Consumer complaint received 2015-08-07
Company: Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
XXXX XXXX was in foreclosure with a high 10 percent interest on her XXXX mortgage. There was no sale date on the home XX/XX/2015. No one from her servicer contacted her with regards to seeking assistance with the loan to retain the property. XXXX XXXX sent in a modification over two weeks before her sale date which was plenty of time for a review to start per SLS employees. On XX/XX/2015 the single point of contact XXXX XXXX stated that she has the modification package and reviewed the information while on the phone. ( Calls are recorded, this conversation took place. ) XXXX stated the file is being reviewed. She stated that the contributor section needed to be filled out completely on the RMA form. On XX/XX/2015 XXXX said there was no new update on the account. On XX/XX/2015 Supervisor XXXX ID XXXX came to the phone. Not only was XXXX rude, she had bad customer service. XXXX stated that per federal law and according to the consumer financial protection bureau, they were not reviewing the file for assistance. We asked if the calls are being recorded and she said yes. She again stated that they will not review the file for assistance because the sale date is less than 37 days from the date they received the request, therefore they will not review the file nor postpone the sale date. This complaint is with regards to how SLS is conducting business. Supervisor XXXX ID XXXX and underwriting are quoting XXXX " guidelines. '' However, per the foreclosure attorney/trustee The Mortgage Law Firm employee XXXX XXXX, they were authorized to move forward with the sale on XX/XX/2015, which is less than 37 days ' time to even get the package in. California has different guidelines in general. And in this case, SLS is in clear violation of these laws and is misinterpreting " Federal Law. '' It is apparent that SLS is not only in clear violation pertaining to federal guidelines, but they are discriminating against XXXX XXXX based on her age, sex, marital status, race. There are numerous reason why SLS behavior Is unacceptable. The number of times that SLS was contacted regarding status of the file should extinguish any opportunity to excuse SLS 's behavior. Rude employees only validate the issue of discrimination. There is no tangible reason for SLS to have treated the homeowner and file in this manner. SLS is refusing to consider XXXX XXXX request for assistance negating any opportunity for her to save her home. The events described above are just a sample of the practices that are taking place at SLS. SLS appears to be more interested in foreclosing on the home and selling it at auction to make a profit. It appears that SLS lack of participation in a meaningful modification review of the file indicates a preference to profit directly from XXXX XXXX 's hardship. At this time we are demanding that SLS provide XXXX XXXX with a work out solution or she will assert her legal rights and name both SLS and The Mortgage Law Firm as defendants in a civil complaint.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation