Consumer complaint received 2025-11-19 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Payment process
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: TN

Complaint narrative:
IMMINENT HARM Orphan Servicing, Denied Ownership, and Void Loan Enforcement by XXXX XXXX XXXX NewRez LLC XXXX Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing Product and Company Product : XXXX residential mortgage Companies involved : NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX ( alleged parent of NewRez LLC ) What happened I am a 100 % permanent and total XXXX veteran with a XXXX-backed mortgage that is being serviced by NewRez LLC / Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, which publicly claims to be owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX However, in multiple written responses to my CFPB complaints, these entities have denied ownership, denied parent-subsidiary status, and denied servicing responsibility, effectively placing my loan into what I will call orphan status. 

An orphan loan is one where the claimed servicer and the alleged parent/owner explicitly disclaim any ownership, authority, or legal linkage over the loan, while still attempting to collect payments and threaten foreclosure. That is exactly what is happening here. 

1. Conflicting ownership and wrong company responses XXXX XXXX represents in SEC filings and public investor materials that NewRez LLC and Shellpoint are its wholly owned subsidiaries and key servicing platforms generating its mortgage servicing income. 
In contrast, my CFPB complaint responses from XXXXNewRez/Shellpoint repeatedly state wrong company, we dont service this loan, or deny that XXXX is the parent of NewRez and that NewRez/Shellpoint are related entities, despite those SEC and investor representations.

NewRez/Shellpoint have also denied servicing responsibility or legal ownership while still sending me mortgage statements, default/collection notices, and threats tied to foreclosure. 

These positions can not all be true. If XXXX is not the parent and NewRez/Shellpoint deny linkage, then no entity in this chain is acknowledging legal ownership or authority to enforce my promissory note and deed of trust. That creates an orphan loan with no valid party entitled to enforce it. 

2. Orphan status = no standing to collect or foreclose Under mortgage and UCC principles, a party may only enforce a negotiable promissory note and secured deed of trust if it is a person entitled to enforce the note ( XXXX ) or an authorized agent for such a person. Courts have held that : A foreclosure is invalid if brought by a party that does not hold the mortgage or can not demonstrate a valid assignment at the time of foreclosure ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ). 
A creditor or servicer must prove it is the party entitled to enforce the note and related security instrument to have standing ( XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 

Here, NewRez/Shellpoint and XXXX have , in writing to the CFPB, disclaimed parentage, ownership, and servicing authority while still attempting to bill and collect from me. If they are not the owner, not the parent, and not even the correct company, then they are not the XXXX, not a lawful mortgagee, and have no standing to collect, report, or foreclose on my XXXX  mortgage. 

3. Servicing while denying ownership is an unfair, deceptive, and abusive practice ( UDAAP ) Despite denying ownership and linkage : NewRez/Shellpoint continue to accept and demand monthly mortgage payments. 
They continue to send account statements, collection notices, and foreclosure-related communications. 
They continue to manipulate ledgers and escrow while refusing to correctly acknowledge who actually owns or has authority over my loan.

Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act, it is unlawful for covered persons or service providers to engage in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with consumer financial products or services. 

Servicing a loan while simultaneously denying any ownership, parentage, or servicing responsibility is : Unfair : It causes substantial injury ( threats of foreclosure, misapplied payments, emotional and financial harm ) that consumers can not reasonably avoid and that has no legitimate countervailing benefit. 
Deceptive : Consumers are misled as to who owns their loan, who is authorized to collect, and who has authority to modify or foreclose. 
Abusive : Consumers reasonably rely on the servicer and parent company to act in their interest, while those entities exploit that reliance by collecting on a loan they disclaim authority to enforce. 

This is especially abusive against me as a 100 % permanent and total XXXX veteran with a XXXX loan. 

4. RESPA / Regulation X violations from error notices about ownership and mis-servicing I have repeatedly given written and electronic notice of serious servicing errors, including : Conflicting loan balances and ledgers Misapplied or unapplied funds Receipt of another borrowers foreclosure financial documents ( clear data/servicing contamination ) Contradictions in who owns/controls my loan Threats of foreclosure while these issues remained unresolved Under Regulation Xs error resolution procedures, any written notice asserting an error in the servicing of a mortgage loan is a notice of error, and the servicer must investigate and either correct the error or provide a written explanation with supporting documents. 

