Consumer complaint received 2015-05-16
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: TX
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: Home equity loan or line of credit
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint:
I have submitted several complaints and also requested many Qualified Written requests.  My QWR ALWAYS request that the company provided Certification that the signatures on the Assignment and Transfer Document be provided by a bank officer that has the authority to do so.  Providing copies of documents that are robo signed do NOT solve the issue.  In addition, I have repeatedly requested that I be provided all accounting document, notes, charges, fees records going back to the beginning of the original loan.  They, along with the previous servicer say they do not have that information.  If they transferred the loan then they should have that information.  I cannot review the accounting and charges if I do not have all the information.  This loan was included in the Foreclosure Fraud program by application - I cited that the loan was robo signed to XXXX from XXXX (XXXX acting on behalf of XXXX!!!!) and illegal foreclosure action.  They sent me a check for that application in the program.  I had also filed a quiet title action about the same time in District Court challenging their legal ownership of the loan.  XXXX did not respond to that action within the XXXX day time frame allowed by the Court.  They did, however, come in after that timeframe and try to prevent the judgement action - They also began sending a series of notifications out to me concerning qualification in the National Mortgage Settlement Act.  However, even tho we had a court action ongoing and they were sending me letters to contact about settlement under the Department of Justice National Mortgage Settlement Act, they had already transferred the loan in XX/XX/XXXX to SPS.  They did not send notification out that they were GOING to transfer the loan until XX/XX/XXXX and they now say that the transfer took place in XX/XX/XXXX.   XXXX shows that the transfer to SPS NEVER took place and also shows that the loan is inactive (that would also correspond with the Fraud foreclosure action to remove the loan from foreclosure and rescind those actions).  
Research shows that the signature on the assignment and transfer document by XXXX which supposedly transfer the loan to SPS does not match the signatures as represented in other court actions wherein she and XXXX (notary) signatures are robo signed.   
Discussions with XXXX revealed recently that the original transfer of this loan to SPS ASSIGNED the loan to XXXX - and that was done so because she was specially assigned loans that would be offered modifications under the DOJ National Mortgage Settlement Act program.  XXXX also affirmed that the program was not, in fact ever offered to me and that the normal reaching out and effort to extent application to the appropriate tagged loans had not been followed.   She could not offer a reason why and when querried about why they had denied my repeated querries about being afforded the program she told me she would send me all representative notes and communications so I would have then.  Those notes never were furnished. When I called back to check on the status of such I was told that I could not obtain that information but could only get records going back to XX/XX/2014....which totally missed the timeframe in question.
The actions of SPS have impacted me in that I totally missed the timeline available to apply for modification under the National Mortgage Settlement Act.  All my effort to do so was denied and they did not follow guidelines established to ensure I was afforded that opportunity.  Although I am confident that there is fraud and deception in the assignment of this loan to both XXXX and SPS, I am attempting to settle this mess by requesting that I be afforded a guaranteed modification on the loan to the maximum standards that would have been allowed me under the DOJ modification program.

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