{"took":120,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":72,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12103142","_score":25.191673,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to file a formal complaint against Selene Finance LP, XXXX XXXX  Loans, and XXXX concerning several unlawful actions related to my mortgage loan. Specifically, I wish to address issues regarding unauthorized interest rate increases, violations of bankruptcy protections, improper handling of my loan modification request, and failure to communicate. Below are the key issues and events, along with my requested resolution. \n\nKey Issues : Unlawful Interest Rate Adjustments During Bankruptcy : While under bankruptcy protection, XXXX XXXX  Loans unlawfully increased my interest rate twice : From XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX, and From XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX. \nThese increases violated the legal limit of a XXXX XXXX increase per adjustment under bankruptcy protections. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney challenged these increases, and XXXX XXXX XXXX admitted to the error, restoring the interest rate to XXXX XXXX through XXXX. \nBreach of Agreed Interest Rate Terms : In XX/XX/XXXX, Caliber Home Loans issued a Notice of Mortgage Change, increasing my interest rate to XXXX XXXX, which was reflected in my mortgage statements. \nHowever, in XX/XX/XXXX, the rate unexpectedly jumped to XXXX XXXX, violating the agreed-upon terms. \nAfter servicing was transferred to XXXX, they further increased the rate to XXXX XXXX, without providing a proper explanation or justification for this increase. \nViolation of XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX Notices : The Notice of Mortgage Change filed in bankruptcy court explicitly stated that no changes would be made to the principal, interest, or mortgage payments. \nDespite this, Selene Finance LP and XXXX implemented unauthorized rate increases, breaching the protections afforded by bankruptcy and undermining the court-approved agreement. \nFailure to Communicate & Obstruction in Loan Modification : Selene Finance LP has repeatedly refused to communicate with me directly, despite my written confirmation that I do not have legal representation for the loan modification. \nThey continue to claim that I have legal representation for the loan modification process, causing unnecessary delays and confusion. \nFurthermore, my loan modification requests have been wrongfully denied, citing missing documents, even though I have fully complied with all document requests and deadlines provided by Selene Finance LP.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-24T22:09:07.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"900XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12103142","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Selene Holdings LLC","date_received":"2025-02-17T23:03:34.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Key Issues : <em>Unlawful</em> Interest Rate Adjustments During <em>Bankruptcy</em> : <em>While</em> <em>under</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> <em>protection</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  <em>Loans</em> <em>unlawfully</em> increased my interest rate twice : From <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> to <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, and From <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> to <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. \nThese increases violated the legal limit of a <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> increase per adjustment <em>under</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> <em>protections</em>. \nIn XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, my attorney challenged these increases, and <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> admitted to the error, restoring the interest rate to <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> through <em>XXXX</em>."],"sub_issue":["Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, <em>bankruptcy</em>, or foreclosure"]},"sort":[25.191673,"12103142"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16104272","_score":20.838276,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Allegations : XXXX. Invalid Assignment of Mortgage Note and Deed of Trust PennyMac has failed to produce a valid chain of title or properly executed assignment documents. This raises serious questions under California Civil Code Section 2932.5 and federal standing requirements. \nXXXX. Dual Tracking Violations PennyMac pursued foreclosure while simultaneously engaging in loss mitigation discussions, violating California Civil Code Section 2923.6 and RESPA 's dual tracking prohibitions under C.F.R. Section 1024.41 ( g ). \nXXXX. Robo-Signing and Forged Documents Recorded documents contain signatures from unknown robo-signers and raise concerns of forgery and fraud, violating California Penal Code Section 115 and undermining the integrity of the foreclosure process. \nXXXX. Failure to Honor Valid Loan Modification Agreement A previously negotiated and executed loan modification agreement was ignored, violating contractual obligations and RESPA 's servicing standards under 12 C.F.R. Section 1024.38 5. Failure to Act on Good Faith Settlement Offer PennyMac refused to engage meaningfully with a documented settlement offer made in good faith, violating the spirit of California Civil Code Section 2924.18 and federal guidelines encouraging resolution outside foreclosure. \nXXXX. Fraud by Misrepresentation of Mortgage and Bankruptcy Plan Terms PennyMac misrepresented the terms of the mortgage and the confirmed bankruptcy plan, violating 18 U.S.C. Section 157 ( Bankruptcy Fraud ) and 15 U.S.C. Section 1692e ( False Representations ) XXXX Misapplications of Payments in Bankruptcy Plan Payments made under the confirmed plan were misapplied or not credited properly, violating 11 U.S.C Section 1327 and 12 C.F.R Section 1026.36 ( c ) XXXX. Violations of Bankruptcy Protection and Debt Collection Laws PennyMac 's conduct constitutes unlawful debt collection under the FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. Section 1692c and Section 1692d ) and violates the protections afforded under the Bankruptcy Code.\n\nThese allegations are supported with the attached documents and relevant information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-22T17:26:59.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"95821","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16104272","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","date_received":"2025-09-22T16:30:24.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Violations of <em>Bankruptcy</em> <em>Protection</em> and Debt Collection Laws PennyMac 's conduct constitutes <em>unlawful</em> debt collection <em>under</em> the FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. Section 1692c and Section 1692d ) and violates the <em>protections</em> afforded <em>under</em> the <em>Bankruptcy</em> Code.\n\nThese allegations are supported with the attached documents and relevant information."],"company":["PENNYMAC <em>LOAN</em> SERVICES, LLC."]},"sort":[20.838276,"16104272"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15069659","_score":18.307434,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Jefferson Capital Systems is attempting to collect and report a debt that should have never existed in the first place. \n\n\n-- - Issuing the Card While I Was in Active XXXX  Was Illegal I filed for XXXX  XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX, and my case remained active until XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX Credit Card was issued and opened on XX/XX/XXXX while I was still in an active XXXX  plan. \n\nUnder 11 U.S.C. 364, any new credit or loan issued during an active XXXX  must receive prior approval from the XXXX  court. \n\nXXXX ( the original creditor ) did not seek or receive this approval, which makes the account void and unlawfully originated. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is Now Trying to Collect on This Illegal Debt XXXX XXXX is now reporting and attempting to collect a {$1200.00} debt that was illegally issued while I was protected by bankruptcy. \n\nThis violates the protections of : XXXX. XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  The automatic stay prohibits any creditor or collector from collecting or enforcing any debteven XXXX issued improperlywithout XXXX  court approval. \nXXXX XXXX is violating this by trying to collect and report this account. \n\n\n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX entity XXXX continue collection activity on any debt that was not properly approved during XXXX. \nThis debt was never approved. XXXXXXXX XXXX reporting and collection is a clear post-discharge violation. \n\n\n\nXXXX. FDCPA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX is a debt collector and is breaking the law by : Misrepresenting the legal status of the debt Reporting a debt that was never valid Using unfair collection methods on an illegally-issued account","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-04T20:20:12.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"365XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15069659","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CL Holdings LLC","date_received":"2025-08-04T20:01:10.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> ( the original creditor ) did not seek or receive this approval, which makes the account void and <em>unlawfully</em> originated. \n\n\n\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> is Now Trying to Collect on This Illegal Debt <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> is now reporting and attempting to collect a {$1200.00} debt that was illegally issued <em>while</em> I was protected by <em>bankruptcy</em>. \n\nThis violates the <em>protections</em> of : <em>XXXX</em>. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[18.307434,"15069659"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13953950","_score":18.040972,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Continued Violation of Bankruptcy Discharge Injunction Account # XXXX Dear CFPB and Toyota Financial Services ' ( TFS ) : I am writing to address ongoing concerns regarding Toyota Financial Services ( TFS ) collection efforts related to my XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX : XXXX ), account number XXXX, following my XXXX  XXXX bankruptcy discharge ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, my XXXX  XXXX bankruptcy case ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Case No. XXXX ) was discharged, as ordered by the Bankruptcy Court . \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received XXXX letters from XXXX addressed to myself, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX to my wife, XXXX XXXX. These letters acknowledged the total loss claim and included language stating : If your vehicle is not deemed a total loss, then you will be responsible for any payments not made while your claim was being reviewed by your insurance company. Furthermore, the letters threatened that You will also be responsible for any balance that remains if no payment is received from your insurer. These statements wrongly assert post-discharge financial liability, contradict the protections provided under federal bankruptcy law, and create confusion and distress. \n\nThe subsequent letters dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, further escalated the issue by stating that I may be responsible for the entire balance if the insurance payment was not receivedagain reinforcing the impression that I remain liable for a debt that has been legally discharged. The companys XX/XX/XXXX, response claimed that these letters were sent \" for information purposes only '' and included standard bankruptcy disclaimers. However, this does not shield TFS from liability under 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ), especially when the body of the letters directly contradicts the discharge by coercing or suggesting payment. \n\nTherefore, I request the following resolution : TFS must cease all further collection-related communications concerning the discharged debt.\n\nTFS must send written confirmation that they acknowledge the Chapter 7 discharge and will not pursue any remaining balance related to this vehicle loan.\n\nTFS must correct any inaccurate or misleading communications, including those sent to my wife, and I. TFS must formally retract language that implies post-discharge financial responsibility.\n\nTFS must ensure that all credit reporting agencies reflect the discharged debt appropriately.\n\nI ask the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to investigate this matter and ensure that TFS complies with federal bankruptcy and consumer protection laws to prevent further violations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n\nThe statement that I may be responsible for this debt constitutes a violation of the discharge injunction under 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ), as it attempts to coerce repayment of a debt that the bankruptcy court has released me from. Sending multiple letters with such language can not be excused or mitigated by any disclaimers provided by TFS. Their insistence on potential liability improperly pressures me and conflicts with federal bankruptcy protections. \n\nFurthermore, in TFSs response dated XX/XX/XXXX, they assert that their letters are not an attempt to collect, assess or recover a claim in violation of the Bankruptcy code and are provided for information purposes only. This disclaimer is inappropriate and insufficient. Simply labeling these communications as informational does not absolve TFS from responsibility when the substance of the letters violates the discharge injunction. This legal disclaimer does not absolve TFS or grant TFS legal immunity.\n\nThe letters threatening tone and implication of personal financial responsibility are coercive and misleading. Courts have held that attempts to circumvent bankruptcy protections through veiled or indirect language still constitute violations under 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ) and may also violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ).\n\nTherefore, TFSs continued attempts to collect or imply responsibility for this discharged debt, even under the guise of informational notices, are unlawful and must cease immediately. I request that the CFPB investigate this matter thoroughly and take appropriate action to ensure TFS complies with the bankruptcy discharge injunction and federal debt collection laws. \n\nThank you for your attention to this urgent matter. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-07T03:42:48.000Z","issue":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"786XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13953950","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-06-07T03:14:08.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Courts have held that attempts to circumvent <em>bankruptcy</em> <em>protections</em> through veiled or indirect language still constitute violations <em>under</em> 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ) and may also violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ).\n\nTherefore, TFSs continued attempts to collect or imply responsibility for this discharged debt, even <em>under</em> the guise of informational notices, are <em>unlawful</em> and must cease immediately."],"product":["Vehicle <em>loan</em> or lease"],"issue":["Problems at the end of the <em>loan</em> or lease"],"sub_product":["<em>Loan</em>"],"sub_issue":["Unable to receive car title or other problem after the <em>loan</em> is paid off"]},"sort":[18.040972,"13953950"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3432674","_score":17.297989,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing because I believe my home has been foreclosed on illegally and I need assistance to stop this unlawful sale. I started to fall behind because I owed back taxes and the money I was making from the coffee shops I own was going to paying off the IRS. I also was involved in a custody battle over my child and opened a new business around the same time and lost a substantial amount of money. In XX/XX/XXXX I began to fall behind and thats when the issues with my lender started because they wouldnt work with me to accept the partial payments I was trying to submit and they consistently refused the requests I opened for modification and assistance. Things started to get even more complicated also because my loan was transferred to several different lenders who all gave me different information.\n\nAs a result I went into foreclosure in XX/XX/XXXX and the lender put my house up for sale at the foreclosure auction on XX/XX/XXXX. I never received a notice of sale and found out about the sale last minute and had to file Bankruptcy to stop the sale to try to see if I could apply for a loan modification or assistance and work something out with the lender to repay the debt I owed. I told the lender that I filed bankruptcy and followed up with them several times throughout the month of XX/XX/XXXX, and even spoke with an individual named XXXX, id # XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX who told me that my foreclosure was suspended because of the bankruptcy. But apparently, my bankruptcy was dismissed on XX/XX/XXXX and when I called on XX/XX/XXXX they told me that and also tried to say I had not been in contact with them for over a month when I had reached out several times within that time frame including on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and again on XX/XX/XXXX. The next time I called was on XX/XX/XXXX and that is when a representative, XXXX ID # XXXX told me I had another sales on XX/XX/XXXX. I never received an actual notice of sale, but I was scared so I filed bankruptcy again on the day before the sale. I called the lender the same day I filed and spoke with XXXX XXXX who told me that he was going to give my information to the bankruptcy department and get the sales date postponed. I called again on XX/XX/XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX who told me that my account was in active bankruptcy and that I had 45 days to submit files for the loss mitigation department to review. I also called on XX/XX/XXXX and thats when a representative told me that my bankruptcy was dismissed on XX/XX/XXXX. Then, the next thing I know I got a motion to ratify in the mail on XX/XX/XXXX saying that my home was sold in a foreclosure auction on XX/XX/XXXX and that the sale had been finalized as of XX/XX/XXXX. \nI tried to call the lender to see why my home was sold while I was in bankruptcy and the representative I spoke with, XXXX, told me that my bankruptcy was not filed correctly. When I asked to speak with the bankruptcy department she would not transfer me and also told me that the bankruptcy department was not comfortable speaking with me and that something did happen with my bankruptcy but that she couldnt tell me what happened. She then tried to tell me that because I did not file all of my paperwork the day that I filed bankruptcy that it was the reason the bankruptcy was not valid. But she confirmed that the courts had my bankruptcy filing pending from XX/XX/XXXX through the XXXX and that because the bankruptcy wasnt completely filed they did not have to postpone the sales date, even though several representatives told me that my sales date was postponed throughout the entire month of XXXX. I asked to speak with the manager about this and spoke with XXXX in Loss Mitigation who told me that the bankruptcy attorneys advised them the sale was valid and that the stay of protection from bankruptcy was not valid. XXXX also was very rude to me and hung up in my face before I could ask if they filed anything with the court to stop my protection in the bankruptcy. I reached out to the bankruptcy attorney office which is XXXX XXXX XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX, the Post Sales Manager. XXXX was extremely rude and treated me as if I were stupid and told me that my bankruptcy was not valid and that I had no protection under it. So I asked him if they had asked the court to lift my protection and he insisted that he would not explain bankruptcy law to me, even though I told him I already understand it and just need to see proof that they filed for the protection to be removed but he declined. I asked to speak with the bankruptcy department and he also refused to transfer me and told me to get a bankruptcy lawyer.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-11-08T18:01:54.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"20003","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3432674","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC","date_received":"2019-11-08T17:21:23.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> was extremely rude and treated me as if I were stupid and told me that my <em>bankruptcy</em> was not valid and that I had no <em>protection</em> <em>under</em> it. So I asked him if they had asked the court to lift my <em>protection</em> and he insisted that he would not explain <em>bankruptcy</em> law to me, even though I told him I already understand it and just need to see proof that they filed for the <em>protection</em> to be removed but he declined."],"company":["RUSHMORE <em>LOAN</em> MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC"]},"sort":[17.297989,"3432674"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3437456","_score":16.895954,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My name is XXXX XXXX. I have a mortgage loan with PHH Mortgage Loan # XXXX. I recently filed a consumer protection complaint against them under case # XXXX-XXXX and they responded XX/XX/XXXX. The issue with them is continuing to collect mortgage payments under my name by an unauthorized 3rd party who filed bankruptcy chapter XXXX on my debt lying to bankruptcy court listing debt as her own ( Ms. XXXX XXXX ) when the debt is solely mines. I am the purchaser of property at hand and already filed chapter XXXX bankruptcy with my debt being discharged. I requested my case be closed, my personal information stop being used by others, and all debt collection under my name and loan be ceased. However, debt is still being collect by bank from unauthorized 3rd party who has been late continuously under the bankruptcy plan. She lied to court she lives in property when it actual sits empty. I'm filing another complaint ahainst PHH in esponse to first complaint which they stated I may contact them and when I did, a representative refused to speak to me on my own debt because the case is under chapter XXXX with an attorney for this 3rd party unauthorized party. Ms. XXXX XXXX. This is unlawful I can not even speak on my own debt I acquired and the bank assigned a manager relation named XXXX XXXX which numbers provided in response are invalid. \n\nThe resolution I'm requesting from PHH is to : 1. Clear me to speak on my own debt. I am not represented by an attorney and therefore, should be allowed to speak on my debt. \n\nThe bank indicated in their response they obtained legal counsel to inquire how this property was obtained. \nI am responding to they inquiry. \nI purchased home in XXXX as a single woman. Worked all my life living in home for 14years. I had become terribly ill with ongoing health problems and in XX/XX/XXXX was hospitalized where Ms. XXXX XXXX, my cousin came with notary while I was on medication and had me sign my home so she can handle my affairs if I died. When I got out I asked her to sign home back.over while I lived in it continuing payments. However, she always wanted home but was never willing to work for one of her own and lied stating she spent {$20000.00} on upgrades not willing to produce one rreceipt for so called upgrades to rent house out for me. We had mediation with court mediator who told my cousin she can clearly see she is trying to take my home and any arbritrator could see that and she knows she's lying about spending {$20000.00} in this home she barely had signed over to her. My cousin then evicted me out the house with no place to go. I have never been homeless in my life until this dirt bag came along. \nWorked all my life until I became very sick and XXXX. I had money to pay her back for true amount she really spent on upgrades after I went to store XXXX XXXX  and obtained receipt she only spent {$3000.00} but she continued to tell her same {$20000.00} lie to make sure I could not get my home back. The true place ms. XXXX spent {$20000.00} on is all her attorneys fighting to take and keep my home. During this time, I have had negative reportings on my credit because she pays late having to dispute negative credit reportings. I still have home owners insurance being bought on my behalf by bank. I'm still currently receiving billing statements every month when I already filled bankruptcy and my debt discharged. I think this is the most illegal thing I ever heard how bankruptcy court allowed a unuthorized 3rd party person to make payment arrangements on a debt that is not even legally theirs. \nI am once again asking PHH to stop and cease all payments and actions under my name. If they don't, I'm going to be searching for an attorney to bring a lawsuit so great against the bank and bankruptcy court for violation of my rights to privacy of my personal information and violation of my own bankruptcy. This is plan ridiculous!","date_sent_to_company":"2019-11-13T20:48:35.