Select Portfolio Servicing on Your Credit Report: The Sixty Days After a Transfer

Almost nobody chooses Select Portfolio Servicing. The loan arrives, usually mid-life and often already distressed, because a trust or an investor moved the servicing and the letter announcing it went into a drawer. Then a payment sent on time to the old company posts late at the new one, and a delinquency lands on a credit file that had nothing wrong with it. The sixty days after a servicing transfer are the most legally interesting window in mortgage credit reporting, and they are also the least understood. This page is about what that window actually protects, what SPS has promised in writing that goes beyond it, and how to turn either one into a dispute that creates a duty someone can be held to.

The company you did not choose, and the check anyone can run on it

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. is a Utah corporation founded in 1989, headquartered at 3217 S. Decker Lake Drive, Salt Lake City, with a second office in Jacksonville, Florida. It publishes NMLS ID 3114 and a licence list covering fifty-three jurisdictions: all fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Both rest on the company's own disclosure: the list carries no date, and the NMLS Consumer Access record for entity 3114 is blocked to our retrieval tool by that site's robots file and was not retrieved. Run the check yourself.

Set that answer aside: a licensed, long-established servicer can still transmit a delinquency for a month you paid. The Fair Credit Reporting Act does not count licences; it asks whether the information is accurate, and whether the company investigated properly when told it was not.

What kind of servicer this is. SPS specialises in loans other companies would rather not administer: non-agency, subprime, Alt-A, non-performing and re-performing credit, taken in bulk through servicing transfers and appointment as servicer or special servicer to securitization trusts. A special servicer handles the loans that have gone wrong under a trust's pooling and servicing agreement. Either way the borrower has no say.

Scale and ownership, dated. As a primary servicer SPS handled $166.7 billion in unpaid principal balance as of June 2024. Credit Suisse acquired SPS in 2005, UBS acquired Credit Suisse in 2023, and a sale to a consortium led by Sixth Street with Davidson Kempner completed on 30 April 2025 at no disclosed price. The corporate entity is the same throughout, so earlier conduct did not pass to a new company that could disown it.

Fairbanks, Rushmore, and the servicer this company is not

Four names collide here, and getting them wrong sends a dispute or lawsuit to the wrong place.

Fairbanks Capital Corp. is not a predecessor. It is this company under an older name. The Federal Trade Commission put it plainly: In early 2004, the defendants changed their names to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. and SPS Holding Corp. The change was announced on 2 July 2004. SPS did not acquire Fairbanks; it renamed itself, so anyone serviced by Fairbanks in 2002 and SPS in 2006 dealt with one corporate person.

Specialized Loan Servicing LLC is a different company entirely. This is the commonest mix-up online, since both service distressed non-agency mortgages. They are unrelated: Specialized Loan Servicing is a Colorado limited liability company in Highlands Ranch, Select Portfolio Servicing a Utah corporation in Salt Lake City. Enforcement actions against one must never be attributed to the other.

Rushmore Loan Management Services is a distinct company whose work SPS bought. In September 2022 SPS agreed to acquire Rushmore's servicing-related contracts and personnel, so if the error predates that move the correct defendant may not be the company on your statement today. SPS Holding Corp. is a fourth name, a Delaware corporation named separately in the FTC's case file, its present status unverified.

Hence the useful habit: the name on your note, the name on your statement and the name beside the tradeline are three separate facts, and they are allowed to disagree. The FCRA imposes its duties on any person who furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency, so furnisher status is a question of conduct, not of title. We publish no canonical spelling of how an SPS tradeline appears, because no source we would rely on confirms one. Read the string on your own report and quote it exactly.

The transfer window: sixty days, and what it actually protects

First, the notices. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.33(b)(3)(i) the old servicer must send a transfer notice not less than 15 days before the effective date and the new servicer not more than 15 days after. (b)(3)(ii) extends that outside date to not more than 30 days after the effective date where the transfer follows termination of the servicing contract for cause, the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings for the servicer, or the commencement of FDIC or NCUA conservatorship or receivership proceedings. Separately, (b)(2) exempts three kinds of transfer from the notice requirement altogether, between affiliates, on a merger or acquisition of servicers or subservicers, and between master servicers where the subservicer does not change, but every one of those exemptions is conditioned on there being no change in the payee, the address to which payment must be delivered, the account number, or the amount of payment due. Change any one of the four and the notices are required; leave all four alone and the reasonable inference is that who handles your loan can change with nothing arriving in the post. (b)(4) sets out what a proper notice must contain. Keep both letters: they fix the date the sixty-day window opened.

Second, the sixty days. The statute, 12 U.S.C. 2605(d), reads: During the 60-day period beginning on the effective date of transfer of the servicing of any federally related mortgage loan, a late fee may not be imposed on the borrower with respect to any payment on such loan and no such payment may be treated as late for any other purposes, if the payment is received by the transferor servicer (rather than the transferee servicer who should properly receive payment) before the due date applicable to such payment. The regulation, 12 C.F.R. 1024.33(c)(1), puts it differently: During the 60-day period beginning on the effective date of transfer of the servicing of any mortgage loan, if the transferor servicer (rather than the transferee servicer that should properly receive payment on the loan) receives payment on or before the applicable due date (including any grace period allowed under the mortgage loan instruments), a payment may not be treated as late for any purpose.

The conditions are narrower than the headline. The window runs sixty days from the effective date of transfer, not from the day the notice arrived; the payment must have reached the old servicer on or before the due date, grace period included; and the remedy is characterisation, not correction, since the rule bars treating a payment as late and tells nobody to delete an entry.

Third, the limit, labelled plainly. Neither text uses the words credit report or consumer reporting agency. The proposition that furnishing the misdirected payment as a delinquency is itself treating it as late, and so barred, is an inference from the phrase for any purpose. It is an argument, not an express provision: Regulation X contains no express sixty-day credit-reporting bar for servicing transfers. The express furnishing bars live at 12 C.F.R. 1024.35(i)(1) and 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3), both triggered by a letter you send. The transfer gives you an argument; the notice of error gives you a remedy.

Fourth, what SPS itself promises. On its Help page at spservicing.com/StaticDetails/Help the company publishes this: Late fees will not be charged for 60 days following the transfer date. In addition, we do not negatively report credit for 60 days following the transfer date. That second sentence gives more than the regulation does. Be precise about what it is: a voluntary policy commitment, not a legal right. No statute requires it, and a policy is not a private right of action. Its value is evidentiary. If a delinquency was furnished within sixty days of the transfer date on your notices, set it beside the accuracy duty in 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a): the company's own published policy says it does not do the thing the tradeline records it doing. Print the page, dated.

Fifth, dating, lest this be mistaken for a pandemic rule. The CARES Act credit-reporting provision, which did require accommodations to be reported as current, ran only to 8 August 2023, 120 days after the COVID-19 national emergency ended on 10 April 2023. The CFPB's supervisory statement about it was rescinded effective 1 April 2021, and the COVID-specific provisions of Regulation X effective 15 July 2025. None of that touches the sixty-day transfer rule, which predates the pandemic and is still in force. The intersection worth naming is a loan transferring in during a forbearance or trial modification the new servicer has no record of: 12 C.F.R. 1024.41(k) preserves the timeframes that were running with the old servicer, which on the better reading forecloses the stock answer that the new servicer had to start over. That reading is an inference from the provision, not a holding.

What the complaint record shows, and what none of it decides

The complaint record shows what has been alleged, by how many people, about what. The CFPB Consumer Complaint Database, queried under the exact company name and current to 27 July 2026, holds 16,305 complaints about SPS all-time: mortgage 14,912, debt collection 808, and 508 under two credit reporting labels. The interface floors at 1 December 2011, so the span of that total is inferred. The category that maps onto this page is incorrect information on your report, at 452. Since 1 July 2025 there are 1,269 complaints, of which 94 allege incorrect information and 44 specify that the account status is incorrect. Every one is an allegation by a consumer; the Bureau notes that narratives are not verified before publication.

The response fields look like verdicts and are not. SPS closed 16,140 complaints with an explanation, 87 with non-monetary relief and 37 with monetary relief; 16,237 were answered timely against 68 that were not. Closed with explanation is the company's own characterisation of its own conduct, not an adjudication.

The Better Business Bureau file, accessed 27 July 2026, shows the company not accredited and rated NR, meaning Not Rated: a suspended grade, the reason given being that it is responding to previously closed complaints. It is not an F. The 410 complaints closed in three years are filings, not findings.

What recurs across the narratives, none of it adjudicated, is difficulty reaching anyone on the telephone who would own the problem. Calls are worth making for information and nearly worthless as a record: nothing said on one starts a statutory clock or binds the company, and a promise to fix the entry is unprovable six months later. That is why 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 and 1024.36 are written channels with acknowledgment periods, response deadlines and, for a notice of error, a furnishing bar.

Post Office Box 65277, and the four boxes that are not it

SPS designates one exclusive address for Notices of Error, Requests for Information and Qualified Written Requests, published on its FAQ and Help pages:

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., P.O. Box 65277, Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0277

The company warns that sending a dispute elsewhere may result in slower response times. 12 C.F.R. 1024.35(c) lets a servicer require that notices of error go to one designated address, and 1024.36(b) does the same for requests for information. In Bivens v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., Eleventh Circuit No. 16-15119, decided 17 August 2017, summary judgment for SPS was affirmed because the borrower used a different address, so SPS owed no duty to respond. Every published address, by purpose:

• Notices of error, requests for information and qualified written requests: P.O. Box 65277, Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0277. The only address that starts the RESPA clocks and the 60-day furnishing bar.
• Payments, lockbox: Attn: Remittance Processing, P.O. Box 65450, Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0450. By inference from Bivens, a dispute mailed here risks producing no duty to respond at all.
• Overnight payments: 3217 S. Decker Lake Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84119. Money only.
• General correspondence, escrow and payoff: P.O. Box 65250, Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0250. The same inference applies, and no RESPA clock starts here.
• Property tax bills: P.O. Box 9203, Coppell, TX 75019-9210. Documents, not disputes.
• Insurance documents: P.O. Box 7277, Springfield, OH 45501-7277. Policy paperwork.
• Credit reporting disputes: no address for this purpose is published on the SPS website.

Send the notice of error certified mail, return receipt requested, one identified error per letter. Within five days, excluding legal public holidays, Saturdays and Sundays, the servicer must acknowledge receipt; within 30 business days, extendable by 15 with notice, it must correct the error or explain why it found none. A request for information under 1024.36(d) runs on the same acknowledgment period and a 30-business-day response, and who owns the loan must be answered within 10 business days, with no extension. The provision that repays the postage is 1024.35(i)(1): for 60 days after receiving a notice of error, the servicer may not furnish adverse information to any consumer reporting agency about the specific payment that is its subject. Under 1024.35(g) a notice that is duplicative, overbroad or untimely switches off the response duties, and the furnishing bar with them.

The FCRA side is different. We checked the Contact Us, FAQ, Legal, New to SPS, account management and privacy pages. None identifies an address for direct disputes of information SPS furnishes to the bureaus, so the accurate sentence is that one is not published on the website. That is not the same as failing to designate one, because 12 C.F.R. 1022.43(c) gives a direct dispute three destinations and a public website is not necessarily one of them. Under (c)(1) you may use the furnisher's address as the furnisher provided it and as it appears on your consumer report, which for most homeowners is the address printed beside the tradeline. Under (c)(2) you may use an address the furnisher has clearly and conspicuously specified for direct disputes and provided to you in writing or electronically. Under (c)(3) you may use any business address of the furnisher, but only where the furnisher has not specified and provided an address under (c)(1) or (c)(2). Read your own report and statement before assuming there is none. And note the ceiling: subsections (c) and (d) of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 reserve enforcement of subsection (a) to regulators, so you cannot sue on it, and the bureau step below is not optional.

The enforcement file and the docket, with the postures left in

2003, the origin story. FTC File No. 032-3014, Civil Action No. 03-12219-DPW, District of Massachusetts, announced 12 November 2003. The FTC and the Department of Housing and Urban Development charged the company, then Fairbanks Capital Corp., its holding company and its founder Thomas Basmajian under the FTC Act, the FDCPA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and RESPA: late posting of payments, unauthorised fees, and furnishing inaccurate payment information to credit reporting agencies. HUD also alleged late fees imposed during the 60-day transfer period. Relief was $40 million in consumer redress from those corporate defendants and $400,000 from Basmajian, paid by them and by no later owner; redress is not a penalty, and no civil money penalty is identified in the announcements. Nothing was admitted. A 2 August 2007 Modified Stipulated Final Judgment added a five-year marketing ban and audits; it ended long ago, SPS is not currently under FTC supervision, and expiry of an order is not exoneration.

New York. The Department of Financial Services settled with SPS over four unauthorised branch locations in Utah operated March to December 2013. The penalty was $20,000, paid by SPS, which waived a hearing; no admission is recorded, and we give no execution date, the signature being illegible and so unverified. A branch-registration matter, not a finding about a credit report.

California, and read the posture word. On 5 June 2026 the California Attorney General announced a settlement with SPS over alleged Homeowner Bill of Rights and federal servicing violations during the pandemic: $1.6 million in civil penalties plus $3 million in consumer relief, $4.6 million in all, payable by SPS, proposed and subject to court approval. No court or case number was disclosed, and no source states that SPS admitted liability.

The FCRA cases. Forgues, Sixth Circuit No. 16-3540, 30 May 2017, unpublished: summary judgment for SPS affirmed, the court holding SPS bound to investigate reasonably and this investigation reasonable. Wesker, District of Maryland No. 1:21-cv-03012: both FCRA counts dismissed on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion in 2023, the plaintiff not having alleged that a credit reporting agency notified the defendants. The pattern, our reading and not any court's, is that the claim rises or falls on whether the consumer disputed through a bureau first.

Debt collection rulings, most at the pleading stage, one past it. Daniels, Eleventh Circuit No. 19-10204, 34 F.4th 1260, 24 May 2022: dismissal reversed, monthly statements held capable of being communications in connection with the collection of a debt. A revival is not liability. In DeSimone, Eastern District of New York No. 1:20-cv-03837, a motion was denied on 13 September 2024, SPS held a debt collector on the allegations before the court. In the consolidated Evans and DeSimone matter, Nos. 18-cv-5985 and 24-cv-7379, a putative class action over property inspection fees, on 31 March 2026 summary judgment was denied to SPS and class certification denied without prejudice. Both are procedural: a summary-judgment denial means a triable issue remains and decides nothing against SPS, and a certification denial without prejudice means the class question can be put again. No class is certified.

Class treatment refused. Fleming v. Select Portfolio Servicing, District of Massachusetts Civil Action No. 21-12092-PBS, decided 22 November 2022: the court denied the plaintiffs' motion for class certification. That decides nothing on the merits and is a ruling in nobody's favour; a putative class that fails certification is not a certified class, and SPS admitted nothing. A servicer-side ruling on the pleadings, with a caveat. Reese v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, No. A167637, opinion filed 19 December 2024: a demurrer sustained without leave to amend was affirmed. No FCRA, FDCPA, RESPA or TILA claim was pleaded, and we cite it by case number only, no official citation being confirmed. The caveat is on the opinion's own face: it describes itself as the second appeal, following an earlier one that reversed a summary judgment the defendants had won, and that earlier appeal was not located. A pleading ruling that went to SPS, then, but not the whole of that litigation.

Filed, not decided. Rothman, Rockland County Index No. 035296/2024, removed to the Southern District of New York as No. 7:24-cv-07249, is a putative class action alleging late reporting during a COVID-19 forbearance. No ruling was located: allegations only. We also located no CFPB enforcement action, consent order or civil investigative demand as of 27 July 2026, and no reported breach: that is the searchable record on that date, not a clean bill of health, supervisory findings being confidential by statute.

On the record assembled here, no court has found Select Portfolio Servicing liable to a consumer under the FCRA, the FDCPA, RESPA or TILA. Somebody else's docket does not decide your case. Your own file does.

Three letters, three statutes, and the one that creates a claim you can bring

There are three ways to complain about a mortgage tradeline, they are not interchangeable, and sending the wrong one is the commonest error here. The notice of error. Posted to P.O. Box 65277 under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, it produces the five-business-day acknowledgment, the thirty-day response and the sixty-day furnishing bar at (i)(1), and RESPA gives a private right of action under 12 U.S.C. 2605(f). For a transfer problem the errors to name are refusal to accept a conforming payment under (b)(1), misapplication of a payment under (b)(2), failure to transfer servicing information accurately and timely under (b)(8), and the catch-all at (b)(11). Reading inaccurate credit reporting into that catch-all is an argument from the text; no case law resolving it was retrieved. Note too that 1024.41 carries an express private-enforcement provision and 1024.38 does not, so the records-transfer duty at 1024.38(b)(4) is a standard of care rather than a claim. That distinction is an inference from the two texts. What the notice does not do is reach the bureaus.

The bureau dispute. This is the channel with teeth, and the only one that ends in a claim you can bring yourself. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i a bureau must reinvestigate free of charge within 30 days, extendable to 45, and must forward your dispute and documents to the furnisher within five business days. That forwarded notice triggers 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(b), the duty to investigate reasonably and then modify, delete or permanently block anything inaccurate, incomplete or unverifiable, at every bureau the furnisher supplied. Wesker above failed on exactly this point. It is the element, not a formality.

The direct dispute. 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(8) and 12 C.F.R. 1022.43 give a genuine right to dispute with the furnisher, with an investigation period matching the bureau's and a five-business-day notice if the furnisher treats the dispute as frivolous. But subsection (a) is not privately enforceable, as noted above. Use it to build a dated paper trail, never instead of the bureau.

For a post-transfer delinquency all three letters say the same six things: the loan number as it appears on your statement, the effective date of transfer, the date the payment left your account, the date the old servicer received it, the field on the report that is wrong, and what it should say instead. Attach both transfer notices and the bank record. Our credit dispute letter guide sets out the structure. Send everything certified: every deadline here runs from receipt.

Pull your reports from all three bureaus before you write and again after the reinvestigation closes; the two versions side by side show whether anything changed. 15 U.S.C. 1681j(a)(1)(A) entitles you to one free file disclosure from each nationwide bureau every twelve months, through AnnualCreditReport.com. The weekly free reports on that site are a voluntary bureau programme, not a statutory entitlement.

How long the entry stays, what a claim is worth, and what waiting costs

The reporting clock. The seven-years-plus-180-days formulation circulating online is real but narrower than advertised. 15 U.S.C. 1681c(c)(1) applies by its own terms only to paragraphs (4) and (6) of 1681c(a), so the 180-day add-on measured from the date of first delinquency reaches a mortgage charged off or placed for collection. Individual late payments on a loan brought current fall under 1681c(a)(5): seven years from the item itself, with no add-on. A bankruptcy runs ten years under 1681c(a)(1). If the new servicer sets the date of first delinquency at the transfer date rather than the original default, the clock restarts and an item that should have aged off stays for years. That is re-aging, provable from your own documents.

The characterisation clock. Being late under your note is a contractual fact between you and the lender; a furnished delinquency is a statement to third parties. And the widely repeated idea that a payment becomes reportable only once it is thirty days past due is an industry convention, not a rule this page will import. The standard is that what is furnished must be accurate and complete.

The damages clock. Recovery is graded by culpability. 15 U.S.C. 1681o reaches negligence and stops at proven loss, costs and reasonable fees. 15 U.S.C. 1681n reaches willfulness, which the courts read to include reckless disregard, and unlocks statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 plus punitive damages. Reverifying a post-transfer delinquency after the bureau forwarded the transfer notice and the bank record is the shape of a recklessness argument. RESPA runs on its own scale: 12 U.S.C. 2605(f) gives actual damages, plus additional damages capped at $2,000 and available only where a pattern or practice is shown.

The limitation clocks, and they differ. 15 U.S.C. 1681p allows suit within the earlier of two years after you discover the violation or five years after it occurred. RESPA is shorter: 12 U.S.C. 2614 gives three years from the occurrence for a section 2605 claim, with no discovery rule. A borrower who finds the problem three and a half years after a botched transfer may still have an FCRA claim from a recent mishandled dispute while the RESPA claim has gone.

The gate. TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), held that without concrete harm there is no standing to sue for damages. That makes proof of dissemination decisive: the denied application, the adverse action notice, the repriced quote. Where servicing arrived after the loan was already in default, an FDCPA analysis may run alongside the FCRA one, as the rulings above show. A debt validation letter under 15 U.S.C. 1692g then opens its own thirty-day window, and 1692e(8) makes it a violation to report information known to be disputed without saying so.

How The Kim Law Firm handles Select Portfolio Servicing problems

We act for homeowners and consumers only, never for servicers, investors, trusts or credit bureaus.

The files that turn into cases have a shape. A payment sent on time to the previous servicer inside the sixty-day window, applied late by SPS and furnished as a delinquency. A forbearance or trial modification that did not survive the transfer. A date of first delinquency reset to the transfer date. A bureau dispute that came back verified with nothing changed.

What no lawyer can lawfully do is take accurate negative information off a report, and we say so early rather than after a retainer. If the payment was late and the tradeline records it correctly, that is the answer. Poor service, long hold times, or a correctly calculated escrow bill you dislike, are real grievances that are not FCRA claims.

Bring six things and a review takes minutes, not weeks: the 1024.33 transfer notices from both servicers; the statements and payment records for the period in dispute, with bank records showing when each payment left and arrived; every escrow analysis; all loss-mitigation correspondence; the dispute letters you sent, with certified mail receipts; and the bureaus' reinvestigation responses. The last two convert a complaint into a claim, and the first is the one almost everybody has thrown away.

Our FCRA lawyer guide sets out how a matter of this kind proceeds, and our credit reporting errors overview covers the tradeline problems that recur. Every company in this industry has an entry under mortgage servicers. Once the paperwork is together, contact us and we will read the report and transfer notices at no charge.

Frequently asked questions

Who is Select Portfolio Servicing and why is it servicing my loan?

Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. is a Utah corporation founded in 1989 and based in Salt Lake City, with a second office in Jacksonville, Florida. It publishes NMLS ID 3114 and licences in 53 jurisdictions. It specialises in non-agency, subprime and non-performing or re-performing mortgages, and it acquires that work in bulk through servicing transfers, purchases of other servicers' contracts, and appointment as servicer or special servicer to securitization trusts. That is why you did not choose it. The investor or trustee moved the servicing and you were notified after the decision. As a primary servicer it handled $166.7 billion in unpaid principal as of June 2024.

Is Select Portfolio Servicing the same company as Specialized Loan Servicing?

No. They are unrelated companies that get confused because both service distressed mortgages and both are abbreviated with a three-letter S. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC is a Colorado company based in Highlands Ranch, previously owned by Computershare, and Rithm Capital announced its acquisition on 3 October 2023 with operations moving to Newrez. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. is a Utah corporation in Salt Lake City, NMLS 3114, owned since 30 April 2025 by a consortium led by Sixth Street with Davidson Kempner. Complaints, lawsuits and enforcement actions against one should never be attributed to the other. Separately, Fairbanks Capital Corp. is not a different company at all: it is the former name of Select Portfolio Servicing.

Does the law stop my servicer reporting me late for 60 days after a transfer?

Not in those words, and the difference matters. Under 12 U.S.C. 2605(d) and 12 C.F.R. 1024.33(c)(1), for 60 days after a servicing transfer a payment that reached the old servicer on or before the due date cannot draw a late fee and cannot be treated as late for any purpose. Neither text mentions credit reporting, so the argument that furnishing it as a delinquency is treating it as late is an inference from the words for any purpose rather than an express rule. Separately, Select Portfolio Servicing publishes its own promise on its Help page that it does not negatively report credit for 60 days following a transfer date. That is a voluntary company policy, not a legal right, but it is the company's own words and it is useful evidence.

Where do I send a dispute about my Select Portfolio Servicing mortgage?

It depends which dispute, because two different letters go to two different places. A notice of error, request for information or qualified written request must go to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., P.O. Box 65277, Salt Lake City, UT 84165-0277. That is the exclusive address the company designates, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for SPS in Bivens, No. 16-15119, decided 17 August 2017, because the borrower used a different one. A credit reporting dispute is separate and goes to Equifax, Experian and TransUnion, because only a bureau-routed dispute triggers the furnisher duty you can enforce yourself under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(b). No designated direct-dispute address is published on the SPS website, so check the address printed beside the tradeline on your own report and any address specified on your account statement. Send everything certified.

Has Select Portfolio Servicing been sued or fined over credit reporting?

It has been sued often, and the postures matter more than the case numbers. In 2003 the company, then named Fairbanks Capital Corp., settled FTC and HUD charges in the District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 03-12219-DPW, that included furnishing inaccurate payment information to credit reporting agencies, paying $40 million in consumer redress plus $400,000 from its founder, with no admission of a law violation. New York regulators imposed a $20,000 penalty over four unauthorised branch offices operated in 2013. A California Attorney General settlement announced on 5 June 2026, $1.6 million in penalties plus $3 million in relief, is proposed and subject to court approval. No CFPB action against the company was located as of 27 July 2026, which describes the searchable record rather than clearing the company. On that record, no court has found it liable to a consumer under the FCRA, the FDCPA, RESPA or TILA.

You do not have to be in Pennsylvania to work with us. The Kim Law Firm represents consumers nationwide in Fair Credit Reporting Act matters, from our offices in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. If Select Portfolio Servicing is reporting a delinquency that appeared in the weeks after your loan was transferred in, a forbearance that did not survive the move, or a date of first delinquency that quietly reset itself, send us the report and both transfer notices and we will tell you what the record supports.