Consumer complaint received 03-08-2017 about Mortgage (Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)) with Specialized Loan Servicing LLC (AZ).
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint: Additional and more severe violations have occurred by my loan servicer, SLS, since my original complaint ( CFPB Case number : XXXX ) submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. At that time, I claimed that my loan servicer SLS was illegally " dual tracking '' my loan. Not only has SLS continued these actions, but they have pushed into the realm of what I believe to be criminal fraud. In additional to multiple call recordings which I can provide, I also have written proof. 

Only after prior complaints to the AZ AG 's Office, the CFPB, and submitting a Qualified Written Request ( QWR ) did SLS honor their written agreements and follow regulatory guidelines, and offer the loss mitigation option of a short sale. All deadlines were met, and full appraisal price was offered by the buyer. SLS rejected the short sale and later provided FALSE STATEMENTS claiming that the buyer 's offer was too low. 


FRAUD SLS repeatedly provided false statements to myself and to the Making Home Affordable ( MHA ) escalations team by claiming that the buyer 's offer was too low, therefore rejecting the short sale, and moving to foreclosure. However, emails from our realtor show that the initial buyer was willing to pay full asking price ( EXHIBIT A ). We also had back-up offers for above appraised value ( EXHIBIT B ). Our realtor made multiple requests to speak with an SLS supervisor to ask why a full price offer was rejected, and all such requests were denied ( EXHIBIT B ). 

These actions combined with my assigned representative 's refusal to help ... from day one ... confirms that SLS never intended to evaluate for a Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternative ( HAFA ) short sale, for which I applied. I can only speculate that SLS is financially motivated to foreclose on my home. 

I realize that fraud is a strong accusation. However, the repeated false statements and stone walling, loss and mishandled paperwork, and lack of access to supervisors can not be ignored. Willful deception to another party resulting in significant financial harm meets the definition of fraud. 


RESPA VIOLATIONS My assigned representative, XXXX, was hostile from our very first conversation. She made it clear that she would not be assisting with ongoing loss mitigation efforts, and repeatedly stated that XXXX will instead be foreclosing on my home. These are clear and continued violations of Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ), particularly 1024.41 ( g ) for ILLEGAL DUAL TRACKING and 1024.38 for failing to provide minimum servicing. EXAMPLES : XX/XX/XXXX : During my initial call to XXXX confirming SLS 's receipt of my complete short sale packet ( before the HAFA deadline of XX/XX/XXXX ). XXXX stated that they will not process the short sale, XXXX will foreclose on my home, and that I should seek a lawyer. 
XX/XX/XXXX : 3-way call with HUD Counselor XXXX, an authorized 3rd party, and XXXX refused to even discuss the account. It was only until the HUD Counselor demanded an escalation to a supervisor that any progress was made to discuss the account. 
XX/XX/XXXX : Could not reach XXXX but instead spoke with XXXX, who refused to discuss the ongoing short sale only to repeat that SLS will foreclose. I made repeated requests ( at least 5 ) to escalate to supervisor, at which time XXXX refused all requests and then disconnected the call. 


PLEA FOR ASSISTANCE SLS could argue that their actions are honest mistakes simply made by a large organization, e.g. the left hand does n't know what the right hand is doing. However, because of the repeated denied requests by myself and by my realtor to speak with next-level supervisors, it shows a concerted effort by their organization to cut off even the most basic communication regarding ongoing loss mitigation activity. And now, with written proof of SLS providing false statements in an attempt to illegally foreclose, I stand by my claim.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation