Consumer complaint received 2025-10-18 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this updated complaint against Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( Shellpoint ) regarding ongoing issues with the servicing of my mortgage loan, account number XXXX, for the property at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, CA XXXX. Since my previous communications, additional violations have occurred, including another rushed denial of my loss mitigation application and refusal to postpone the impending foreclosure despite federal protections. I believe Shellpoint has violated federal laws, including the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ), the Consumer Financial Protection Act, and rules prohibiting dual-tracking ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ). Below, XXXX detail the updated events, the company 's misconduct, and my requested resolution. 
What Happened Background on My Loan and Property Value : My original loan in XXXX was approximately {$1.00} XXXX, which I dispute has inexplicably remained around {$1.00} XXXX. My home is valued at least {$4.00} XXXX, with substantial equity that makes foreclosure unnecessary and harmful. The loan is serviced by Shellpoint and held by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ). 
Recent Hardship and Multiple Modification Applications : I lost my job in XX/XX/XXXX, a clear hardship affecting my payments. I submitted complete applications, acknowledged as such by Shellpoint on XX/XX/XXXX ( complete as of XX/XX/XXXX ), and again on XX/XX/XXXX ( complete as of XX/XX/XXXX ). Each promised a 30-day review and foreclosure protection. 
Pattern of Rushed Denials : Despite these acknowledgments, Shellpoint denied my applications prematurely. The XX/XX/XXXX, denial cited reasons like the approaching foreclosure sale, maximum modifications reached ( I've had three prior ones ), insufficient hardship verification, failed XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) test, excessive delinquency, and other programmatic ineligibility. No additional documents were requested before denial. Similarly, following the XX/XX/XXXX acknowledgment, I received another denial on XX/XX/XXXX, with similar excuses and no opportunity to address issues. This pattern suggests no genuine review is occurring. 
Lack of Communication and Deflection : Shellpoint continues to ignore my emails ( which I can see are opened ) and calls for months. Customer service refers me to the legal department, where attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX insists all communication go through him. He has repeatedly stated no further modifications are possible due to the prior three, ignoring my new hardship. Emails from Shellpoint 's Loss Mitigation XXXX XXXX XXXX ( e.g., in the chain ) confirm receipt but provide no substantive help. Recently, XXXX XXXX from XXXX requested a statement, underscoring Shellpoint 's failures. 
Foreclosure XXXX, XXXX, and Rejection of XXXX : The foreclosure sale remains scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX, despite protections granted in the acknowledgments. On XX/XX/XXXX, I emailed XXXX XXXX requesting postponement or cancellation and proposing a {$500000.00} short payoff settlement to resolve everything. On XX/XX/XXXX, he rejected the offer, reiterated ineligibility for modification, and refused to postpone the sale, stating " no reason to further postpone '' despite the active review period ( which should end around XX/XX/XXXX, per the XX/XX/XXXX letter ). This appears to be stalling to force foreclosure, violating dual-tracking prohibitions. 
Legal Action : I filed a verified complaint in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Case No. XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX, alleging dual-tracking, HBOR violations XXXX slander of title, emotional distress, and more. Shellpoint 's demurrer attempts to dismiss it, but these recent events bolster my claims. 

Under RESPA, I am entitled to responses to qualified written requests ( QWRs ) and direct communication, which Shellpoint has denied. 
What the Company Did Wrong Violation of Loss Mitigation Rules : Shellpoint must evaluate complete applications fully, considering new hardships like my job loss ( 12 CFR 1024.41 ). Denials based solely on prior modifications or without requesting needed info violate these rules.

Failure to Respond to Inquiries : RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2605 ) requires timely acknowledgments and responses, which Shellpoint has ignored, deflecting to an unresponsive attorney. 
Dual-Tracking Prohibition : Foreclosure can not advance during evaluation of a complete application. The acknowledgments explicitly granted protection, yet the XX/XX/XXXX sale proceeds, constituting illegal dual-tracking. 
Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts : Rushed denials, refusal to postpone despite protections, and rejecting a reasonable settlement feel abusive, especially with my equity and hardship. This ignores CFPB guidelines and appears designed to foreclose.

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