Consumer complaint received 2025-12-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: NM

Complaint narrative:
Subject : RESPA 8 Kickback and ABA Disclosure Violations by Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. and Affiliates, Fraudulent Misrepresentations regarding foreclosure sales and " evictions '' I am a New Mexico homeowner subjected to unlawful evictions facilitated by unlicensed brokers in an undisclosed affiliated business arrangement involving Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( SPS ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( revoked broker under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX ( inactive associate broker under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), and XXXX XXXX, ( broker and owner of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 

SPS is using its affiliate, XXXX to direct local real estate brokers to seek assistance from sheriff 's offices to take possession of properties when those brokers have no authority to do so. SPS regularly acts without authority itself to act on behalf of the alleged " owners '' named in " special master 's deeds '' or writs of assistance. XXXX acts as an intermediary between local realtors, engaging them with a " fee agreement '' and a " referral '' to its " client '' SPS to list and sell the foreclosed property. The agreement is not a grant of any authority from the named " owner '' to the realtor but simply an intent to allow the realtor to list the property. Yet the realtor engages in property preservation-type activities long before the property is listed and is the individual who facilitates the eviction through the sheriff 's office. Locally, the sheriff does not ask for the realtor 's authority to do so, and presumes a right to take properties, making the scheme easy for SPS to claim and sell properties to which it is not entitled. 

Special master 's deeds are executed by individuals who are supposed to be independent arms of the courts but are actually agents for SPS. XXXX XXXX, employee of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) is regularly used as special master in foreclosures in New Mexico. XXXX is owned by pervasive foreclosure attorney XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who owns XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX formerly XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX In many cases where XXXX XXXX XXXX servicer, XXXX is used as the special master. In other cases XXXX is engaged by the attorneys for the servicer, in this case SPS.

The attorneys retained by SPS who claim to represent the named plaintiffs ( again, many times without any authority, as in my case ) drive the " sale ''. The special master 's reports are unsupported, lacking evidence of consideration or satisfaction of judgment, and are based solely on information provided to the special master by the attorney for SPS. The attorneys for the " servicers '', including SPS, draft ALL documents signed by the " special master ''. The special master does not verify or validate whether an account is credited, debt reduction or satisfaction, or that consideration is paid and there does not appear to be any independent review by the court or anyone else to ensure that the " sale '' conforms to specifics in the judgment. In my case the sale included amounts in excess of {$240000.00} ABOVE what was granted in the judgment with unapproved interest and conducted by a special master who was not appointed by the court or substituted according to the rule. 

The only " evidence '' of a bid stems from a " bid information worksheet '' sent by SPS to their attorney, which states an amount they claim the special master should bid. The sheet directs the attorney to have the deed vested in the name of the " plaintiff '' ; however, the named plaintiff has nothing to do with any part of the process. In my situation, the named plaintiff is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as trustee on behalf of the holders of the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX certificates, series XXXX, " XXXX XXXX XXXX ''. The latest filing for this trust was XXXX of XXXX due to fewer than XXXX holders. It is highly unlikely that the trust was in existence even at the time of filing the foreclosure ( XXXX ) let alone at the time of the " sale '' ( XXXX ) or writ of assistance " eviction '' ( XXXX ). Further, XXXX XXXX sold its XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to XXXX in XXXX and no longer acts as trustee for any trusts, therefore even if there were proof at any point that SPS had authority to act on behalf of XXXX XXXX ( which there is not ), XXXX XXXX has no authority to act as trustee for the stated trust as of, at the latest, XX/XX/XXXX based on publicly available information. 

The bid information worksheet is used to obtain title insurance, in this case from XXXX XXXX, claiming the title is vested in XXXX XXXX XXXX when that entity does not appear to be in existence let alone hold any kind of actual interest in the property. 

All documents filed in the foreclosure by SPS attorneys are self-serving and self-generated, which claim XXXX XXXX XXXX has some interest in the note but there is no actual evidence of any such acquisition or transfer. None of the filings explicitly disclose SPS 's involvement, particularly that it drives the entire process to the exclusion of XXXX. 

Based on evidence I have obtained post-eviction, I determined that SPS profits not only from the sale of the foreclosed property, where the named plaintiff does not have any involvement at all. It also profits from all aspects of the sale- the Broker Price Opinions ( BPOs ) done by XXXX and the commissions through XXXX. The " bid '' amount is determined from a BPO by XXXX, which is owned by the same executives who own SPS and XXXX. SPS attempts to give an illusion of independence through the following : XXXX attempts to appear as a separate, unrelated real estate company out of Utah, which claims SPS is its " client '' referring the listing to a local real estate agent ; the local real estate agent " hires '' XXXX  to conduct a BPO to place a value on the property ; the local realtor uses the XXXX to valuate the property for its listing while agreeing to give XXXX up to 43 % percent of the commission. Thus, if a property is sold, SPS 's executives profit from : ( 1 ) the proceeds of the sale ; ( 2 ) a large percentage of the commission for the sale; and ( 3 ) the valuation of the property.

