Consumer complaint received 2018-02-09 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Other type of mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — 
Company: Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC
State: NV

Complaint narrative:
I purchased my property via a first & second mortgage ( 80/20 loan ) originated by XXXX XXXX Loans. XXXX XXXX Loans debt was assumed by XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX became my servicer. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   was/is my investor. 

The Attorney Generals lawsuit aka National Mortgage Settlement was announced which included XXXX XXXX XXXX. In the state of Nevada, XXXX  XXXX XXXX had to pay additional moneies due to all of the XXXX XXXX XXXX   XXXX bad debt to the state of Nevada for principal reductions and second lien extinguishments. If you qualified for the lawsuit XXXX  XXXX XXXX would reach out to you in that attempts to rework any and all loans to save the property. 

Specialized loan servicing seems to think that the settlement was geared towards the Loans & not geared towards the specific properties. The lawsuit was to stop foreclosures and forgive bad debt. 

During the announcement of the settlement I had the first and second lien serviced by XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
After the announcement of the lawsuit ( Approximately two weeks & SLS has all of these documents on file ). The second mortgage was bundled up and sold to a company called XXXX XXXX XXXX   which is now at XXXX. 

Shortly after that I started receiving letters from XXXX XXXX XXXX that my property met the criteria for the national mortgage settlement lawsuit and that I needed to send in specific financials so they could work the formula in the lawsuit to get my new payment amount and the principal reduction amount. 

I have sent these documents to specialized loan servicing along with the 300 plus page of United States of America vs. XXXX  XXXX XXXX. 

Note- Per the lawsuit documentation the lawsuit carries and is binding & transferable from servicer to servicer. 
Which means just because it left XXXX  XXXX XXXX and went to XXXX and then to specialize loan servicing does not mean the lawsuit is not still legally binding. The lawsuit is 100 % legally binding no matter the servicer. 

To try to be as brief as possible : AFTER the announcement of the lawsuit & I am included in said lawsuit ... 

The second mortgage servicer became XXXX. XXXX try to collect on the second mortgage and I informed them of the situation and I did not hear from XXXX again. 

Specialized loan servicing became the servicer after it was removed from the previous servicer. 

I have tried to resolve this issue without going the route of a quiet title action. 

I have provided specialized loan servicing, multiple times, Showing the letters to me saying that I am part of the Attorney Generals National Mortgage Settlement. I have sent in the specific parts of the lawsuit that show if a XXXX XXXX XXXX Nevada first lien had a principal reduction that the XXXX   XXXX XXXX second lien shall be extinguished Per the lawsuit. 

I have received letters from specialized loan services full of inaccuracies and blatant negligence. 

1- I was told that I was not part of the settlement even though I have sent in the official county recorded modified principal reduction paperwork. 

2- I was told in one of the letters that my investor didnt participate in the program Even though the lawsuit was against the servicers and it was not up to the investor whether or not they were willing to participate. Having said that, my investor was named in the lawsuit and was ordered to give principal reduction and second lien extinguishments. 

3- I was told one time that just because my house was foreclosed upon doesnt mean I still dont know the money. 
My house was not foreclosed upon and I still own it but these are the type of responses I am getting. 

I want this to go to the legal department a specialized loan servicing and not to customer care department that does not understand federal and state law. 

This is regarding a lawsuit and should be handled by the legal department. 

This needs to be reviewed by somebody that comprehends what I am stating and that knows how to interpret the law. 

I want this escalated to the right department. The legal department of specialized loan servicing. 

All of the documentation is already on file with specialized loan servicing.

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