Consumer complaint received 2019-05-20 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX, my husband and I suffered some financial difficulties and we worked to get a loan modification from SPS. Again in XXXX, my company, being sold, dropped my income in half causing further financial issues. My husband and I tried several RMA submissions and were denied. Eventually we went bankrupt in XX/XX/XXXX. After 15 months, in early XX/XX/XXXX, SPS filed a motion from relief of stay to get us out of the house & were granted it. Now although my husbands income was going to escrow to the XXXX, we were told the Trustee was unable to pay SPS due to the new court ruling granting the relief of stay. We couldn't pay the mortgage with the bulk of our funds going into escrow & went into default. I submitted a new RMA in XX/XX/XXXX and we were fully denied in XX/XX/XXXX. I was frantically calling my lawyer to see what we could do and he got the Trustee to release our funds in the escrow account to SPS. We had very few other debtors, who were already paid in full, so most funds were for SPS. Over $ XXXX was submitted to SPS and was denied saying it was not enough. In XXXX out of the blue, SPS called and told me we could resubmit my RMA. They didn't need financials but were willing to review it again. I did so, but because at this point I didn't trust what was going on, I contacted the Attorney General 's office. They followed up on my complaint and got me in touch with XXXX XXXX. It was now late XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, when XXXX / I requested mediation. Original mediation set up for XX/XX/XXXX. Bankruptcy was discharged XX/XX/XXXX due to no further debtors to be paid. Mediation was pushed back to XX/XX/XXXX due to Mediator requirement. Attendees - SPS representative, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX ( SPS Attorney ), XXXX XXXX, XXXX County Mediator, XXXX XXXX of XXXX Hud Counseling and homeowners, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Notes from XXXX XXXX can be submitted. 
Per Sues notes : Offered almost duplicate repayment plan that was previously offered & not accepted due to unrealistic with affordability for the balloon XX/XX/XXXX {$2200.00} 12 months with balloon due XX/XX/XXXX {$66000.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2200.00} 12 months with balloon due XX/XX/XXXX {$57000.00} SPS doubled the current P & I {$1100.00} to come to the monthly amount XXXX said there was an investor restriction with offering a modification when they payment would increase. Turns out there is not an investor guideline when questioned for the excerpt of the PSA. Then it was said it was industry standard. Pointed out that it is not industry standard but a XXXX guideline and is usually overcome with showing the homeowner can afford an increased payment. 
XXXX said that the modification was not offered due to the delinquency status it is too late since BK said the balloon would be too high and tossed a $ XXXX # that when questioned could not answer. Cant refi for XXXX yrs since BK. 
XXXX said 6.025 % was the investor required lowest rate possible for a modification for they tpe of loan but changed the tune when questioned. 
XXXX said to take the repayment plan and make payments on time and all the homeowner needs to do is call and ask for the repayment plan to be extended in XX/XX/XXXX. This didnt sit well since she already told us the investor required no more than a 12 month repayment plan. No trust to SPS from homeowners. 
Agreed ( without mediator discretion ) 2nd session. 
The repayment plan offer inputs show if a modification was offered it would be 40 year with 4.25 % giving a P & I payment of {$1200.00} which is very affordable to the homeowner. This also shows balloon of {$39000.00}. with UPB {$280000.00} so it appears some of the currently deferred amount from modification in XXXX would be rolled back into the UPB if it is offered. 
Issues discussed : SPS reported to XXXX credit report that the property is in DIL. XXXX is handling having it removed. XXXX said that this was outside of mediation but will handle. XXXX said she could not. 
On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX, mediation assistant for XXXX XXXX added an unknown person to the mediation email chain XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX said that they escalated to supervisor and also apologized in email. 
NPV inputs have XXXX income and so does repayment plan offer. 
XXXX said income was not used to do the review. Went in circles and determined that a review was not really done for a modification due to the packet submitted with mediation invoking was not reviewed due to the repayment plan was out there but that was voided XX/XX/XXXX if not received a payment and no payment was made. Mediation confirmed PV stating the offer stated it was voided due to no payment made. 
XXXX sent mediation packet to SPS on XX/XX/XXXX SPS and SPS did not review it since the repayment offer was out there. Determined it was already voided. SPS has in their call records that they told XXXX she could pay on it even though it was XXXX XXXX says they did not tell her and the bk was an issue with the relief of stay leading to SPS rejecting trustee payments. Bk discharged XX/XX/XXXX. 
Discussed the redacted docs XXXX issues it is internal and they are working on the vendor providing them. 
SPS has not actively participated in the mediation hardly at all. 
XXXX to provide the terms that were confusing in the session previous modification XXXX has : UPB {$200000.00} balloon {$130000.00} ( XXXX said prev mod had a balloon of {$38000.00} ) deferred {$85000.00} with HAMP incentives, forgave $ XXXX so remaining amount deferred $ XXXX Current UPB {$230000.00} Reinstate GT XX/XX/XXXX {$77000.00} Payoff GT XX/XX/XXXX {$320000.00} I have piles of documents including the above from XXXX XXXX, the mediator, all emails & original documents of denial & original repayment plans, new updated repayment plan ( same as old with larger balloon ) and screen captures of DIL on our credit reports with XXXX. 
The documents attached are from our recent mediation meeting on XX/XX/XXXX. I had previously filed a complaint with WA AG, but was closed XX/XX/XXXX. ( Note- SPS couldn't do an account review due to this, but had over 4 months since it was closed ). I have refiled complaints with WA state Attorney General, and new complaints with Dept of Financial Institutions and CFPB.

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