Consumer complaint received 2017-02-22 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC
State: OK

Complaint narrative:
This is concerning my previous claim that was only partially addressed. The case number : XXXX would time out every time I tried to dispute the claim so I am entering a new claim in reference to the aforementioned case number. 

SLS finally resolved part of our issue and claimed responsibility for giving out misinformation regarding the amounts due and the due dates. However, they have not addressed the main issue which is the XXXX payment that is past due because of their failures. We never received a statement for XXXX and we do not have the finances to pay an extra payment now on top of our current monthly payment and obligations. The explanation SLS gave us was -- basically they messed up and its " unfortunate '' that they gave us misinformation, but there is nothing they could or would do about it. The fact is, we were told by XXXX separate representatives for their company that we had no payment due for the month of XXXX and both advised us not to send a payment. This has been verified and confirmed by the leadership of SLS. A supervisor by the name of XXXX ' listened to the conversations and collaborated my claims that we were given misinformation on XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX via recorded phone conversations with their representatives. During the conversations, we were also told to disregard the incorrect billing statements and NOT to remit payment for XXXX. Furthermore, we did not even get a statement for XXXX. In fact, we still continue to get incorrect billing statements even to this date. We have not received a single correct billing statement for the past 4 months. To add more to the confusion, SLS has retroactively changed the amount due every month since XXXX as well. Most of the time these changes have been without any disclosure or in a couple instances, we were notified after the fact. They finally addressed the initial issue of overcharging us by over {$1800.00} per month on XXXX XXXX after numerous attempts from us to inform them of their errors. I have included copies of the erroneous billing statements for XXXX, XXXX and XXXX as evidence. I would have included the XXXX statement, but SLS did not have XXXX to send me. HaHaHa! You do n't say??? As you will be able to see, they have our regular monthly payment listed as {$6800.00} on the XXXX and XXXX billing statements and also claim a late payment for XXXX. Our payment BEFORE the modification was only {$5800.00}. Why would we do a modification for our payment to go up {$1000.00} per month? I have also included a copy of the Loan Modification Agreement signed by SLS on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX showing the borrower promises to make principal and interest payments of {$3800.00} and the escrow would be {$1100.00}. This would make the total due only {$5000.00}. This is over {$1800.00} less than what our billing statement showed. Also, note that the document was signed by the SLS V.P. a day after the supposed billing due date. This just further illustrates and explains why we did not get a statement for XXXX and also why their representatives said " the loan was in underwriting and no payment was due. '' There is also proof on the recorded statements that we asked multiple times if we should remit payment for the amount on the modification and both representatives told us emphatically, " No '', '' Your first payment is due XXXX XXXX ''. Finally, I have also included as evidence a statement SLS sent dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, that I received on the XXXX, stating our escrow account was changed from an analysis conducted on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, resulting in a new increased monthly payment that was EFFECTIVE XXXX XXXX, XXXX. This is being submitted as just XXXX of the many examples of unfair business practices conducted by SLS. It is not ethical and probably not legal to change the amount due 2 weeks after the due date and retro its effective date to the beginning of that current month.

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