Consumer complaint received 2025-06-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: MT

Complaint narrative:
Response to CFPB Complaint Shellpoint Misrepresentation of TILA Rescission Consumer : XXXX XXXX Number : XXXX ID : XXXX Submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX Summary of Response to Shellpoint Mortgage Servicings Reply Dated XX/XX/XXXX : I am submitting this response to correct material misstatements and legal mischaracterizations made by Shellpoint in their XX/XX/XXXX reply to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regarding my valid exercise of rescission under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), 15 U.S.C. 1635.

Shellpoint 's Claim Regarding a 3-Day Rescission Period is Legally Incorrect : Shellpoints statement that " the right to rescind a mortgage under the U.S. Truth in Lending Act expires after three days '' is flatly false. TILA provides a three-year extended rescission period under 15 U.S.C. 1635 ( f ) if the lender fails to provide accurate material disclosures. The originating lender, XXXX XXXX, acknowledged their non-compliance with these disclosures in internal communicationsevidence which was provided to Shellpoint. My rescission on XX/XX/XXXX, was therefore lawfully exercised within the extended period.

Rescission is a Legal Event Not a Request : Under the Supreme Court 's ruling in Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, 574 U.S. 259 ( 2015 ), a borrower " exercises '' the right of rescission simply by notifying the creditor in writingno lawsuit is required. Once the notice is served, the security interest becomes void by operation of law unless the creditor disputes it within 20 days under 15 U.S.C. 1635 ( b ). Shellpoint failed to respond within that window and has instead engaged in unlawful collection and reporting activity.

Shellpoint Has Been Provided Ample Evidence of the Rescission : Shellpoints assertion that it lacks information is false. Its representatives ( including XXXX and XXXX ) confirmed in recorded calls on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, that my rescission was documented in their system and that I requested escalation to their legal department. Shellpoints continued denial constitutes willful noncompliance. 

Servicer Liability and Responsibility : As the current entity attempting to collect on the debt and report to credit bureaus, Shellpoint has legal obligations under both TILA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Servicers can not disregard rescission notices by claiming they did not originate the loan. They must suspend enforcement and refer the matter to their legal department, which Shellpoint failed to do.

Misuse of Note and Deed of Trust Contract Language : Shellpoints citation of contractual terms ( e.g., payment obligations ) is irrelevant once rescission is exercised. TILA rescission voids the contract 's enforceability, making further reliance on those provisions a violation of law.

Requested Remedy : Immediate cessation of all collection and credit reporting activity related to the void loan ; Removal of any derogatory reporting to Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion ; A formal written acknowledgment that the security interest is void and the debt extinguished by operation of law ; Referral of this matter to CFPB enforcement division for supervisory review.

I request that Shellpoint be held accountable for knowingly disregarding federal law and continuing to collect on a rescinded obligation. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, MT XXXX

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