Consumer complaint received 2025-09-02 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: Shellpoint Partners, LLC
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
. 
RE : Complaints # XXXX & # XXXX - FORMAL DISSATISFACTION & DEMAND FOR ESCALATION TO ENFORCEMENT CONSUMER : XXXX XXXX XXXX ADDRESS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CA XXXX FORECLOSURE SALE XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX - 31 days as of XX/XX/XXXX CONTACT : XXXX | XXXX SUBJECT : CFPB Improper " Duplicate '' Marking - Procedural Obstruction of Emergency Enforcement TO : XXXX XXXX XXXX, CFPB Office of Enforcement EMERGENCY SITUATION : 31 days until XX/XX/XXXX foreclosure sale CFPB PROCEDURAL OBSTRUCTION VIOLATES AGENCY GUIDELINES The CFPB 's marking of XXXX # XXXX ( against Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, filed XX/XX/XXXX ) as a " duplicate '' of # XXXX ( against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, filed earlier ) constitutes procedural obstruction of emergency enforcement. This violates CFPB 's own guidelines on independent complaint processing, which reserve duplicate markings for identical issues submitted by or on behalf of the same consumer against the same entity, not distinct violations across separate regulated companies. This also breaches 12 C.F.R. Section 1024.35 requirements for error resolution. 

These complaints are fundamentally and legally distinct : Different regulated entities : Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( mortgage servicer ) vs. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( indenture trustee ) Different federal violations : Shellpoint 's RESPA Section 2605 ( e ) servicing errors, including predatory reinstatement quotes inflating deficits to {$590000.00} as of XX/XX/XXXX, improper fees ( {$2500.00} legal fees and {$970.00} inspection charges ), and failure to validate debt under FDCPA Section 1692g despite XX/XX/XXXX certified mail requests vs. XXXX 's trustee fiduciary breaches under federal securities law Different legal theories : Shellpoint 's dual tracking and California Civil Code Section 2924c violations vs. XXXXXXXX XXXX indenture trustee duties under XXXX XXXX XXXX and Investment Company Act fiduciary standards This improper marking obstructs time-sensitive consumer protection for a XXXX XXXX homeowner surviving on {$1300.00} monthly Social Security, enabling illegal foreclosure despite documented federal and state violations. The CFPB 's procedural error creates potential agency liability under the Administrative Procedure Act for arbitrary and capricious action. 

SYSTEMATIC DELAY COORDINATION ENABLED BY CFPB INACTION The " duplicate '' marking occurred XX/XX/XXXX, the same day I submitted feedback demanding director-level intervention after a CFPB representative claimed the Bureau " can't do much. '' This statement directly contradicts CFPB 's enforcement authority under 12 U.S.C. Section 5564 and suggests bias, inadequate training, or procedural error requiring immediate supervisory review. 

This CFPB procedural obstruction enables a coordinated delay strategy across the entire securitization chain : - Shellpoint deflected to New Residential while ignoring systemic name fraud using " XXXX '' despite XXXX court order, violating FDCPA Section 1692e - New Residential deflects to Caliber - Caliber deflects to XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX deflects to XXXX - XXXX deflects to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX - CFPB marks legitimate complaints as " duplicates, '' preventing mandatory company responses and regulatory resolution This coordinated buck-passing targeting a vulnerable XXXX XXXX consumer on limited Social Security income constitutes systematic elder financial abuse. This is bordering on elder abuse, and this must cease and desist immediately. 

EXTRAORDINARY PAYMENT HISTORY DEMONSTRATES GOOD FAITH I have paid approximately {$1.00} XXXX over 19 years on a {$1.00} XXXX loan, with principal balance confirmed at {>= $1,000,000} as of XX/XX/XXXX. This exceptional 84 % payment performance over nearly two decades should preclude foreclosure under any reasonable servicing standard. This payment history, combined with predatory reinstatement quotes inflating deficits and deliberate silence on validation requests, renders the XX/XX/XXXX sale unconscionable and constitutes systematic elder financial abuse. 

DOCUMENTED FEDERAL VIOLATIONS REQUIRING EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT This case involves systematic violations across multiple federal statutes requiring immediate CFPB enforcement action : FDCPA Sections 1692e and 1692g Violations : Persistent use of " XXXX '' identification constituting identity fraud that prevents effective consumer defense, combined with deliberate silence on XX/XX/XXXX debt validation requests while proceeding with collection and foreclosure activities. This mirrors predatory collection practices targeting elderly consumers. 

RESPA Section 2605 ( e ) Dual Tracking Violations : Advancing foreclosure sale amid pending error resolution disputes while providing inaccurate reinstatement quotes that exclude XXXX payment of {$15000.00} and artificially inflate deficit amounts to deny statutory reinstatement rights under California Civil Code Section 2924c. 

Elder Financial Abuse under California Welfare & Institutions Code Section 15610.30 : Coordinated delay tactics and buck-passing across entities designed to exploit the vulnerability of a XXXXXXXX XXXX citizen on fixed Social Security income , warranting treble damages under Section 15657.5. 

Federal Securities Law Violations : XXXX 's deflection ignores non-delegable fiduciary duties as indenture trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX, enabling the predatory servicing scheme in violation of Investment Company Act standards and SEC oversight requirements. 

California Civil Code Section 2924c Violations : Weaponized reinstatement calculations designed to deny statutory reinstatement rights through inflated and inaccurate figures that exclude legitimate payments and add unauthorized fees. 

DEMAND FOR EMERGENCY ENFORCEMENT ACTION WITHIN 24 HOURS Pursuant to CFPB 's emergency enforcement authority under 12 U.S.C. Sections 5564 ( a ) and 5531, I demand the following immediate actions within 24 hours of receipt ( by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) : 1. Immediate removal of improper " duplicate '' marking from Complaint # XXXX with supervisory review of the staff member responsible 2. Separate expedited processing of both complaints with mandatory company responses within 15 business days under emergency timeline 3. Emergency cease-and-desist order halting the XX/XX/XXXX foreclosure sale pending full investigation of documented federal violations 4. Internal investigation into CFPB staff handling of these time-sensitive complaints and the statement that the Bureau " can't do much '' regarding clear federal violations 5. Immediate referral to CFPB Enforcement Division for civil penalty proceedings against all violating entities for systematic elder financial abuse and coordinated FDCPA/RESPA violations 6. Coordination with California DFPI and Attorney General for parallel state enforcement action given the elder abuse component FORMAL REJECTION OF SYSTEMATIC DEFLECTION RESPONSES XXXXXXXX XXXX deflection to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ignores fundamental legal principles governing indenture trustee responsibilities. Their response fails to address : - Non-delegable fiduciary duties under the XXXX XXXX XXXX indenture agreement - Statutory authority to halt foreclosure proceedings amid documented chain-of-title defects and servicer violations- Fiduciary obligations to both certificate holders and borrowers under federal securities law - The 31-day emergency timeline requiring immediate trustee intervention to prevent irreparable harm - Elder abuse implications of coordinated delay tactics targeting vulnerable consumers Similarly, Shellpoint 's deflection to New Residential while continuing to use fraudulent " XXXX '' identification violates both FDCPA Section 1692e and elder protection statutes by deliberately preventing effective consumer defense during the critical pre-foreclosure period. 

COMPREHENSIVE MULTI-CHANNEL ESCALATION INITIATED This matter is being simultaneously forwarded to investigate CFPB 's failure to enforce statutory consumer protection duties and prevent systematic elder financial abuse : Federal Level : - CFPB Director XXXX XXXX and Enforcement Division - Senate Banking Committee XXXX XXXX XXXX and Ranking Member XXXX XXXX XXXX House Financial Services Committee Chairman XXXX XXXX and Ranking Member XXXX XXXX - CFPB Office of Inspector General for procedural violations and potential bias - Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Ombudsman State Level : - California Attorney General XXXX XXXX Elder Abuse Unit - California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation - California Department of Aging Elder Abuse Prevention Program Consumer Advocacy and Media : - National Consumer Law Center - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Local and national media outlets covering elder financial abuse and regulatory failure The coordinated nature of these violations across multiple CFPB-regulated entities, combined with the Bureau 's procedural obstruction through improper duplicate marking, demonstrates systemic failure in consumer protection that requires immediate congressional oversight and public accountability. The elder abuse component makes this case particularly egregious and appropriate for comprehensive media coverage. 

LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF CONTINUED CFPB INACTION Should the CFPB fail to take emergency enforcement action within the demanded 24-hour timeframe ( by XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), this procedural obstruction and regulatory failure will be included in subsequent federal litigation as evidence of : - Administrative Procedure Act violations through arbitrary and capricious agency action - Failure to enforce statutory consumer protection mandates under the Dodd-Frank Act - Enabling of elder financial abuse through improper case handling - Potential agency bias or inadequate staff training requiring oversight intervention The documented pattern of federal law violations, if allowed to proceed to illegal foreclosure sale, will result in comprehensive litigation against all entities in the securitization chain with CFPB 's procedural failures and enforcement abdication as primary evidence of systematic regulatory breakdown and potential agency liability. 

Additionally, this case will serve as precedent for challenging CFPB 's improper use of " duplicate '' markings to obstruct legitimate consumer complaints involving distinct entities and violations, requiring policy reform and staff retraining. 

STATUS : FORMAL DISSATISFACTION - EMERGENCY ESCALATION ACTIVE ACROSS ALL CHANNELS Time remaining until illegal foreclosure : 31 days as of XX/XX/XXXX CFPB emergency response window demanded : 24 hours ( by XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) Escalation status : Active across federal, state, advocacy, and media channels Elder abuse reporting : Initiated with appropriate state and federal agencies Congressional notification : Pending CFPB response timeline Media outreach : Prepared for immediate release upon CFPB inaction This emergency situation requires immediate CFPB enforcement action to prevent irreparable harm to a vulnerable consumer through illegal foreclosure proceedings enabled by systematic federal law violations. The documented pattern of FDCPA, RESPA, and securities law violations, combined with CFPB 's procedural obstruction and staff statements minimizing agency authority, creates comprehensive liability for both the regulated entities and potentially the Bureau itself if this foreclosure proceeds without proper emergency enforcement intervention. 

The CFPB 's mission to protect consumers, particularly vulnerable populations like elderly and XXXX Americans, is being undermined by procedural obstruction and inadequate enforcement response. Immediate director-level intervention is required to restore agency credibility and prevent systematic elder financial abuse. 

Respectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX CFPB Complaint # XXXX CFPB Complaint # XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX this is not s similar complaint please read the entire thing do not ignore

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