Consumer complaint received 2021-12-12 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I have been in a loan modification with Select Portfolio Servicing for the last three and a half months. They are servicing the loan for XXXX XXXX, for which I earlier demanded to know who owned the note. To date, XXXX XXXX has not recorded the note with the County Recorder 's Office. 

My income was affected by Covid and I wasn't able to make my mortgage payments for the last year and a half. They put XXXX payments on the back end of my mortgage and some of XXXX. 

In XXXX, I was sent a demand letter for over {$22000.00}, and told them I couldn't pay it. In XXXX, I asked for another loan modification and they said I was eligible, and I promptly sent them their every request. Then the charade started. 

For some reason, it would appear that SPS was intentionally stalling the process, for what reason I have not the faintest idea. They wanted to see more recent check stubs. I very carefully explained that I was a XXXX XXXX, the checks come from the studios to the XXXX XXXX XXXX, are processed by the guild and sent to me. They continued with this, saying that the stubs were over 90 days old. They were not. Not one stub was over 60 days old. I started sending them every stub I got for months. Then their emails came in saying they couldn't see the year-to-dates. The YTDs were very clearly marked on every stub I sent. Then they wanted to see another stub from XXXX, where again I explained that isn't how it works, the checks come when they come and from wherever they come. This went on for some more weeks, until finally they quit on the XXXX obsession. This is all in black and white in my file. The latest and final absurdity came by way of email, stating that my residuals were too infrequent. I showed them I had made over {$13000.00} this year in residuals. I told them I had worked over thirty years and made over XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This fell on deaf ears. 

I want to further point out, and let the file show, that I reached out to my relationship manager threw the course of this meandering process both in email and on the phone no fewer than fifty times. I have yet to ever speak with this woman. It was noted in one phone call and email that she had tried to reach out to me the day before I was speaking to another Customer Care Expert. My cell phone record disputes. Every call I received the day before was accounted for. This was simply not true. 

Finally, I got a decision, congratulating me on getting a repayment plan, to the tune of paying back over {$30000.00} dollars at nearly {$6000.00} dollars a month for a year. They further went on to inform me that I wasn't eligible for a modification because I had already had one. This was a complete contradiction from earlier correspondence stating that I most clearly eligible for a modification. My friend just got her second modification from SPS, servicing for XXXXXXXX XXXX, same as mine. Then it goes on to say that their decision was NOT based on my income, with no further explanation. They went on to tell me that if these terms didn't work for me, I could do a short sale to avoid a foreclosure on my record. 

I received this congratulatory decision on XX/XX/XXXX, stating I had until XX/XX/XXXX to accept the terms or I could appeal, and not be in jeopardy of foreclosure while the appeal is reviewed, unless, of course, the courts decide otherwise, no guarantees. 

Needless to say, I immediately wrote and emailed my appeal the following day, XX/XX/XXXX. SPS 's suggested nearly 100 % income to payment ratio is egregious and predatory and violates institutional regulatory oversight and compliance with this bureau and any number of any other banking regulatory agencies. SPS has put me in an impossible situation that is untenable, not to mention that they are solely responsible for dragging this out, for no good reason that I am aware of. Everything I have stated here is true and correct, and if anything, is conservative respectful of the vast amount of unnecessary correspondence. I will further add that I've heard nothing from SPS since I sent over my appeal. 

Finally, on a personal note, I wish to convey clearly that my wife has XXXX and this process and manipulation has been extremely stressful and impactful on her. This is now getting to a point of jeopardizing her health and that is unacceptable.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation