Consumer complaint received 2026-04-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am formally disputing the application of what appears to be a 35 % default-rate interest adjustment applied retroactively beginning XX/XX/XXXX, as reflected in documentation provided by the servicer. The loan originated in XX/XX/XXXX, and servicing transferred to Select Portfolio Servicing XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. However, amortization materials later provided by SPS reflect the loan as operating under a default-rate framework beginning in XX/XX/XXXX, effectively treating the loan as if it were already in default from inception of servicing. This raises serious concerns regarding both servicing accuracy and disclosure compliance. ________________________________________ Servicing Guidance Provided by SPS In XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted SPS directly and was explicitly informed that my loan was operating under the default-rate structure reflected in the amortization schedule provided to me. I relied on this servicing guidance in understanding the status and expected treatment of my loan. That guidance materially contributed to decisions I made regarding management of the account and perpetuated and worsened the servicing situation now in dispute. ________________________________________ Disclosure Concerns and Consumer Protection Issues At the time of closing, no independent or clearly distinguished disclosure was presented indicating that a late payment or servicing-related condition could trigger a retroactive increase from approximately 7 % to approximately 35 % within a short time frame and applied back to loan inception. A change of this magnitude constitutes a material economic alteration of the loan and raises serious concerns regarding whether : the provision was clearly disclosed, the provision was separately acknowledged, the provision was properly explained, or the provision was enforceable as applied. It is a fundamental consumer-protection concern that a borrowers equity position in a mortgage loan could be materially impaired through the application of a default-rate structure of this magnitude without independent disclosure separate from standard closing documentation. I am not attempting to avoid responsibility for my loan obligations. Rather, I am requesting confirmation that the loan has been administered consistent with proper disclosure standards, servicing accuracy requirements, and applicable consumer-protection expectations. The possibility that a mortgage interest structure could move from approximately 7 % to 35 % within roughly XXXX days without independent disclosure raises substantial servicing and compliance concerns that warrant review. ________________________________________ Additional Servicing Errors Identified I have identified the following concerns requiring clarification : 1. Payments submitted by me appear to have been held rather than properly applied. 2. A life-of-loan amortization schedule beginning at the elevated default-rate level from XX/XX/XXXX was provided. 3. Servicing transfer from origination to SPS occurred in XX/XX/XXXX, yet amortization reflects default-rate treatment from XX/XX/XXXX. 4. SPS representatives in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX explicitly confirmed that the loan was operating under the default-rate structure. 5. Foreclosure-related correspondence has been issued while this dispute remains unresolved. ________________________________________ Documentation Requested Accordingly, I request the following : Complete payment history from origination to present Executed promissory note and all riders All disclosures referencing default-rate provisions Identification of the contractual clause authorizing retroactive application Documentation supporting SPS servicing guidance provided in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Corrected amortization schedule reflecting properly disclosed loan terms Reasonable payoff amount based on the original agreed structure Confirmation that adverse servicing actions are paused during review ________________________________________ Proposed Remedy In the interest of resolving this matter promptly and cooperatively, I propose the following reasonable servicing correction : 1. Restore the loan to its original amortization structure prior to the improper application of the default-rate adjustment. 2. Add four ( 4 ) months to the loan term to account for the servicing disruption created during the disputed period and reliance on SPS servicing guidance. 3. Accept my regular contractual monthly payment of {$900.00} beginning XX/XX/XXXX, applied consistent with the original loan terms. 4. Remove all charges associated with the disputed default-rate adjustment. 5. Pause foreclosure-related activity while this dispute remains under review. This proposal reflects my continued willingness to maintain the loan in good standing based on the originally disclosed loan structure. ________________________________________ Please treat this correspondence as a formal servicing dispute under RESPA. I request written confirmation of receipt and a substantive response within the statutory response period. I also reserve all rights related to borrower harm resulting from servicing errors and reliance on inaccurate servicing guidance. ________

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation