Consumer complaint received 2025-03-18 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX IN TRUST FOR THE HOLDERS OF XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX BY XXXX TO XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, AS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, I respectfully submit this detailed correspondence to highlight significant and irrefutable evidence of fraudulent mortgage assignments central to the above-referenced case. I have carefully reviewed and analyzed the timeline and associated documentation, which conclusively indicate serious fraudulent practices requiring the immediate intervention of this court. This submission serves not only as notice of critical legal discrepancies, but also provides the necessary grounds to challenge prior foreclosure judgments based on fraud on the court, newly discovered evidence, and clear instances of legal malpractice by involved counsel. It is imperative to address these egregious irregularities swiftly, as failure to do so directly undermines judicial integrity and fairness. The facts and analysis detailed herein substantiate the pressing need for judicial action, as they reveal deceptive practices violating state and federal statutes governing mortgage assignments and foreclosure procedures.

The mortgage at issue was officially originated and executed on XX/XX/XXXX, creating the initial obligation between myself and XXXX XXXX However, the purported mortgage assignment was documented as taking place on XX/XX/XXXX, which is prior to its official recording date of XX/XX/XXXX. Under established law, assigning a mortgage prior to it being officially recorded within county records is both legally impossible and indicative of intentional fraudulent activity. Furthermore, the assigning entity, XXXXXXXX XXXX experienced institutional collapse on XX/XX/XXXX, when the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC ) became receiver. Given that XXXXXXXX XXXX had failed and ceased legal authority on that date, any subsequent assignment action claimed thereafter without FDIC authority would be unequivocally invalid. Thus, the assignment dated XX/XX/XXXX, is demonstrably fraudulent, as it predated the official recording of the mortgage and occurred shortly before XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX documented failure and federal receivership. 
Further exacerbating this fraudulent assignment, the mortgage was assigned directly into XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX entity not legally in existence at the purported date of the assignment. Official records confirm the trusts establishment occurred in XXXX, rendering a XXXX assignment legally impossible and invalid on its face. Subsequent assignments involving XXXX XXXX in XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, and ultimately XXXX XXXX in XXXX are thus based upon a demonstrably illegitimate and fraudulent chain of title. Each subsequent institution 's purported rights to the mortgage originate from an invalid assignment, rendering their foreclosure claims null and void as a matter of law. Consequently, judicial intervention and corrective action is urgently warranted to rectify these unlawful transfers and foreclosure actions. 
This pattern of fraudulent documentation and submission constitutes clear fraud on the court, undermining the integrity of prior judicial processes. Fraud on the court specifically includes situations where intentionally falsified documentation or misleading evidence has been introduced to influence judicial decision-making unjustly. The facts herein demonstrate beyond mere speculation intentional misconduct designed to deceive this court and support wrongful foreclosure proceedings. Recent diligent investigations have yielded new evidence previously unavailable, reinforcing and substantiating the claims asserted here. This new evidence warrants immediate reconsideration of prior judgments and supports filing motions for relief based upon documented fraud. 
Additionally, I must emphasize my significant concerns regarding potential legal malpractice by attorneys representing the involved financial institutions and their trustees. Attorneys bear professional and ethical obligations to ensure accuracy, legal compliance, and due diligence in matters presented before this court. Their apparent failure to adequately verify and address the irregularities detailed here not only facilitated the progression of fraudulent assignments but also caused me direct, tangible harm. Such malpractice constitutes an additional serious violation necessitating judicial scrutiny, possible sanctions, and remedial action. Given their professional duty and apparent negligence or complicity, these attorneys should likewise be held accountable by this court. 
I urgently demand that responsible parties produce definitive, verifiable documentation demonstrating valid mortgage transfers and authority from the FDIC as XXXXXXXX XXXX receiver. In the absence of legally verifiable FDIC transfers, all subsequent foreclosure actions based upon this invalid assignment must immediately be dismissed with prejudice. Furthermore, formal reports and inquiries should also be directed to relevant regulatory authorities, including the FDIC and New York Attorney Generals Office, compelling detailed investigations into this matter. These agencies retain statutory oversight and investigative authority to confirm fraudulent practices, rectify irregularities, and impose penalties upon parties involved. 
I urge you to carefully examine the evidence presented here. I am neither irrational nor misguided ; rather, I have methodically gathered overwhelming proof of intentional fraud regarding my mortgage assignment. I initially trusted our judicial system and legal institutions to protect my interests, only to find fraudulent and deceptive practices undermining my right to maintain ownership of my home. Nevertheless, I remain fully prepared, both legally and morally, to vigorously challenge this fraudulent foreclosure. My position is strongly supported by fact, law, and documented evidence, compelling prompt judicial intervention to correct the grave injustices perpetrated against me. 
Thank you for your time, thoughtful consideration, and prompt action regarding these serious allegations. Should additional clarification, documentation, or testimony be required, please contact me directly at your earliest convenience. 
Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Timeline Chart and Supporting Documentation Here is the detailed timeline formatted in list form with clear chronological order, highlighting key events related to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , and XXXX XXXX  XXXX , while also emphasizing evidence of fraud in the mortgage assignment : Timeline of Key Events and Mortgage Fraud Evidence 1. Formation and Operations of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX was established as a nationwide mortgage banking entity specializing in subprime lending. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX  XXXX, was formed when the XXXX and XXXX families acquired XXXX XXXX, a troubled federal savings and loan association. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX was integrated into XXXX XXXX, enhancing its focus on subprime mortgage lending. 

2. Origination and Assignment of XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX closed on her mortgage at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, NY XXXX XXXX 
XX/XX/XXXX : An Assignment of Mortgage was executedbefore the mortgage was officially recorded. 
o Problem : A mortgage can not be assigned before it is recorded, suggesting fraudulent documentation. 
XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXXk failed, and the FDIC was appointed as the receiver. 
o Problem : How did XXXXXXXX XXXX legally assign mortgages after failing? 
XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX 's mortgage was officially recorded in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
o Problem : This happened after the lender XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) had already failed. 

3. Transfer of Mortgage and Trustee Successions XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX was created. 
o Problem : How was XXXX 's mortgage assigned to a trust that did not exist in XXXX? 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX became trustee for the XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
o Problem : The FDIC should have been responsible for transferring XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXs assets. There is no valid FDIC documentation showing a legal transfer. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX ( a controversial mortgage servicer ) was rebranded as Select Portfolio Servicing ( SPS ) and continued servicing subprime loans, including those from XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX acquired XXXX XXXX for {$21.00} XXXX. 
o Problem : If the original transfer from XXXXXXXX XXXX  was fraudulent, then all subsequent trustee transfers are also invalid. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX acquired XXXX XXXX, strengthening its control over mortgage-backed securities ( MBS ). 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX took over as trustee for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
o XXXX : XXXX XXXXXXXX is now enforcing a mortgage that was fraudulently assigned in XXXX, before the trust even existed. 

4. Foreclosure Actions and Fraudulent Legal Practices XXXX : Mass foreclosures began due to the financial crisis, with XXXXXXXX XXXX filing foreclosure actions based on improper mortgage assignments. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a foreclosure law firm, faced legal scrutiny for fraudulent robo-signing and wrongful foreclosures. 
XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX  filed a foreclosure action against XXXX XXXX XXXX 
o Problem : The statute of limitations expired in XXXX, making the foreclosure unlawful. 
XXXX : The Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act ( FAPA ) was enacted. 
o FAPA explicitly prohibits lenders from reviving expired foreclosure cases. 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX  continued foreclosure proceedings despite FAPA prohibitions XXXX 

Evidence of Mortgage Fraud Event Date Significance Mortgage Closing Date XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX signed the mortgage agreement. 
Assignment of Mortgage XX/XX/XXXX The mortgage was assigned before it was officially recorded ( impossible and fraudulent ). 
XXXXXXXX XXXX  Failure XX/XX/XXXX The lender failed before the mortgage was recorded. Who controlled the loan after this date? 
Mortgage Recorded XX/XX/XXXX The mortgage was officially recorded after the lender had already failedwhich is highly suspect. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Created XXXX The trust did not exist at the time of assignment in XXXX, proving fraud. 
XXXXXXXX XXXX  Becomes Trustee XXXX The mortgage should have gone through the FDIC, but no proof of a legal transfer exists. 
XXXX XXXX  XXXX Acquired XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX If the original transfer was fraudulent, then all later trustee transfers were also fraudulent. 
XXXXXXXX XXXX Became Trustee XXXX XXXX XXXX is enforcing a mortgage that was never legally transferred. 
Foreclosure Action Filed by XXXX XXXX  XXXX The foreclosure should be time-barred, as the statute of limitations expired in XXXX. 
Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act ( FAPA ) Enacted XXXX Law prohibits lenders from restarting expired foreclosure actions. 
XXXX XXXX Continues Foreclosure Attempts XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX is acting against the law by reviving an expired foreclosure.

Legal Arguments Against Foreclosure 1. The Foreclosure Is Time-Barred Under CPLR 213 ( 4 ), foreclosure actions must be filed within six years of loan acceleration. 
XXXX loan was accelerated in XXXX, meaning the statute of limitations expired in XXXX. 
FAPA ( XXXX ) explicitly prohibits reviving time-barred foreclosure actions. 
2. The Mortgage Assignment Is Fraudulent The mortgage was assigned before it was recordedan impossibility under New York law. 
The bank that allegedly assigned the mortgage had already failed. 
The mortgage was assigned to a trust that did not exist at the time. 
3. XXXX XXXX  Lacks Standing No valid chain of title exists showing how XXXXXXXX XXXX legally obtained the mortgage. 
Without a legal assignment, XXXXXXXX XXXX can not foreclose. 
4. Violation of New Yorks Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act ( FAPA ) XXXX XXXX illegally revived a foreclosure action beyond the statute of limitation.

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