Consumer complaint received 2025-11-08 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Payment process
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Servicer Identity Confusion and Regulatory Non-Response Complainant : XXXX XXXX Loan Number : Property Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, TN XXXX Servicer ( s ) Named : NewRez LLC / Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
Date : XX/XX/XXXX Point 1 : 1 Summary of the Problem My mortgage account is being presented under three different company XXXX XXXX XXXX, NewRez LLC, and Shellpoint Mortgage Servicingcreating confusion about who is legally responsible for servicing, error correction, and RESPA compliance. 
When I log into myaccount.newrez.com, it authenticates as NewRez but immediately redirects me to a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing dashboard that displays the same loan information. 
My billing statements, notices, and letters all carry the Shellpoint logo, while the website footer and licensing information identify NewRez LLC as the legal servicer. 
When I file CFPB complaints against NewRez, I receive only generic form letters from Shellpoint that do not address the specific regulatory violations raised. 

This structure leaves meand other borrowersunable to determine which company is accountable under federal law. 



2 Background Facts 1. Payments made in XX/XX/XXXX were misapplied or held in unapplied funds. 
2. I submitted several Notices of Error directly naming NewRez LLC as the servicer.

3. Every reply has come from Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing with language such as Thank you for contacting us ; your concern has been forwarded to the appropriate department. 
None of the replies include the statutory acknowledgment or findings required by 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ). 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, in its SEC filings, lists NewRez LLC ( and therefore Shellpoint ) as a wholly owned subsidiary, yet XXXX has previously responded to CFPB complaints by saying wrong company. 



3 Why This Matters Federal law allows only one servicer of record. Using multiple brand names fragments accountability and prevents borrowers from receiving proper statutory responses. 
The result is : No valid acknowledgment of Notices of Error. 
Contradictory account information between the NewRez and Shellpoint portals. 
Consumer confusion as to where to send payments, disputes, and legal correspondence. 

This pattern may constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice under 12 U.S.C. 5531 and a violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) ( 11 ) ( other errors ).

4 Requested Action 1. The CFPB should require NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing and parent XXXX XXXX XXXX to clarify in writing which legal entity is responsible for RESPA and Regulation X compliance.

2. Compel the servicer to provide a single point of contact and a full written investigation report addressing the errors previously submitted.

3. Examine whether the use of dual brand identities ( NewRez / Shellpoint ) constitutes a deceptive practice that impairs borrower rights.

4. Order correction of account balances, removal of any false delinquency entries, and full reconciliation of unapplied funds.

5 Attachments ( Recommended Exhibits ) Exhibit A : Screenshot of NewRez login page showing redirect to Shellpoint. 
Exhibit B : Copy of a CFPB complaint filed under NewRez LLC. 
Exhibit C : Customer Service form letter reply on Shellpoint letterhead. 
Exhibit D : Excerpt from XXXX XXXX XXXX  filing listing NewRez LLC as a wholly owned subsidiary. 



6 Complainant Statement Because these entities share data systems and corporate ownership, they should be treated as one servicer for regulatory purposes. Their current structure prevents meaningful error correction and causes continuing financial and credit harm. I request that the CFPB and state regulators require unified oversight and direct accountability from NewRez LLC / Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 


Exhibit E Proof of Servicer Identity Mismatch Description : Attached envelope received XX/XX/XXXX from Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, addressed to XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX. 

Significance : 1. Mailing Origin vs. Legal Servicer The envelope bears the Shellpoint brand and XXXX XXXX, XXXX  return address, yet the borrowers online account is hosted at myaccount.newrez.com, listing NewRez LLC as the servicer of record. 
2. Evidence of Dual Branding This demonstrates that NewRez and Shellpoint are operating a single servicing platform under two separate public identities. 
3. Consumer Confusion & Regulatory Conflict Borrowers are instructed to correspond with Shellpoint while their mortgage note, RESPA rights, and CFPB complaint filings are legally directed to NewRez LLC. This disconnect obstructs proper dispute resolution and misleads consumers about the responsible entity. 
4. Regulatory Implication : Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) ( 11 ) ( other errors ) and 1024.38 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( vi ), the servicer must clearly disclose its legal name and ensure accurate borrower communications. Using a trade name without disclosure of the underlying servicer violates both provisions and has been cited in CFPB v. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) as deceptive and misleading. 



I have attached an envelope showing that Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing corresponds with me, although my online account is under NewRez LLC. This proves that the same loan is being managed and communicated through two brand identities. Borrowers can not tell who the actual servicer is or where to direct RESPA notices. The enclosed mail piece establishes that NewRez LLC and Shellpoint are one and the same operation under XXXX XXXX, and this dual branding should be investigated as a deceptive servicing practice. 

Complaint Point 2 : 1. The Corporate Structure and Concealment Mechanism XXXX XXXX XXXX is the publicly traded parent company. 
NewRez LLC is XXXX wholly owned mortgage subsidiary the licensed servicer of record that holds the contractual and regulatory duties under RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2605 ) and Regulation X ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ). 
Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing is not a separate entity ; it is simply a trade name or doing business as division of NewRez LLC. 

However, consumers are rarely told this. Each brandXXXX NewRez, and Shellpointpresents itself as distinct. This fragmentation allows the same corporate group to shift responsibility among its own layers, producing the illusion that one company ( XXXX ) is only a holding company, another ( NewRez ) is a wholesaler, and a third ( Shellpoint ) is the servicer. 

The truth, documented in XXXX SEC  filings, is that all three operate as one integrated servicing enterprise. XXXX consolidates all revenue, risk, and operations of NewRez ( and therefore Shellpoint ) in its quarterly and annual reports. When consumers file complaints, XXXX legal team can respond wrong company, while NewRez funnels correspondence through Shellpoints customer-service portal. The result is a self-reinforcing system of misdirection. 



2. Why This Matters Under Federal Law This layered branding scheme directly interferes with the consumers federally protected rights : Violation of the Servicer-of-Record Requirement : Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ), the servicer of record must acknowledge and resolve Notices of Error. When NewRez delegates responses to Shellpoint, it circumvents that requirement and denies the borrower a compliant written determination. 
False and Misleading Communication : The Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) prohibits deceptive acts or practices. Communicating through a different brand while legally acting as NewRez creates confusion about who is accountable and frustrates a borrowers ability to obtain relief. 
Failure of Oversight by the Parent Company : Because XXXX certifies the integrity of NewRezs servicing operations in its SEC filings, repeated misapplications of funds and non-responses to CFPB complaints constitute evidence of parent-level control failure and potential material misrepresentation to investors. 



3. The Practical Impact on Consumers This structure creates a three-layered vacuum of accountability : 1. Borrower Confusion : Homeowners trying to resolve errors or apply unapplied funds receive form letters from Shellpoint that never mention NewRezs compliance obligations or XXXX ownership. Most borrowers have no idea which entity holds legal responsibility. 
2. Regulatory Evasion : Each brand can deny knowledge : Shellpoint claims its only the servicer. 
NewRez claims Shellpoint handled the response. 
XXXX claims its the wrong company. 
The complaint then circulates indefinitely without a proper statutory answer, defeating the purpose of RESPAs 30-day correction requirement. 
3. Financial Harm : Payments are often misapplied or trapped in unapplied funds accounts, producing artificial delinquency, negative credit reporting, and unwarranted fees. In this case, over {$100000.00} in unapplied funds and {$5000.00} in false past-due amounts are evidence of direct economic and reputational injury. 
4. Systemic Market Risk : When a parent company consolidates billions in servicing assets yet denies responsibility for its own subsidiarys compliance failures, both investors and consumers are relying on distorted disclosures. This undermines trust in the integrity of mortgage-servicing data used in securitizations and risk assessments. 



4. Broader Consumer Protection Significance The CFPB and state regulators have repeatedly sanctioned servicers for similar fragmentation tactics ( CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; In re XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). Those cases established that a parent company can not outsource or rebrand its way out of statutory duties. Consumers must have a single, accountable servicer of record. 

Here, the XXXXNewRezShellpoint chain converts that principle into a maze that ordinary borrowers can not navigate, effectively nullifying RESPAs protections through corporate opacity. 

