Consumer complaint received 2024-06-01 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Escrow, taxes, or insurance
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: PR

Complaint narrative:
As has been extensively documented during this past year and already on SPS files, for the reasons herein reinstated once again, SPS needs to be impeded to demand from us, as mortgage debtors, a money restitution for payment disbursed to XXXX. With supportive evidence this is the uncontroverted factual background : a. Our house mortgage, that SPS is now servicing, had an escrow account managed by SPS, and before managed by its prior servicer, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ). 
b. The escrow account was meant to accumulate the yearly amount needed to pay the property taxes to XXXX in XXXX semesters periods, and the insurance annual renovation policy. 
c. The escrow yearly estimated amount was made part of the mortgage monthly payment and was adjusted accordingly. 
d. My wife and I ( We ) paid on time the monthly mortgage payment that included, principal, interest, taxes, and insurance, without questioning the monthly amount as it was adjusted accordingly. 
e. It was XXXX and SPS obligation to pay the property taxes to XXXX XXXX when they became due, on time, XXXX times a year with the yearly amount collected in the escrow account. 
f. XXXX  without giving us any warning of knowledge, and for inexcusable reasons, ceased to pay on time the property taxes to XXXX each semester, grossly violating their obligations as mortgage servicers. 
g. Although XXXX arbitrarily and gross negligently stop paying the property taxes, the escrow account was paid by us as mortgage debtors in the amount demanded by XXXX as mortgage servicers. 
h. When SPS took over the mortgage servicing from XXXX XXXX SPS did not audit the property tax account, nor did SPS required from XXXX and XXXX XXXX before succeeding as the new mortgage servicers, a certification of property tax payment. 
i. SPS continue the same grossly negligent pattern of not paying the property taxes but nevertheless kept collecting a sum in the escrow that should have been sufficient to cover the taxes and the annual insurance policy. 
j. SPS had the opportunity to cure its gross negligence in handling the mortgage service by paying the accrued property taxes under an XXXX XXXX, that would have resulted in the full condonation of penalties and interest imposed by XXXX for failure to pay the taxes when due in each of the XXXX semesters, as well as a partial condonation of the taxes principal. 
k. We notified and follow-up insistently on our notification to SPS of the XXXX XXXX, but SPS opted to ignore the highly significant debt reduction benefits provided in the XXXX XXXX and instead, SPS waited until the XXXX XXXX had expired to then make an unauthorized payment to XXXX months after for the full unaudited face amount of the wrongly debt statement issued by XXXX. 
l. A computation made using as its base, for analytical purposes the wrong face amount of the CRIMs debt statements revealed, that if SPS would have made the payment a few months before under the XXXX XXXX, the payment amount would have been XXXX XXXX less and it would have liquidated the full debt. 
m. XXXX  tax debt statement listed as debits semesters that had been paid by XXXX while they serviced the mortgage. This would have been avoided if XXXX and SPS would have audited the tax debt prior to transferring the mortgage servicing from XXXX to SPS. 

Due to all the above, we, as mortgage debtors, have no obligation to reimburse to SPS the unauthorized payment SPS made to the XXXX for the past property taxes.

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