Service Link LP

Review: Me and my husband had signed a Purchase Agreement with Fifth Third (which I will be filing on them also). That stated they pay all closing cost, and when we got the final contract it said nothing about them paying for all. I questioned it and they said If I refuse to pay the $500.00, I would lose my $1,000.00 earnest money. So I agreed to pay it because I was not losing a $1,000.00 over it. Then when we get to closing they had prepared another settlement statement that neither I nor my realtor had gotten a copy of. The amounts had been changed due to the property taxes, and I ended up owing another $233.00 more dollars. The settlement statements are I thought by law to be given to all parties within 3 business days of closing, and I did not get a new copy. I am very dissatisfied with this company and do not recommend them to anyone......Desired Settlement: I would like to be reimbursed for the $500.00 closing cost I had to pay that if the person would have read the Purchase Agreement when they were typing up the contract this would have never happened.

Business

Response:

Revdex.com,

As a response to complaint #[redacted]; ServiceLink offers the following facts:

Closing Cost Section:

The initial Purchase Agreement did state that the seller was to pay all closing costs (referenced in (G) on line 79, 80, and 81 on page 2 of 7). We believe that this is to what she is referring.

However, there was a seller’s Counter Offer/Addendum; (# 8) that stated that the buyer and seller agree to pay the closing costs customarily paid by each in the area where the property is located. Therefore, the $500.00 to which she refers would not be eligible for refund due to the contract addendum.

As a side note; any direction given to the buyer regarding the seller retaining their earnest money would have come from the seller, their asset management company (FAS), or the listing agent. ServiceLink does not initiate this type of direction.

HUD Fee Section:

The HUD that was showing a tax proration amount of $435.07 on line 211 of the HUD was merely an estimated HUD for the seller once an offer is accepted from a buyer. We never send those to a buyer as we have not yet begun any diligence for closing at that point. I am not sure how the buyer received this version.

The actual HUD that was sent to closing has the proper amount of taxes prorated for this settlement. The HUD was sent to both the listing and selling agents on Thursday, 8/22/2013 for the closing on Monday, 8/26/2013:

04 - REO - 08/22/2013 12:17:11 PM [redacted] - CLS: From: [redacted], [redacted]

Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 12:17 PM

To:

Subject: [redacted] / [redacted] / ** / [redacted]

Since the HUD contains so much private information, we will send another copy directly to her at [redacted]

Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond. Please let me know if there are any additional questions.

Sincerely,

ServiceLink Operational Audit and Compliance

Office) ###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Not only did we end up paying the $500.00 we were not given the new settlement statement till closing and had to pay an extra $233.00. I thought the law states we should have had a copy of that prior to signing.

Business

Response:

Mrs. [redacted]

Review: We are purchasing a REO home form [redacted]. The bank requires us to use Service Link LP as the closing agent.

We told Manda, the agent in charge of closing the deal that we are planing a closing on the 15th.

Due to the new regulation all the numbers must be added to the new system and the buyer must sign the disclosure 3 days before closing. The mortgage company went above and beyond to make sure they were ready on time. We got everything together, we were just waiting for the closing agent to upload the numbers and lo and behold three days before closing she is out of the office and cant be reached. Her backups were Linda, and Nicole and they were nice enough to put everything together and ready for Monday when Manda would be back in.

Came Monday and Manda was unreachable and left the office early. Her backups claim that they have no access to the system and no one knows what has to be done.

We have little kids and need to move into a hotel, and find a place to store our stuff because they couldn't close on time.Desired Settlement: To finish the closing ASAP or we will request compensation for the hotel and extra charges

Business

Response:

On behalf of ServiceLink, I apologize for the delay in closing this transaction. It appears that the buyer had 2 different lenders who both ordered services from us. We weren't informed until 12/10 which lender the buyer was proceeding with. I understand that the closing occurred on Friday, 12/18 and that the buyer and her family now have access to the property. I trust that this resolves the issue. Should there be any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Eric E[redacted], SVPChief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

Review: I bought a property in Milwaukee WI last year in September, as a closing company, ServiceLink did not record my deed properly. As of today 2-19-2016, the title owner of the property is still under someone's name. I tried to contact ServiceLink multiple times, however I did hearing anything from them.Desired Settlement: Your company should record the deed correctly and pay for all the penalty from city of milwaukee.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. On behalf of ServiceLink, I'd like to apologize for the inconvenience the recording delay has caused. ServiceLink initially attempted to record this deed on November 19, 2015, but the county rejected it. Since that time, ServiceLink has submitted this deed on four separate occasions and the county has rejected the recording for a different reason each time. The deed is currently with a local abstractor who is presenting it for recordation this week. We'll continue to follow up to make sure it is recorded as soon as possible. Again, I apologize for the inconvenience caused by the delay. Sincerely, Eric E[redacted]Chief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

Review: The closing agent failed to carry out the contract impartially. Ms. Carla C[redacted] was designate to close my purchase contract of [redacted]. The contract states:

1. Page 7, D (2). "CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS TO THE ESCROW/CLOSING AGENT. Pay all fees, costs, .....which are payable by Seller (if any) and other expenses relating to the purchase and sale of the Property which are required to be paid by Seller under this Agreement" The seller's wire fee, POA fee, and overnight fee were unduly charged to buyer and Ms, Carla Ce[redacted] refuses to correct this issue.

2. Page 17 11 B. " SELLER’S EXPENSES --Seller shall pay the premium for the Owner’s Policy, as well a title search fee. " Ms. Carla C[redacted] is charging me, as the buyer 275+75 title searching and update fee.

3. After the seller failed to honor the contract, this closing agent suggest the seller to keep the Ernest money deposit.

This closing agent is unilaterally biased towards the benefits of the seller. Unfit to carry out the contract. Waste my time and money.Desired Settlement: This agent is inexperience and unfamiliar with the process. A lot of mistakes and biases. Please replace her and correct all the issues.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Attached is a contract amendment, signed by the complainant, which states that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the purchase agreement, the buyer shall be solely responsible for all expenses. (See page 4, paragraph 13(a) and 13(c)) As an independent escrow agent, ServiceLink is tasked with following the terms of the contract, which is what they attempted to do in this case.Please let me know if you have any additional questions.Sincerely,[redacted]Chief Regulatory and Compliance [email protected]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Service Link has evaded my questions in my original complaints.1. Please specify on Page 4, 13 (a) and (c), where does it say buyer shall pay seller's Wire fee, overnight fee and POA related fees? This section is regarding the owed taxes, HOA fee, utility bills related to the occupied property etc. not to be paid or prorated to be paid by the seller. It's not about to have buyer to pay for whatever seller's specific requested services. Say, if the seller wants its money to be wired to 1000 different accounts, you, as the closing agent, will just simply pass the bill to the buyer for their 25k wire fee? These fees are not property sale related, but rather seller requested service. Whoever wants specific service, who is responsible for their own demands.

Review: We used Service Link to close on a property we bought through a foreclosure auction. We closed 11/25/15. As of 3/3/2016, a final deed has not been filed with my local auditor or provided directly to me. The foreclosing bank is still showing as the owner of this property. I can't do anything with a house I can't prove that I own. I have left multiple voicemails to several parties at Service Link, in addition to many emails, begging for any information. I have even attempted to contact the legal service they used to draw the deed, and the original auction company. I haven't gotten a single word back from anyone. I'm dumbfounded at the lack of service. I just want this to be completed.Desired Settlement: Provide me with a completed deed, or file with my county auditor, so I can officially own a property that I paid for three months ago.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The deed was sent a local abstractor to record with the county. The county rejected the recording stating that they needed a copy of the property survey in order to record. The survey was provided to the abstractor on 3/15 and the deed was re-submitted to the county for recording at that time. We are waiting to receive confirmation that the deed has recorded. As soon as we hear back, we will notify Ms. [redacted] of this. I apologize for the inconvenience this delay has caused. Sincerely, Eric E[redacted]Chief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel[redacted]

Review: Incompetent does not even begin to describe ServiceLink's failings/ shortcomings.

Finalizing my refi, my bank selected this company for services for title/ payoffs, etc:

1. ServiceLink stated they show the title has NO mortgages (including showing that the bank I am refi with does not have a payoff and they know they are listed) - Can they find the property - wreaks of INCOMPETENCE, lack of training, unprofessional! Did they look at the property description, counties where recorded, etc? Seems they didnt... did they magically expect some info to populate in their screens?

2. Asked me to sign an authorization to obtain mortgage info, but listed the wrong account info on the form. Whose account number did they list? Why did they not verify this? Also stated in the form I would pay a "fee" but no description/amount is listed? Sorry I dont sign blank checks!

3. ** State license information (lookup page) seem to be under other corp organization vs. the location and company the ServiceLink rep uses in her email signature... make one wonder if they have valid and legal licenses and registrations in our state. Is the rep handling this registered (required to be done in the past 30 days - i.e. since Feb 1st, 2016)... it does not appear to be listed on the state lookup pages.

4. They do not provide a Privacy Statement or list of security controls - yet they ask for things like SSN, when they really do not need it as they already have the required info. Wonder if they have been linked to a source of identity fraud?

Avoid if possible!Desired Settlement: 1. Have a competent and license agent and company FINISH (in a timely manner, as it seems overdue already).

2. Reduce their fees for services by 25% for their lack of following processes, incompetence, and time delays due to their seemingly lack of training, knowledge, capabilities, and competence with the person who they assigned originally.

3. Ensure all future actions and efforts are performed accurately and timely - as many other complaints and reviews state they have performed several activities in error or with material delays.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. I am the Chief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel for ServiceLink and am authorized to respond in that capacity.Mr. [redacted]’s property is in the [redacted] which is a community that spans both [redacted] and [redacted] in **. Mr. [redacted]’s lot, number [redacted], however the mortgages that he references are not recorded in [redacted], they are recorded in [redacted], please see attached confirmation of recording. Since Mr. [redacted]’s property lies fully in [redacted] there was no reason for ServiceLink to search the [redacted] records. The authorization that we requested Mr. [redacted] sign was populated with an account number we were provided from his new lender. We do apologize that the information provided was not accurate. The “fee” information that Mr. [redacted] references is in relation to any fee that the current lender from which we are obtaining the payoff information may impose.In [redacted], Title Insurance Agents are licensed by the [redacted] Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. ServiceLink is properly licensed to operate by the ** DFPR. Individual employees are not required to be licensed as title producers in Illinois. ServiceLink does have multiple locations with our Corporate office being located at [redacted] and our main operating office at [redacted].ServiceLink is part of the Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (NYSE: FNF) family of companies. As such, it has adopted and follows the privacy policies of FNF. Our rull Privacy Statement is attached as well as available on our website: [redacted]As to fees for services provided I recognize that Mr. [redacted] is requesting a discount of fees and we are certainly open to providing compensation for what his inconvenience, however since our contractual obligation is to his lender we will discuss the matter which [redacted] and they will relay the agreed upon fees to Mr. [redacted].Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.Eric E[redacted], SVPChief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. ServiceLink management was responsive and has addressed the root cause of the issues raised, and further has communicated both with myself and my lender to facilitate improved services and our resolution. Regards,

Review: We entered into a real estate contact to purchase a home on June 23, 2015. We sent earnest money to ServiceLink on July 3, 2015 per the terms of the agreement. We notified the broker that we were not moving ahead due to inspection results and our contact was null and void on July 8, and requested the return of our earnest money, in writing. Timing to cancel the contract was within the terms of the agreement. We again requested the return of our earnest money on July 15, 2015, in writing. We contacted ServiceLink on July 28 by phone and was told it was on the way. We AGAIN contacted them on August 5, in writing, and they asked us where to send the check. We still have not received our earnest money.Desired Settlement: Refund our earnest money immediately.

Business

Response:

On behalf of ServiceLink, I sincerely apologize for the delay in returning this earnest money. I confirmed that the check was delivered by UPS today to the law firm of [redacted]. Again, I apologize for the delay. Should you need anything else, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Eric E[redacted]Chief Regulatory and Compliance CounselServiceLink

Consumer

Response:

Hi,Thank you for your involvement. The check was received by our attorney today, so no further action is needed on your part. Regards, [redacted]

Review: I signed a contract in May 2014 to purchase a home from [redacted], and [redacted] hired a Servicelink department in [redacted] to record the Deed in Lieu from the previous buyers. The Colorado department was tasked with overseeing another recording department located in Pennsylvania. First, the deed was rejected by Montgomery County because the signature block was prepared incorrectly. After the first rejection, Servicelink proceeded to sit on the deed for two months doing absolutely nothing to correct it. I relentlessly pressured the bank and the sellers other title company, Title365, to help me, which Title365 finally agreed to do in mid-July. Title365 acquired the affidavit from Servicelink and got a signature from the previous buyers within a couple of days. At this point, Servicelink was supposed to submit the corrected deed and affidavit for recording again, but they never did. After a couple more weeks, Title365 figured out that Servicelink never submitted the deed because they had sent it back into their Quality Control department even though they had received approval from the county to submit it after the affidavit was signed. After more pushing from Title365, Servicelink sent the deed for e-recording even though Deed in Lieu deeds can NEVER be e-recorded. Please note that the individuals responsible for overseeing this recording in Colorado have job titles such as Deed in Lieu Asset Manager, and there is no excuse to not know that a Deed in Lieu cannot be e-recorded. About a week later, we found out that the deed was rejected for e-recording, and on August 8th we were informed that Servicelink had hired an Abstractor to hand deliver the deed to the courthouse. They said that the deed was at the courthouse by the end of the day on August 8th and would be recorded by August 13th. We waited, and on August 15th it was still not recorded. We then received the news that the deed never made it to the county, and Servicelink does not even know where the deed is anymore.Desired Settlement: Deed recorded in Montgomery County immediately and a copy sent to buyer so that settlement can be scheduled.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond. On behalf of ServiceLink, I apologize to Ms. [redacted] for the inconvenience caused by the delay in having the Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure recorded. The original documents have been sent to Ms. [redacted]'s title company and they are now handling the recording as part of her purchase transaction. Please let me know if there are any further questions or issues on this transaction and I will make sure they are addressed.

Sincerely,

Regulatory and Compliance Counsel

Review: As part of my process to remove PMI from my mortgage payment, [redacted] required that I obtain an appraisal of the property. The letter from [redacted] stated, "The appraisal cost is approximately $385.00, but can vary depending on property value and type." There was no disclosure of a processing fee, etc. ServiceLink said before they would process the appraisal request I had to pay $385 upfront but depending on property value and type it could be adjusted. I own a condo which is less than 1,500 square feet with no estate property outside the condo itself. I paid the $385 and the appraisal occurred. A few days later the appraiser sent me directly the appraisal report which also included the invoice which showed that his fee was $225. The residual balance ($160) was kept by ServiceLink. Within minutes of obtaining the appraisal report directly from the appraiser, I then received a copy of the appraisal report from ServiceLink which did not include the invoice showing the cost of the appraisal. I reached out to the contact Patricia C[redacted] stating I had received the appraisal directly from the appraiser which also included the cost being $225 and that I expected a refund of the $160. She replied, "The total fee charged by Servicelink to complete the appraisal was $385.00. Yes the appraiser's portion is 225.00 for their service. However, our company has to make a profit on all appraisals therefore the additional 160.00 is retained by Servicelink for processing charges." These 42% processing charges were never disclosed to me and seem like a misleading business practice.Desired Settlement: Refund of $160.

Business

Response:

ServiceLink has reviewed this complaint and does not believe a refund is owed. As shown on the attached authorization, electronically signed by Mr. [redacted], he agreed to a charge of $385 for an appraisal, as required by his mortgage lender. The authorization also discloses the fact that ServiceLink performs a quality assurance review prior to delivering the report to the lender, which indicates that ServiceLink is performing functions for which it can be compensated. As a result, ServiceLink does not feel this is a misleading business practice.Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this matter.Eric E[redacted], SVPChief Regulatory and Compliance Counsel[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

Review: Oct 19, of 2015 my husband, [redacted] and I, placed an offer on [redacted] which was accepted and I mailed a $1,000.00 earnest money deposit to Service Link as requested by seller's agent. This check cleared Oct 28, 2015. On Oct. 27th after an inspection we canceled escrow and requested our deposit back. To this date (2/1/2016) we have yet to receive our deposit back. This is not right and not fair. My Realtor submitted all of the necessary paperwork to service link including the signed cancellation and a copy of my cleared check .Desired Settlement: Immediately and without hesitation return my money. It is NOT yours to keep.

Business

Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The $1,000 earnest money deposit has been returned to the complainant. On behalf of ServiceLink, I want to apologize for the inconvenience caused. Sincerely, Eric E[redacted], SVPChief Regulatory and Compliance [email protected]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Thank you Eric F[redacted] for responding so quickly and taking immediate action. Also I would like to thank Gladys F[redacted] for her concern in verifying the package was received. I appreciate both of your help.

Review: An inspector representing ServiceLink inspected my property. I did not initiate this inspection or was I aware of it. I have No Trespassing signs up and this inspector violated those signs. I do not know who sent them or what the exact reason. I do not want them or anybody on my property without my permission.Desired Settlement: I want to know exactly why they were on my property, who hired them, and why was my property found to be vacant or abandoned. I also want to know why they violated my No Trespassing signs.

Business

Response:

Ms. [redacted] we appreciate your letter dated October 16, 2015 inquiring into the facets of Ms. [redacted]’s complaint against ServiceLink Field Service, LLC. arising from services performed at the property.

ServiceLink Field Services, LLC was hired to perform monthly inspections at the property by the mortgage lender, which identified Ms. [redacted]’s mortgage as being in default. The inspections are ordered to determine whether the defaulted property is vacant or occupied. If a property is reported vacant, the lender will order preservation services to maintain the value of the property during foreclosure proceedings. The terms of the mortgage note signed by the borrower usually grant the lender authority to enter the property to inspect and preserve the asset in the event of a mortgage default.

In this case, an inspector working as an independent contractor of ServiceLink determined that the property in question was vacant based upon consideration of factors specified by the mortgage lender. If the property is, in fact, occupied, the borrower should contact the mortgage lender immediately and advise them that the property is occupied.