Consumer complaint received 2025-08-26 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
Here is the previous recap To recap over the course of this year, I was repeatedly asked for the same documents over and over. You spent XXXX  months with the XXXX submission of my tax return information. I supplied you with my tax extension confirmation but customer service kept repeating that underwriting, for some reason, wouldnt accept it even though it was direct from the IRS website. So eventually it was supposedly accepted by underwriting. Then it was the verification of mortgage which I supplied several times for my investment properties. After that it was the bank statements showing the proof of rent. I uploaded several bank statements as well as provided verbal verification to the different customer servicd reps. After a few months it was acceptable. Then it was the existing leases. I explained that for XXXX properties, the tenant lease wasnt renewed and that they were on a month-month lease, as highlighted in the lease provided to SPS. Once again, underwriting kept telling customer service to tell me that my response was not acceptable. This is when I knew SPS was maliciously trying to force the foreclosure. They spent another XXXX months telling me I needed to provide an updated lease and will not accept the fact that the tenant had reverted to a month to month, which meant there would be no signing of a new lease. I was clear to customer service, that either underwriting was maliciously trying to force foreclosure. How can they not accept my explanation and proof that the tenant had reverted to a month to month lease. Once they eventually accepted that, all of a sudden they needed new tax returns, then new bank statements, then new verification of mortgages, etc etc. After each call I was assured that the documents I would provide over and over would be the last thing underwriting would need to complete the review. This turned out to be a complete lie. All while I was being told the document I provided was the last thing needed, I was told the foreclosure sale date was set for XXXX, which was a few months away at the time. Even then they started asking for the same documents again. Most recently I was asked for bank statements with explanation of what was rent roll. This was just over a week ago. So I asked for a supervisor call back to explain why am I being asked for the same documents over and over again after being told at each step I have provided everything. Well I call in yesterday to check the eta of the call back and was abruptly informed that the review was closed and they had no type of assistance to offer. Mind you this was the day after someone posted a sheriff sale sign on the door which I was alerted with the tenant called me in a dire panic. At the time of thei letter the tenant informed me that someone came back to the house today. So now the tenant is stressed and suffering my emotional distress. 
====== I now believe the lender and servicer are in collusion to force the sale of the property. The servicer rep when I called after the judge pushed the original sale date because I provided enough detail to give my claim of negligence against the servicer some basis. I even called the servicer back the day after leaving court and was even told they don't have a copy of my loss mitigation paperwork to give me for my records, even though they told me they reviewed it and found that I didn ; t make enough money, which is a lie. Also in court the lender 's attorney lied to the judge 's face after his ruling by telling the judge they have already pushed the date twice even though that was my XXXX time ever in any XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX. Also on the call with the servicer, and once he realized my attorney was on the phone, the rep stated again that they denied my year long application but I could pay the reinstatement fee, which was never ever an option before.

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