What the documents
revealed.
What changed because of it.
Every case here began with documents a consumer already had. What changed was that someone knew what to look for. All cases are anonymized. All outcomes are representative of actual Serv Inc. investigations.
Homeowner submitted servicer correspondence and loan documents during active foreclosure proceeding. Investigation revealed a gap in the chain of assignment — the assignment to the foreclosing trust was recorded 14 months after the trust's closing date, creating a potentially fatal standing defect. Formal notice issued. Action dismissed.
Consumer had received collection calls for a disputed debt. After sending a written dispute, collection activity continued — documented by postmark analysis. Servicer failed to produce original documentation within the 30-day statutory window. Non-compliance formally documented. Case settled in the consumer's favor.
Salaried employee submitted 18 months of pay stubs and performance reviews. Investigation documented improper deductions destroying the salary basis test, systematic classification of overtime-eligible hours at straight time, and job duties inconsistent with claimed administrative exemption. Formal record established. Judgment for back wages plus attorney fees.
Consumer in good standing submitted escrow statements after noticing payment fluctuations. Investigation identified systematic escrow shortage miscalculations over a four-year period, a QWR sent by the consumer that received a non-responsive reply on day 34, and force-placed insurance charges during a period with documented consumer coverage. Formal notice issued. Servicer corrected accounts and issued refund.
Consumer in good standing requested a proactive title review after a servicer transfer. Investigation identified three assignments bearing signatures matching known robo-signing patterns, an allonge executed after the purported transfer date, and a notarization in a state where the signatory had no documented presence. Quiet title action brought. Title cleared.
Worker classified as independent contractor for three years submitted invoices, communications, and work schedules. Investigation applied the FLSA economic reality test: worker had no opportunity for profit or loss, used employer-provided tools, performed work integral to the business, and had no other clients. Failed on all six factors. Settled for three years of back wages and FICA contributions.
Consumer facing foreclosure submitted original loan documents. Investigation identified an APR disclosure error at origination that exceeded the TILA tolerance threshold, preserving a rescission right the consumer did not know existed. Formal notice of rescission right issued. Institution negotiated rather than litigate. Loan modified to current terms; foreclosure withdrawn.
Consumer noticed late fees appearing on statements following a servicer transfer, despite documented on-time payments. Investigation cross-referenced payment postmarks against crediting dates and identified 11 months of same-day crediting failures, generating improper late fees and negative credit reporting. Formal notice and CFPB complaint filed. All late fees reversed; credit report corrected.
Consumer submitted a complete loss mitigation application and received a foreclosure sale notice eleven days later. RESPA prohibits dual-tracking — advancing foreclosure while a complete loss mitigation application is pending. Investigation documented the timeline precisely. Formal notice of RESPA violation issued. Foreclosure halted. Modification subsequently approved.
The legal precedents
behind the process.
Serv Inc. investigations are grounded in federal statute and case law. These are the foundational decisions that govern our practice areas — the rulings that define what institutions are required to do, and what happens when they do not.
Adding new cases
as they develop.
This page is built to grow. Every new anonymized outcome can be added to the case grid in a few minutes without touching any other part of the site. Below is the exact process for your team or your WordPress developer to follow when new cases are ready to publish.
case-card div and update the fields: category data attribute, badge class, headline, narrative, stats, and framework tags. Each case card is self-contained.modal-10, modal-11, etc.). Reference the same ID in the card's onclick attribute. Fill in the deeper narrative, specific findings, and applicable case law references.cl-card block, update the citation, title, holding, and relevance line.Your documents may contain
the same story.
Find out for free.
Every case above began with a document upload. Upload yours — no cost, no commitment — and we will tell you what we find.