Consumer complaint received 2026-01-21 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Applying for or obtaining a modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or deed-in-lieu
Company: Selene Holdings LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding systemic FHA servicing failures, impermissible dual tracking, and procedurally defective loss-mitigation handling by Selene XXXX XXXX .

1. Partial Claim Offered Without Any Income Documentation or Review In or around XX/XX/XXXX, Selene XXXX offered me an FHA partial claim despite the fact that : No income documentation was requested No income documentation was reviewed No affordability or sustainable payment analysis was conducted No determination was made as to whether I could afford the ongoing mortgage payment As a self-employed borrower, FHA servicing rules require review of alternative income documentation. That did not occur. The partial claim was offered without any financial evaluation, and without determining whether the resulting payment would be sustainable. I did not accept this option because it did not address affordability and was issued without proper review. 

2. File Transferred to a New Loss-Mitigation Representative Who Denied All Options Without Income Review After the partial claim was declined, my loss-mitigation file was transferred to a new loss-mitigation representative. 

This new representative then denied me for all loss-mitigation options, including home-retention options, without requesting or reviewing any income documentation, despite my self-employed status. 

No income analysis, affordability calculation, or FHA worksheet was provided. No explanation was given as to how eligibility was determined without financial review.

3. Appeal Reviewed and Denied by the Same Individual Without Income Review I timely appealed the denial, submitting the appeal as permitted under FHA guidelines. 

The appeal was then reviewed and denied by the same individual who issued the original denial, with no independent review and again without any income documentation review. 

The denial cited insufficient number of payments since loan origination as the basis for denying all FHA loss-mitigation options, despite : No income analysis being conducted No evaluation of FHA partial claim plus modification No sustainable payment determination No written explanation of how this criterion was applied or whether exceptions were considered Denying all loss-mitigation options based on this factor without reviewing income and without independent appeal review constitutes a procedurally defective and non-compliant FHA evaluation. 

4. Foreclosure Activity Continued During Active Appeal Period ( Dual Tracking ) While my appeal rights remained open through XX/XX/XXXX, Selene XXXX continued foreclosure activity, including assessing new foreclosure attorney and title search fees on XX/XX/XXXX, as reflected on my XX/XX/XXXX mortgage statement. 

Proceeding with foreclosure actions while a borrower is within an FHA loss-mitigation appeal period constitutes impermissible dual tracking. 

Why This Is a Problem FHA loss-mitigation decisions were issued without any income documentation review A partial claim was offered without assessing affordability All options were later denied without income review The appeal was denied by the same individual, with no independent reconsideration Foreclosure actions continued during an active appeal window These actions deprived me of FHA-mandated procedural protections and materially increased arrears Foreclosure activity taken against an owner-occupied FHA borrower who is actively seeking to retain their primary residence and exercising appeal rights undermines the purpose of FHA loss-mitigation requirements and consumer-protection safeguards Selene XXXX XXXX has stated that a property valuation ( written appraisal or property evaluation ) was obtained and uploaded to the borrower portal in connection with my loss-mitigation review. 

However, when I accessed the borrower portal, no appraisal or property valuation report is available, and no copy has ever been provided to me despite repeated review of the portal.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation