Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.'s headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. has 11 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

  3217 S Decker Lake Dr Salt Lake Cty, UT 84119-3284

• 

  Select Portfolio Servicing Inc.

  PO Box 53077 Jacksonville, FL 32201

• 

  Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

  PO Box 65250 Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0250

• 

  Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

  PO Box 65450 Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0450

• 

  Select Portfolio Servicing Inc.

  10401 Deerwood Park Blvd Bldg 2 Jacksonville, FL 32256-5007

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/12/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Ref: Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., aka ‘SPS’. Located in Salt Lake City, Ut. and Jacksonville, Florida. On June 28, 2023 I closed on my property located in Broward County Florida. The title company sent two checks via overnight delivery that were received and signed for by SPS on June 29, 2023. The two checks, prepared as per the SPS payoff statement, were issued in a timely manner to satisfy a primary and a second mortgage. This is where the problems begin. And it seems to be an all too common thread in SPS published complaints. Documentation was sent to SPS however they claim to have not received, or could not locate, the primary pay off check. This prompted the title company to stop payment on the check and wire the funds a second time to SPS. SPS is now claiming additional payment is required to cover escrow disbursements and interest due to late receipt of funds. This is a false claim so formal dispute was entered with SPS. They stated they would conduct an investigation on the missing funds/check and provide a written response within 30 days. SPS has not provided a written response 60 days hence. Further to this, SPS is reporting derogatory information to the credit companies and is attempting to collect on 2 months past due payments on a mortgage that is paid off. Several attempts were made, phone calls and in writing, to resolve the disputes to no satisfaction. SPS should close out the final payoff, reverse the claim of additional funds and remove the negative credit reports. I suspect SPS will likely respond with a preformatted auto reply: ‘We are in the process of completing our research to address your concerns. We apologize for the delay and expect to have a response shortly.’ This statement is simply not good enough. SPS is in clear violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and engages in negligent corporate behavior. I do not accept responsibility for any late charges or penalties brought about by SPS’s malfeasance.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/28/2023

  Payoff - 
  In the inquiries, Mr. **** stated a check in the amount of $296,204.04 was sent on June 29, 2023, to
  pay off this account in full. FedEx documentation was provided to support the date of receipt for this
  check. We conducted an investigation and determined the package in question contained funds in the
  amount of $40,174.74 with a payoff quote for loan **********, which is Mr. ****’s other account.
  These funds were applied and that loan was paid in full.
  SPS has no record of receiving the check #*****. However, funds in the amount of $296,204.04 were
  received by wire for this account on July 11, 2023. Because, this amount was short by $720.54 to pay the
  account in full, and the short amount was not provided to SPS before July 25, 2023, this wire was
  returned to sender.
  However, as seen in the enclosed SPS Transaction History, we received the payoff funds on September
  27, 2023, and the account is now paid in full.
  Credit Reporting
  In the inquiries, Mr. **** questioned SPS’ credit reporting processes. Please know that our legal and
  contractual obligations guide SPS on how to report an account’s status to the credit reporting agencies
  (CRAs). Our review of the information provided to the CRAs confirms that the reported information
  matches the status of the account.
  Based on this, we will not be requesting an update to the information we provided. SPS reports credit
  information to Equifax, Experian, TransUnion, and Innovis. If Mr. **** is reviewing a report from any
  other source, please be advised we are unable to review or update that source.
  Allegations
  In the inquiries, Mr. **** and Mr. Anderson raised several claims regarding negligent corporate
  behavior. We have reviewed the claims and find no merit to the allegations. SPS is confident that the
  servicing of the loan by SPS has been compliant with all applicable state and federal regulations.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/29/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:Select Portfolio servicing provided false credit information to the credit companies based on their assertion that the primary payoff funds were not received in a timely manner.  There exists irrefutable proof that the payoff check was sent in a timely manner by the title company and signed for by SPS. There are bank records of the payoff check and a title company affidavit that confirms due diligence.  SPS delayed a resolution to the issue for over 80 days while accumulating additional payments and late charges totaling $10,983.00. SPS continues to issue mortgage statements in an attempt to collect monies not owed to them.  The described SPS actions demonstrate a willful intent to provide false information to the credit companies.  I do not accept the response and will not accept anything less than the original request.  Reverse the payments / late charges, correct the derogatory credit reports and close out the mortgage satisfaction.     
  

  Sincerely,
  
  ******* ****

  Business Response

  Date: 10/10/2023

  Fees / Paid in Full Transaction -
  In the inquiries, Mr. **** questioned information related to the payoff and late fees. As explained in the
  enclosed response letter dated September 28, 2023, SPS investigated the issue and determined that the
  FedEx package contained funds in the amount of $40,174.74 with a payoff quote for loan #**********,
  which was Mr. ****’s other account. That loan was paid in full, and we have no evidence that the
  $296,204.04 was included in that package.
  SPS has a record of receiving $296,204.04 via wire on July 11, 2023. This amount was short the amount
  to pay this account in full by $720.54, and the shortage amount was not remitted to SPS before July 25,
  2023, which caused the funds to be returned to sender.
  On September 26, 2023, the new payment of $296,924.58 was received and the funds were used to
  satisfy the loan in full; we made this transaction effective July 11, 2023. Please be advised further that
  the Lender Placed Insurance (LPI) charge of $2,007.51 assessed to the escrow account on September 6,
  2023, was removed from the account.
  While the LPI charge and the late fees on the account from August 2023 and September 2023 were
  valid, SPS also waived the late fees of $155.88.
  Credit Reporting - 
  In the inquiries, Mr. **** questioned the credit information SPS provided to the credit reporting agencies
  (CRAs). As a one-time courtesy, SPS has requested that the CRAs suppress all of the negative
  reporting. Please be advised that the corrections were completed October 5, 2023.
  It may take up to 60 days for the update to appear on the credit report. Until posted, you may use this
  letter as evidence of the updated credit reporting.
  As of the date of this letter, the account is paid in full

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/07/2023

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I was given & took the option from the mortgage company to pause my payments during the pandemic due to financial hardship. While acknowledging I was already behind on my mortgage payments due to prior unemployment, I was able to secure a loan modification about 6 years ago. After the pandemic ended, I tried to get back on terms to begin paying my mortgage again and applied for another modification in which I was denied and will not even consider a modification unless I pay over $85,000 in back payments. The mortgage company is taking advantage of me by using my financial hardship as an excuse to deny the modification & begin foreclosure proceedings.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/11/2023

  The response does not fit in the allotted parameters. Response is also being mailed. 

  Response:

  Loss Mitigation
  In the inquiries, loss mitigation assistance was requested. It was previously indicated that ********
  ******** was impacted by COVID-19. On June 30, 2020, SPS sent the enclosed Forbearance Plan. As
  outlined in the Forbearance Plan, the account was approved for a three-month temporary Forbearance
  Plan, which began on June 1, 2020.
  Our records show that Mr. ******** completed the Post-COVID-19 Application and based on the
  information provided, the account was approved for an extension of the Forbearance Plan. As outlined in
  the enclosed COVID 19 Decision Notice sent on September 3, 2020, the account was approved for a sixmonth
  temporary Forbearance Plan, which began on September 1, 2020.
  Our records show that Mr. ******** completed the Post-COVID-19 Application again, and based on
  the information provided, he was approved for an extension of the Forbearance Plan. As outlined in the
  enclosed COVID-19 Decision Notice sent on February 8, 2021, the account was approved for a threemonth
  temporary Forbearance Plan, which began on March 1, 2021.
  On February 5, 2022, we spoke to an account holder, and it was indicated Mr. ******** as still
  impacted by COVID-19. As outlined in the enclosed COVID-19 Decision Notice sent on February 8,
  2022, the account was approved for a six-month temporary Forbearance Plan, which began on February
  1, 2022. Our records show that Mr. ******** completed the Post COVID-19 Application again, and based on the
  information provided, a further review was needed to evaluate options to resolve the past due amounts
  on the account.
  Please note the account was in foreclosure at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, the
  account was ineligible for a Deferral under NY Banking Law 9-X. However, SPS still offers loss
  mitigation.
  On June 4, 2021, SPS sent the enclosed Trial Modification Plan. Our records showed we received all
  three Trial Modification Plan payments.
  On November 11, 2021, SPS sent the enclosed Loan Modification Agreement. As outlined in the
  enclosed Assistance Review Expiration Notice dated December 27, 2021, SPS considered the Loan
  Modification Agreement withdrawn because our customer was offered a modification, but did not accept
  the offer of loss mitigation assistance by the established deadline.
  On October 27, 2022, SPS sent the enclosed Assistance Review Decision Notice, which advised the
  account was approved for a Trial Modification Plan. SPS considered the Trial Modification Plan
  withdrawn because we did not receive the first payment by the required due date.
  On May 9, 2023, an Assistance Review Application was initiated. As outlined in the enclosed Assistance
  Review Decision Notice sent on June 23, 2023, SPS reviewed the complete Assistance Review
  Application for eligibility under its loss mitigation options, which are established through investor rules,
  and are based on individual circumstances. We were unable to offer a home retention solution. All programs listed in the Assistance Review Decision Notice are the programs for which the account was
  denied and the specific reason for non-approval. These denials were based on the criteria where the
  account did not pass the program eligibility requirements; we did not consider other criteria regarding
  ineligibility as part of our decision.
  If there are any further questions, please contact SPS or visit our website for more information.
  SPS is confident that the servicing of the account by SPS has been compliant with all applicable state
  and federal regulations.
  Noteholder
  In the inquiries, you requested clarification regarding the Noteholder’s identity. Freddie Mac is the owner
  of the account, and SPS is the mortgage servicer of the account. As the mortgage servicer, SPS is
  authorized to collect all payments and administer the terms of the enclosed Note and Mortgage.
  Questions or disputes regarding the account and any request for mortgage assistance should be directed
  to SPS in order to ensure a timely response and resolution. We have enclosed the Noteholder
  Information Notice.
  As of the date of this letter, the account is due for August 1, 2019.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/12/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because it was never communicated to me I was in foreclosure at the onset of the covid-19 pandemic.  Also if I was supposedly approved for a Trail Modification plan 10/7/22 (which I never received), why would I be rejected for it only months later 6/23/23 after initiating the Assistance Review Application using the same information provided (paystubs, tax returns W-2s, etc) then as it was now?  I don't understand what could've changed in the few months in-between.  I'm still not satisfied this complaint has been resolved to my satisfaction.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******** ********

  Business Response

  Date: 09/20/2023

  Loss Mitigation
  In the inquiry, Mr. ******** requested loss mitigation assistance. On June 30, 2020, SPS sent the
  enclosed Forbearance Plan. As outlined in the Forbearance Plan, the mortgage account was approved
  for a three-month Temporary Hardship Forbearance Plan, beginning on June 1, 2020.
  Our records show that Mr. ******** completed the Post COVID-19 Application and based on the
  information provided, he was approved for an extension of the COVID-19 Temporary Forbearance Plan.
  As outlined in the enclosed COVID-19 Decision Notice dated September 3, 2020, the mortgage account
  was been approved for an additional six month Temporary Hardship Forbearance Plan, beginning on
  September 1, 2020.
  Our records show the Post COVID-19 Application was completed again, and based on the information
  provided, Mr. ******** was approved for an extension of the COVID-19 Temporary Forbearance Plan.
  As outlined in the enclosed COVID-19 Decision Notice dated February 8, 2021, the mortgage account
  was approved for a three-month Temporary Hardship Forbearance Plan, beginning on March 1, 2021.
  On June 4, 2021, SPS sent the enclosed Assistance Review Decision Notice with an approved Trial
  Modification Plan. Our records showed we received all three Trial Modification Plan payments and on
  November 11, 2021, SPS sent the enclosed Loan Modification Agreement. As outlined in the enclosed
  Assistance Review Expiration Notice dated December 27, 2021, SPS considered the Loan Modification
  Agreement withdrawn because Mr. ******** was offered a modification, but did not accept the offer of
  loss mitigation assistance by the established deadline.
  On February 5, 2022, we spoke to Mr. ******** and he indicated he was still impacted by COVID-19.
  As outlined in the enclosed Forbearance Plan dated February 8, 2022, the mortgage account was
  approved for an additional six-month Temporary Hardship Forbearance Plan, beginning on February 1,
  2022.
  Mr. ******** completed an additional Post COVID-19 Application on July 20, 2022; however, based on
  the information provided, in which he indicated that his hardship had not been resolved and he was
  unable to resume payments of $1,525.18, a further review was needed to evaluate options to resolve the
  past due amounts on the account because we had previously offered the maximum forbearance period
  allowed for the account. As such, on July 20, 2022, an Assistance Review Application was initiated. As
  outlined in the enclosed Assistance Review Decision Notice dated October 27, 2022, SPS reviewed the
  complete Assistance Review Application for eligibility under its loss mitigation options.
  Mr. ******** was approved for a three month Trial Modification Plan with monthly payments due on the
  first of each month in the amount of $1,627.86, beginning with the first payment due on December 1,
  2022. The mailing address on file at the time the notice was sent was ** ******** **., Mahopac, NY
  10541-0000; however, Mr. ******** was enrolled in paperless communication as of February 10, 2021.
  As such, this notice was available to him on the SPS website provided below. SPS considered the Trial
  Modification Plan withdrawn because we did not receive the first payment by the required due date.
  On May 9, 2023, an Assistance Review Application was initiated. As outlined in the enclosed Assistance
  Review Decision Notice dated June 23, 2023, SPS reviewed the complete Assistance Review Application
  for eligibility under its loss mitigation options, which are established through investor rules and are based
  on individual circumstances and we were unable to offer a home retention solution. All programs listed in
  the Assistance Review Decision Notice are the programs for which Mr. ******** was denied and the
  specific reason for non-approval. These denials are based on the criteria where the account did not pass
  the program eligibility requirements; we did not consider other criteria regarding ineligibility as part of our
  decision. While SPS is committed to assisting customers, not all circumstances will allow for an available
  home retention option.
  Additionally, Mr. ******** questioned why he was not approved for a Trial Modification Plan after prior
  approvals were issued. SPS is required to service its accounts according to the requirements of the
  Noteholder, which may include limitations on modification characteristics.
  A refinance may be an option to consider. SPS does not originate loans and is not able to provide Mr.
  Cunsumano with new financing. However, he may seek financing with another company.
  If you or Mr. ******** have any further questions, you or Mr. ******** may contact SPS at the phone
  number provided below or visit our website for more information.
  Foreclosure
  In the inquiry, Mr. ******** indicated that he was unaware that the account was in a foreclosure status
  at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, which was March 1, 2020. Please note that the account was
  due for the January 2019 payment as of March 1, 2020. Our records indicate the account was referred to
  an attorney to initiate legal action as of June 1, 2019.
  On February 19, 2019, the enclosed New York Demand Notice was issued advising Mr. ******** that
  he may be at risk of foreclosure. The notice indicated that he needed to take action to resolve this matter
  within 90 days. This notice was sent via first class and certified mail to both Jennifer ******** and
  ******** ********.
  On April 23, 2019, the enclosed Notice of Default – Right to Cure was sent via first class mail. The notice
  indicated that to cure the default, $6,272.02 must be paid by May 26, 2019, to avoid being referred to
  foreclosure.
  As of June 1, 2019, the delinquency had not been resolved, and the loan was reviewed and referred to
  foreclosure. Please note that at the time of the referral there were no active loss mitigation reviews.
  Please be advised that the mailing address on file is ** ******** **, Mahopac, NY 10541. If this
  address needs to be updated, we ask that Mr. ******** contact us as the phone number below to
  provide this update.
  In response to the concerns Mr. ******** expressed regarding his interaction with SPS, we regret that
  he feels that our service has not met his expectations.
  As of the date of this letter, the account is due for August 1, 2019. There is a foreclosure sale date
  scheduled for November 13, 2023.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/11/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Select Portfolio Servicing *** bought my loan from *******/*************** on June 1, 2023. I experienced extremely poor customer service and unethical behavior. Due to my losing trust, I closed my escrow account with SPS and was told by SPS that a refund check in the amount of $11,062.95 was mailed to me (regular mail) on July 14, 2023. Today is exactly 4 weeks and I still have not received the check to pay property taxes and insurance on my own. I did my part and informed SPS weekly over the past month that I had not received the check. I was told by an SPS supervisor that she requested reissuance of the check but the process of ensuring the prior check had not been cashed and issuing the new check is 30 days. How in the world does reissuing a check take 30 days? So I had waited 30 days for a check, and supposedly now have to wait another 30 days for the new check to be issued. And SPS insists that they send out refund checks by regular mail. And I was told to my face that, God forbids, if the next check does not come, I have to wait a full 30 days BEFORE I can request issuance of a third check. Theoretically, if I even receive the check at all at the end of that process, that's a full 90 days just because SPS does not want to spend an extra 75 cents to buy a tracking number when mailing out a large check. I believe the regulation says that I have the right to receive my refund within 30 days after closing the escrow account. It appears that once the initial 30 days has passed, SPS has the duty to expedite and re-issue the check to me, after checking that the initial check has not been cashed (which should not take more than 1-2 business days in this electronic age). Kindly help me get my escrow refund money!!! Eleven thousand dollars plus is a lot of money that SPS is insisting on keeping and in the meantime, creates bizarre deceptive processes.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/28/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Starting in September of 2022 my mortgage was moved to select portfolio servicing (sps). Since then, they have added an escrow to my account, in which I have not had prior, nor do I need beings I pay my own insurance through State Farm and pay my own taxes. Once I realized this I called and requested it be removed, since then I have continuously sent in any and every document they request for the removal, some multiple times, this has been going on for close to a year now with no resolution in sight. They continue to give me the run around and keep stacking onto the escrow. I cannot seem to get it removed no matter what I do. My State Farm plan has been in effect for over 20+ years, with no lapse in payment. The mortgage has been owned by multiple other companies over the years, and there has never been an issue with escrow, until SPS. It is clearly a problem on their end and/or a scam to inflate the mortgage and make further profits for their company.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/31/2023

  We are unable to identify any account associated with the information provided in the inquiry. Please provide further details such as an account #, customer name, or subject property address.
  
  Thank you

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/19/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  We have been working with this company for a while now. After our bankruptcy was over, they claim we are months behind. We sent so much paper work to them, the latest packet was delivered to their post office box on November 21st. We got another letter today stating they did not get all the information that is needed. Haven't received a full application. Everything that was needed and filled out and copies were made was sent and delivered by post office on Nov. 21.We are also working with ***** here in ***. **. It takes up to 60 days for part to go through which is still pending. And they know this. Was sent a letter as well. They won't state what is missing. This had been going on since the last pkg of papers we mailed last March, which they stated they did not receive. But this time I sent it certified mail. When you call them, the call goes to a make payment. Or other confusing departments. Can't talk to a human person or get disconnected. We are doing everything right but nothing is getting solved with this company.