information I sent to SPS, and waited 2 months for a response, when per the CFPB 30 business days is the allowed period to respond, + a 15-day extension if within the 30 days notice is sent with a valid reason for the extension. Instead, I was sent a notice stating SPS needed a 30-day extension, ( even though CFPB states no more than 15 days, ) it was outside the 30 day dispute period, and without a valid reason. XXXX replied she is required to call when a dispute is filed. I asked her about the credit report mistakes discussed in our previous call on XX/XX/XXXX, and all she could say is we are working on it. I mentioned it took 2 months to reply to my first dispute and asked how long would it take to respond to the Credit Report Disputes, and she said she didn't know. Based on this discussion, and my desire to have my credit report corrected, I plan to file another complaint with the CFPB for the credit issues, and the carelessly put together response from SPS to my " Error resolution letter. 

Please read the response SPS subsequently made on XXXX, ( attached, ) and come to your own conclusion, why would a one-page response take 2 months to accomplish. It really didn't address any of my concerns, and what is really humorous is the letter is filled with misconstrued facts and conclusions. 

The correspondence included an " Applied Funds Table, '' along with pages of XXXX payment history, ( which I already had. ) As I reviewed the payment history ( supplied by XXXX, ) it became clear, I had been supplied with an internal form, based on the " heading of each column. '' Such as " XXXX '' which was not defined for the average consumer to understand. By comparing the payment history supplied by SPS, to the actual history XXXX  XXXX XXXX supplied with my final Escrow Analysis, the abbreviation was for " Transaction Date. '' It is clear that the XXXX payment history SPS supplied, ( which neglected to include either the 13-page numbers for reference or an explanation as to why it was included, ) as it appears to have been thrown in as fluff. 

If the " Table '' and " Payment History '' matched it would make sense. Instead, it conflicted with the '' Applied Funds Table, '' which fail to show my last payment made to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, nor did it include the correct payment amount of {$1300.00}. Which by law, must be posted and disbursed as of the date of receipt, ( in this case XX/XX/XXXX, ) not XX/XX/XXXX.Additionally, the table includes an " Escrow Shortage '' payment of {$74.00} made on XX/XX/XXXX but fails to show the " Escrow Shortage '' payment of {$5.00}, or the waving of the late charge of {$48.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. In fact, if my " Error Letter '' had been read, it would be easy to see these mistakes clearly. How can a company come to an accurate conclusion without having or giving me information that is thoroughly reviewed and analyzed? I had the right to be explained why the table in the letter from SPS did not match the XXXX loan history and how you came to the conclusions in the table. I am still in limbo because nothing has been corrected. 

Paragraph two of the letter dated XXXX states, We are unable to comment on the escrow amounts collected by the prior servicer, as we collect the escrow information from the agencies after the loan was transferred to SPS. Why isn't AGENCIES explained? What agencies are you talking about? SPS has an obligation to be clear, and accurate. Why would I be supplied with SPS 's internal form of my payment history with XXXX, only to tell me you can't comment about it? Should you really have sent me this form at all? Did the so-called " Agencies '' make a mistake supplying it? Per 1024.38 38 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( ii ) -1 SPS must have " reasonable policies and procedures, '' and I have not seen this in attempts to work with this Servicer. 

Late Fee : One more Error made by SPS : For some reason, Ms. XXXX was under the impression that I questioned the late charge XX/XX/XXXX had added to my XXXX payment. I questioned the accounting, XX/XX/XXXXmistakenly charged a late fee and waved it the same day. My concern about this charge was, being accurately credited for this fee. The payment history showed It posted as a charge on XXXX, and it also showed a credit 4 times the same day, but my balance was not adjusted. SPS XX/XX/XXXX letter explains I was charged a late fee on XX/XX/XXXX, but fail to state that this amount was credited back the same day, ( all they had to do was look at the payment history under total late fees. ) This question remains unanswered, I still want to see that I was credited. If the payment is held in a suspense or unapplied funds account, this fact must be reflected on future periodic statements, in accordance with 1026.41 ( d ) ( 3 ). When sufficient funds accumulate to cover a periodic payment, as defined in 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( I ), they must be treated as a periodic payment received in accordance with 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( I ). By being treated as a periodic payment the payment must be posted on the date received. 

Phone Call : I requested to be contacted by phone to explain the results of your investigation, I did not say this request was in lei of sending a written response. The XX/XX/XXXX letter states : " We are unable to fulfill this request as it is our policy to respond by US Postal Service. '' One more blunder or failure to properly communicate what they mean. SPS " DID '' in fact call me, on XXXX and explained what was stated in the letter, ( hadn't yet been received ) and I was told what the conclusion was. The final paragraph of the letter states, " Should you have any further questions, please call Customer Service. '' This conflicts with the prior statement SPS made which began, " We are unable to fulfill this request. '' It concludes : " SPS has reviewed and responded to your inquiries, ( I unequivocally disagree with such a statement. ) Then continues to say, " We have provided all documentation relied upon to reach our determination, '' ( This explains and concurs, that there was little time spent investigating my concerns, ( even though it took 2 months to answer them. ) It is part of the reason there are so many mistakes, there was a lack of investigation by SPS. ) The letter continues to say : " If a document was not provided, it is because it is privileged or proprietary, '' ( such as in supplying an internal form, from XXXX. ) Isn't this statement in conflict with the prior one stating We have provided all documentation relied on? 

Servicer 's use a computerized loan management system. The system SPS uses should keep track of the borrowers account, and communications with the Servicer. What happened? Did the server at SPS go down while this case was investigated? One of the main duties of a Servicer is to collect and process payments from the borrower, and have accurate accounting. When funds are applied improperly when the grace period is ignored, or there is a failure to credit funds to the principal balance, or escrow account there can be an artificial shortage, and SPS is in violation of the terms in the deed of trust. Please remember, I was told there would not be another Escrow Analysis completed for a year on XXXX XXXX, ( date of transfer, because XXXX had completed one a month and a half before the transfer. Yet, in XXXX I was sent a new Analysis by SPS, knowing Federal Laws only allows one completed per year, unless I request to have one completed. I was told there was a shortage of {$130.00}, which triggered my letter of dispute. 

THERE WAS NO PART OF THIS LETTER THAT HAD CREDIBILITY! It is frightening to know that I am stuck with this Servicer until I either sell my home or refinance. 

Escrow Closure : My request to close Escrow, and SPS acknowledgment of closure on XX/XX/XXXX, was one more string of errors, ( see attached Escrow Payment change notice XXXX, Escrow Closure Request form, SPS Acknowledgement XXXX, and Escrow Closing Notice/Notification Escrow Closing XXXX. ) The form was supplied by SPS and clearly shows I no longer wanted " both '' my Property Taxes and Insurance Impounded. I was sent a letter Acknowledging my escrow would close on XXXX if I didn't call and cancel this request. I called on XX/XX/XXXX to verify my escrow was closed and was told a check was sent for the balance of my Taxes, but the Insurance was still opened. I asked why and was told the Escrow Department would be contacted, and I would get a call within 3 days with an answer. How do you botch up something so simple, and with your own forms? 

I asked to speak with the escrow department and was told, I could only speak to Customer Service, who clearly did not understand the makings of an Escrow Account. I had never heard of a company that did not let you speak to this department. It is no wonder there are so many mistakes made. I asked to have the insurance check sent XXXX overnight since this was an error made by SPS, and my insurance was coming due within a few weeks. Plus my form clearly stated it was not longer SPS 's responsibility to pay taxes or insurance, ( even though they still held the insurance balance of my escrow account. ) I was told they would " try '' to request the check and overnight it. I replied that is not good enough. 

Two days later, I received a call from SPS stating a check was request was made that day, and he would internally, e-mail my request to have my check overnighted. One week later I received the check regular mail. SPS repeatedly has made mistakes, and taken shortcuts at every stage of the mortgage servicing process, costing me additional fees along the way. When an error was made in the servicing of my mortgage, SPS must either correct the error I identified, called " notice of error '', or investigate the alleged error. SPS has routinely failed to properly acknowledge and investigate my complaints, or make necessary corrections. 

This is probably a result of loading inaccurate and incomplete information into its servicing system, or even when their data is accurate, SPS still generated errors, because of their system failures and deficient programming. 

Inaccurate Credit Reporting : XXXX : The results of my dispute from my report dated XX/XX/XXXX arrived on XX/XX/XXXX ( see attached ) as certified accurate and unchanged. This is a gross misstatement and shows that SPS either has untrained employees is too busy to verify and correct the information or is a company who skips through federal compliance regulations hoping not to get caught in an audit by the CFPB. 

Looking at the attachment, " XXXX Dispute with SPS '' is noticeably & erroneous based on a status date of XX/XX/XXXX : it fails to show loan transferred/sold, a recent payment made of {$2600.00}, ( also shown in error on the attached SPS Account summary, ) which is the total of the individual payments I made for XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$1300.00} the monthly payment, also shown in error on my report is shown as {$1300.00}, which was the payment I made in XXXX because of SPS 's inaccurate Escrow Analysis, which has disputed as of XX/XX/XXXX, ( see attachment, SPS Error Letter. ) The term is 40 years, with 32 years remaining, not 46 years. There is no 46-year term for mortgages. 

Finally, SPS felt a need to add, ( in error ) a comment : " Loan Modified under a Federal Government Plan. '' This is a negative reporting remark, which can not be made after 7 years, ( it has been almost 10 years, ) the Modification completed by XXXX, ( see attachments XXXX  XXXX Credit Report change, & XXXX XXXX Mod ) was disputed & removed from all credit reports in XXXX, and can not be added back. 

