Consumer complaint received 2022-05-12
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: CA
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
RE : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX Select Portfolio Servicing - SPS Loan Number XXXX XXXX XXXX Select Portfolio Servicing is engaging in Mortgage Service Abuse, Unfair Business Practices, BREACH OF IMPLIED DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING, VIOLATION OF XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX ; Dealing in Bad Faith with deceptive and misleading practices. 
SPS engaging in Mortgage Service Abuse, Unfair Business Practices, Dealing in Bad Faith with deceptive and misleading practices causing a great deal of senseless stress and mental anguish by their action by feigning a Loan Modification and engaging in attempted equity thief by dragging their feet designed to increased cost and fees and unjust enrichment. 
SPS acted in Bad Faith by knowingly and purposely created a repayment plan the XXXX XXXX could meet. 

In XX/XX/2020 the homeowner contacted SPS to inquire for mortgage assistance and was told by an SPS representative that he would be placed in a 90 day no play plan due to Covid- 19 and that at the end of the plan the loan would be adjusted /modified by the recommendation of SPS. In one conversation with an SPS the callus representative the representative stated you dont own this house ; it is the Bank property. Causing the homeowner severe stress necessitating the XXXX session of XXXX  health homeowner to XXXX counseling sessions. 

In XX/XX/2020 the homeowner attempted to resume the regular monthly PITI payment of {$2700.00}. However, the payment was rejected by SPS presentative saying that the payment needs to be made by mail in check or money order only, causing additional fees and delinquencies. Their Bad Faith behavior tactics of stalling delaying, deflection and denying thereby not allowing for the homeowner to receive a fair and just loan modification review. 
Next, the Proprietary Trial was denied because Insufficient Monthly Payment Reduction we could not reduce your principal and interest payment. However, you provide any NPV inputs, showing what the existing principal and interest payment is, what interest rate is, what principal and interest ( PITI ) payment is {$1900.00} vs the proposed {$2000.00} PITI payment, a mire difference of {$94.00}. We demand that SPS provide the calculation for income use to compute the {$7400.00} used by SPS as the homeowners income is an average of {$8500.00} a month, additionally request a review for any other programs as well as Proprietary Trial Modification. 
Upon appeal SPS sent correspondence dated XXXX XXXX XXXX Repayment Plan as follows : Total to Reinstate {$61.00}, XXXX Regular Pay Due During Plan {$32000.00} = 12 payments of {$2700.00} Total Repayment Plan Amount {$94000.00} Plan Payments 12 12 monthly payments of {$5400.00} Plus, the regular monthly payment of {$2700.00} Total monthly pay of {$8100.00} While in the attached the monthly income stated in SPS correspondence in response to CFPB Complaint # XXXX dated XXXX XXXX shows a monthly income of {$7400.00}. That {$750.00} more that his total monthly income. 

SPS acted in Bad Faith by knowingly and purposely created a repayment plan the XXXX XXXX could meet.

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