SPS has a direct hand in creating and changing property values wherever they claim to hold REO properties. This trickles into property taxes and the overall health of the communities in which they operate. Moreover, it SPS appears to be engaged in further misrepresentation among its own " vendors '' where the most recent BPO conducted by XXXX requested by XXXX, the local realtor, does not state that XXXX XXXX XXXX or even SPS is its client, but claims its client is an entity completely unrelated to the situation.

This indicates two things : ( 1 ) SPS is misrepresenting the identity of the alleged owner of the property and ( 2 ) the realtor does not bother to read the writs of assistance or deeds they invoke with the assistance of the sheriff. The realtor ( XXXX, whose qualifying broker license was revoked for discipline over a year before the " eviction ) has failed to provide any additional evidence of agency or contractual relationship and does not appear to know on whose behalf his ( unlicensed ) associate claimed possession of the property, nor did she. 

Also, in the process of eviction and " lockouts '', SPS uses companies who do not appear to vet their vendors or agents and no evidence even exists to show that the locksmiths or property management companies have any authority to act on behalf of SPS, let alone the named " plaintiff '' / '' purchaser '' / '' owner ''. In my case, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX took possession of my personal property, hiring a locksmith to lock me out of my house. XXXX 's representative did not know for whom it was working. In New Mexico locksmiths are unlicensed. 

During the eviction, where an unlicensed realtor who has no connection to the property claimed possession, a " lock smith '' later entered the property to " lock out '' the house. This individual was acting on directions from an intermediary, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a Colorado company that is unregistered to conduct business in New Mexico, at the direction of XXXX XXXXXXXX failed to disclose its involvement. The individual is a convicted felon who spent several years in prison for capital crimes and was, at the time of the " eviction '' a fugitive in a pending felony case. Moreover, SPS and its associates who have no apparent agency or even contractual relationship failed to verify the status of the broker licensing of those it engaged to deprive me of property, thereby making material misrepresentations to the local sheriff and violating numerous laws. The former realtor ( XXXX ) was listed as the property manager on the notice left by the felon locksmith yet she disclaimed all involvement in the situation, leaving me with no contact.

Finally, the attorneys for these servicers are seeking orders from courts to declare personal property left on the premises of foreclosed properties abandoned, which courts regularly grant. In my case the judgment claimed the property could be declared abandoned and " disposed of according to law ''. The only law applicable to abandoned property in New Mexico ( besides under the Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act, which is inapplicable here ) is the Uniform Unclaimed Property Act. This law is NOT being followed by property management companies or servicers. Instead, the companies are taking personal property and " trashing '' them out. The " vendors '' hired to do this work either keep the property, sell the property for their own personal gain, or destroy the property. SPS and its affiliates are complicit in this illegal activity or are directly profiting from the sale of personal property that is not subject to the foreclosure judgment and to which they otherwise have no right. 

The law firm that appears to be pervasively involved in SPS " evictions '' is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Other law firms involved besides this and XXXX are : XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, all of which should be investigated as well. 

Violations : RESPA 8 ( a ) & ( b ) Kickbacks ( 12 U.S.C. 2607 ) : SPS referred my property for XXXX services to XXXX ( affiliate ) for 2543.75 % referral fees + {$150.00} Exceleras " tech fee '' unearned payments for referrals. 

RESPA 8 ( c ) ( 4 ) ABA Disclosure Failure ( 1024.15 ) : SPS owns/controls XXXX but never XXXX XXXX required disclosure explaining the relationship and estimated fees. 

Use of Unlicensed Brokers : SPSXXXX referred services to Titus ( licenses revoked XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( inactive ) for possession-taking and BPO with no connection to the property. 

XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : SPS 's undisclosed ABA enabled use of unvetted agents ( felon locksmith via unregistered XXXX ) for " trash-outs, '' causing unfair injury through potential theft/destruction of personal property and abusive advantage of my vulnerability. 

FDCPA 1692f ( 6 ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692f ( 6 ) ) : SPS used unvetted agents to wrongfully repossess personal property via " trash-outs '' without present right, violating unfair collection practices.

Reg X 1024.38 ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ) : SPS failed to maintain reasonable vendor-oversight policies, allowing unvetted felons/unlicensed brokers to mishandle personal property and conduct evictions without authority.

Full details, timeline, and evidence in attached narrative and exhibits. This caused loss of home access for months, emotional distress, and costs exceeding {$10000.00}.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation