Consumer complaint received 2023-06-08 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — 
Company: Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
I am writing based on the mistreatment I received from my mortgage servicer, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (SLS). SLS services or serviced loans for properties held at XXXX (redacted street) (sold in XXXX XXXX) and XXXX (redacted street, several doors down from XXXX) (trying to sell), both in XXXX. SLS is based in Colorado, at least domestically. There is a note on their website that complaints need to be filed in Texas, and I am also filing in Illinois as that is where I am domiciled.

There is significant supporting material that I could submit if or when requested, but I do not want to overburden the servers  not counting numerous communications (often contradictory or incorrect), I have a stack of call notes several inches tall. I have contemporaneous notes from virtually all my discussions with SLS customer service representatives (CSR) as well as most of their correspondence. Much of the correspondence from SLS is not meaningful as it took several days to go from computer to print to mailing. They are better now, but many of the earlier correspondence would occur after subsequent actions had occurred.

In summary:
	We started to attempt a short sale on the XXXX property in XXXX. It took four and a half years to consummate a short sale on a XXXX XXXXroperty with about XXXX  in mortgage debt.
	There were multiple starts and stops, and each time I phoned in to check on the progress, I had to start over again with representatives since there seemed to be no recordkeeping on SLS part.
	It was not until over four years into the process that SLS explained that they were the servicer only and there were two different investors in the mortgages. This explained why we were constantly running into situations where one investor might approve the sale, but the other investors approval went stale and had to be resubmitted from step one. There were at least five complete restarts of the process due to this.
	At one point, one of the CSRs told me that the reason the processing was taking so long and that we risked rejection was that the loans were being repaid, and that we would have a better chance of getting approval if we were not paying the loans. We stopped paying the debt so that the short sale would occur. At one point, I told the CSR that it sure looked like they knew that the mortgagee was an XXXX XXXX  man and that they were hoping that when he passed away, I would continue to make the payments on the loans. There was about 15 seconds of silence before the CSR stated that they would never do that. I suggested they look at the account history (only about 18 months at that point) and tell me differently. They looked and could not. It still took an additional three years or so.
	 and in that period, we were charged over XXXX in apparently junk fees for things like property inspection, which were charged to BOTH loans though it is highly unlikely that the property was inspected given its location and the fact that live appraisers could not be located for the sales valuations. We were also charged foreclosure fees, though the property was never placed in foreclosure. We also did not receive notifications of the charges as they were occurring.
	As to the multiple submissions of data  
o	Whenever additional information  or repeat of information  was requested, it was submitted within 24-36 hours. Every time. I have the proof of email submissions saved in my XXXX  and can append them to a submission if needed.
o	On some calls with CSRs, I was told that information was not submitted, which is why SLS was not processing the paperwork. I promptly showed that not only was the documentation submitted properly and promptly, but also submitted evidence showing that. 
o	Many times during the process, I received information by mail or in the CSR calls that we had withdrawn our submissions for short sales. As I indicated in all my calls, based on the fact that for over a year in the process I was calling weekly to check the status, it should be evident that I was not withdrawing from the process. I NEVER withdrew from the program for the attempted short sale.
o	Multiple times I had to provide information to a mortgage company and underwriters to unclog the process that should never have been required. For example, I had to explain a Required Minimum Distribution from an IRA, I had to explain how we did not control publicly traded companies and thus had no control over certain information provided or not provided, and  probably most frustratingly  had to resubmit data since on my Schedule C some self-employment income was labeled XXXX XXXX  whereas when I submitted an interim income statement for their analysis I called it XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and SLS thought they were different businesses and delayed the mortgage review.
o	On a call XXXX XXXX  (pen blotched  I think that is the date), XXXX at XXXX XXXX Central Time,  I spoke with XXXX in the Retention Department. I had received information that the document submission was incomplete. I supplied evidence on the call that I had submitted all requested documentation. I was told, this happens all the time. They are always asking for documents we already have and that gets everyone upset.
o	Not only did they often ask for documents they already had, they often held up processing for documents they were adding to the request list without informing us the documents were needed. There were also several times when the introductory voice message said that the documents were being analyzed but the CSR indicated they were not.
o	For example, on XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX Central Time, we were told that all documents were submitted on the introductory message on the call but the CSR informed us the processing was delayed as there were missing returns, which was not true as I could and did show. On XXXX XXXX XXXX  at XXXX XXXX Central Time, I was told the underwriter needed additional documentation as to a required minimum IRA distribution of approximately XXXX, which held up processing. 
o	I also have documentation of several CSRs who hung up on me during discussions and of requests on their voice mail system for call backs. In the five plus years we have been trying to do the two short sales, NO CALLS HAVE EVER BEEN RETURNED.
o	On several calls, I requested to talk to a supervisor. None was ever provided  apparently, SLS does not have a mechanism for its customers to advance a question. I left several requests for supervisors to call. NONE EVER CALLED BACK.
o	On XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX Central Time, I was told that the P&L statement submitted for an interim period for a Schedule C needed to be signed or certified by a CPA, which was a new request after MANY submissions. In addition, as a CPA, I tried to explain that what they were asking for in the manner they were asking was against CPA Professional Standards, but they would not listen. In effect, they were asking me to violate my professional standards to appease their underwriters and give them cover for not promptly doing their job.
o	On my XXXX XXXX XXXX call, I was told by the CSR that you dont want to listen to the recording at the beginning of the call, where it tells you if all documentation was received, for example.
o	On XXXX XXXX XXXX, I was informed by the CSR that an application was never accepted in the first place. This was two years into the process. A while later, I was informed that SLS was getting confused on my submissions  since everything was through SLS (a mortgage and a HELOC), I was submitting paperwork with both account numbers at the top of the papers. They told me two plus years into the process that I needed to submit all the information twice, one for each account. At this point, I started doing that.
o	In XXXX XXXX, four months into the attempted sale of XXXX, I was informed that some of my paperwork was rejected as they required a wet signature and not a copy or XXXX XXXX. Again, this was four months and multiple submissions into the process.
o	The attached letter details how SLS changed the valuation of the XXXX property from the reasonable and I believe correct amount of XXXX to XXXX based on the SAME PAPERWORK. The lower, correct value is compatible with the selling price of the XXXX XXXX  six months earlier. The increase, based on my experience with SLS, is in my opinion nothing more than an attempt to squeeze more money out of the situation.
o	When the valuation was disputed within three days of discovering the issue, in midXXXX there was no response. Apparently, my submission through the website like I did for all short sale documentation was not in accordance with their procedures to send any dispute to a street address. Two months later, I sent in the dispute to the street address after finally determining with a competent CSR the cause of the lack of response. Their mailed acknowledgment to me stated that they would reply within the legally permitted timeframe, without indicating the timing to be expected.
o	The CSR who had assisted me in figuring out the valuation issue started an investigation into the error in XXXX I have an email from that CSR dated XXXX XXXX XXXX  that they apologized for issues and were starting an investigation into my complaint, which they had received, which contradicts their other comments as noted above. For some reason, this what should have been simple review took three months.
	Had the first short sale been properly processed, the Cancellation of Debt income we had to report would likely have been hundreds if not thousands of dollars less, since there was at least 18 months of interest added to the loan balances at closing, which should not have been incurred. The Cancellation of Debt income was also increased by the approximately XXXX of junk fees attached to the account generally without our knowledge.
	The incomplete processing  including the use of the incorrect valuation  of the second property is costing me approximately XXXX  per month in mortgage, HELOC and HOA payments, plus utilities. We have not been able to rent the property as we believe that they were about to be sold and were led to believe it might be harder to sell with a tenant in place.
	Shortly into this three-month interregnum, I was told that my applications had expired and I had to refile all my paperwork.
	SLS placed one or two of my payments into a suspense account for some reason, and did not apply the payments to the balance due. Then they reported me to credit ratings agencies for being late with payments. I filed a complaint with XXXX  and it was resolved, with no apology from SLS (not that one was expected).
	The final rejection letter from SLS which alleged to answer my dispute indicated that the offer was XXXX This shows there was an issue at SLS  the negligent at best valuation was XXXX and the offer was XXXX (well above the correct value oXXXX XXXX) for a DIFFERENCE of XXXX. This response from SLS further buttresses my contention that SLS is not aware of what it is they are doing.