XXXX  : On XX/XX/XXXX, I received the results of my dispute against XXXX   XXXX XXXX & SPS ( see attachment, ). XXXX updated their information to now show the loan closed & transferred with the date of the last payment. 
XXXX : SPS, on the other hand, created the illusion I had two mortgages instead of one, & one of them was a new mortgage, ( dropping my credit scores. ) Account information '' it also needs many of the same corrections for based on the " Date of last activity '' shown as XX/XX/XXXX, Loan Balance must be reduced to match " Date of last Activity, '' but continues to state the original balance on transfer of my loan XX/XX/XXXX, " Actual Payment, '' {$2600.00}, should match " Scheduled Payment. '' The " Months Reviewed '' state 2 payments reported it is should state 3 were reviewed, the monthly payment was updated but still wrong, since the status date remains unchanged at XX/XX/XXXX, the updated payment is based on my new payment as of XXXX, which no longer has an escrow account. 

Under " Historical Account information '' the months of XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX must be completed to show payment in the amount of {$1300.00} and XXXXXXXX XXXX payment must be corrected to show this payment as well. By failing to report the XXXX & XXXX payment amounts, that the payments made were " Regular Payments '', not " Trial Payments '' ( under a trial period for a loan modification, by failing to report the loan as transferred/sold, ( needs to be added, ) but most importantly by reporting a comment the " Loan Modified under a Federal Government Plan, '' ( MUST remove outdated negative information. ) it has caused my credit score to drop 120 points. All of these mistakes contributed to lowering my overall credit score. 

XXXX XXXX : Not only is XXXX XXXX reporting the same errors as XXXX, but instead of showing a " Historical Account information '' XXXX XXXX XXXX format places a table under the " Remarks '' " Loan Modified under a Federal Government Plan. '' that " RATES '' the payments for XXXX and XXXX as " X '' which is defined as " Unknown, '' once again indicating a " Trial Payment '' under a Modification. Instead, it should have shown as " OK '' under their Rating Key method. This is unreasonable, will not be tolerated misleading, uncalled for, and must be changed immediately. 

Concerning the above comments, I would like to add, I was not notified by SPS that they were reporting " any '' information to the credit bureau 's, much less " negative reporting '' concerning the type of mortgage I had. To reiterate ; when a loan is transferred there is a 60 day grace period before any credit reporting may be made. 

When an Error Resolution Letter such as the one SPS received on XX/XX/XXXX, is received concerning mortgage payments, ( and SPS had not even received all the data from BAC, ) SPS may not report during the resolution period, which is usually another 60 days. In my case, during the period discussed, my payment changed with SPS 3 times, and SPS just sent another notice dated XXXX, received XX/XX/XXXX. Stating they are again reviewing my concerns, yet SPS choose to ignore the State and Federal law and incorrectly began reporting on XXXX. Additionally, outdated information/negative reporting over 7 years old must not be reported. 

Under the FCRA ( Fair Credit Reporting Act ) prohibits false credit reporting of any type. A creditor must not supply information to a CRA that it knows ( or should know ) is inaccurate. That includes : misstating the balance due or reporting late payments when you paid timely. 

Failing to Follow Debt Dispute Procedures When you submit a written dispute about the accuracy of an item on your report, credit bureaus and your Servicer ( SPS ) must take certain actions in response. Their duties include conducting a reasonable investigation of your dispute, correcting any inaccurate information, or even removing the disputed debt from your credit report. There are a number of ways they can fall short of their duties. 

Some common violations by a CRA include failing to : Notify a creditor that you dispute the debt that it has reported, conduct a reasonable investigation of your dispute, or correct or delete any inaccurate, incomplete or unverifiable information within 30 days of the receiving notice of your dispute, refrain from continuing to submit information that it knows ( or should know ) is incorrect, conduct an internal investigation of your dispute within 30 days ( or 45 days if you supply additional information during the investigation. ) When a private investor such as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX owns the loan, the market drives the servicing fee. Generally, the fee depends on the underlying credit quality of the borrower. Servicing a loan with a higher quality credit rating brings in fewer fees because servicing costs are lower. Servicing a loan that has lower credit quality generates a higher fee because borrowers tend to default on this type of loan, which makes them more labor-intensive to service. How many borrowers have SPS supplied inaccurate information, in an effort to drive their fees up to and cost the investor thousands of dollars, by misleading them? 

Because I have no say over who services my mortgage, I must depend on the CFPB to remain vigilant to ensure I get fair treatment. '' I can only hope the CFPB uncovers substantial evidence that SPS has engaged in significant and systemic misconduct, at nearly every stage of the mortgage servicing process. 
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, such as those described above. The CFPBs mortgage servicing rules require that servicer 's promptly credit payments and correct errors on request. 

I hope you take these remarks seriously by discussing these errors with SPS and making sure the corrections are made immediately. The information on my credit report should be prioritized, and when completed the FCRA states I am to be notified within 5 days. I would be glad to discuss anything you feel is not clear.

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