Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
NARRATIVE STATEMENT OF COMPLAINT : This complaint details violations of federal consumer protection laws, specifically the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), by Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. ( SPS ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). Despite formally acknowledging Complainants status as a confirmed successor in interest to the property at XXXX XXXX XXXX, SPS and XXXX XXXX proceeded with a foreclosure, denied Complainant all federally mandated protections, and made misrepresentations in multiple court proceedings. Factual Background : XXXX. Property Acquisition and Loan History : Complainant acquired title to the property at _XXXX XXXX XXXX, via a quitclaim deed dated XX/XX/XXXX, and recorded on XX/XX/XXXX. The original borrower obtained the mortgage on XX/XX/XXXX. The original Borrower 's personal liability on the mortgage note was discharged in a XXXX XXXX bankruptcy proceeding, with the discharge order entered on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy Court, XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. SPS has been the loan XXXXervicer since XX/XX/XXXX. Complainant has made payments on this loan totaling approximately {$10000.00}. XXXX. Confirmation as Successor in Interest : On XX/XX/XXXX, after Complainant provided documentation of ownership interest, SPS sent formal written correspondence explicitly confirming Complainants status. The letter states : SPS has added " Complainant '' as an authorized third party to the above-referenced account. As an authorized third party, they will be granted access to all account information and are authorized to make any changes to the account. This written confirmation legally established Complainant as a confirmed successor in interest under RESPA ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.31 ), entitling Complainant to the same rights and protections as the original borrower. XXXX. Foreclosure and Denial of RESPA Rights : Despite this written confirmation, SPS and XXXX XXXX proceeded with a foreclosure sale on XX/XX/XXXX, and recorded a Sheriffs Deed on XX/XX/XXXX. Complainant was not treated as a confirmed successor ; instead, SPS sent generic occupant notices, in violation of their duty to provide specific notice to a known successor. XXXX. Defective Foreclosure : The foreclosure contained procedural defects. The Notice of Default was issued on XX/XX/XXXX, purportedly on behalf of XXXX XXXX. However, XXXX XXXX did not acquire any recorded interest in the mortgage until XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX than XXXX months after the default was declared. SPS initiated foreclosure as an attorney-in-fact for a principal ( XXXX XXXX ) that had no recorded interest in the property at that time. XXXX. Settlement Agreement : On XX/XX/XXXX, a Settlement Agreement was executed between the original borrower, SPS, and XXXX XXXX, which released all claims related to the foreclosure. Pursuant to this agreement, SPS issued a XXXX Settlement payment to the original Borrower. A logical outcome of this Settlement was the discharge of the underlying mortgage Lien. However, SPS and XXXX XXXX have not recorded a discharge of the Lien, leaving a cloud on the Title. XXXX. Misrepresentations in Litigation : In multiple court proceedings, including the current Quiet Title action ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), counsel for SPS and XXXX XXXX have represented that Complainant is a stranger to the mortgage to deny standing, despite their own XX/XX/XXXX, letter confirming Complainants status. Furthermore, at a hearing on XX/XX/XXXX, their counsel stated that Complainant had failed to make a Court-ordered Escrow paymenta statement immediately proven false by the court docket. IV. SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL LAW XXXX. RESPA Violation Failure to Recognize Confirmed Successor Status ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ) SPS violated RESPA by failing to treat Complainant as a borrower after confirming successor-in-interest status in writing on XX/XX/XXXX. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( vi ), a servicer must facilitate communication with successors. SPS had an affirmative duty to provide Complainant with borrower-level notices and protections but instead proceeded with foreclosure. XXXX. RESPA Violation Inadequate Successor Notice ( 12 U.S.C. 2605 ; 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ) SPS knew Complainant was the confirmed successor in interest. Yet they provided only generic occupant notices regarding foreclosure. A confirmed successor is entitled to the same specific notices as the original borrower. This failure to provide adequate notice deprived Complainant of the ability to exercise established rights. XXXX. RESPA Violation Failure to Provide Loss Mitigation & Dual Tracking ( CFPB Mortgage Servicing Rules ) As a confirmed successor in interest, Complainant is considered a borrower for purposes of loss mitigation under 12 C.F.R. 1024.41. SPS did not provide an opportunity to apply for loss mitigation options or conduct any required review. By proceeding with foreclosure sale while Complainant was communicating with them about rights, SPS engaged in prohibited dual tracking. XXXX. FDCPA Violations Debt Collection Abuses by SPS ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. ) SPS has acted as a debt collector throughout this process. Their counsel admitted this in a XX/XX/XXXX, email stating, This firm is a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. SPS violated the FDCPA by : - Attempting to collect on a debt for which personal liability was extinguished by XXXX XXXX XXXX bankruptcy discharge ( 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) ). - Using misrepresentations to collect a debt by misrepresenting the validity of the debt and their legal authority to foreclose ( 1692e ( 10 ) ). XXXX. Pattern of Misrepresentation and Servicer Misconduct The actions of SPS and XXXX XXXX suggest a pattern of non-compliance. This includes : - Misrepresenting Complainants legal status in court proceedings after confirming successor status in writing. - Initiating foreclosure with a chain of Title that appears defective, using a notice of default that predates their recorded interest. - Not honoring the Settlement Agreement by failing to discharge the mortgage, Lien.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation