Consumer complaint received 2016-11-20 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
Over the course of the past 4.5 months, I 've become aware of the clear facts that Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc., the new mortgage servicer on my mortgage, evidently believes that Federal laws that govern the transfer of mortgage debt are merely 'suggestions ' and not actual law. 

Here are XXXX specific examples : 1. On or about XXXX XXXX, 2016, I received the attached " Service Transfer Notice '' from SPS alerting me to the fact that my loan was being transferred to SPS, effective XXXX XXXX, 2016. As you know, according to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 1692-1692p, specifically 809 - Validation of debts section ( a ) Notice of debt, SPS is required to send me within FIVE days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a written notice containing containing relevant information about the alleged debt. That subsequent letter, called a 'Verification of Debt ' letter, was not sent by SPS until XXXX XXXX, 2016, which was more than 2 weeks after the original communication, and well beyond the statutorily-required 5 day period ( see attached ). 

2. In addition, Federal law clearly requires that SPS disclose the name of the current CREDITOR since it was allegedly different than the original creditor. As of today, after 4.5 months and repeated attempts on my part to obtain the name of the original creditor, SPS has failed to provide that information to me, and instead, has tried to deflect answering the direct question by absurdly identifying XXXX XXXX, Trustee, as the 'Noteholder ' of the debt. 

However, in making that obviously false claim, SPS has : a. Completely and intentionally mis-stated my written request that clearly asked SPS to identify the name of the CREDITOR, and said nothing about providing the identity of the 'Noteholder ', as SPS falsely claimed. 

b. As you know, 803, part 4 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act defines a creditor as one to whom the debt is owed and does not include one to whom the debt has been transferred to solely to collect a debt following a default, which is what SPS is alleging occurred, making the title of " Creditor '' impossible as it relates to XXXX XXXX. 

c. Further, XXXX XXXX has stated in writing that it is 'merely the trustee for the Trust which owns the mortgage and note on this property ', and goes to say that 'the Trust is the owner of the mortgage and note, not the trustee ( see attached letter from XXXX XXXX ) . 

3. As you know, Federal law requires that SPS provides the name of the original CREDITOR as part of the Validation of Debt process. Accordingly, I requested in writing that SPS provide me with the name of the original creditor, and instead, the mis-stated again my request by changing the term to " Lender '', which may or may not be the actual creditor, also known as the person with a 'pecuniary ' interest in the loan. I requested from SPS to receive an affidavit stating the true identity of BOTH the original and current creditor, and to date, SPS has not provided either one. 

I realize that the CFPB is not an 'enforcement ' agency, but changes need to be made in the process that allows a mortgage servicer to simply ignore the law of the land, and worse, pretending it is following it by providing sham answers that rely on twisted definitions of clearly defined words. 

In the most recent correspondence from SPS, XXXX XXXX XXXX states that he 'consider ( s ) this matter resolved ''. 

Nothing could be further from the truth since I still do not know who the original creditor was, nor do I know who the current creditor is.

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