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3437456","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2019-11-13T19:40:28.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My name is <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. I have a mortgage <em>loan</em> with PHH Mortgage <em>Loan</em> # <em>XXXX</em>. I recently filed a consumer <em>protection</em> complaint against them <em>under</em> case # <em>XXXX</em>-<em>XXXX</em> and they responded XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. The issue with them is continuing to collect mortgage payments <em>under</em> my name by an unauthorized 3rd party who filed <em>bankruptcy</em> chapter <em>XXXX</em> on my debt lying to <em>bankruptcy</em> court listing debt as her own ( Ms. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ) when the debt is solely mines."]},"sort":[16.895954,"3437456"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10166940","_score":16.839283,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally request immediate correction and removal of inaccurate information being reported to the credit bureaus regarding my student loan Account # XXXX. It has come to my attention that this loan, which was placed under deferment and qualified for forgiveness, continues to reflect late payments and other negative information on my credit report, which is erroneous and in violation of multiple federal laws. \n\nViolations Under Student Loan Law and GAAP Standards Inaccurate Reporting in Violation of GAAP Standards : As a financial institution, you are required under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ( GAAP ) to maintain accurate and truthful records. The continued reporting of late payments on a loan that was deferredand subsequently forgivenrepresents a direct breach of these principles. The concept of material accuracy under GAAP mandates that all financial representations, including those impacting credit reporting, must be truthful and free of material misstatements. The errors in reporting violate the very essence of GAAPs consistency and transparency standards.\n\nHigher Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 1098e ) Violations in Deferment Reporting : Under federal law, student loans placed in deferment are not subject to penalties, late fees, or reporting of delinquency during the deferment period. My loan was under deferment, and the reporting of late payments constitutes a violation of my rights under the Higher Education Act, which prohibits lenders and servicers from reporting inaccurate statuses on deferred loans. \n\nFair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Violation of Accurate Reporting ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 ) : Under the FCRA, creditors and credit reporting agencies have a duty to ensure that any information they provide is accurate, complete, and up to date. Reporting false late payments and other incorrect details about my student loan is a clear violation of this statute. I demand that this incorrect information be removed immediately, as it is materially damaging and not reflective of the true status of my loan.\n\nBankruptcy Law and Student Loans Bankruptcy Code ( 11 U.S.C. 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ) Discharge of Student Loans : While student loans are generally non-dischargeable in bankruptcy, certain circumstances, including undue hardship or forgiveness, may qualify the loan for discharge. If any portion of my loan was supposed to be forgiven or discharged due to these circumstances, continued reporting of delinquent payments would also constitute a violation of the Bankruptcy Code, leading to further legal remedies.\n\nAdditional Violations Related to Loan Forgiveness Public Service Loan Forgiveness ( PSLF ) Program or Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Forgiveness : If my loan qualified for forgiveness under either the PSLF or IDR programs, it is unlawful to continue reporting the loan as active or delinquent. The incorrect reporting of late payments violates the terms of these programs and impedes my legal right to the benefits provided therein. \n\nConsumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Guidelines : The CFPB has issued guidance regarding the accurate servicing and reporting of student loans, particularly in relation to forgiveness and deferment. Any continued misreporting is a violation of federal guidelines, and I reserve the right to seek additional relief through the CFPB. \n\nLoan 1-01 Direct Loan - Subsidized Balance : {$2200.00} Interest Rate : 3.40 % School : XXXX XXXX Loan 1-02 Direct Loan - Unsubsidized Balance : {$1600.00} Interest Rate : 6.80 % School : XXXX XXXX Formal Demand for Removal and Deletion In light of these significant violations, I demand the following : Immediate cessation of all inaccurate and false reporting regarding this student loan.\n\nCorrection and deletion of all negative entries, including late payments, from all three major credit reporting agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ). \n\nWritten confirmation that the corrections have been made and that my loan has been accurately updated to reflect it's true deferred and forgiven status. \n\nComplete removal of the loan from my credit report if it qualifies for forgiveness, as prescribed under federal law. \n\nI expect a response and resolution to this matter within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Should you fail to comply with this request, I will have no alternative but to seek legal remedies available to me under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Higher Education Act, and other applicable laws. \n\nThank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter. Please consider this letter a formal dispute, and govern yourselves accordingly. Should you have any further questions, you may reach me at the contact information provided above. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-26T19:14:22.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33162","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10166940","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Maximus Federal Services, Inc.","date_received":"2024-09-18T12:27:02.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I demand that this incorrect information be removed immediately, as it is materially damaging and not reflective of the true status of my <em>loan</em>.\n\n<em>Bankruptcy</em> Law and Student <em>Loans</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> Code ( 11 U.S.C. 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ) Discharge of Student <em>Loans</em> : <em>While</em> student <em>loans</em> are generally non-dischargeable in <em>bankruptcy</em>, certain circumstances, including undue hardship or forgiveness, may qualify the <em>loan</em> for discharge."]},"sort":[16.839283,"10166940"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15806803","_score":16.618774,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Loan No. : XXXX Bankruptcy Case No. : XXXX ( XXXX  XXXX ) I write to you today to demand the immediate cessation of XXXX XXXX  illegal and predatory conduct. Your company has systematically violated federal law, breached its contractual duties, and engaged in a bad-faith campaign that has sabotaged my financial recovery and threatened my home. This letter serves as a formal demand for immediate corrective action to avoid imminent litigation in both bankruptcy and federal court. This isn't an attempt at deletion ; rather, this serves as an attempt to get XXXX XXXX  to accurately report this credit line to all the Credit Reporting Agencies properly. This credit line is extinguished, meaning the balance on the account is {$0.00} and not --. \n1. BAD FAITH SABOTAGE OF REAFFIRMATION RIGHTS & MANUFACTURED DEFAULT The Bankruptcy Code provides debtors the right to reaffirm a debt under 11 U.S.C. 524 ( c ). I exercised this right immediately upon filing my XXXX  XXXX petition in XX/XX/XXXX. Your own correspondence acknowledges my repeated requests for a reaffirmation agreement. \nHowever, XXXX XXXX  engaged in a pattern of conduct that illegally blocked this process : You assessed unauthorized bankruptcy fees against the account, artificially manufacturing a delinquency. \nYou then used this manufactured delinquency as the pretext to deny the reaffirmation agreement I was actively pursuing, as evidenced by your email stating the loan was not able to be reaffirmed due to the delinquency. \nYou have since provided contradictory explanations, alternately blaming this manufactured delinquency and then blaming me for not signing an agreement that your legal counsel failed to finalize and present promptly before discharge. \nThis constitutesbad faith negotiationand a direct interference with a right granted by the Bankruptcy Code. You created an illegal Catch-22 that prevented me from securing the protections of a reaffirmation agreement. \n2. WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE INJUNCTION ( 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ) ( 2 ) ) The debt was discharged by court order on XX/XX/XXXX. The permanent injunction under 524 ( a ) ( 2 ) immediately took effect, voiding any personal liability.\n\nIn blatant contempt of this court order, XXXX XXXX has : Continued to demand payment, sending statements with a \" Next Payment Due Date '' of XX/XX/XXXX. \nAccepted post-discharge payments, as detailed in your own transaction history.\n\nAssertedthat a current principal balance of {$72000.00} is still personally owed.\n\nThese are not informational statements. They are unlawful acts to collect, recover, or offset a discharged debt. Each communication is a separate and sanctionable contempt of court. ( The discharge injunction is one of the most critical protections the Bankruptcy Code affords to debtors.In re XXXX, XXXX ). \n3. WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT ( FCRA ) As a furnisher of data, XXXX XXXX has a non-delegable duty under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) to report accurately. The only accurate reporting for a discharged debt is a {$0.00} balance and a status reflecting its discharge. \nYour willful failure to do soinstead reporting a balance and ongoing delinquency for monthsis a flagrant FCRA violation. Your XX/XX/XXXX CFPB response admits this error but attempts to shift blame, proving your failure to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. This has caused significant and quantifiable damage to my creditworthiness. \n4. THE UNCONSCIONABLE CATCH-22 : PAYMENTS WITHOUT PROTECTION Your company has engineered a no-win scenario that exploits my need for shelter : Option 1 : I stop paying. XXXX XXXX forecloses. I lose my home.\n\nOption 2 : I continue paying to avoid homelessness. However, because you refuse to accurately report, I receiveZERO creditfor these timely payments. My credit score remains depressed, and I am denied the primary consumer benefit of fulfilling this financial obligation.\n\nThis is a grossly unfair and predatory shadow arrangement that exists solely for your benefit. You accept my money while ensuring my financial profile can not recover.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-08T06:32:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"74066","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15806803","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-09-08T06:32:02.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Loan</em> No. : <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> Case No. : <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> ) I write to you today to demand the immediate cessation of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  illegal and predatory conduct. Your company has systematically violated federal law, breached its contractual duties, and engaged in a bad-faith campaign that has sabotaged my financial recovery and threatened my home. This letter serves as a formal demand for immediate corrective action to avoid imminent litigation in both <em>bankruptcy</em> and federal court."]},"sort":[16.618774,"15806803"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20278005","_score":16.494114,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My mortgage servicer has engaged in a continuous, multiyear pattern of unlawful payment handling, suspense manipulation, and false delinquency creation beginning no later than XX/XX/XXXX and continuing through XXXX. These violations occurred before, during, and after my XXXX XXXXXXXX bankruptcy and have caused significant financial harm, credit damage, and wrongful delinquency status. \n\nThe earliest documented violation occurred on XX/XX/XXXX, when the servicer drafted my payment via XXXX and applied {$0.00} to my loan, placing the entire payment into suspense. This was a full periodic payment that the servicer initiated themselves. They failed to credit it, left the due date unpaid, and immediately created a false delinquency. This is a direct violation of Regulation Z, Regulation X, and the CFPBs mortgage servicing rules. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the servicer drafted my payment again and applied it 35 days late, despite it being an XXXX draft. They again diverted part of the payment into suspense without any lawful basis. This continued the false delinquency they created the month before. \n\nFrom XXXX through XXXX, the servicer repeatedly : applied payments weeks or months after the received date marked payments XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX days late placed full payments into suspense split payments into multiple fragments used received date outside applied date as a routine explanation applied payments to the wrong due month created and maintained false delinquency statuses reported inaccurate late payments to the credit bureaus manipulated effective dates failed to provide accurate account statements These errors continued during my active XXXX XXXX bankruptcy, which violates 11 U.S.C. 524 ( i ). The servicer continued to misapply payments, use suspense improperly, and generate false delinquencies while I was under federal bankruptcy protection. Their actions undermined the bankruptcy process and caused ongoing harm. \n\nThe servicers misconduct escalated into foreclosure threats. My husband and I were forced to file XXXX XXXX bankruptcy to stop a foreclosure that was triggered by the servicers own errors, not by any failure on our part to make payments. The servicer continued the same pattern of misapplication during bankruptcy and is still issuing delinquency notices in XXXX, including letters stating that we are seriously delinquent, despite the fact that the delinquency was created entirely by their own servicing failures. \n\nI also received a XXXXn alert showing that my mortgage was reported as XXXX days late while simultaneously showing that I was {$0.00} behind. This is not possible unless the servicer created an artificial delinquency through misapplication of payments. A true XXXX delinquency would show a pastdue balance. Reporting me as XXXX days late with a {$0.00} delinquent amount confirms that the servicers own payment handling errorsnot any missed paymentscaused the false delinquency. This inaccurate reporting has damaged my credit and further demonstrates the servicers systemic failure to apply payments correctly and maintain accurate records. \n\nAs a result, my account history is materially inaccurate, my credit has been damaged, and I have been repeatedly and falsely shown as delinquent due to the servicers misconduct. This is a systemic servicing failure that has persisted for XXXX years.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-15T08:22:32.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"39440","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20278005","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC","date_received":"2026-03-15T08:08:04.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Payment process"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The servicer continued to misapply payments, use suspense improperly, and generate false delinquencies <em>while</em> I was <em>under</em> federal <em>bankruptcy</em> <em>protection</em>. Their actions undermined the <em>bankruptcy</em> process and caused ongoing harm. \n\nThe servicers misconduct escalated into foreclosure threats. My husband and I were forced to file <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> to stop a foreclosure that was triggered by the servicers own errors, not by any failure on our part to make payments."]},"sort":[16.494114,"20278005"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14908011","_score":16.425386,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"EMERGENCY DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF JUDICIAL RECUSAL, QUIET TITLE, AND FEDERAL OVERSIGHT REGARDING SYSTEMIC MORTGAGE SERVICING FRAUD, TITLE LAUNDERING, AND LOAN NUMBER MANIPULATION, INCLUDING CORPORATE ASSIGNMENT UNAUTHORIZED WHILE IAM ON A BK XXXX XXXX VIA CFPB PORTAL XX/XX/XXXX WHICH I WAS NOT AWARE OF. ALSO RECORDS OF XXXX  DOCUMENT TAMPERING UNCOVERED XX/XX/XXXX AND URGENT OBJECTION TO FRAUDULENT JUDGMENT SCHEDULED FOR XX/XX/XXXX, AND URGENT OBJECTION TO FRAUDULENT JUDGMENT SCHEDULED FOR XX/XX/XXXX, WHICH REPRESENTS UNLAWFUL TITLE LAUNDERING, AND DE FACTO THEFT OF DEBTOR PROPERTY FILED PRO SE BY BORROWER WITH URGENT REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE CFPB INVESTIGATION, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND PROTECTION OF RIGHTS.UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT/CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA XXXX XXXX XXXX URGENT OBJECTION TO FRAUDULENT JUDGMENT SCHEDULED FOR XX/XX/XXXX, WHICH REPRESENTS UNLAWFUL TITLE LAUNDERING AND DE FACTO THEFT OF DEBTOR PROPERTY Filed Pro XXXX by Borrower With Urgent Request for Immediate CFPB Investigation, Injunctive Relief , and Protection of Rights. INTRODUCTION, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, submit this complaint and urgent objection as a XXXX, pro se borrower and self-represented litigant seeking federal and state agency intervention. This complaint exposes a systemic pattern of mortgage and loan fraud, title laundering, identity theft, bank account hacks, judicial misconduct, and civil rights violations uncovered after more than XXXX years of court records, mail, and electronic document investigations, including newly discovered evidence from the website and public filings.BACKGROUND AND ALLEGATIONS A. Fraudulent Corporate Assignment Discovery. On XX/XX/XXXX, I discovered critical corporate assignment assignments posted on the CFPB website, revealing unauthorized and backdated mortgage assignments being used to enable fraudulent collections and evade federal protections. \nXXXX XXXX Document Tampering. Newly additional fraudulent tampering of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX  ) documents, including inactive and purged Mortgage Identification Numbers predating loan execution, confirming coordinated record suppression and title laundering. \nC. Synthetic Loan Number Fraud. The servicer fabricated and used a synthetic loan number ( XXXX ) unrecognized by HUD, Treasury, or IRS, leveraged to enforce illegal collections and cloud lawful title. \nD. Certified Payoff and Tax Fraud. HUD-certified payoff statements from XXXX have been ignored. False IRS Form 1098 filings have resulted in tax harm and misreported income, violating IRS statutes and tax laws. \nE. Mortgage Servicing and Escrow Manipulation. Forensic mortgage ledgers reveal missing escrow payments, payment reversals, and artificially manufactured defaults to justify foreclosure. \nF. Judicial Suppression and Procedural Abuse. Court allowance of unauthorized pleadings have obstructed my ability to defend my rights.G. Identity Theft and Retaliation. Since XXXX, coordinated identity theft, unauthorized financial withdrawals, and unlawful Social Security garnishment have been inflicted in retaliation for my reporting of fraud. Fraudulent Judgment Scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX while I have an open XXXX  XXXX XXXX and payments are all on file with Mr Cooper plus the trustee on the XXXX  XXXX XXXX at XXXX and XXXX  XXXX an unlawful judgment based on recycled, XXXX  discharge scheduled, representing an attempt to unlawfully seize my home via title laundering while Judge has ignored certified HUD payoff statement which proves that is it is a XXXX balance! XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX HUD US Treasury XXXX # XXXX. CLAIM has been discharged recycled under my name going on the XXXX round with the Judge and court. I discovered Iam a XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX as I never authorized or filed the use of my information on XX/XX/XXXX. I filed adversary claim against the Trustee for using my entity and falsifying COURT on the cases and dismissed with Prejudice on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX adversary XXXX. I have identified multiple case numbers and reference across XXXX  and court documents, including but not limited to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX has consistently being manipulated to obscure and hide the evidence and case tracking, to deliberate attempts to obscure filings, create confusion, and due process rights. This pattern of manipulation, recycling and recycling of identifiers, altered and recycled numbers, documents, and signatures is ongoing and has resulted in systemic procedural and due process violations.III. CASE NUMBER VARIANTS AND PACER MANIPULATION. I have identified multiple inconsistent and manipulated case numbers and references across XXXX  and court documents, including but not limited to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  has consistently being manipulated to obscure and hide the evidence and case tracking, to deliberate attempts to obscure filings, create confusion, and due process rights. These discrepancies appear and confuse the recordkeepers for discovery of any person to investigate. \nIV. EMERGENCY MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RECUSAL AND PACER MANIPULATION. I filed an emergency motion to recuse the presiding judge on XX/XX/XXXX, in case number XXXX, citing ongoing judicial bias, repeated due process violations and procedural abuse impacting my ability to obtain fair hearings within XXXX. My original filing to RECUSE the judge was manipulated on XX/XX/XXXX of approximately XXXX pages. That same day, my scanned filing recorded as XXXX pages, despite these tactics, I remain committed to seeking judicial fairness and federal intervention. Over the coming weekend, I plan to submit this comprehensive complaint and all supporting evidence to the CFPB and relevant agencies to secure the relief and protection I am entitled to under law. \nV. ONGOING HARASSMENT, IDENTITY THEFT, TITLE LAUNDERING AND JUDGE TRUSTEE JUDICIAL OBSTRUCTION. Since XX/XX/XXXX, my personal phone, email, and bank accounts have been subjected to unauthorized hacking and intrusion, severely impacting my ability to manage my legal affairs and personal finances. Despite my repeated and numerous filingsmotions, declarations, and complaintsthe presiding judge has consistently responded by labeling my submissions as incomprehensible or unintelligible, dismissing them with a lack of legal authority or clarity. Dozens of legitimate filings made on my behalf have been systematically ignored, obstructing my ability to obtain justice and undermining the fairness of the proceedings not to mention calling and painting my motions as INCOMPREHENSIBLE UNINTELLIGIBLE AND LACK OF AUTHORITY MATERIAL EVIDENCE which has included fraud XXXX098s, HUD CERT PAYOFFS, TRUSTEE FRAUD LEDGER larrge amounts of money and dates being rotated with different dates, RE-CONVEYANCES shows claim paid fraud corp assignments total XXXX plus XXXX endorsement timelines not matching Most RECENT DISCOVERY XX/XX/XXXX CFPB WEBSITE FRAUD ASSIGNMENT RECORDED XXXX XXXX RECORDING # XXXX AND MERS RECORD TAMRERING MERS DISCOVERY DOCS XX/XX/XXXX that has now changed versus to what appeared before on the website with over the XXXX  FILINGS AND MOTIONS I HAVE PROVIDED TO COURT.VI. LEGAL VIOLATIONS. I am prepared to provide all relevant documentation evidencing these violations to support my claims and request immediate intervention. \nViolation of Bankruptcy Code protections ( 11 U.S.C. 524, 362 ) Fraudulent recording violating California Civil Code 1095, 2932.5 Mortgage servicing violations under the Dodd-Frank Act, RESPA, TILA, and FDCPA False IRS filings and tax fraud ( 26 U.S.C. 7206, 7212 ) Criminal instrument violations under California Penal Code 115 Discrimination and retaliation violating ADA ( 42 U.S.C. 12132 ) and civil rights statutes ( 42 U.S.C. 1983 ) Federal mail fraud violations ( 18 U.S.C. 1001, 1341 ) VII. REQUESTS FOR RELIEF. Conduct a full forensic audit of all mortgage servicing, escrow, payoff, recording, and IRS documents related to my loan and property. Issue an immediate stay of all foreclosure, collection, garnishment, and eviction actions pending investigation. Initiate correction and civil investigations and prosecutions against all responsible parties. Order correction and expungement of all fraudulent loan numbers, assignments, and false IRS filings. Enforce full XXXX accommodations and protections from retaliation. Award monetary and exemplary punitive damages for fraud, identity theft, and civil rights violations. Provide me with regular updates and full participation rights in all proceedings. Grant emergency injunctive relief to stay or vacate the fraudulent judgment scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX, protecting my home from unlawful seizure.VIII. LEGAL ISSUES AND TIMELINE DISCREPANCIES. Post-Discharge Loan Modification ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). Under 11 U.S.C. 524 ( a ), the discharge releases the debtor from personal liability on discharged debts. Attempting to impose a loan modification after discharge is legally void and unenforceable. \nImproper County Recorder Filings ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) : Recording documents related to discharged debts improperly clouds title and may constitute fraudulent or unauthorized encumbrances harming the debtors property rights. \nMotions for Relief from Stay Filed After Discharge ( XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX ) : The automatic stay under XXXX U.S.C. XXXX terminates on discharge, rendering such motions moot and possibly abusive collection tactics. Fabricated Synthetic Loan Numbers and Ignored HUD/Treasury Payoffs : The servicers use of fabricated loan numbers unrecognized by HUD, Treasury, or IRS undermines lawful debt collection and tax reporting, violating consumer protection laws. Judicial Obstruction and PACER ManipulationRepeated denial of electronic filing access and XXXX accommodations, coupled with docket manipulation, impede fair adjudication and violate the rights of a pro se litigant. PHONE BANK ACCT AND EMAIL HAVE BEEN HACKED AS EARLY AS XX/XX/XXXX IN AN ATTEMPT TO STEAL PROPERTY AND USE STRATEGY IN COURT WITH BK CASE AND LAUNDER TITLE. PRO SE DEBTOR DISCOVERED THE FULL CLARITY ON XX/XX/XXXX BY MAILING COUNTY AND MR COOPER A CEASE AND DESIST LETTER DISCOVERY OF THE FRAUD 1098S WHICH SHED notified the courts with Motion along with the RECUSAL OF JUDGE. \nI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX IS THE FILING FOR RECUSAL OF JUDGE FOR XX/XX/XXXX FRAUD JUDGMENT TO LAUNDER TITLE AND MASK THE FRAUD TO STEAL PROPERTY COLLABORATION LAUNDER SCHEME WITH TRUSTEE XXXX XXXX AND XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T01:43:21.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"92618","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14908011","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Mr. Cooper Group Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-28T00:30:11.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Fraudulent Judgment Scheduled for XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>while</em> I have an open <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> and payments are all on file with Mr Cooper plus the trustee on the <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> at <em>XXXX</em> and <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> an <em>unlawful</em> judgment based on recycled, <em>XXXX</em>  discharge scheduled, representing an attempt to <em>unlawfully</em> seize my home via title laundering <em>while</em> Judge has ignored certified HUD payoff statement which proves that is it is a <em>XXXX</em> balance! XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> HUD US Treasury <em>XXXX</em> # <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[16.425386,"14908011"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5907273","_score":16.25456,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I attended a XXXX XXXX institution from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX, I took out a direct-to-consumer XXXX XXXX XXXX made by AES/XXXX  for {$22000.00} XXXX Funds were sent directly to me in the mail via paper check, completely bypassing the schools financial aid office. Like any commercial loan, it was based on creditworthiness and came with a variable interest rate. This loan did not originate from the financial aid office and the amount was above and beyond the schools published cost of attendance. AES never bothered to verify the published cost of attendance nor did they consider any federal student loans or other private loans I had already received. \n\nI filed for bankruptcy on XX/XX/XXXX ; it was discharged XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX AES received the Notice of XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy Case, Meeting of Creditors, & Deadlines ; the debt at issue was listed on Schedule F of my petition. The deadline to object to the discharge was XX/XX/XXXX. Under 523 ( a ) ( 8 ), as written in law practice guides, the lender ( AESXXXX XXXX has the initial burden to establish the existence of the debt and that the debt is an educational loan within the statutes parameters ( Roth v. Educational Credit Mgm't Corp. ( In re Roth ), 490 B.R. 908, 916 ( 9th Cir. BAP XXXX ) ). To meet this burden, the creditor must prove that the debtmore likely than notfalls entirely within the meaning of one of Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) s exceptions ( Love v. Navient Solutions, XXXX ; McDaniel v. Navient, XXXX ). If the creditor does not prove that the debt is an educational loan that more than likely falls entirely within the meaning of one of Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) s exceptions, it is automatically and as a matter of law discharged upon entry of the Discharge Order. This includes XXXX XXXXr and other direct-to-consumer loans that exceed the schools cost of attendance ( pp. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, Morally Bankrupt, XX/XX/XXXX ). AES did not challenge dischargeability ; they did not establish the existence of the debt ; they did not prove the debt is presumptively non-dischargeable ; nor did they prove that the debt is an educational loan within the statutes parameters. Therefore, this loan was discharged upon entry of the Discharge Order in my XXXX XXXX bankruptcy case.\n\nFollowing receipt of the Discharge Order, AES temporarily ceased collection efforts but soon thereafter encouraged forbearance ; they began collecting monthly installments of {$170.00} in XXXX XXXX AES misled me as to the status of this loan. It is because of the many recent court cases and reports filed by the CFPB and XXXX, namely Morally Bankrupt ( XX/XX/XXXX ), that I learned that this loan servicer is in violation of Bankruptcy Code Section 524 and violating my rights as a consumer. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I sent a notice via certified mail to AES requesting that they immediately stop debiting my bank account and refund me all the money I have paid toward this loan since XX/XX/XXXX, the date of my Discharge Order. On XX/XX/XXXX, AES acknowledged receipt of my written correspondence via email. On XX/XX/XXXX, they uploaded a notice to my online portal stating my loan debt is presumptively not dischargeable and that I would have to file an adversary proceeding ( an untrue and deceptive statement that violates California law AB-376 1788.101 ( b ) ( 2 ) ). AES claims the outstanding balance is {$24000.00} with a current variable interest rate of 7.13 % and continues to collect on this debt at the rate of $ 208 monthly. \n\nIn previous filings, XXXX has not claimed their private loans are excepted from discharge under 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( A ) ( i ) or 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ). Nor has XXXX claimed that any of their private loans should be excepted from discharge under 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( A ) ( ii ) as an obligation to repay a scholarship or stipend. Rather, they argued that the purpose of the loan, not its use, controls whether the loan confers an educational benefit. The purpose test can not be used to elevate a non-qualified educational loan into a qualified educational loan ( Murphy v. Pa. Higher Educ. Assistance Agency ( In re Murphy ), 282 F.3d 868, 870 ( 5th Cir. XXXX ) ). The Second, the Fifth, and the Tenth Circuit Courts of Appeals have all rejected arguments made by creditors that courts need only confirm that the promissory note expresses an educational purpose for the loan to be non-dischargeable. Boilerplate language in loan agreements can not bring loans that are outside of the definition of qualified education loans within that definition. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, United States Bankruptcy XXXX XXXX XXXX said the question of dischargeability of a private student loan under Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ) turns on objective, not subjective, matters including the facts and circumstances of the loan and the applicable cost of attendance. If the facts show that a private student loan exceeds the applicable cost of attendance, then that borrowers statementboilerplate or otherwisethat a loan does not exceed the cost of attendance does not change those facts. Judge Strong wrote private [ student ] loans that exceed the cost of attendance do not meet the nondischargeability requirements of Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ), and are therefore within the scope of [ the student borrowers ] bankruptcy discharges. AES bears the burden of showing that the debt is nondischargeable. Creditors who act to collect XXXXischarged debts in contravention of 524 are subject to claims for declaratory judgment that the debt was discharged, equitable claims to cease the collection and return the money collected, as well as claims for compensatory damages and contempt sanctions for knowing and willful violations of the Bankruptcy Code ( Homaidan and Youssef v. Navient ( In re Homaidan ) ( In re Youssef ) Adv. Pro. No. 17-1085 ( E.D.N.Y. XX/XX/XXXX ) ). \n\nAcademic Answer loans are not qualified education loans under Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ) because they are simple consumer loans subject to the same discharge rules as any other consumer debt ; they lack the traditional characteristics of educational loans ; and they were made through a direct-to-consumer lending program not through the financial aid office of an eligible school. These types of loans were not limited in amount, were for sums that were above and beyond the published cost of attendance, and were assigned adjustable/variable interest rates at the time of origination, the same as any commercial loan. AES originated these loans using consumer loan methods taking into account credit scores and other underwriting considerations. They should not be able to behave like commercial lenders while simultaneously receiving the same protection in bankruptcy as governmental student lending programs. \n\nAcademic Answer loans are not qualified education loans as defined in section 221 ( d ) ( 1 ) of the Internal Revenue Code of XXXX ( any indebtedness incurred solely to pay qualified higher education expenses, which are defined as the [ published ] cost of attendance at an eligible educational institution reduced by the sum of certain amounts excluded from gross income and the amount of any scholarship, allowance, or payment ) under Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ), nor do they constitute an obligation to repay funds received as an educational benefit within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( A ) ( ii ). In fact, this Academic Answer loan does not fall into a category of debt that is excluded from discharge under ANY subsection of Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) and was therefore discharged pursuant to the Courts Discharge Order in my XXXX XXXX bankruptcy case. \n\nDirect-to-consumer loans that exceed the schools published cost of attendance do not meet the specific legal definition of a qualified student loan. The cost of attendance is a concrete value determined by the eligible institution based on the average costs for individual students. Institutions must report the cost of attendance as a concrete value to the Department of Education to participate in federal student aid programs. The reported cost of attendance is published on the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) website. If an educational loan exceeds the published cost of attendance or, alternatively, is within the cost of attendance but exceeds the qualified higher education expensesfor example, because the amount is greater than the cost of attendance reduced by a scholarship receivedthe loan is not solely for qualified higher education expenses and hence it is not a qualified education loan. Such a loan ( exceeding either the cost of attendance or the qualified higher education expenses ) is not exempted from discharge under Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ). The loan at issue exceeded the schools published cost of attendance, less other scholarship grants and loans. Funds I received from AES while attending school totaled {$22000.00}. During my enrollment, I also received {$100000.00} through XXXX XXXX XXXX and Unsubsidized qualified federal student loans ( XXXX ), {$110000.00} in other private student loans, at least {$500.00} in scholarship funds, and {$110000.00} in gross income. While the published cost of attendance ( PCOA ) for the academic years I was enrolled in school ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) can not be found in the XXXX website archives ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  ), the PCOA for the current XXXX academic school year on XXXX is {$31000.00}. Using the current PCOA to calculate the total PCOA for the duration of my enrollment arrives at a sum of {$95000.00}, which is no doubt greater than the PCOA from 14 years ago. The amount I received in qualified federal student loans and scholarships totaled {$100000.00}, demonstrating that this loan absolutely exceeded the published cost of attendance less other scholarship grants and loans. Therefore, this loan is not a qualified education loan and, as such, was automatically and as a matter of law discharged upon entry of the Discharge Order.\n\nIn a blog article, the CFPB published that several types of loans associated with education expenses are dischargeable in bankruptcy, like most other types of unsecured consumer debt for example loans where the loan amount was higher than the cost of attendance which can occur when a loan is paid directly to the consumer without the filing of an adversary proceeding ( XXXX, XXXX : Busting myths about bankruptcy and private student loans ( consumerfinance.gov ) ). It further explains that using loan funds to pay for fees or expenses related to studying for a professional exam may also fall into the dischargeable category. I received a degree in medicine and had to pay thousands of dollars for board exam reviews, study materials specific for the exam, the board exam itself, and travel costs, as the several-day exam was held out of town. \n\nCongress enacted 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) because there was evidence of an increasing abuse of the bankruptcy process that threatened the viability of educational loan programs and harm to future students as well as taxpayers ( Cazenovia College v. Renshaw ( In re Renshaw ), 222 F.3d 82, 87 ( 2d Cir. XXXX ) ). By enacting section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ), Congress sought principally to protect government entities and nonprofit institutions of higher educationplaces which lend money or guarantee loans to individuals for educational purposesfrom bankruptcy discharge ( Santa Fe Med. Servs., Inc. v. Segal ( In re Segal ), 57 F.3d 342, 348 ( 3d Cir. XXXX ) ). Such loans are not based upon a borrowers proven creditworthiness. Therefore, any private loan based on creditworthiness is not exempt from discharge under Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, loan servicer XXXX XXXX filed a document with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing that student loans made to consumers may be dischargeable if they were dispersed directly to the borrower ( e.g., Academic Answer loans ). XXXX further stated, pursuant to Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ), only private loans made for qualified expenses were excepted from discharge, warning investors that these types of direct-to-consumer loans do not involve school enrollment verification, may be used for things other than qualified education expenses, and can be discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding. The Academic Answer loan is the very same type of direct-to-consumer loan as Navients Tuition Answer Loan XXXX As such, it does not fall into a category of debt that is excluded from discharge under ANY subsection of Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) and was therefore discharged pursuant to the Courts Discharge Order in my XXXX XXXX  bankruptcy case. \n\nThe United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rules [ direct-to-consumer private student ] loans are not protected in bankruptcy and can be discharged, confirming that the legal burden to prove otherwise fell on AES ( the creditor ) in my bankruptcy case, which it failed to do. \n\nBankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ) requires that a student loan be within the cost of attendance at an eligible educational institution in order to be outside the scope of the debtors discharge ( Golden v. JPMorgan Chase Bank ( In re Golden ), 596 B.R. 239, 267-69 ( Bankr. E.D.N.Y. XXXX ) ). AES has made no effort to determine whether the loan was within the cost of attendance ; I am providing proof it was not. \n\nThe loan at issue was discharged in my Chapter 7 bankruptcy case because it does not meet the requirements to be nondischargeable under Bankruptcy Code Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( B ) that is, my loan is not a qualified education loan pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 221 ( d ) ( 1 ). Namely, this loan does not meet Internal Revenue Code Section 221 ( d ) s requirement that a loan must not exceed the cost of attendance, less other scholarship grants and loans, at a XXXX XXXX institution to be a qualified education loan. \n\nAES shirked the qualified written request I sent them dated XX/XX/XXXX ; they provided a boilerplate response with no resolve. XXXXSunTrust failed to meet its legal burden to prove its Academic Answer loan is protected by Section 523 ( a ) ( 8 ) of the Bankruptcy Code in my bankruptcy case. Their continuing collection efforts on my outstanding private loan that was discharged violates the statutory bankruptcy discharge contained in Bankruptcy Code Section 524 ( a ) ( 2 ). \n\nI now must rely upon the CFPB to enforce the law and act on my behalf for complete and permanent relief and restitution on the grounds that this private loan is within the scope of my XXXX XXXX bankruptcy discharges, and AES has disregarded that fact as they have continued their collection efforts for nearly a decade. The servicers efforts to collect on this debt is unlawful and violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Additionally, \" collecting on debts discharged through bankruptcy might not only violate the Consumer Financial Protection Act 's prohibition on unfair, deceptive, and abusive practicesit could also violate the order of a United States bankruptcy XXXX '' ( XXXX, XXXX ( CFPB ) ).","date_sent_to_company":"2022-08-23T07:14:38.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Private student loan debt","zip_code":"949XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5907273","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AES/PHEAA","date_received":"2022-08-23T05:23:33.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They should not be able to behave like commercial lenders <em>while</em> simultaneously receiving the same <em>protection</em> in <em>bankruptcy</em> as governmental student lending programs."],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em> debt"],"sub_issue":["Debt was already discharged in <em>bankruptcy</em> and is no longer owed"]},"sort":[16.25456,"5907273"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11268499","_score":16.166443,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING The address of each property is : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX Urgent Request for Investigation and Enforcement of Legal Violations by Mortgage and Insurance Companies Good Afternoon, My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am the owner of a property management company based in XXXX XXXX, Florida. I am reaching out to bring attention to a series of unlawful actions taken against my business and properties by Specialized Loan Servicing and our insurance provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which have severely disrupted our operations and threatened our financial stability. These actions have left us facing significant losses and jeopardized our ability to operate. \nBackground Due to the devastation caused by Hurricanes Ian ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXXXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ), we sought assistance from Specialized Loan Servicing for the loans we hold. The President declared a major disaster for Florida on XX/XX/XXXX, in response to the damage caused by these storms. Despite filing insurance claims promptly, we have yet to receive any payments for necessary repairs on our properties. \nHowever, instead of assisting us in our recovery, Specialized Loan Servicing has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. Specialized Loan Servicing has imposed excessive fees, sent notices indicating a lack of active insurance policies, and refused to process our claims, claiming they could not proceed without updated insurance information. \nFurthermore, property preservation companies, hired by Specialized Loan Servicing, have unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenantsactions that have harmed both our business operations and tenant relationships. These violations have continued despite our bankruptcy filings and compliance with all relevant bankruptcy provisions. \nIssues with Insurance Companies Fraud and Statutory Violations by Insurance Companies XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has committed fraud by withholding funds and refusing to pay out claims for our properties. Despite legitimate claims and verified damages, they have delayed payments, withheld insurance funds for years, and failed to disburse any payments for necessary repairs. \nThe actions of our insurance company constitute clear violations of state and federal insurance regulations, including : XXXX Florida Statutes 627.70131 ( Prompt Payment of Claims ) This statute requires insurers to initiate an investigation within 14 days and conclude investigations within 90 days. The insurers extended delay and refusal to pay for legitimate claims constitute clear violations of this statute. \nXXXX  Florida Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act ( 626.9541 ) This statute prohibits unfair claims practices, including failing to promptly settle claims where liability is clear and committing acts of bad faith. The insurers delay in disbursing funds or communicating timelines is a violation of this statute. \nCurrent Issues with Specialized Loan Servicing Foreclosure Actions and Fees Instead of assisting us during this difficult time, Specialized Loan Servicing has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. These actions have resulted in the imposition of excessive fees and late charges, placing further strain on our business. Additionally, they have sent notices claiming that the lack of an active insurance policy has prevented them from processing our claims, despite the fact that we have valid insurance in place. \nUnlawful Entry by Property Preservation Companies Specialized Loan Servicing engaged XXXX XXXX XXXX, which unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were under a bankruptcy plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance. \nFurther Damage from Recent Hurricanes Our business suffered additional damage from Hurricanes Helene ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and Milton ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which has severely disrupted the repairs we were able to initiate after the previous storms. The ongoing damage from these hurricanes has compounded the difficulties we are facing, and we are still awaiting necessary insurance payouts to begin repairs. \nLegal Violations We have documented several violations of federal law committed by Specialized Loan Servicing, insurance providers, and their agents. These include : Bankruptcy Plan Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the protections afforded to us under bankruptcy law. \nViolations of Automatic Stay ( Sections 5, 6, and 7 of Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code ) XXXX Specialized Loan Servicing has refused to accept our payments, returned checks, and ignored requests for assistance. \nXXXX They have added unjustified fees to loans during the active bankruptcy plan. \nXXXX  They have sent default notices despite our compliance with the terms of the plan, including making timely payments. \nFailure to Meet Obligations Under Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide loan term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation in disaster scenarios. \nXXXX They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX  They have not provided any loss mitigation or forbearance options during or after the hurricanes, in direct contravention of the CARES Act provisions. \nLegal Basis for Violations In addition to the violations noted above, several other legal provisions have been breached, including : Trespass to Property o Legal Basis : Florida law defines trespass as unauthorized entry onto another persons property, especially where \" No Trespassing '' signs are posted. \nXXXX Violation Details : Property preservation companies entered properties without consent, despite visible \" No Trespassing '' signs, resulting in unauthorized access. \nIllegal Lock Changes and Tenant Interference o Legal Basis : Under Floridas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, unauthorized lock changes and interference with tenants possession of the property are illegal without a court order. \no Violation Details : Locks were forcibly changed on multiple properties while tenants were legally in possession, disrupting tenant rights and property control. \nCivil Theft and Conversion XXXX Legal Basis : Conversion occurs when unauthorized actions deprive the property owner of their personal property. Civil theft involves intentional control or deprivation of property. \nXXXX Violation Details : Property preservation companies removed personal property, including \" For Rent '' signs, and changed locks without authorization, depriving us of rightful control.\n\nBreach of Peace in Enforcement Actions o Legal Basis : Florida law mandates that any enforcement actions, including repossessions or foreclosures, must occur without a breach of peace. \nXXXX  Violation Details : Breaking into homes, forcibly changing locks, and creating disturbances constitute breaches of peace during property enforcement actions. \nFlorida and Federal Statutes Governing Repetitive and Excessive Actions Florida Statutes : XXXX 95.11 : Establishes the statute of limitations for foreclosure claims. \nXXXX 83.67 : Governs illegal actions such as unauthorized lockouts or interference with tenants ' rights. \nFederal Laws : XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits harassment, unfair practices, and repetitive legal actions by creditors or their agents attempting to collect debts. \nXXXX Dodd-Frank Act : Requires mortgage servicers to follow strict procedures when handling properties, especially in foreclosure, including respecting legal stays and avoiding excessive or unlawful property entries. \nRequest for Enforcement Despite our efforts to engage attorneys and resolve these matters, Specialized Loan Servicing and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have continued to violate our rights, causing severe damage to our business operations. We are on the brink of failure due to these actions, and we urgently request government enforcement to hold these companies accountable. \nThe impact of these violations has left us without income, severely damaged our ability to operate, and further delayed our recovery from the hurricanes. We ask for your immediate intervention to ensure these companies face the appropriate consequences for their actions. \nPlease feel free to contact me directly at ( XXXX ) XXXX or via email at XXXX. Thank you in advance for your attention to this urgent matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-24T14:09:00.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"321XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11268499","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","date_received":"2024-12-24T13:29:04.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Unlawful</em> Entry by Property Preservation Companies Specialized <em>Loan</em> Servicing engaged <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, which <em>unlawfully</em> entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were <em>under</em> a <em>bankruptcy</em> plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance."]},"sort":[16.166443,"11268499"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8976229","_score":15.933242,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I hereby attest and affirm to Experian, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and all relevant laws, regulations, and citations, that the account in question is a victim of fraudulent acts and actions that I did not authorize and is therefore due to identity theft. As a result, I'd like to ask that this account be deleted per the FCRA 's legal requirements and factual evidence. \nExperian reports the account as \" closed '' and \" written off, '' while then, against FCRA and other federal regulations, reports the \" current amount owed '' at over {$11000.00} and three times the original amount reported just eighteen months ago of {$3800.00}. Experian states this \" Meets FCRA Requirements, '' when in fact, Experian is reporting monthly an interest rate of over 300 percent, inaccurately reporting the months of XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX as current when in fact, I never made a payment, had my vehicle repossessed barely a month after the first payment due date, do not report terms, monthly payment amounts, and against FCRA and federal laws openly reports an account where XXXX and Predatory lending practices are evident, and to any state or federal law This request also extends to XXXX XXXX, which has been served with the \" FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) '' and the \" Furnishers of Information : Obligations of Furnishers Under FCRA '' documents. I have proof of delivery and receipt of these documents via USPS priority mail, and I would like to ask that XXXX XXXX comply with the directives outlined in these documents. I urge XXXX XXXX to immediately cease all negative reporting activities on this account, as failure to do so will result in criminal and civil action ( s ). Experian has been notified of the situation and is equally accountable. The deletion of this fraudulent account was being reported unlawfully, evidencing XXXX, predatory lending, and anti-FCRA guidelines, and it was causing me tremendous harm. An FCRA 609 request and investigation will be requested in denial of my rights and unlawful acts against XXXX XXXX has failed to respond to the following statements of fact : As a title-loan company, under Tennessee state laws, XXXX violated XXXX XXXX '' laws, charging interest rates above 24 % that are closer to 300 % ; \" Predatory Lending '' laws ; the \" Repossession 10-day notice '' law, which further forced protections sought under XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy ; \" State Consumer Protection Laws '' which prohibit fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices, also known as \" Little FTC Acts. \" ; Additionally, XXXX XXXX violated the \" CFPA '' and \" Dodd-Frank Reform Act, '' which means that it has also violated \" UDAAP '' laws and regulations, the \" Common Law Fraud '' regulations breaching \" Consumer Protection Laws. \" ; \" Violation of Civil Rights Laws '', under \" ADA '' regulations ; the \" FTC ACT, '' \" CFPA, ''","date_sent_to_company":"2024-05-11T03:31:37.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"38122","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8976229","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2024-05-11T02:42:02.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["An FCRA 609 request and investigation will be requested in denial of my rights and <em>unlawful</em> acts against <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> has failed to respond to the following statements of fact : As a title-<em>loan</em> company, <em>under</em> Tennessee state laws, <em>XXXX</em> violated <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> '' laws, charging interest rates above 24 % that are closer to 300 % ; \" Predatory Lending '' laws ; the \" Repossession 10-day notice '' law, which further forced <em>protections</em> sought <em>under</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> ; \" State Consumer <em>Protection</em> Laws '' which"]},"sort":[15.933242,"8976229"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15716907","_score":15.930294,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against TransUnion for its willful and reckless violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and related consumer protection laws. TransUnion is inaccurately reporting a XXXX  XXXX Bankruptcy, Reference XXXX XXXXXXXX, allegedly filed on XX/XX/XXXX and discharged on XX/XX/XXXX. This reporting is not only factually defective but also completely unverifiable as required under federal law.\n\nThe U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, the official custodian of the bankruptcy records, issued an official notice dated XX/XX/XXXX and signed by Deputy Clerk XXXX XXXX. The court explicitly stated : The Clerks Office is not a reporting agency for the credit bureaus. We do not actively report information to any of the credit reporting agencies. \nOur office does not control the actions of credit reporting agencies and their accessing or maintaining this information. \n\nThis notice proves, beyond dispute, that TransUnion can not possibly obtain verification of this bankruptcy from the court. Any claim of verification made by TransUnion is inherently false, misleading, and unlawful.\n\nUnder FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), TransUnion is legally obligated to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of information in consumer reports. Reporting a bankruptcy as verified without contacting the official custodian of the records is not only unreasonable, it is grossly negligent.\n\nUnder FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), when a consumer disputes the accuracy of an item, the bureau must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. I have previously disputed this reporting with TransUnion, and TransUnion falsely claimed the bankruptcy was verified. However, the court has confirmed it does not provide such veri\nfication. TransUnions reinvestigation, therefore, was a sham, viol\n\nating 1681i ( a ). Further, by publishing this unverifiable bankruptcy, TransUnion is in violation of FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692e, which prohibits false, deceptive, or misleading representations regarding the legal status of a consumers debt or obligations. Reporting this bankruptcy as valid and verified misrepresents my legal status, creating the false impression of an ongoing financial obligation. \n\nTransUnions conduct has also created contradictions across the industry. While Experian and XXXX  report different reference numbers and details for the same bankruptcy, TransUnion reports its own unique reference number. These inconsistencies alone prove the data is unreliable and not tied to the actual source of truth the court. \nHarm Caused As a direct result of TransUnions reckless reporting, I have suffered : Credit denials for auto loans, mortgage applications, and revolving credit.\n\nHigher interest rates on approved credit products due to artificially deflated credit scores.\n\nLoss of housing opportunities, as landlords relied on TransUnions false report.\n\nLoss of employment opportunities, as some employers use credit reports in hiring decisions.\n\nEmotional distress, reputational harm, and prolonged financial hardship.\n\nTransUnions willful disregard for accuracy and verification has caused me measurable financial and emotional damage.\n\nLegal Precedent Courts have consistently ruled that credit bureaus may not rely on unverifiable or third-party sources for bankruptcy reporting. In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the court held that a credit reporting agency may be liable when it fails to go beyond the original source of disputed information if the circumstances indicate that further investigation was necessary. TransUnions reliance on unverifiable sources ( such as XXXX or other data vendors ) rather than the court itself is precisely the kind of failure condemned in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), the court reaffirmed that reporting unverifiable information violates the FCRAs mandate for maximum possible accuracy. \n\nTransUnion is in clear violation of these standards.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-04T21:00:39.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Other personal consumer report","zip_code":"73132","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15716907","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-04T19:11:56.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Public record information inaccurate"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this complaint against TransUnion for its willful and reckless violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and related consumer <em>protection</em> laws. TransUnion is inaccurately reporting a <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em>, Reference <em>XXXX</em> XXXXXXXX, allegedly filed on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and discharged on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. This reporting is not only factually defective but also completely unverifiable as required <em>under</em> federal law.\n\nThe U.S."]},"sort":[15.930294,"15716907"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18261029","_score":15.342975,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Respondents XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nLexisNexis Risk Data Management Inc. \n\nBoth entities are consumer reporting agencies as defined under 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ) and are subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nA. False and Inaccurate Bankruptcy Reporting XXXX  and LexisNexis are reporting a bankruptcy that was never adjudicated and was dismissed and statistically closed by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), consumer reporting agencies are required to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information they report. \n\nA dismissed, non-adjudicated bankruptcy is not a valid bankruptcy outcome and its continued reporting is factually false and legally misleading. \n\nI have submitted official documentation from the Bankruptcy Court confirming dismissal and closure. Despite this : XXXX  continues to report the bankruptcy LexisNexis continues to furnish the same inaccurate public record data This constitutes reporting of information that is inaccurate and unverifiable, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ).\n\nB. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation I have submitted multiple formal disputes to XXXX  and LexisNexis. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), once a dispute is received, a CRA must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate. \n\nXXXX has repeatedly issued generic responses stating the information was verified, while failing to disclose : The source of verification The method used How a dismissed, unadjudicated bankruptcy could be verified as accurate This violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), which requires disclosure of the method of verification upon request. \n\nThe fact that XXXX and XXXX  deleted the same bankruptcy immediately using identical documentation further demonstrates that XXXX and LexisNexis failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, constituting willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n or, at minimum, negligent noncompliance under 1681o.\n\nC. Continued Reporting of Disputed Information Despite ongoing disputes and submission of court documentation, XXXX  has continued to report the bankruptcy without proper notation or deletion.\n\nThis violates 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ), which prohibit continued reporting of information known to be inaccurate or misleading. \n\nD. Unauthorized and Unverifiable Credit Inquiries XXXX is reporting 22 inquiries on my consumer credit report that I do not recognize and did not authorize. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681b, a consumer report may only be accessed for a permissible purpose.\n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), XXXX  is required to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure reports are furnished only for permissible purposes. \n\nXXXX has failed to : Identify the entities that accessed my report Provide proof of authorization Establish permissible purpose Continued reporting of these inquiries without verification constitutes a violation of 1681b, 1681e ( a ), and 1681i.\n\nE. Demonstrable Consumer Harm As a direct and proximate result of these violations : I have been denied housing I have been denied an auto loan My credit profile has suffered substantial and ongoing damage This establishes actual damages under 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and 1681o ( a ) ( 1 ). \n\nF. Pattern Consistent With CFPB Enforcement The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) has recently sued XXXX, alleging that XXXX unlawfully : Failed to properly investigate disputes Maintained inaccurate information Relied on automated, unsupported verifications The conduct I describe mirrors those allegations precisely. \n\nAttached to this complaint is a XX/XX/year> Order issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee, signed by a United States Bankruptcy Judge, which expressly confirms that the XXXX XXXX case associated with my name was previously dismissed and subsequently statistically closed The Order states that an Order has been previously signed by a Bankruptcy Judge dismissing the XXXX  XXXX case and that the matter was later closed solely for administrative purposes after approval of the trustees final report. This Order establishes that the bankruptcy was never adjudicated and never resulted in discharge or relief. Despite being provided this official court documentation during multiple disputes, XXXX  continues to report the bankruptcy as valid and verified. \n\nThis demonstrates that XXXX failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i, failed to assure maximum possible accuracy under 1681e ( b ), and continued reporting information that is materially misleading. The fact that Equifax and TransUnion deleted the same bankruptcy upon receipt of this Order further confirms that XXXX verification process was unreasonable and deficient.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-23T22:30:44.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18261029","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"LEXISNEXIS","date_received":"2025-12-23T22:30:23.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Public record information inaccurate"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Pattern Consistent With CFPB Enforcement The Consumer Financial <em>Protection</em> Bureau ( CFPB ) has recently sued <em>XXXX</em>, alleging that <em>XXXX</em> <em>unlawfully</em> : Failed to properly investigate disputes Maintained inaccurate information Relied on automated, unsupported verifications The conduct I describe mirrors those allegations precisely."]},"sort":[15.342975,"18261029"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18261027","_score":15.324163,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Respondents Experian Information Solutions , Inc . \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBoth entities are consumer reporting agencies as defined under 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ) and are subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nA. False and Inaccurate Bankruptcy Reporting Experian and XXXX are reporting a bankruptcy that was never adjudicated and was dismissed and statistically closed by the XXXX Bankruptcy XXXX. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), consumer reporting agencies are required to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information they report. \n\nA dismissed, non-adjudicated bankruptcy is not a valid bankruptcy outcome and its continued reporting is factually false and legally misleading. \n\nI have submitted official documentation from the Bankruptcy XXXX confirming dismissal and closure. Despite this : Experian continues to report the bankruptcy XXXX continues to furnish the same inaccurate public record data This constitutes reporting of information that is inaccurate and unverifiable, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ).\n\nB. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation I have submitted multiple formal disputes to Experian and XXXX. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), once a dispute is received, a CRA must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate.\n\nExperian has repeatedly issued generic responses stating the information was verified, while failing to disclose : The source of verification The method used How a dismissed, unadjudicated bankruptcy could be verified as accurate This violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), which requires disclosure of the method of verification upon request. \n\nThe fact that XXXX  and XXXX  deleted the same bankruptcy immediately using identical documentation further demonstrates that Experian and XXXX failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, constituting willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n or, at minimum, negligent noncompliance under 1681o.\n\nC. Continued Reporting of Disputed Information Despite ongoing disputes and submission of court documentation, Experian has continued to report the bankruptcy without proper notation or deletion.\n\nThis violates 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ), which prohibit continued reporting of information known to be inaccurate or misleading.\n\nD. Unauthorized and Unverifiable Credit Inquiries Experian is reporting 22 inquiries on my consumer credit report that I do not recognize and did not authorize.\n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681b, a consumer report may only be accessed for a permissible purpose.\n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), Experian is required to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure reports are furnished only for permissible purposes. \n\nExperian has failed to : Identify the entities that accessed my report Provide proof of authorization Establish permissible purpose Continued reporting of these inquiries without verification constitutes a violation of 1681b, 1681e ( a ), and 1681i.\n\nE. Demonstrable Consumer Harm As a direct and proximate result of these violations : I have been denied housing I have been denied an auto loan My credit profile has suffered substantial and ongoing damage This establishes actual damages under 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and 1681o ( a ) ( 1 ).\n\nF. Pattern Consistent With CFPB Enforcement The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) has recently sued Experian, alleging that Experian unlawfully : Failed to properly investigate disputes Maintained inaccurate information Relied on automated, unsupported verifications The conduct I describe mirrors those allegations precisely. \n\nAttached to this complaint is a XX/XX/year> Order issued by the United States Bankruptcy XXXX for the XXXX XXXX of Tennessee, signed by a United States Bankruptcy XXXX, which expressly confirms that the XXXX  XXXX case associated with my name was previously dismissed and subsequently statistically closed The Order states that an Order has been previously signed by a Bankruptcy Judge dismissing the XXXX  XXXX case and that the matter was later closed solely for administrative purposes after approval of the trustees final report. This Order establishes that the bankruptcy was never adjudicated and never resulted in discharge or relief. Despite being provided this official court documentation during multiple disputes, Experian continues to report the bankruptcy as valid and verified. \n\nThis demonstrates that Experian failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i, failed to assure maximum possible accuracy under 1681e ( b ), and continued reporting information that is materially misleading. The fact that XXXX  and XXXX  deleted the same bankruptcy upon receipt of this Order further confirms that Experians verification process was unreasonable and deficient.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-23T22:30:44.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18261027","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-23T22:21:45.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Public record information inaccurate"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. \n\nBoth entities are consumer reporting agencies as defined <em>under</em> 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ) and are subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nA. False and Inaccurate <em>Bankruptcy</em> Reporting Experian and <em>XXXX</em> are reporting a <em>bankruptcy</em> that was never adjudicated and was dismissed and statistically closed by the <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.324163,"18261027"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17239114","_score":14.78078,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns serious issues regarding the accuracy, verification, and reporting practices associated with the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy public record, Ref : XXXX, that appears on my consumer credit reports. I am filing this complaint because the way this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is being reported is inaccurate, misleading, and not verifiable according to the requirements set forth by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Additionally, the credit reporting agencies have failed to provide the legally required method of verification when I disputed the reporting, and the information appears to have been sourced from unreliable third-party vendors rather than the actual bankruptcy court. \n\nThe purpose of this narrative is to describe clearly and completely what happened, outline the steps I took to address the issue, identify the failures of the credit reporting agencies, and demonstrate why the reporting of this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is unlawful and requires correction or deletion. My goal is not to dispute the existence of a prior Chapter XXXX filing, but rather to ensure that what appears on my credit report is : XXXX. Accurate XXXX. Court-verified XXXX. Legally sourced XXXX. Up-to-date XXXX. Reported in compliance with the FCRA Because this bankruptcy entry does not meet these standards and can not be verified using original court documents, its continued reporting constitutes a violation of federal law. \n\nXXXX. How I Discovered the Problem While reviewing my credit reports, I noticed that a Chapter XXXX bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, was listed. However, from the very beginning, the listing appeared problematic : The date associated with the case was inconsistent across different credit bureaus. \n\nSome details were missing or incomplete. \n\nThe bureaus did not provide any original source information. \n\nThere was no indication that the bankruptcy court had been contacted. \n\nThe information did not match the official public record format I obtained from the court system. \n\nThese inconsistencies led me to question not the existence of the case itself, but the accuracy and verification of how the case was reported on my credit profile. \n\nXXXX. Courts Do NOT Report Bankruptcy Information to Credit Bureaus A critical fact in this situation is that bankruptcy courts do not furnish or verify bankruptcy information to credit reporting agencies. Federal courts, including bankruptcy courts, have repeatedly confirmed : They do not send consumer data to Equifax, XXXX, or XXXX. \n\nThey do not verify bankruptcy information for reinvestigations. \n\nThey do not participate in private credit reporting systems. \n\nThey do not approve or certify third-party vendors to transmit their records. \n\nThis means that anything the credit bureaus claim to have verified did not come directly from the court. Instead, bureaus rely on third-party data collectorscompanies that scrape or compile public information from PACER or other electronic court databases. These companies : Are not the original source Are not legally authorized court agents Are not regulated for consumer reporting accuracy Are prone to transcription errors, incomplete filings, and outdated updates Can not validate or certify accuracy for disputes Because the bureaus used these third-party sources instead of directly reviewing original court documents, the bankruptcy record is not verified in a legally acceptable manner. \n\nXXXX. I Disputed the Bankruptcy With All Three Credit Bureaus After discovering these issues, I exercised my rights under FCRA 611 ( a ) and disputed the bankruptcy entry with all three major consumer reporting agencies. In my written disputes, I specifically requested : The method of verification The name of the furnisher or entity that supplied the data The original source of the information Copies of the documents used for verification A full description of the procedures used during the reinvestigation The public record information used to confirm the listing These requests are rights guaranteed under FCRA 609 and 611. \n\nXXXX. The Bureaus Returned Generic Verified as Accurate Responses Despite the detailed and legally supported dispute, each bureau responded with nearly the same language : We have verified the information and it will remain on your credit file. \n\nHowever, the bureaus failed to : Provide a method of verification Provide documentation Identify the source Provide the procedures used Provide a copy of the public record Provide any indication the court was contacted These responses make clear that the reinvestigation was not reasonable, as required under the FCRA, and that the bureaus relied on automated systems rather than original legal documents. \n\nXXXX. The Reinvestigation Was Conducted Using Automated Data Instead of Human Review Most credit bureaus rely on XXXX-party vendors such as XXXX to collect bankruptcy data. These vendors send information electronically, which the bureaus treat as the verified source. This is not a true verification. \n\nA reasonable reinvestigation requires : Reviewing original bankruptcy court filings Verifying dates directly with PACER or through certified documents Ensuring the accuracy of docket numbers Confirming the case disposition/status Ensuring the public record matches bureau reporting fields None of these steps were taken.\n\nInstead : The verification returned instantly No human investigator examined records No official court documents were reviewed No cross-checking of dates occurred No verification of case status happened This does not meet the FCRA 's standard for reasonable procedures. \n\nXXXX. The Bankruptcy Reporting Contains Inaccuracies Across Bureaus A major concern is that the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy ( Ref : XXXX ) is not reported consistently across all bureaus. I identified the following issues : Different filing dates Different dismissal dates Different reference formatting Missing information in some bureau reports Different update timestamps Inconsistent status descriptions Under FCRA 607 ( b ), the bureaus must assure maximum possible accuracy. Inconsistent reporting violates this requirement because a public record should match exactly across all bureaus if it is accurate and verified. \n\nXXXX. No Evidence Provided That the Bankruptcy Is Within the Legal Reporting Period Under the FCRA : A Chapter XXXX bankruptcy may remain for XXXX  years from the date of filing. \n\nIf the date of filing is incorrect, the reporting period is incorrect. \n\nBecause the bureaus failed to provide documentation, it is impossible to confirm whether : The date being used is the filing date The bureaus are actually using the dismissal date The bureaus used inaccurate date information from their vendor If the wrong date is used, the bankruptcy may already be expired or beyond the legal reporting period, making it unlawful to continue reporting it. \n\nXXXX. Failure to Comply With FCRA Method-of-Verification Laws Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), when a consumer requests the method of verification : The bureau must provide it Within XXXX  days In writing With full procedural details None of the bureaus provided this, despite my explicit request. Without the method of verification, the bankruptcy is legally classified as unverifiable, which requires deletion under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX. Information From Third-Party Vendors Is Not Legally Sufficient The bureaus rely on systems such as : XXXX XXXX XXXX scraping tools CoreLogic Other data warehouses These entities do not : Provide certified public records Provide official court documents Guarantee accuracy Verify case status Confirm dates Serve as the original source Because the credit bureaus rely solely on these XXXX-party sourcesand the vendors themselves are not validating the informationthe bankruptcy can not be said to be verified under the FCRA. \n\nXXXX. Harm Caused by This Inaccurate Bankruptcy Reporting The incorrect and unverifiable reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy has caused : Significant drops in credit scores Denial of financing and credit applications Higher interest rates on loans Limited access to housing opportunities Negative effects on employment opportunities Increased insurance premiums Ongoing reputational harm Emotional and financial distress Reduced credit limits Difficulty rebuilding credit Because bankruptcy is XXXX of the most damaging items on a credit file, reporting it without verification has caused and continues to cause substantial harm. \n\nXXXX Credit Bureaus Failed to Use Reasonable Procedures The FCRA requires consumer reporting agencies to ensure that all public record information is : Accurate Current Complete Verified through reliable sources Instead, the bureaus used : Automated database matches Bulk public record downloads Outdated or incomplete data No human review No court-verified documents This violates the FCRA mandate to maintain reasonable procedures. \n\nXXXX. Summary of FCRA Violations in This Case Based on the facts, the following FCRA sections were violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) Failure to assure maximum possible accuracy.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to provide the method of verification.\n\nFCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Failure to provide the sources of information.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Failure to delete unverifiable information.\n\nFCRA 611 ( d ) Failure to notify past users of corrected information. \n\nThese failures demonstrate that the reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is not supported by lawful procedures. \n\nXXXX. Conclusion In conclusion, the reporting of the Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, is inaccurate, unverifiable, inconsistent, and not sourced from the original legal authority. The credit bureaus failed to : Contact the bankruptcy court Review original documents Provide method-of-verification details Use reasonable reinvestigation procedures Maintain maximum possible accuracy Because the bankruptcy can not be verified according to federal law, its continued reporting is unlawful and harmful. \n\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau review this matter, require proper verification procedures, and ensure that the credit bureaus correct or delete the bankruptcy if it can not be fully validated with official court documents.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-14T02:39:50.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"631XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17239114","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-14T02:33:04.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Legally sourced <em>XXXX</em>. Up-to-date <em>XXXX</em>. Reported in compliance with the FCRA Because this <em>bankruptcy</em> entry does not meet these standards and can not be verified using original court documents, its continued reporting constitutes a violation of federal law. \n\n<em>XXXX</em>. How I Discovered the Problem <em>While</em> reviewing my credit reports, I noticed that a Chapter <em>XXXX</em> <em>bankruptcy</em>, Ref : <em>XXXX</em>, was listed."]},"sort":[14.78078,"17239114"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11258105","_score":14.777285,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"PNC BANK The address of each property is : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Urgent Request for Investigation and Enforcement of Legal Violations by Mortgage and Insurance Companies Good Afternoon, My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am the owner of a property management company based in XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. I am reaching out to bring attention to a series of unlawful actions taken against my business and properties by PNC Bank and our insurance provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which have severely disrupted our operations and threatened our financial stability. These actions have left us facing significant losses and jeopardized our ability to operate. \nBackground Due to the devastation caused by XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), we sought assistance from PNC Bank for the loans we hold. The XXXX declared a major disaster for XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, in response to the damage caused by these storms. Despite filing insurance claims promptly, we have yet to receive any payments for necessary repairs on our properties. \nHowever, instead of assisting us in our recovery, PNC Bank has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. PNC Bank has imposed excessive fees, sent notices indicating a lack of active insurance policies, and refused to process our claims, claiming they could not proceed without updated insurance information. \nFurthermore, property preservation companies, hired by PNC Bank, have unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenantsactions that have harmed both our business operations and tenant relationships. These violations have continued despite our bankruptcy filings and compliance with all relevant bankruptcy provisions. \nIssues with Insurance Companies Fraud and Statutory Violations by Insurance Companies XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has committed fraud by withholding funds and refusing to pay out claims for our properties. Despite legitimate claims and verified damages, they have delayed payments, withheld insurance funds for years, and failed to disburse any payments for necessary repairs. \nThe actions of our insurance company constitute clear violations of state and federal insurance regulations, including : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Prompt Payment of Claims ) This statute requires insurers to initiate an investigation within XXXX days and conclude investigations within XXXX days. The insurers extended delay and refusal to pay for legitimate claims constitute clear violations of this statute. \nXXXX XXXX Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act ( XXXX ) This statute prohibits unfair claims practices, including failing to promptly settle claims where liability is clear and committing acts of bad faith. The insurers delay in disbursing funds or communicating timelines is a violation of this statute. \nCurrent Issues with PNC Bank Foreclosure Actions and Fees Instead of assisting us during this difficult time, PNC Bank has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. These actions have resulted in the imposition of excessive fees and late charges, placing further strain on our business. Additionally, they have sent notices claiming that the lack of an active insurance policy has prevented them from processing our claims, despite the fact that we have valid insurance in place. \nUnlawful Entry by XXXX XXXX XXXX PNC Bank engaged XXXX XXXX XXXX, which unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were under a bankruptcy plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the XXXX damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance. \nFurther Damage from Recent XXXX  Our business suffered additional damage from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), which has severely disrupted the repairs we were able to initiate after the previous storms. The ongoing damage from these hurricanes has compounded the difficulties we are facing, and we are still awaiting necessary insurance payouts to begin repairs. \nLegal Violations We have documented several violations of federal law committed by PNC Bank, insurance providers, and their agents. These include : Bankruptcy Plan Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the protections afforded to us under bankruptcy law. \nViolations of Automatic Stay ( Sections XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX of Section XXXX of the Bankruptcy Code ) o PNC Bank has refused to accept our payments, returned checks, and ignored requests for assistance. \no They have added unjustified fees to loans during the active bankruptcy plan. \no They have sent default notices despite our compliance with the terms of the plan, including making timely payments. \nXXXX. Failure to Meet Obligations Under Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide loan term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in disaster scenarios. \no They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, XXXX XXXX. \no They have not provided any loss mitigation or forbearance options during or after the hurricanes, in direct contravention of the CARES Act provisions. \nLegal Basis for Violations In addition to the violations noted above, several other legal provisions have been breached, including : Trespass to Property o Legal Basis : Florida law defines trespass as unauthorized entry onto another persons property, especially where \" No Trespassing '' signs are posted. \no Violation Details : Property preservation companies entered properties without consent, despite visible \" No Trespassing '' signs, resulting in unauthorized access. \nIllegal Lock Changes and Tenant Interference o Legal Basis : Under Floridas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, unauthorized lock changes and interference with tenants possession of the property are illegal without a court order. \no Violation Details : Locks were forcibly changed on multiple properties while tenants were legally in possession, disrupting tenant rights and property control. \nCivil Theft and Conversion o Legal Basis : Conversion occurs when unauthorized actions deprive the property owner of their personal property. Civil theft involves intentional control or deprivation of property. \no Violation Details : Property preservation companies removed personal property, including \" For Rent '' signs, and changed locks without authorization, depriving us of rightful control.\n\nBreach of Peace in Enforcement Actions o Legal Basis : XXXX law mandates that any enforcement actions, including repossessions or foreclosures, must occur without a breach of peace. \no Violation Details : Breaking into homes, forcibly changing locks, and creating disturbances constitute breaches of peace during property enforcement actions. \nXXXX  and Federal Statutes Governing Repetitive and Excessive Actions XXXX Statutes : o XXXX : Establishes the statute of limitations for foreclosure claims. \no XXXX : Governs illegal actions such as unauthorized lockouts or interference with tenants ' rights. \nFederal Laws : o Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits harassment, unfair practices, and repetitive legal actions by creditors or their agents attempting to collect debts. \no XXXX XXXX : Requires mortgage servicers to follow strict procedures when handling properties, especially in foreclosure, including respecting legal stays and avoiding excessive or unlawful property entries. \nRequest for Enforcement Despite our efforts to engage attorneys and resolve these matters, PNC Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have continued to violate our rights, causing severe damage to our business operations. We are on the brink of failure due to these actions, and we urgently request government enforcement to hold these companies accountable. \nThe impact of these violations has left us without income, severely damaged our ability to operate, and further delayed our recovery from the hurricanes. We ask for your immediate intervention to ensure these companies face the appropriate consequences for their actions.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-23T21:09:51.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"321XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11258105","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PNC Bank N.A.","date_received":"2024-12-23T21:00:32.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to Meet Obligations <em>Under</em> Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide <em>loan</em> term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial <em>Protection</em> Bureau ( CFPB ) and the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> in disaster scenarios. \no They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[14.777285,"11258105"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11272685","_score":14.737901,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"FAY SERVICING The address of the property is : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nUrgent Request for Investigation and Enforcement of Legal Violations by Mortgage and Insurance Companies Good Afternoon, My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am the owner of a property management company based in XXXX XXXX, Florida. I am reaching out to bring attention to a series of unlawful actions taken against my business and properties by Fay Servicing and our insurance provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which have severely disrupted our operations and threatened our financial stability. These actions have left us facing significant losses and jeopardized our ability to operate. \nBackground Due to the devastation caused by Hurricanes XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), we sought assistance from Fay Servicing for the loans we hold. The President declared a major disaster for Florida on XX/XX/XXXX, in response to the damage caused by these storms. Despite filing insurance claims promptly, we have yet to receive any payments for necessary repairs on our properties. \nHowever, instead of assisting us in our recovery, Fay Servicing has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. Fay Servicing has imposed excessive fees, sent notices indicating a lack of active insurance policies, and refused to process our claims, claiming they could not proceed without updated insurance information. \nFurthermore, property preservation companies, hired by Fay Servicing, have unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenantsactions that have harmed both our business operations and tenant relationships. These violations have continued despite our bankruptcy filings and compliance with all relevant bankruptcy provisions. \n\nIssues with Insurance Companies Fraud and Statutory Violations XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has committed fraud by withholding funds and refusing to pay out claims for our properties. Despite legitimate claims and verified damages, they have delayed payments, withheld insurance funds for years, and failed to disburse any payments for necessary repairs.\n\nThe actions of our insurance company constitute clear violations of state and federal insurance regulations, including : o Florida Statutes 627.70131 ( Prompt Payment of Claims ) This statute requires insurers to initiate an investigation within 14 days and conclude investigations within 90 days. The insurers extended delay and refusal to pay for legitimate claims constitute clear violations of this statute. \no Florida Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act ( 626.9541 ) This statute prohibits unfair claims practices, including failing to promptly settle claims where liability is clear and committing acts of bad faith. The insurers delay in disbursing funds or communicating timelines is a violation of this statute.\n\nCurrent Issues with Fay Servicing Foreclosure Actions and Fees Instead of assisting us during this difficult time, Fay Servicing has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. These actions have resulted in the imposition of excessive fees and late charges, placing further strain on our business. Additionally, they have sent notices claiming that the lack of an active insurance policy has prevented them from processing our claims, despite the fact that we have valid insurance in place. \nUnlawful Entry by XXXX XXXX XXXX Fay Servicing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were under a bankruptcy plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance. \nFurther Damage from Recent Hurricanes Our business suffered additional damage from Hurricanes Helene ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and Milton ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which has severely disrupted the repairs we were able to initiate after the previous storms. The ongoing damage from these hurricanes has compounded the difficulties we are facing, and we are still awaiting necessary insurance payouts to begin repairs. \nLegal Violations We have documented several violations of federal law committed by Fay Servicing, insurance providers, and their agents. These include : Bankruptcy Plan Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the protections afforded to us under bankruptcy law.\n\nViolations of Automatic Stay ( Sections 5, 6, and 7 of Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code ) o Fay Servicing has refused to accept our payments, returned checks, and ignored requests for assistance.\n\no They have added unjustified fees to loans during the active bankruptcy plan. \no They have sent default notices despite our compliance with the terms of the plan, including making timely payments. \nFailure to Meet Obligations Under Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide loan term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation in disaster scenarios.\n\no They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, XXXX XXXX. \no They have not provided any loss mitigation or forbearance options during or after the hurricanes, in direct contravention of the CARES Act provisions.\n\nLegal Basis for Violations In addition to the violations noted above, several other legal provisions have been breached, including : Trespass to Property o Legal Basis : Florida law defines trespass as unauthorized entry onto another persons property, especially where \" No Trespassing '' signs are posted. \no Violation Details : Property preservation companies entered properties without consent, despite visible \" No Trespassing '' signs, resulting in unauthorized access.\n\nIllegal Lock Changes and Tenant Interference o Legal Basis : Under Floridas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, unauthorized lock changes and interference with tenants possession of the property are illegal without a court order.\n\no Violation Details : Locks were forcibly changed on multiple properties while tenants were legally in possession, disrupting tenant rights and property control.\n\nCivil Theft and Conversion o Legal Basis : Conversion occurs when unauthorized actions deprive the property owner of their personal property. Civil theft involves intentional control or deprivation of property.\n\no Violation Details : Property preservation companies removed personal property, including \" For Rent '' signs, and changed locks without authorization, depriving us of rightful control.\n\nBreach of Peace in Enforcement Actions o Legal Basis : Florida law mandates that any enforcement actions, including repossessions or foreclosures, must occur without a breach of peace. \no Violation Details : Breaking into homes, forcibly changing locks, and creating disturbances constitute breaches of peace during property enforcement actions.\n\nFlorida and Federal Statutes Governing Repetitive and Excessive Actions Florida Statutes : o 95.11 : Establishes the statute of limitations for foreclosure claims.\n\no 83.67 : Governs illegal actions such as unauthorized lockouts or interference with tenants ' rights.\n\nFederal Laws : o Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits harassment, unfair practices, and repetitive legal actions by creditors or their agents attempting to collect debts.\n\no Dodd-Frank Act : Requires mortgage servicers to follow strict procedures when handling properties, especially in foreclosure, including respecting legal stays and avoiding excessive or unlawful property entries. \nRequest for Enforcement Despite our efforts to engage attorneys and resolve these matters, Fay Servicing and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have continued to violate our rights, causing severe damage to our business operations. We are on the brink of failure due to these actions, and we urgently request government enforcement to hold these companies accountable. \nThe impact of these violations has left us without income, severely damaged our ability to operate, and further delayed our recovery from the hurricanes. We ask for your immediate intervention to ensure these companies face the appropriate consequences for their actions. \nPlease feel free to contact me directly at ( XXXX ) XXXX or via email at XXXX. Thank you in advance for your attention to this urgent matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-23T19:01:32.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"321XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11272685","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Fay Servicing, LLC","date_received":"2024-12-23T18:53:55.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Unlawful</em> Entry by <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Fay Servicing <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, which <em>unlawfully</em> entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were <em>under</em> a <em>bankruptcy</em> plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance."]},"sort":[14.737901,"11272685"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17213928","_score":14.735827,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns serious issues regarding the accuracy, verification, and reporting practices associated with the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy public record, Ref : XXXX, that appears on my consumer credit reports. I am filing this complaint because the way this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is being reported is inaccurate, misleading, and not verifiable according to the requirements set forth by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Additionally, the credit reporting agencies have failed to provide the legally required method of verification when I disputed the reporting, and the information appears to have been sourced from unreliable third-party vendors rather than the actual bankruptcy court. \n\nThe purpose of this narrative is to describe clearly and completely what happened, outline the steps I took to address the issue, identify the failures of the credit reporting agencies, and demonstrate why the reporting of this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is unlawful and requires correction or deletion. My goal is not to dispute the existence of a prior Chapter XXXX filing, but rather to ensure that what appears on my credit report is : XXXX. Accurate XXXX. Court-verified XXXX. Legally sourced XXXX. Up-to-date XXXX. Reported in compliance with the FCRA Because this bankruptcy entry does not meet these standards and can not be verified using original court documents, its continued reporting constitutes a violation of federal law. \n\nXXXX. How I Discovered the Problem While reviewing my credit reports, I noticed that a Chapter XXXX bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, was listed. However, from the very beginning, the listing appeared problematic : The date associated with the case was inconsistent across different credit bureaus. \n\nSome details were missing or incomplete. \n\nThe bureaus did not provide any original source information. \n\nThere was no indication that the bankruptcy court had been contacted. \n\nThe information did not match the official public record format I obtained from the court system. \n\nThese inconsistencies led me to question not the existence of the case itself, but the accuracy and verification of how the case was reported on my credit profile. \n\nXXXX. Courts Do NOT Report Bankruptcy Information to Credit Bureaus A critical fact in this situation is that bankruptcy courts do not furnish or verify bankruptcy information to credit reporting agencies. Federal courts, including bankruptcy courts, have repeatedly confirmed : They do not send consumer data to Equifax, Experian, or TransUnion. \n\nThey do not verify bankruptcy information for reinvestigations. \n\nThey do not participate in private credit reporting systems. \n\nThey do not approve or certify third-party vendors to transmit their records. \n\nThis means that anything the credit bureaus claim to have verified did not come directly from the court. Instead, bureaus rely on third-party data collectorscompanies that scrape or compile public information from PACER or other electronic court databases. These companies : Are not the original source Are not legally authorized court agents Are not regulated for consumer reporting accuracy Are prone to transcription errors, incomplete filings, and outdated updates Can not validate or certify accuracy for disputes Because the bureaus used these third-party sources instead of directly reviewing original court documents, the bankruptcy record is not verified in a legally acceptable manner. \n\nXXXX. I Disputed the Bankruptcy With All Three Credit Bureaus After discovering these issues, I exercised my rights under FCRA 611 ( a ) and disputed the bankruptcy entry with all three major consumer reporting agencies. In my written disputes, I specifically requested : The method of verification The name of the furnisher or entity that supplied the data The original source of the information Copies of the documents used for verification A full description of the procedures used during the reinvestigation The public record information used to confirm the listing These requests are rights guaranteed under FCRA 609 and 611. \n\nXXXX. The Bureaus Returned Generic Verified as Accurate Responses Despite the detailed and legally supported dispute, each bureau responded with nearly the same language : We have verified the information and it will remain on your credit file. \n\nHowever, the bureaus failed to : Provide a method of verification Provide documentation Identify the source Provide the procedures used Provide a copy of the public record Provide any indication the court was contacted These responses make clear that the reinvestigation was not reasonable, as required under the FCRA, and that the bureaus relied on automated systems rather than original legal documents. \n\nXXXX. The Reinvestigation Was Conducted Using Automated Data Instead of Human Review Most credit bureaus rely on third-party vendors such as XXXX to collect bankruptcy data. These vendors send information electronically, which the bureaus treat as the verified source. This is not a true verification. \n\nA reasonable reinvestigation requires : Reviewing original bankruptcy court filings Verifying dates directly with XXXX  or through certified documents Ensuring the accuracy of docket numbers Confirming the case disposition/status Ensuring the public record matches bureau reporting fields None of these steps were taken.\n\nInstead : The verification returned instantly No human investigator examined records No official court documents were reviewed No cross-checking of dates occurred No verification of case status happened This does not meet the FCRA 's standard for reasonable procedures. \n\nXXXX. The Bankruptcy Reporting Contains Inaccuracies Across Bureaus A major concern is that the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy ( Ref : XXXX ) is not reported consistently across all bureaus. I identified the following issues : Different filing dates Different dismissal dates Different reference formatting Missing information in some bureau reports Different update timestamps Inconsistent status descriptions Under FCRA 607 ( b ), the bureaus must assure maximum possible accuracy. Inconsistent reporting violates this requirement because a public record should match exactly across all bureaus if it is accurate and verified. \n\nXXXX. No Evidence Provided That the Bankruptcy Is Within the Legal Reporting Period Under the FCRA : A Chapter XXXX bankruptcy may remain for XXXX  years from the date of filing. \n\nIf the date of filing is incorrect, the reporting period is incorrect. \n\nBecause the bureaus failed to provide documentation, it is impossible to confirm whether : The date being used is the filing date The bureaus are actually using the dismissal date The bureaus used inaccurate date information from their vendor If the wrong date is used, the bankruptcy may already be expired or beyond the legal reporting period, making it unlawful to continue reporting it. \n\nXXXX. Failure to Comply With FCRA Method-of-Verification Laws Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), when a consumer requests the method of verification : The bureau must provide it Within XXXX days In writing With full procedural details None of the bureaus provided this, despite my explicit request. Without the method of verification, the bankruptcy is legally classified as unverifiable, which requires deletion under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX. Information From XXXX-Party Vendors Is Not Legally Sufficient The bureaus rely on systems such as : XXXX XXXX XXXX scraping tools CoreLogic Other data warehouses These entities do not : Provide certified public records Provide official court documents Guarantee accuracy Verify case status Confirm dates Serve as the original source Because the credit bureaus rely solely on these XXXX-party sourcesand the vendors themselves are not validating the informationthe bankruptcy can not be said to be verified under the FCRA. \n\nXXXX. Harm Caused by This Inaccurate Bankruptcy Reporting The incorrect and unverifiable reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy has caused : Significant drops in credit scores Denial of financing and credit applications Higher interest rates on loans Limited access to housing opportunities Negative effects on employment opportunities Increased insurance premiums Ongoing reputational harm Emotional and financial distress Reduced credit limits Difficulty rebuilding credit Because bankruptcy is XXXX of the most damaging items on a credit file, reporting it without verification has caused and continues to cause substantial harm. \n\nXXXX Credit Bureaus Failed to Use Reasonable Procedures The FCRA requires consumer reporting agencies to ensure that all public record information is : Accurate Current Complete Verified through reliable sources Instead, the bureaus used : Automated database matches Bulk public record downloads Outdated or incomplete data No human review No court-verified documents This violates the FCRA mandate to maintain reasonable procedures. \n\nXXXX. Summary of FCRA Violations in This Case Based on the facts, the following FCRA sections were violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) Failure to assure maximum possible accuracy. \n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to provide the method of verification.\n\nFCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Failure to provide the sources of information.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Failure to delete unverifiable information.\n\nFCRA 611 ( d ) Failure to notify past users of corrected information. \n\nThese failures demonstrate that the reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is not supported by lawful procedures. \n\nXXXX. Conclusion In conclusion, the reporting of the Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, is inaccurate, unverifiable, inconsistent, and not sourced from the original legal authority. The credit bureaus failed to : Contact the bankruptcy court Review original documents Provide method-of-verification details Use reasonable reinvestigation procedures Maintain maximum possible accuracy Because the bankruptcy can not be verified according to federal law, its continued reporting is unlawful and harmful. \n\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau review this matter, require proper verification procedures, and ensure that the credit bureaus correct or delete the bankruptcy if it can not be fully validated with official court documents.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-14T02:51:47.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"631XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17213928","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-14T02:44:30.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Legally sourced <em>XXXX</em>. Up-to-date <em>XXXX</em>. Reported in compliance with the FCRA Because this <em>bankruptcy</em> entry does not meet these standards and can not be verified using original court documents, its continued reporting constitutes a violation of federal law. \n\n<em>XXXX</em>. How I Discovered the Problem <em>While</em> reviewing my credit reports, I noticed that a Chapter <em>XXXX</em> <em>bankruptcy</em>, Ref : <em>XXXX</em>, was listed."]},"sort":[14.735827,"17213928"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11258176","_score":14.705083,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"PLANET HOME LENDING The address of the property is : XXXX - XXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX Urgent Request for Investigation and Enforcement of Legal Violations by Mortgage and Insurance Companies Good Afternoon, My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am the owner of a property management company based in XXXX XXXX, Florida. I am reaching out to bring attention to a series of unlawful actions taken against my business and properties by Planet Home Lending and our insurance provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which have severely disrupted our operations and threatened our financial stability. These actions have left us facing significant losses and jeopardized our ability to operate. \nBackground Due to the devastation caused by Hurricanes XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), we sought assistance from Planet Home Lending for the loans we hold. The President declared a major disaster for Florida on XX/XX/XXXX, in response to the damage caused by these storms. Despite filing insurance claims promptly, we have yet to receive any payments for necessary repairs on our properties. \nHowever, instead of assisting us in our recovery, Planet Home Lending has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. Planet Home Lending has imposed excessive fees, sent notices indicating a lack of active insurance policies, and refused to process our claims, claiming they could not proceed without updated insurance information. \nFurthermore, property preservation companies, hired by Planet Home Lending, have unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenantsactions that have harmed both our business operations and tenant relationships. These violations have continued despite our bankruptcy filings and compliance with all relevant bankruptcy provisions. \nIssues with Insurance Companies Fraud and Statutory Violations by Insurance Companies XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has committed fraud by withholding funds and refusing to pay out claims for our properties. Despite legitimate claims and verified damages, they have delayed payments, withheld insurance funds for years, and failed to disburse any payments for necessary repairs. \nThe actions of our insurance company constitute clear violations of state and federal insurance regulations, including : o Florida Statutes 627.70131 ( Prompt Payment of Claims ) This statute requires insurers to initiate an investigation within 14 days and conclude investigations within 90 days. The insurers extended delay and refusal to pay for legitimate claims constitute clear violations of this statute.\n\no Florida Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act ( 626.9541 ) This statute prohibits unfair claims practices, including failing to promptly settle claims where liability is clear and committing acts of bad faith. The insurers delay in disbursing funds or communicating timelines is a violation of this statute. \nCurrent Issues with Planet Home Lending Foreclosure Actions and Fees Instead of assisting us during this difficult time, Planet Home Lending has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. These actions have resulted in the imposition of excessive fees and late charges, placing further strain on our business. Additionally, they have sent notices claiming that the lack of an active insurance policy has prevented them from processing our claims, despite the fact that we have valid insurance in place. \nUnlawful Entry by Property Preservation Companies Planet Home Lending engaged Guardian Asset Management, which unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were under a bankruptcy plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance. \nFurther Damage from Recent Hurricanes Our business suffered additional damage from Hurricanes XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which has severely disrupted the repairs we were able to initiate after the previous storms. The ongoing damage from these hurricanes has compounded the difficulties we are facing, and we are still awaiting necessary insurance payouts to begin repairs. \nLegal Violations We have documented several violations of federal law committed by Planet Home Lending, insurance providers, and their agents. These include : 10. Bankruptcy Plan Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the protections afforded to us under bankruptcy law.\n\n11. Violations of Automatic Stay ( Sections 5, 6, and 7 of Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code ) o Planet Home Lending has refused to accept our payments, returned checks, and ignored requests for assistance.\n\no They have added unjustified fees to loans during the active bankruptcy plan.\n\no They have sent default notices despite our compliance with the terms of the plan, including making timely payments.\n\n12. Failure to Meet Obligations Under Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide loan term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation in disaster scenarios.\n\no They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, Jack Aberman.\n\no They have not provided any loss mitigation or forbearance options during or after the hurricanes, in direct contravention of the CARES Act provisions.\n\nLegal Basis for Violations In addition to the violations noted above, several other legal provisions have been breached, including : Trespass to Property o Legal Basis : Florida law defines trespass as unauthorized entry onto another persons property, especially where \" No Trespassing '' signs are posted.\n\no Violation Details : Property preservation companies entered properties without consent, despite visible \" No Trespassing '' signs, resulting in unauthorized access.\n\nIllegal Lock Changes and Tenant Interference o Legal Basis : Under Floridas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, unauthorized lock changes and interference with tenants possession of the property are illegal without a court order.\n\no Violation Details : Locks were forcibly changed on multiple properties while tenants were legally in possession, disrupting tenant rights and property control.\n\nCivil Theft and Conversion o Legal Basis : Conversion occurs when unauthorized actions deprive the property owner of their personal property. Civil theft involves intentional control or deprivation of property.\n\no Violation Details : Property preservation companies removed personal property, including \" For Rent '' signs, and changed locks without authorization, depriving us of rightful control.\n\nBreach of Peace in Enforcement Actions o Legal Basis : Florida law mandates that any enforcement actions, including repossessions or foreclosures, must occur without a breach of peace.\n\no Violation Details : Breaking into homes, forcibly changing locks, and creating disturbances constitute breaches of peace during property enforcement actions.\n\nFlorida and Federal Statutes Governing Repetitive and Excessive Actions Florida Statutes : o 95.11 : Establishes the statute of limitations for foreclosure claims.\n\no 83.67 : Governs illegal actions such as unauthorized lockouts or interference with tenants ' rights.