Consumer complaint received 2019-12-18 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — 
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, My mortgage has been bought and sold two times in the past three months. I received no notification other than an email from the  purchaser each time. These emails went to my spam folder and I searched for any mortgage related information because I noticed that my automatic mortgage payment had not processed. In all cases, I set up automatic payments with the mortgage servicing company in good faith. In all cases I expect that my payments will be processed until I ( the consumer ) have been properly notified and onboarded to the new service company. 
This has not been the case. Neither time that my mortgage was sold was I notified appropriately. By this I mean I must receive notification in writing from the current owning institution that the mortgage has been sold, and I must receive notification in writing from the new mortgage owner with instructions regarding what I need to do to set up my payments. Then after I have been onboarded to the new service company, and only then, must my automatic payment be discontinued with the original company, e.g. the one selling the mortgage instrument. The discontinuation must only take place after the new mortgage payment arrangements with the new mortgage company have been established and verified, and I provide an acknowledgement to the selling institution that I wish to discontinue my payment arrangement with them. 
Current Situation and Historical Facts in This Matter : The original service company for my mortgage is " XXXX XXXX  XXXX  '' ( XXXX ). XXXX ; XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX I set up automatic payments with the XXXX institution when I bought my home in XX/XX/2019. On or about XX/XX/2019, XXXX sold my mortgage to Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( SMS ). 
Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, SC XXXX XXXX or call us at XXXX http : //www.shellpointmtg.com/ I received no written notification of this new arrangement either from XXXX or SMS. The only communique was an email that I came across by chance from Shellpoint. I contacted Shellpoint, was informed they had acquired the mortgage, and set up automated payments with Shellpoint. Payment was established XX/XX/2019. 
On or about XX/XX/2019, SMS sold my mortgage to XXXX. 
XXXX Mail code XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, LA XXXX XXXX Based on conversations with XXXX I have learned that SMS is under the misconception that I am " two mortgage payments behind. '' SMS discontinued my automatic payments ; I have bank statements detailing this fact. SMS is negligent in so doing because : 1 ) SMS canceled my payments without alerting me ; 2 ) SMS canceled my payment without my consent ; 3 ) SMS subsequently alleges that I am behind on my mortgage payment ( s ) to them, but this condition was created by SMS ' own action ; 4 ) SMS, if they reported this to credit bureaus, is intentionally harming me. Any rational thinker would suppose that some part of SMS ' fiduciary system is broken. SMS claim is patently absurd. SMS can not cancel my automated payment, and then claim that I have not paid. To reiterate, the reality of the situation is that SMS is negligent ; 1 ) By canceling my automated payments without my knowledge or consent ; 2 ) By then reporting to the credit agencies that I am the responsible party and to blame for the late payments.

Based on deduction, it is clear to me that SMS does not have a firm grasp of their own internal processes. I suggest that at the very least a team of SOC1 Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements ( SSAE ) 18 auditors should be dispatched to examine the SMS process and procedure to uncover the flaws that clearly exist. The most likely cause of this scenario is most likely something very similar to this scenario : 1 ) SMS is drawing funds from my bank to service my mortgage ; 2 ) SMS initiates a process by which my mortgage is bundled for sale ; 3 ) SMS discontinues my automated payments ; 3 ) SMS completes the sale of mortgages to XXXX  ; 4 ) SMS does not verify with me that I am aware of and prepared for this new development ; 5 ) SMS realizes that the sale of mortgages comes after payment is due, therefore SMS needs to receive payment ; 6 ) since the SMS payment automation no longer works, and I the so-called responsible party have no knowledge of the internal activities of SMS, my payment is not forthcoming because to my knowledge I am enrolled in an automated payment process for the mortgage ; 7 ) SMS reports me to the credit agencies. This is  outrageous. Such willfully negligent behavior by SMS must first be uncovered by SOC1 auditing, then once uncovered, this negligence must be addressed via sanctions or harsher actions in order that this atrocious behavior is publicized and summarily discontinued. Finally, SMS must repair their internal systems based on the SOC1 SSAE 18 report, so such unfortunate situations do not arise in the future. Again, I have never received any form of communication from SMS regarding these developments. SMS did not verify that I was aware of the developments with my mortgage. Nor did SMS go to any lengths to ensure my safety or wellbeing throughout any of the process. SMS by all indications is only looking out for SMS. Therefore, SMS has failed in its fiduciary duty to me as the servicer of my mortgage, and the failure is due entirely to SMS negligence. 
To recap, I have received no written notification of this new arrangement either from SMS or XXXX. The only communique was an email that I came across by chance from XXXX. I have contacted XXXX to gather information and set up automatic payments with them. Hence, in addition to my obligation to set up yet another automatic payment scheme, this time with XXXX, I am in the unfortunate situation of disabusing SMS of the notion that " I am behind '' in my payments. In fact, SMS is willfully negligent, and is the direct cause of this situation because they have failed in their duty to process my automatic payments. Apparently, SMS, and XXXX, believe that they have no obligation to me to process my payments when they have washed their hands of the mortgage. Nothing could be further from the truth, because when these " mortgage servicing companies '' fail to pay as per our arrangement, without verifying with me that payment new payment methods are in place, then I, the consumer, am imperiled. This situation is unacceptable. 
Clearly something is wrong with this process, as the consumer is the last to know that the mortgage arrangement has changed. It is incomprehensible that the consumer, the individual most vulnerable and susceptible to damage, is left out of the process completely. The consumer is left out that is until it is time to pay the piper. Then the consumer is expected to heave ho and produce. This " responsibility '' so conceived exists weather or not the consumer has been informed or has enough knowledge to pay whichever servicing company is now the " owner '' of the loan. 
Therefore, it must be mandatory that these servicing companies contact the consumer and verify that consumer is aware of the developments regarding such an important credit instrument. The consumer must be made aware of developments regarding the consumer 's important loan. This contact must be established and verified before the new servicing company takes the lead on servicing any loan. The consumer must have awareness of the situation and this understanding must be verified by the two service companies involved. 
This has not been the case, for me, and as a result, according to XXXX, SMS now claims that I am two payments behind on [ my ] mortgage. This although I have previously established automatic payments with SMS. Therefore, SMS is negligent in its obligation to me ( the consumer ) to service my loan. The same situation occurred in the case of the transfer from XXXX to SMS.  XXXX did not process my automatic payment, and as a result it was suggested I was late in paying the new owner, SMS. Actually, XXXX is negligent in its obligation to me ( the consumer ) in servicing my loan. Where are my interests, and the interests of the consumer in all this high-flying finance? Clearly my interests, and the interests of the consumer, are unimportant, subjugated, irrelevant ; the consumer does not even come into the equation on his/her loan except as a footnote after the fact. Clearly, somebody must pay for all this ; that falls on me the consumer. 
At this juncture, XX/XX/2019, I am in the unenviable position of needing to advocate for myself with the SMS the manifest unfairness of these developments. I am now situated such that I must converse with SMS regarding notions of " fair play, '' in lending practices and in the buying and selling of mortgage instruments. This is the crux of the issue then, to me a mortgage represents my home, something acquired with great personal sacrifice, and a safe happy family. To the bank a mortgage is a financial tool. To the bank a mortgage is an impersonal device, an appliance crafted to derive profit. 
This entire exercize is a needless waste of time and effort, as it is due entirely to the negligence of the mortgage servicing companies. At this point it is clear who suffers the damages. It is not the large institutions. In fact, it is the " small player, '' the consumer who bears the brunt of this outrage. 
Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, MD XXXX

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