To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions ( TNDFI ) CC : NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Subject : Demand for Immediate Federal and State Intervention Coercive Threats, Extortion, and Systemic Misapplication of Funds by NewRez LLC / Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing Executive Summary This complaint establishes that NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX knowingly maintained over {$100000.00} in unapplied funds while continuing to post false delinquency notices and demand payment already satisfied. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, a Shellpoint representative confirmed in a recorded call that approximately {$12000.00} in unapplied payments existed. Subsequent review revealed the true amount approaches {$100000.00}, spanning multiple periods. Despite this knowledge, the company issued collection-style communications and portal alerts warning of payment default and possible foreclosure. 

Such actions constitute coercive extortion and financial intimidation, violating multiple federal statutes and regulations governing mortgage servicing integrity. 



Key Evidence 1. Confirmed Payments ( Exhibits AB ) : XX/XX/XXXX : {$3900.00} posted from XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX. 
XX/XX/XXXX : {$750.00} posted from same account. 
Both transactions cleared the consumers bank and were accepted by Shellpoints system. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Exhibit C ) : Agent confirmed we currently show around XXXX XXXX in unapplied funds and that payments may be in suspense awaiting manual release. 
Follow-up supervisor call revealed internal audit identified significantly more unapplied fundsnear XXXX XXXX XXXX dollars. 
XXXX. Threat and Extortion Pattern ( Exhibits XXXX ) : Despite these admissions, Shellpoint issued late-fee postings, delinquency alerts, and payment threats via portal and email, demanding immediate payment under risk of foreclosure. 
This occurred after proof of payment had been verified and unapplied funds were acknowledged internally. 
XXXX. Systemic Ledger Manipulation ( Exhibits XXXX ) : Dual portals ( NewRez vs Shellpoint ) show identical loan number XXXX but conflicting balances. 
Escrow listed as {$2700.00} since XX/XX/XXXX with no correction. 
Late fees ( {$1000.00} ) and Other Fees ( {$75.00} ) imposed without missed payments. 



Violations 12 C.F.R. 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) Failure to credit payments as of date received.

12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) Failure to correct servicing error after notice.

12 C.F.R. 1024.36 ( d ) Failure to provide complete accounting upon request.

12 U.S.C. 5531 and 5536 Unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices.

18 U.S.C. 1344 ( Bank Fraud ) Execution of a scheme to defraud by manipulating financial records.

18 U.S.C. 875 ( d ) Extortion through threat of financial harm to obtain additional payments.

Interpretation Once NewRez confirmed the existence of unapplied funds, any continued billing, late-fee imposition, or threat of foreclosure ceased to be administrative error. It became intentional coercion, leveraging false delinquency to compel duplicate payments. 
This conduct mirrors the predicate acts recognized in XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) ( extortion via financial coercion ) and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( payment misapplication violating RESPA ). 

The internal segregation of payments into unapplied/suspense accounts while simultaneously demanding further payment constitutes a dual-ledger enrichment mechanism : consumers pay twice, while servicer balance sheets inflate escrow deficits for revenue recognition under XXXX XXXX consolidated reporting. 



Requested Relief and Action 1. Immediate CFPB and TNDFI enforcement audit of NewRez/Shellpoint servicing operations. 
2. Cease-and-desist order against further collection or threat communications on XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX. Mandatory application of all unapplied funds to principal and interest as of original receipt dates. 
XXXX. Refund of improper fees and charges ( total {$1000.00} plus interest ). 
XXXX. Written ledger audit and servicing history under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36 ( d ) ( 2 ). 
XXXX. Referral to the Department of Justice for review of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. 1344 and 875 ( d ). 
XXXX. Compensatory damages of {$100000.00} for withheld funds and {>= $1,000,000} for emotional, psychological, and financial harm caused by coercive threat and public credit risk. 



Conclusion NewRez LLC and Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing intentionally used false delinquency threats to extract additional payments after acknowledging the existence of unapplied funds exceeding {$100000.00}. This constitutes systemic fraud and extortion within the meaning of federal law and demands immediate multi-agency enforcement. 

Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX / Consumer Witness

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