Consumer complaint received 2020-01-29
Product: Mortgage — Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)
Issue: Trouble during payment process — 
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC. (TX)

We took out a Texas Home Equity Adjustable Rate Loan in XX/XX/XXXXfor {$560000.00} ( which was 60 % of the total worth of our home which we bought in 1989 for  {$160000.00} ) with XXXX XXXX XXXX  at a high interest rate ( 10.25 % ) to make payments on what we owed IRS, to pay our large property taxes owed, and to spend the rest on small home improvements. Very quickly we found our regular monthly payments were being applied to late fees before interest and principal first as is required on page 4 of the Texas Home Equity Instrument. 
When I asked for a payoff number from XXXX  XXXX XXXX  ( which had bought XXXX  XXXX XXXX ) since we had arrangements to get loans then at fixed rates from other lenders for less than 7 %, XXXX refused to give us the payoff amount. By XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX was not crediting our payments until they were late then paying late fees before principal and interest repeatedly. 
IRS agent XXXX XXXX suggested that we file ChXXXX in XX/XX/XXXXso we could dismiss our old IRS debt per her supervisor. Once we were in Ch. XXXX, XXXX attorney XXXX XXXX claimed we were behind in our mortgage payments ( we were not ) and asked the Ch XXXX Judge to dismiss our Ch XXXX protection. 
Instead of bundling what we owed to XXXX  XXXX and spreading the payments over 60 months as is typical in ChXXXX protection, XXXX   XXXX asked for the monthly payments be caught up in the next 3 months split in 6 payments by cashier check mailed to a Florida XXXX XXXX . I was refused by local XXXX  XXXX XXXX in XXXX to make cash payments instead and my payments that were mailed on time failed to credited to accepted on time. When we failed to be on time 3 times, the Ch XXXX Judge agreed to dismiss our Ch XXXX and XXXX XXXX returned all late payments to us in XX/XX/XXXX because we were going to be foreclosed on shortly.Our IRS debt remained intact as well. 
Our credit was now ruined. 
We were not foreclosed on until XX/XX/XXXX and that's when we sought Ch. XXXX to protect our home. Again Trustee payments to XXXX  XXXX were not made to principal and interest. In XX/XX/XXXX, I notified Attorney XXXX XXXX by certified mail ( which he/she signed for ), as a representative of XXXX  XXXX, that all payments are required to be paid on principal and interest before late fees. As per page 6 of the Texas Home Equity Instrument, if the payments are correctly applied in a reasonable amount of time ( later defined as 60 days ) to principal and interest first and late fees last, the result is to void the agreement between the Lender and the Borrower and the loan becomes void. 
This is the part of the of my Texas Home Equity Loan that the CFPB has never understood and should have voided my loan many years ago. CFPB did provide the accounting records for the years when other banks were in control of my loan, for example, XXXX XXXX with help from Senator XXXX XXXX XXXX Constituent Services Office. I wanted my loan voided as per the Texas Home Equity Instrument. 
As it is, I was evicted from my home on XX/XX/XXXX but I am the only one with the continuous accounting record that of this loan. I have run out of the funds to hire the legal power to fight XXXX XXXX  who now owns my loan as a part of a mortgage security which the DOJ in XX/XX/XXXX has already found guilty of committing mortgage fraud. 
I hope the US government can help me yet. 
Originally, I asked for help with the OCC because XXXX XXXX  said we would receive {$8500.00} if we moved out by XX/XX/XXXX and if we never sued XXXX XXXX  again. 
It was the latter statement that made us refuse to sign that statement because we refused to give up the right to sue XXXX XXXX  after so many years of having clear title to our home since XX/XX/XXXX, even if the Ch XXXX Judge claimed otherwise. The Texas Home Equity Instrument passed as a constitutional amendment in Texas in 1998 by a statewide vote and that Ch XXXX judge could not overrule its protection reacting to the XXXX /XXXX XXXX attorney 's request for a summary judgement without more study and hearing all of our attorney 's arguments.