SLS incompetence and negligence has cost me thousands of dollars and countless hours between phone hold time, discussions and repeats of information with CSRs, and accumulating and sending documents many times  the attempted sale of XXXX  is now on its fifth submission in ten months.

I am not sure if there is any redress for me other than SLS being forced to perform its duties and functions as if it were a competent mortgage servicing company and help us complete the short sale. It should not take five years to complete a short sale that is as uncomplicated as the XXXX XXXX  should have been, and so far ten months for XXXX XXXX

If you would like specific notes, emails or SLS letters to further explain the above or to help aide your understanding, please let me know.

THE PRIOR LETTER REFERRED TO ABOVE IS:
Sir or Madam:

I am writing in response to your letter dated XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding a potential short sale of the property at XXXX  (redacted street), XXXX XXXX, mortgage number (redacted). The letter indicates that the offer was insufficient. When I contacted the Customer Resolution number, I was told that the offer was XXXX below the XXXX value of XXXX  to XXXX  that the investor used. HOWEVER, the two copies of the XXXX I received from SLS indicated a valuation of XXXX. The offer we received satisfied this valuation.

The customer service representative forwarded copies of the two XXXX on the property. Interestingly, both were dated XXXX XXXX XXXX  for the property investigation. The initial valuation was the XXXX  determination. The property somehow in the next ten days was increased in value by about a third, to the XXXX valuation, with no indication as to how or why. 

When I finally was able to get through to Customer Service again on Monday, before even indicating what the issue was, the representative stated that the property had a valuation of XXXX. I am writing to figure out what happened, what is going on and what can be done  I do not want the information provided to go stale and have to reapply, I do not want to lose another potential buyer, and based on the sale of another unit  same condition of the property, same situation as a borrower - a couple months ago, the lower valuation is appropriate. How do we correct this and have the investor understand the situation and continue with the sale?

This is of utmost importance. I have been working on this specific round of short sale for over six months and we need to reach a conclusion.

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