Instead, NewRez/ShellpointXXXX : Responded with wrong company or ownership denials instead of resolving the core error. 
Continued to bill, collect, and threaten foreclosure while those ownership and ledger errors remained outstanding. 

Servicing a loan as if they are the owner/authorized servicer while simultaneously telling the CFPB they are not the owner/parent/servicer is a continuing Regulation X violation and a UDAAP. 

5. Systemwide risk : every NewRez/Shellpoint/XXXX  loan similarly affected is potentially unenforceable Because XXXX touts NewRez and Shellpoint as its core servicing platforms in SEC filings and investor presentations, yet NewRez/Shellpoint and XXXX have used wrong company and ownership-denial language in CFPB responses, the orphan-servicing problem is not just about my loan. It appears systemic. 

If NewRez and Shellpoint deny linkage to XXXX and deny ownership/servicing responsibility in formal responses while still collecting on loans, then : Every loan they service under this structure is at risk of orphan status. 
Every borrower in that situation is being subjected to potentially illegal collections, escrow manipulations, and foreclosure threats without a lawfully identified owner or XXXX. 
XXXX is being enriched by servicing income and cash flows from loans that, based on their own statements, they deny owning or legally controlling. 

This raises systemic UDAAP and RESPA concerns across the entire Rithm/NewRez/Shellpoint servicing book, not just my account. 



What I want the CFPB to do For my individual loan : Determine that, based on the companies own written denials of ownership, parentage, and servicing responsibility, NewRez/Shellpoint/XXXX  do not have standing or authority to collect, report, or enforce my mortgage. 
Treat my loan as legally unenforceable by these entities and require them to : Immediately cease all collection activity, including billing, phone calls, letters, and credit reporting. 
Immediately cease any foreclosure activity or threats, including acceleration notices or foreclosure referrals. 
Provide a full chain-of-title and XXXX verification, identifying the true owner or stating on the record that no lawful owner/servicer can be identified. 
Correct all tradeline reporting and remove any negative credit information they have furnished while denying ownership/authority. 

For systemic relief : Open a supervisory and enforcement investigation into XXXX XXXX, NewRez LLC, and Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing for : Collecting and foreclosing on loans where they have denied ownership, parentage, or servicing responsibility in CFPB responses or other regulatory communications. 
Violating RESPA/Regulation X servicing rules and the CFPBs UDAAP authority by operating orphan servicing platforms. 
Require these entities to : Identify and remediate every loan where a borrower is being serviced or foreclosed upon by an entity that has denied ownership/linkage. 
Cease all collections and foreclosure activity on such loans until a lawful owner/XXXX and agency authority are documented and disclosed to affected consumers. 
Provide restitution, fee refunds, and credit repair for borrowers who were billed, defaulted, or foreclosed upon by an entity that denied ownership or servicing authority. 
Consider civil money penalties and injunctive relief to ensure that XXXX/NewRez/Shellpoint can not continue to operate an orphan-servicing model that enriches XXXX on loans it disclaims. 

As a XXXX veteran with a XXXX loan, I am asking the CFPB to treat this as a high-priority matter affecting not only my home, but potentially thousands of other borrowers ( including servicemembers and veterans ) whose mortgages may already be in the same unlawful orphan status. 



Citation matrix ( APA-style ) Consumer Financial Protection Act UDAAP 12 U.S.C. 5531 & 5536 ( prohibiting unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with consumer financial products or services ). 

RESPA / Regulation X servicing error and loss mitigation duties Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. 26012617.

12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( error resolution procedures ; servicer must investigate and correct or reasonably explain errors, including servicing and payment application problems ).

12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( loss mitigation procedures ; prohibits certain foreclosure activity while issues remain unresolved ).

Standing/ person entitled to enforce the note ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( servicer/creditor must be a person entitled to enforce the note under the UCC to have standing ). 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( foreclosures invalid where foreclosing entities could not prove they held the mortgage at the time of sale ).

UDAAP interpretive guidance CFPB Policy Statement on Abusive Acts or Practices ( XXXX ). 
FDIC/NCUA guidance summarizing unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices.

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