Consumer complaint received 2021-12-31 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
This is in regard to SLS/XXXX now the servicing company for XXXX. 
FYI Prior when the INTENTIONAL FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE was filed the Plaintiff was XXXX, however, it was XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. When the papers were dropped at my front door, the Plaintiff read " XXXX '' which was confusing to me as I was under the impression it was XXXX XXXX. 
Nevertheless, for the 'history ' of this ongoing INJUSTICE, there is on file with CFPB and SLS the Affidavit of XXXX XXXX attesting to the FRAUD via XXXX XXXX to miss 3 payment then we will modify... which did NOT happen. XXXX FORECLOSED . 

CURRENTLY Please see email enclosed from SLS. with higlighted areas of complaint and interest. 

You will see the email was sent ONLY to my Realtor, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I had requested that I, as Seller, be cc 'd on all emails.. This particular email instruccts " to reach out to your SPOC agent '' 1st of all, WHAT is SPOC? I called and spoke with XXXX yesterday inquiring of the email, reiterating that I requeted to be cc 'd on all emails to the Realtor, XXXX XXXX, along with 'what ' is SLS requesting and WHO is XXXX XXXX XXXX 
1 ) SPOC= Single Point Of Contact. Who would knwo that as a XXXX  PERSON? Goodness! 
Further, it is truly unbelievable to mention SPOC as each and every time I've been given a name as the contact person for me, they are unavailable, as with XXXX, who was NEVER available, NEVER returned a call when pressing the prompt for a call back as well as other agent as the SPOC ( albeit that was NOT what was mentioned ) simply the agent assigned or some such language ... NEVER SPOC! 
As well, when XXXX  was the contact, he was condescending in his manner, asking? 's that were not necessary and simply awful. 
Other assigned agents were not available, either. 
XXXX has been available on the last 2 calls. XXXX is decent and addresses business without disdain... yet, he has only been available the past 2 calls. Prior 3 calls in one day without contact or return calls. 
2 ) XXXX was making note to cc me, XXXX, XXXX on all emails, again. 
3 ) SLS is requesting a letter from me relinquishing the insurance funds being held in the amount of ( according to XXXX ) XXXX ) yet when I spoke with the SLS Insurance Dept on XXXX XXXX, I was told the insurance amount on deposit iw {$57000.00}. ( I do not recall the exact dollar amount BUT am certain of the $ 57K+ ) My question for XXXX is why would I send a letter relinquishing $ 61K= when YOUR Insurance Dept quoted me $ 57K+? XXXX stated he is Loss Mitigation not Insurance., Please check with your insurance dept. I do not want to face liability for the difference between $ 61K & $ 57K. Further, the Insurance Dept agent made it clear THAT THE INSURANCE FUNDS ON DEPOSIT WOULD NEVER BE RELEASED TO ME AS THEY ARE BEING KEPT AS DELINQUENCY?!! 
4 ) Who is XXXX XXXX? He is also with Loss Mitigation I was told. 

Please look, further at the included 'documents ' ... what appears on paper herewith is NOT as is when going through this Short Sale process. 
Buyer " Proof of Funds & Articles of INC '' both state NOT REQUIRED. That is not true. 
We have had to provide Proof of Funds which SLS has held with total inconsideration of the prospective BUYER FUNDS being held without answering. 
OTHER MSSING Please provide letter from borrower forfeiting loss draft funds. 
AGAIN, as there is definitely a discrepency as to the total amount fo funds being held as well as why is the LETTER necessary when the insurance dept MADE IT CLEAR THE FUNDS WOULD REMAIN WITH SLS/XXXX DUE TO THE DELINQUENCY. 
FURTHER, THIS IS AN INTENTIONAL FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE .... how does one fight this INUUSTICE? 
Please forgive my delay in sending the next complaint as I have had XXXX XXXX procedures within the past I bleieve, 6 weeks, which have kept me exhausted. 

Please see ENCLOSURE regarding the above.

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