\n\nFederal Laws : o Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits harassment, unfair practices, and repetitive legal actions by creditors or their agents attempting to collect debts.\n\no Dodd-Frank Act : Requires mortgage servicers to follow strict procedures when handling properties, especially in foreclosure, including respecting legal stays and avoiding excessive or unlawful property entries.\n\nRequest for Enforcement Despite our efforts to engage attorneys and resolve these matters, Planet Home Lending and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have continued to violate our rights, causing severe damage to our business operations. We are on the brink of failure due to these actions, and we urgently request government enforcement to hold these companies accountable. \nThe impact of these violations has left us without income, severely damaged our ability to operate, and further delayed our recovery from the hurricanes. We ask for your immediate intervention to ensure these companies face the appropriate consequences for their actions Please feel free to contact me directly at ( XXXX ) XXXX or via email at XXXX. Thank you in advance for your attention to this urgent matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-23T20:58:16.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"321XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11258176","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC","date_received":"2024-12-23T20:50:23.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Bankruptcy</em> Plan Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the <em>protections</em> afforded to us <em>under</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> law.\n\n11."]},"sort":[14.705083,"11258176"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11272641","_score":14.641831,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES SHELLPOINT The address of each property is : XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX Terrace XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nXXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. \n\nUrgent Request for Investigation and Enforcement of Legal Violations by Mortgage and Insurance Companies Good Afternoon, My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am the owner of a property management company based in XXXX XXXX, Florida. I am reaching out to bring attention to a series of unlawful actions taken against my business and properties by PHH Mortgage Services and our insurance provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which have severely disrupted our operations and threatened our financial stability. These actions have left us facing significant losses and jeopardized our ability to operate. \nBackground Due to the devastation caused by Hurricanes XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), we sought assistance from PHH Mortgage Services for the loans we hold. The President declared a major disaster for Florida on XX/XX/XXXX, in response to the damage caused by these storms. Despite filing insurance claims promptly, we have yet to receive any payments for necessary repairs on our properties. \nHowever, instead of assisting us in our recovery, PHH Mortgage Services has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. PHH Mortgage Services has imposed excessive fees, sent notices indicating a lack of active insurance policies, and refused to process our claims, claiming they could not proceed without updated insurance information. \nFurthermore, property preservation companies, hired by PHH Mortgage Services, have unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenantsactions that have harmed both our business operations and tenant relationships. These violations have continued despite our bankruptcy filings and compliance with all relevant bankruptcy provisions. \nIssues with XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has committed fraud by withholding funds and refusing to pay out claims for our properties. Despite legitimate claims and verified damages, they have delayed payments, withheld insurance funds for years, and failed to disburse any payments for necessary repairs. \nThe actions of our insurance company constitute clear violations of state and federal insurance regulations, including : o Florida XXXX XXXX ( Prompt Payment of Claims ) This statute requires insurers to initiate an investigation within 14 days and conclude investigations within 90 days. The insurers extended delay and refusal to pay for legitimate claims constitute clear violations of this statute. \no Florida Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act ( XXXX ) This statute prohibits unfair claims practices, including failing to promptly settle claims where liability is clear and committing acts of bad faith. The insurers delay in disbursing funds or communicating timelines is a violation of this statute. \nCurrent Issues with PHH Mortgage Services Foreclosure Actions and Fees Instead of assisting us during this difficult time, PHH Mortgage Services has initiated numerous foreclosure actions against us, causing a significant financial loss. These actions have resulted in the imposition of excessive fees and late charges, placing further strain on our business. Additionally, they have sent notices claiming that the lack of an active insurance policy has prevented them from processing our claims, despite the fact that we have valid insurance in place. \nUnlawful Entry by XXXX XXXX XXXX PHH Mortgage Services XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which unlawfully entered our properties, changed locks without permission, and disturbed tenants. These actions have further harmed our business, especially as we were under a bankruptcy plan. These violations have been exacerbated by the financial hardship caused by the hurricane damage and the failure of mortgage companies to provide assistance. \nFurther Damage from Recent Hurricanes Our business suffered additional damage from Hurricanes XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which has severely disrupted the repairs we were able to initiate after the previous storms. The ongoing damage from these hurricanes has compounded the difficulties we are facing, and we are still awaiting necessary insurance payouts to begin repairs. \nLegal Violations We have documented several violations of federal law committed by PHH Mortgage Services, insurance providers, and their agents. These include : Bankruptcy XXXX Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the protections afforded to us under bankruptcy law.\n\nViolations of Automatic Stay ( Sections 5, 6, and 7 of Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code ) o PHH Mortgage Services has refused to accept our payments, returned checks, and ignored requests for assistance. \no They have added unjustified fees to loans during the active bankruptcy plan. \no They have sent default notices despite our compliance with the terms of the plan, including making timely payments. \nFailure to Meet Obligations Under Federal and State Laws Post-Disaster o Our mortgage lenders have failed to provide loan term modifications, as required by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation in disaster scenarios.\n\no They withheld insurance funds, even though checks were payable to me, XXXX XXXX. \no They have not provided any loss mitigation or forbearance options during or after the hurricanes, in direct contravention of the CARES Act provisions.\n\nLegal Basis for Violations In addition to the violations noted above, several other legal provisions have been breached, including : Trespass to Property o Legal Basis : Florida law defines trespass as unauthorized entry onto another persons property, especially where \" No Trespassing '' signs are posted.\n\no Violation Details : Property preservation companies entered properties without consent, despite visible \" No Trespassing '' signs, resulting in unauthorized access. \nIllegal Lock Changes and Tenant Interference o Legal Basis : Under Floridas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, unauthorized lock changes and interference with tenants possession of the property are illegal without a court order. \no Violation Details : Locks were forcibly changed on multiple properties while tenants were legally in possession, disrupting tenant rights and property control. \nCivil Theft and Conversion o Legal Basis : Conversion occurs when unauthorized actions deprive the property owner of their personal property. Civil theft involves intentional control or deprivation of property.\n\no Violation Details : Property preservation companies removed personal property, including \" For Rent '' signs, and changed locks without authorization, depriving us of rightful control.\n\nBreach of Peace in Enforcement Actions o Legal Basis : Florida law mandates that any enforcement actions, including repossessions or foreclosures, must occur without a breach of peace. \no Violation Details : Breaking into homes, forcibly changing locks, and creating disturbances constitute breaches of peace during property enforcement actions. \nFlorida and Federal Statutes Governing Repetitive and Excessive Actions Florida Statutes : o XXXX : Establishes the statute of limitations for foreclosure claims. \no XXXX : Governs illegal actions such as unauthorized lockouts or interference with tenants ' rights. \nFederal Laws : o Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits harassment, unfair practices, and repetitive legal actions by creditors or their agents attempting to collect debts. \no XXXX XXXX : Requires mortgage servicers to follow strict procedures when handling properties, especially in foreclosure, including respecting legal stays and avoiding excessive or unlawful property entries. \n\nOcwen, headquartered in XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, is XXXX of the nations largest nonbank mortgage servicers. As of XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Ocwen serviced almost XXXX XXXX loans with an aggregate unpaid principal balance of {$200.00} XXXX. It services loans for borrowers in all XXXX states and the District of Columbia. A mortgage servicer collects payments from the mortgage borrower and forwards those payments to the owner of the loan. It handles customer service, collections, loan modifications, and foreclosures. Ocwen specializes in servicing subprime or delinquent loans. \nThe CFPB uncovered substantial evidence that Ocwen has engaged in significant and systemic misconduct at nearly every stage of the mortgage servicing process. The CFPB is charged with enforcing the XXXX XXXX XXXX Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which protects consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, and other federal consumer financial laws. In addition, the XXXX adopted common-sense rules for the mortgage servicing market that first took effect in XX/XX/XXXX. The XXXX mortgage servicing rules require that servicers promptly credit payments and correct errors on request. The rules also include strong protections for struggling homeowners, including those facing foreclosure. \n\nNOTE : We didnt have knowledge about this when we first contacted them in XXXX. They have been doing this to other people for more than XXXX years. \n\nRequest for Enforcement Despite our efforts to engage attorneys and resolve these matters, PHH Mortgage Services and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have continued to violate our rights, causing severe damage to our business operations. We are on the brink of failure due to these actions, and we urgently request government enforcement to hold these companies accountable. \nThe impact of these violations has left us without income, severely damaged our ability to operate, and further delayed our recovery from the hurricanes. We ask for your immediate intervention to ensure these companies face the appropriate consequences for their actions. \nPlease feel free to contact me directly at ( XXXX ) XXXX or via email at XXXX. Thank you in advance for your attention to this urgent matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-23T18:21:38.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"321XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11272641","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2024-12-23T17:55:06.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These include : <em>Bankruptcy</em> <em>XXXX</em> Violations These companies have violated discharge injunctions by sending default notices, initiating foreclosure procedures, charging excessive fees, and hiring property preservation companies to trespass on our properties. This constitutes a direct violation of the <em>protections</em> afforded to us <em>under</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> law."]},"sort":[14.641831,"11272641"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3548663","_score":14.5388365,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, my late husband and I executed a sub-prime / adjustable interest rate refinance mortgage loan transaction wherein XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( \" XXXX  XXXX  '' ) designated itself the lender, my late husband was the sole obligor who executed a promissory note, and we both executed a mortgage instrument wherein Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems , Inc. ( \" MERS '' ) as the alleged nominee for XXXX  XXXX   was declared the \" mortgagee ''. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, XXXX XXXX  became a Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy Debtor in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXX, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage loan for MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXXXXXX XXXX remainedthe purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of XXXX XXXX XXXX bankruptcy petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the Chapter XXXX Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX  bankruptcy filed a rejection of executory contracts to cancel any agreements betweenthe debtor, XXXX XXXX. ( \" XXXX   '' ) and the latter 's subsidiary MERS. A true copy of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX rejection of executory contracts with XXXX and MERS is annexed hereto as Exhibit B. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, Litton Loan Servicing, LP ( \" Litton Loan '' ) as our mortgage servicer instructed us to become delinquentin order to qualify for a loan modification being our payments had increased due to the adjustable interest rate. In good faith, my late husband and I followed Litton Loan 's  instructions by missing the payment due XX/XX/XXXX and thereafter. \n\nInstead of modifying our loan upon us following instructions to become delinquent, Litton Loan initiated foreclosure proceedings by complaint filed XX/XX/XXXX in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. : XXXX, on the same day my husband departed this life, by asserting that : ( 1 ) because of the default on XX/XX/XXXX, Litton elected to nullify the original maturity date of XX/XX/XXXX by accelerating the total principal sum with interest declared due pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 as of XX/XX/XXXX and ( 2 ) MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXX  XXXX   assigned our mortgage loan on XX/XX/XXXX, after XXXX  XXXX  entered bankruptcy in XX/XX/XXXX and after XXXX  XXXX   cancelled its executory contracts with XXXX and MERS in XX/XX/XXXX. A true copy of the foreclosure complaint filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket  No. XXXX by Litton Loan on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died, is annexed hereto as Exhibit C. \n\nTowards the end of XX/XX/XXXX, I was able to negotiate a trial modification with Litton Loan wherein the latter required that I make three equal payments of approximately {$1900.00} each, starting XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, in order to receive a permanent modification. As displayed within Exhibit D, I fulfilled my obligation by making the payments demanded by Litton Loan towards the trial period modification for XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and Litton Loan breached its promise to provide me with a permanent modification. In total, Exhibits D through M, displayed where I tendered approximately {$21000.00} in payments to Litton Loan for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, with at least approximately {$16000.00} in payments being cashed by Litton Loan and the latter refused to provide me with a permanent modification. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ( \" Ocwen '' ) became the servicer for my mortgage loan and maintained the aforementioned foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX without de-accelerating my mortgage loan because of the default as of XX/XX/XXXX as declared within the complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died ( See Exhibit C ). \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, Ocwen caused the first foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX to be voluntarily dismissed as displayed within Exhibit N annexed hereto. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen entered into a consent judgment with the CFPB and 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit Ocwen 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed asConsumerFinancial Protection Bureau, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, et al. ( CaseNo. 13-cv-2025-RMC )  in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit O, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen further violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon commencing a second foreclosure action in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. XXXX, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit P, wherein : ( 1 ) my mortgage loan was already time-barred from foreclosure upon the acceleration pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 upon commencing the first foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit C ) that was dismissed in XXXX of XXXX ( See Exhibit N ) ; ( 2 ) Ocwen recited two falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instruments misrepresented to be assignments of my mortgage ; and ( 3 ) Ocwen falsely asserted a default occurred as of XX/XX/XXXX, contradicting the first foreclosure action setting forth a default as of XX/XX/XXXX, falsely implying payments were made for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered and forwarded to Ocwen 's predecessor / affiliate company Litton Loan from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibits D through M ), wherein at least approximately {$16000.00} was cashed. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a third falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Corporate Assignment of Mortgage '' annexed hereto as Exhibit Q,  consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, PHH Mortgage Corporation ( \" PHH '' ) entered into a consent judgment with 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit PHH 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed asState of Alabama, et al. v.PHH Mortgage Corporation ( Case No. 1:18-cv-00009-TFH ) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia . \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, PHH violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit R, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by PHH and or its affiliate company Ocwen. \n\nTo present date, XXXX, XXXX ( \" XXXX '' ), PHH and XXXX XXXX ( \" XXXX  '' ) are illegally maintaining foreclosure against my home by seeking enforcement of an already time-barred mortgage loan, while concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered as of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibits D through M ), and using the aforementioned false and forged evidence along with a counterfeit note instrument annexed hereto as Exhibit S, wherein a separate page displays an undated stamp and forged signature of \" XXXX XXXX '' whose varying signatures and unoriginal stamps were mentioned inthe Florida Office of theAttorney General Economic Crimes Division titled Unfair, Deceptive AndUnconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ). \n\nFurthermore, despite receiving at least three FDCPA validation letters and Qualified Written Request dating back to XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, PHH, Ocwen and XXXX  have either : ( 1 ) failed to response as required by applicable laws ; and / or ( 2 ) provided incomplete and or false responses in violation of applicable laws. \nAdditionally, by order entered by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on XX/XX/XXXX in Case No. XXXX that is annexed hereto as Exhibit T, the Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX bankruptcy was directed to forward me certain documents that I requested prior to their destruction. In return, I received several documents including, but not limited to, a \" Telephone Verification of Employment '' and \" Underwriter 's Income Analysis for Full Docs '' for my husband that was falsified by XXXX  XXXX  and / or its successors upon falsely declaring my husband 's income earned was {$9600.00} a month and {$110000.00} a year for XXXX which was extremely exaggerated and false, and XXXX XXXX  and / or its successors further falsified the loan application by including my earnings for XXXX and XXXX even though I was a non-obligor. A copy of the falsified income documents received from XXXX XXXX XXXX  bankruptcy trustee in the year XXXX is annexed hereto as Exhibit U. \n\nHence, the incomplete responses to by FDCPA and QWR letters that I received from XXXX, PHH and XXXX conveniently omitted the aforementioned falsified income verification information that was forwarded to me in the year XXXX from the Trustee in XXXX XXXX XXXX bankruptcy matter ( See Exhibit U ), which XXXX XXXX  and / or its successors illegally created to approve my late husband and I for a loan that we could not afford and for which XXXX and PHH should have in their possession. \n\nIn closing, the aforementioned issues and events is causing me a great deal of anguish, mental and emotional distress, especially the fact that XXXX, PHH and XXXX continue to falsely assert that no payments were made as of XX/XX/XXXX, while omitting and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments made between XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX during the hardest time in my life upon the death of my husband on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day Litton Loan commenced a foreclosure upon the default onXX/XX/XXXX which is the result of my husband and I following Litton Loan 's  instruction to become delinquent to qualify for a modification.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-03-06T19:35:41.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"76543","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3548663","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2020-02-28T17:08:36.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In <em>XXXX</em> of <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  became a Chapter <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> Debtor in the U.S. <em>Bankruptcy</em> Court for the District of Delaware <em>under</em> Case No. <em>XXXX</em>, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage <em>loan</em> for MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXXXXXX <em>XXXX</em> remainedthe purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>bankruptcy</em> petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A."]},"sort":[14.5388365,"3548663"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3548861","_score":14.520491,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, my late husband and I executed a sub-prime / adjustable interest rate refinance mortgage loan transaction wherein XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( \" XXXX XXXX '' ) designated itself the lender, my late husband was the sole obligor who executed a promissory note, and we both executed a mortgage instrument wherein Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems , Inc. ( \" MERS '' )  as the alleged nominee for XXXX XXXX was declared the \" mortgagee ''. In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX became a Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy Debtor in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXX, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage loan for MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXX XXXX remained the purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A. On XX/XX/XXXX, the Chapter XXXX Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX bankruptcy filed a rejection of executory contracts to cancel any agreements between the debtor, XXXX  XXXX. ( \" XXXX  '' ) and the latter 's subsidiary MERS. A true copy of XXXX XXXX XXXX rejection of executory contracts with XXXX  and MERS is annexed hereto as Exhibit B. In XX/XX/XXXX, Litton Loan Servicing, LP ( \" Litton Loan '' ) as our mortgage servicer instructed us to become delinquent in order to qualify for a loan modification being our payments had increased due to the adjustable interest rate. In good faith, my late husband and I followed Litton Loan 's instructions by missing the payment due XX/XX/XXXX and thereafter. Instead of modifying our loan upon us following instructions to become delinquent, Litton Loan initiated foreclosure proceedings by complaint filed XX/XX/XXXX in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. : XXXX, on the same day my husband XXXX  this XXXX, by asserting that : ( 1 ) because of the default on XX/XX/XXXX, Litton elected to nullify the original maturity date of XX/XX/XXXX by accelerating the total principal sum with interest declared due pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 as of XX/XX/XXXX and ( 2 ) MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXX  XXXX assigned our mortgage loan on XX/XX/XXXX, after XXXX XXXX entered bankruptcy in XX/XX/XXXX and after XXXX XXXX cancelled its executory contracts with XXXX  and MERS in XX/XX/XXXX. A true copy of the foreclosure complaint filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. XXXX by Litton Loan on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died, is annexed hereto as Exhibit C. Towards the end of XX/XX/XXXX, I was able to negotiate a trial modification with Litton Loan wherein the latter required that I make three equal payments of approximately {$1900.00} each, starting XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, in order to receive a permanent modification. As displayed within Exhibit D, I fulfilled my obligation by making the payments demanded by Litton Loan towards the trial period modification for XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and Litton Loan breached its promise to provide me with a permanent modification. In total, Exhibits D through M, displayed where I tendered approximately {$21000.00} in payments to Litton Loan for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, with at least approximately {$16000.00} in payments being cashed by Litton Loan and the latter refused to provide me with a permanent modification. In XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ( \" Ocwen '' ) became the servicer for my mortgage loan and maintained the aforementioned foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX without de-accelerating my mortgage loan because of the default as of XX/XX/XXXX as declared within the complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died ( See Exhibit C ). In XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen caused the first foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX to be voluntarily dismissed as displayed within Exhibit N annexed hereto. On XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen entered into a consent judgment with the CFPB and 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit Ocwen 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed as ConsumerFinancial Protection Bureau, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, et al. ( CaseNo. XXXX ) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit O, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. On XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen further violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon commencing a second foreclosure action in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. XXXX, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit P, wherein : ( 1 ) my mortgage loan was already time-barred from foreclosure upon the acceleration pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 upon commencing the first foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit C ) that was dismissed in XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit N ) ; ( 2 )  Ocwen recited two falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instruments misrepresented to be assignments of my mortgage ; and ( 3 ) Ocwen falsely asserted a default occurred as of XX/XX/XXXX, contradicting the first foreclosure action setting forth a default as of XX/XX/XXXX, falsely implying payments were made for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered and forwarded to Ocwen 's predecessor / affiliate company Litton Loan from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX Exhibits D through M ), wherein at least approximately {$16000.00} was cashed. On XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a third falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Corporate Assignment of Mortgage '' annexed hereto as Exhibit Q, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. On XX/XX/XXXX, PHH Mortgage Corporation ( \" PHH '' ) entered into a consent judgment with 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit PHH 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed as State of Alabama, et al. v. PHH Mortgage Corporation ( Case No. XXXX ) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia . On XX/XX/XXXX, PHH violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit R, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by PHH and or its affiliate company Ocwen. To present date, XXXX, XXXX ( \" XXXX '' ), PHH and XXXX XXXX ( \" XXXX  '' ) are illegally maintaining foreclosure against my home by seeking enforcement of an already time-barred mortgage loan, while concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered as of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibits D through M ), and using the aforementioned false and forged evidence along with a counterfeit note instrument annexed hereto as Exhibit S, wherein a separate page displays an undated stamp and forged signature of \" XXXX XXXX '' whose varying signatures and unoriginal stamps were mentioned in the Florida Office of theAttorney General Economic Crimes Division titled Unfair, Deceptive AndUnconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ). Furthermore, despite receiving at least three FDCPA validation letters and Qualified Written Request dating back to XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, PHH, Ocwen and RAS have either : ( 1 ) failed to response as required by applicable laws ; and / or ( 2 ) provided incomplete and or false responses in violation of applicable laws. Additionally, by order entered by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on XX/XX/XXXX in Case No. XXXX that is annexed hereto as Exhibit T, the Trustee for XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy was directed to forward me certain documents that I requested prior to their destruction. In return, I received several documents including, but not limited to, a \" Telephone Verification of Employment '' and \" Underwriter 's Income Analysis for Full Docs '' for my husband that was falsified by New Century and / or its successors upon falsely declaring my husband 's income earned was {$9600.00} a month and {$110000.00} a year for XXXX which was extremely exaggerated and false, and XXXX XXXX and / or its successors further falsified the loan application by including my earnings for XXXX and XXXX even though I was a non-obligor. A copy of the falsified income documents received from XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy trustee in the year XXXX is annexed hereto as Exhibit U. Hence, the incomplete responses to by FDCPA and QWR letters that I received from XXXX, XXXX and XXXX conveniently omitted the aforementioned falsified income verification information that was forwarded to me in the year XXXX from the Trustee in XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy matter ( See Exhibit U ), which New Century and / or its successors illegally created to approve my late husband and I for a loan that we could not afford and for which XXXX and PHH should have in their possession. In closing, the aforementioned issues and events is causing me a great deal of anguish, mental and emotional distress, especially the fact that XXXX, PHH and XXXX continue to falsely assert that no payments were made as of XX/XX/XXXX, while omitting and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments made between XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX during the hardest time in my life upon the XXXX  of my husband on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day Litton Loan commenced a foreclosure upon the default on XXXX XXXX, XXXX which is the result of my husband and I following Litton Loan 's instruction to become delinquent to qualify for a modification.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-02-28T17:51:52.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"76543","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3548861","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2020-02-28T17:38:45.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> became a Chapter <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> Debtor in the U.S. <em>Bankruptcy</em> Court for the District of Delaware <em>under</em> Case No. <em>XXXX</em>, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage <em>loan</em> for MERS as the alleged nominee for <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> remained the purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> 's <em>bankruptcy</em> petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A."]},"sort":[14.520491,"3548861"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3548587","_score":14.508731,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, my late husband and I executed a sub-prime / adjustable interest rate refinance mortgage loan transaction wherein XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( \" New Century '' ) designated itself the lender, my late husband was the sole obligor who executed a promissory note, and we both executed a mortgage instrument wherein Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems , XXXXnc. ( \" MERS '' ) as the alleged nominee for New Century was declared the \" mortgagee ''. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX became a Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy Debtor in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXX, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage loan for MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXX XXXX remainedthe purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the Chapter XXXX Trustee for New Century 's bankruptcy filed a rejection of executory contracts to cancel any agreements betweenthe debtor, MERSCORP Inc. ( \" MERSCORP '' ) and the latter 's subsidiary MERS. A true copy of New Century 's rejection of executory contracts with MERSCORP and MERS is annexed hereto as Exhibit B. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, Litton Loan Servicing, LP ( \" Litton Loan '' ) as our mortgage servicer instructed us to become delinquentin order to qualify for a loan modification being our payments had increased due to the adjustable interest rate. In good faith, my late husband and I followed Litton Loan 's  instructions by missing the payment due XX/XX/XXXX and thereafter. \n\nInstead of modifying our loan upon us following instructions to become delinquent, Litton Loan initiated foreclosure proceedings by complaint filed XX/XX/XXXX in the Superior Court of New  Jersey under Docket No. : XXXX, on the same day my husband departed this life, by asserting that : ( 1 ) because of the default on XX/XX/XXXX, Litton elected to nullify the original maturity date of XX/XX/XXXX by accelerating the total principal sum with interest declared due pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 as of XX/XX/XXXX and ( 2 ) MERS as the alleged nominee for XXXX  XXXX assigned our mortgage loan on XX/XX/XXXX, after New Century entered bankruptcy in XX/XX/XXXX and after New Century cancelled its executory contracts with MERSCORP and MERS in XX/XX/XXXX. A true copy of the foreclosure complaint filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No.  XXXX by Litton Loan on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died, is annexed hereto as Exhibit C. \n\nTowards the end of XX/XX/XXXX, I was able to negotiate a trial modification with Litton Loan wherein the latter required that I make three equal payments of approximately {$1900.00} each, starting XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, in order to receive a permanent modification. As displayed within Exhibit D, I fulfilled my obligation by making the payments demanded by Litton Loan towards the trial period modification for XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and Litton Loan breached its promise to provide me with a permanent modification. In total, Exhibits D through M, displayed where I tendered approximately {$21000.00} in payments to Litton Loan for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, with at least approximately {$16000.00} in payments being cashed by Litton Loan and the latter refused to provide me with a permanent modification. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ( \" Ocwen '' ) became the servicer for my mortgage loan and maintained the aforementioned foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX without de-accelerating my mortgage loan because of the default as of XX/XX/XXXX as declared within the complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day my husband died ( See Exhibit C ). \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen caused the first foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX to be voluntarily dismissed as displayed within Exhibit N annexed hereto. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen entered into a consent judgment with the CFPB and 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit Ocwen 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed asConsumerFinancial Protection Bureau, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, et al. ( CaseNo. 13-cv-2025-RMC ) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit O, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen further violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon commencing a second foreclosure action in the Superior Court of New Jersey under Docket No. XXXX, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit P, wherein : ( XXXX ) my mortgage loan was already time-barred from foreclosure upon the acceleration pursuant to N.J.S.A. 46:9-6 upon commencing the first foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit C ) that was dismissed in XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit N ) ; ( 2 ) Ocwen recited two falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instruments misrepresented to be assignments of my mortgage ; and ( 3 )  Ocwen falsely asserted a default occurred as of XX/XX/XXXX, contradicting the first foreclosure action setting forth a default as of XX/XX/XXXX, falsely implying payments were made for the months of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered and forwarded to Ocwen 's predecessor / affiliate company Litton Loan from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibits D through M ), wherein at least approximately {$16000.00} was cashed. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a third falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Corporate Assignment of Mortgage '' annexed hereto as Exhibit Q,  consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by Ocwen. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, PHH Mortgage Corporation ( \" PHH '' ) entered into a consent judgment with 49 State Attorneys General to prohibit PHH 's further engagement in unfair, deceptive and unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices cited in the civil complaint filed asState of Alabama, et al. v.PHH Mortgage Corporation ( Case No. 1:18-cv-00009-TFH ) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia . \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, PHH violated the aforementioned consent judgment upon creating and causing the XXXX County Clerk to record a second falsely uttered - falsely signed - forged - falsely notarized instrument titled \" Assignment of Mortgage New Jersey '' annexed hereto as Exhibit R, consisting of misrepresentations and false assertions regarding a transfer of my mortgage loan, false considerations, imposters, and a false notarization by persons employed by PHH and or its affiliate company Ocwen. \n\nTo present date, XXXX, XXXX ( \" XXXX '' ), PHH and XXXX XXXX ( \" XXXX  '' ) are illegally maintaining foreclosure against my home by seeking enforcement of an already time-barred mortgage loan, while concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments that I tendered as of XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibits D through M ), and using the aforementioned false and forged evidence along with a counterfeit note instrument annexed hereto as Exhibit S, wherein a separate page displays an undated stamp and forged signature of \" XXXX XXXX '' whose varying signatures and unoriginal stamps were mentioned inthe Florida Office of theAttorney General Economic Crimes Division titled Unfair, Deceptive AndUnconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ). \n\nFurthermore, despite receiving at least three FDCPA validation letters and Qualified Written Request dating back to XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, NewRez, PHH, Ocwen and RAS have either : ( 1 ) failed to response as required by applicable laws ; and / or ( 2 ) provided incomplete and or false responses in violation of applicable laws. \nAdditionally, by order entered by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on XX/XX/XXXX in Case No. XXXX that is annexed hereto as Exhibit T, the Trustee for XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy was directed to forward me certain documents that I requested prior to their destruction. In return, I received several documents including, but not limited to, a \" Telephone Verification of Employment '' and \" Underwriter 's Income Analysis for Full Docs '' for my husband that was falsified by New Century and / or its successors upon falsely declaring my husband 's income earned was {$9600.00} a month and {$110000.00} a year for XXXX which was extremely exaggerated and false, and XXXX XXXX and / or its successors further falsified the loan application by including my earnings for XXXX and XXXX even though I was a non-obligor. A copy of the falsified income documents received from XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy trustee in the year XXXX is annexed hereto as Exhibit U. \n\nHence, the incomplete responses to by FDCPA and QWR letters that I received from XXXX, PHH and XXXX conveniently omitted the aforementioned falsified income verification information that was forwarded to me in the year XXXX from the Trustee in XXXX XXXX 's bankruptcy matter ( See Exhibit U ), which New Century and / or its successors illegally created to approve my late husband and I for a loan that we could not afford and for which XXXX and PHH should have in their possession. \n\nIn closing, the aforementioned issues and events is causing me a great deal of anguish, mental and emotional distress, especially the fact that XXXX, PHH and XXXX continue to falsely assert that no payments were made as of XXXX XXXX, XXXX, while omitting and concealing approximately {$21000.00} in payments made between XXXX XXXX, XXXX through XXXX XXXX, XXXX during the hardest time in my life upon the death of my husband on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day Litton Loan commenced a foreclosure upon the default on XXXX XXXX, XXXX which is the result of my husband and I following Litton Loan 's  instruction to become delinquent to qualify for a modification.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-02-28T17:36:05.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"76543","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3548587","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2020-02-28T17:36:01.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> became a Chapter <em>XXXX</em> <em>Bankruptcy</em> Debtor in the U.S. <em>Bankruptcy</em> Court for the District of Delaware <em>under</em> Case No. <em>XXXX</em>, at which time, the local land records were void of any instruments asserting a transfer and assignment of my mortgage <em>loan</em> for MERS as the alleged nominee for <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> remainedthe purported mortgagee of record. A true copy of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> 's <em>bankruptcy</em> petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit A."]},"sort":[14.508731,"3548587"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":72,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":72}]}},"product":{"doc_count":72,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":30,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":20},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":4},{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":2},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":18,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":17},{"key":"Other personal consumer report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":17,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":6},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":3},{"key":"Auto debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Private student loan debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":72,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":21,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief","doc_count":10},{"key":"Foreclosure","doc_count":5},{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":10,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed","doc_count":4},{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":3},{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Public record information inaccurate","doc_count":4},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":4},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":2},{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":2},{"key":"Loan sold or transferred to another company","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing dispute for services","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":1},{"key":"Notification didn't disclose it was an attempt to collect a debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":72,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":72}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":72,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":63},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":9}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":72,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":72}]}},"company":{"doc_count":72,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":9},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":7},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":7},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":6},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":5},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":4},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Mr. Cooper Group Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"21ST MORTGAGE CORP.","doc_count":2},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"BWW Law Group, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Brock & Scott, PLLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FCI Lender Services Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Fay Servicing, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"LEXISNEXIS","doc_count":1},{"key":"Maximus Federal Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Selene Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":72,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":16},{"key":"CA","doc_count":13},{"key":"TX","doc_count":9},{"key":"GA","doc_count":4},{"key":"OR","doc_count":4},{"key":"TN","doc_count":4},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":3},{"key":"DC","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":2},{"key":"MO","doc_count":2},{"key":"OK","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA","doc_count":2},{"key":"AL","doc_count":1},{"key":"CO","doc_count":1},{"key":"IN","doc_count":1},{"key":"LA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MS","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"WA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":72,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":27},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":5}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":72,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":5},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":4},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[14.508731,"3548587"],"3":[11.13443,"15736982"]}}}