{"took":105,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":13,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3448138","_score":13.187115,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Go to college, they said. Get an education, they said. You cant be successful without a degree, they said. For the last 32 years of my existence, this has been engrained in me, played on repeat like a broken record. So, I did just that. I went to college and got an education. Fast forward eight years after completion, hear I am at XXXX in the morning, thinking maybe this was the biggest mistake of my life. With just six days away from what is supposed to be one of the happiest days of my life, closing on my new home, I cant really begin to get excited yet because, ironically I am not sure it is going to happen. And I am sure youre anxious to know why not, three simple words -- -- $ XXXX Debt Sentence. \n\nThats right, that college education that everyone so consciously persuaded me to go get my whole life is standing in the middle of me closing on my dream home. I am ashamed of my naivety in believing that getting a college education would be my gateway to the American Dream. Boy, was I wrong! \n\nLets back track briefly. For the last year, I have been preparing for this moment in my life, the time where I would become a homeowner. I worked hard, made sure my credit was up to par, researched the housing market, all in the interest of making an informed home buying decision. After a year of adequate preparation, I was ready to pull the trigger ; In early XXXX, I applied for a mortgage. \n\nI was thrilled when I got my pre-approval letter and my green light to go house shopping. I contacted my realtor, met with her, gave her the specifics I was looking for, my dream home. I found a home I liked online. She scheduled the showing for XX/XX/2019. We went. I fell in love and the rest is history. We made an offer. They countered. We made another offer. On XX/XX/XXXX, we had deal. Contracts were signed and closing was scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX, six days from now. Sounds perfect. So, what possibly could go wrong? \n\nThe conversations with the lender started about the loan process, what I needed to do etc. I inquired about first time homebuyer grants, because this is technically the first home Ive purchased, so you can understand my dismay when I was informed I did not qualify for grants. HUH!? The confusion was paralyzing. What do you mean I dont qualify for FIRST TIME HOMEBUYER GRANTS? The name in itself says I should qualify! This is when I was smacked in the face with a crash course in debt to income ratio ( dti ) and first time home buyer grant qualifications. Probably one of the most absurd things I have heard in my life- if your debt to income ratio is too high, you dont qualify for any type of assistance, a tragic repeat of history- the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer. \n\nAs I previously stated, I prepared for this moment, at least I thought I did. My credit is the best it has ever been. With 3 credit cards with a total balance of less than {$1000.00}, an auto loan ( I mean I have to get from point a to b for crying out loud ) and a CD secured loan, which is really a savings account, I was using credit responsibly. I learned my lesson during my 20s about being reckless with my finances and I cleaned up my act, all besides that $ XXXX student loan bill that accompanies my three credit cards, my auto loan, and my CD secured loan on my credit report. \n\nCurrently, my student loans are deferred where there is no payment due for a year and are not in default. Additionally, as an employee of the State of XXXX, I am a part of the Student Loan Forgiveness Program, which means that after 120 loan payments, my loans will be forgiven. I explained all this to the lender and even provided documentation to substantiate. Appallingly, this did not change a thing. That $ XXXX student loan bill substantially inflated my dti. I could not comprehend how a {$0.00} payment could do such a thing. How is this even possible, I asked. \n\nThats when I got another crash course FHA Guidelines. The FHA Guidelines say something like this : we dont care whether your loans are deferred, whether you have an income based repayment, we dont care if you are in a forgiveness program, we dont care if youll be homeless, we dont care if youll ever touch the American Dream none of that matters to us. What matters to us is, we require the lender to calculate 1 % of the total student loan balance, in my case {$590.00} and calculate that figure into my monthly debts. Got it. Makes no sense, but understood. \n\nI knew I was not the only person with student loans, and after doing further research thats when I discovered that there are millions of Americans in the very same predicament. They cant even get a pre-approval for a mortgage, and I qualified barely, by the skin of my teeth, so that I was told I should be grateful. But unfortunately, I am not. \n\nI put down my earnest money, paid for the inspection and appraisal, got my homeowners policy, all in preparation to close. After finding out that I did not qualify for a down payment assistance grant, I went to withdraw the money from retirement account, only to discover that I was not able do that because hardships are not allowed and you even after to retire or quit to access my money that Ive been investing this whole time. Great! Another one bites the dust. So, now I have to bring {$4300.00} to closing on Friday, but I dont have it.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-11-22T05:34:53.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3448138","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Draper and Kramer Mortgage Corp.","date_received":"2019-11-22T05:26:48.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Thats when I got another <em>crash</em> <em>course</em> FHA Guidelines. The FHA Guidelines say something like this : we dont care whether your loans are deferred, whether you <em>have</em> an income based repayment, we dont care if you are in a forgiveness program, we dont care if youll be homeless, we dont care if youll ever touch the American Dream none of that matters to us."]},"sort":[13.187115,"3448138"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12465266","_score":11.647363,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX submitted a Response to my Complaint and you have received it as well. \n\nI've also printed it out to examine the findings carefully and to compare the details with my own notes. \n\nThere are multiple inaccuracies, not to mention the fact that they've now admitted to both the CFPB as well as to myself that they did in fact receive multiple payments from the following sources : A. In Paragraph 5 CAC states that \" First, a claim was filed with your insurance carrier and proceeds of {$4.00}, XXXX were applied to your account balance. '' B. Paragraph 5 continues onto Page 2 to state : \" Second, because your vehicle was purchased in New York, you automatically qualified for New York Gap coverage. Our Insurance team processed a NY XXXX claim on your behalf and a rebate of {$2.00}, XXXX was applied to your account ''. \n\nC. Once again, in Paragraph 5 they've stated that \" XXXX, the XXXX was cancelled upon notification of your vehicle 's total loss, and a rebate of {$860.00} was applied to your account balance. '' XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX pm I screencaptured my Experian Credit Report under the category of Credit Acceptance which showed XXXX in the Payment Calendar and clearly showed XXXX and XXXX with a Green Check-Mark indicating that Payment was received. XXXX XXXX thereafter is illustrated as being 'Late ' which is likely possible since less than 2 months after I began financing the XXXX - I had to turn to have it towed for repairs after a wheel almost complely came off. Despite having VSC - the Dealer advised me NOT to use it, and to instead process the repairs through my own auto insurance which resulted in a $ XXXX deductible. While the latter matter XXXX or XXXX not have been on the fault of CAC specifically- they're still making fraudulent claims that I never paid anything beyond XXXX. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the Account # they've listed differs from the account Number I have on my file. They have alleged that XXXX ' account # is XXXX- whereas my own records show XXXX. Which could have perhaps been construed as a simple Typo or system glitch had they previously provided me my Account Information as I asked Regardless - their own Testimonies have admitted to having received the following amounts : {$4.00}, XXXX + {$2400.00} + {$860.00} ( although it should be noted that they likely received the full $ {$1600.00} from XXXX since it was never used ). \n\nThese self declared totals equals {$7900.00}. \n\nSince the only Payments I sent which qualify as Received, and according to CAC logic - Late means not received at all - than I did in fact make XXXX payments of {$270.00} ( although I'm certain that I made more which are not being counted )- this equals {$550.00}. \n\nThe Total Loan Amount of {$8900.00}. \n\nI also believe that based on the fact that they stated that XXXX received a 'Rebate ' of {$860.00} upon cancellation of the VSC - that they most assuredly received an additional {$780.00} from XXXX which means that from a {$8900.00} loan in split terms of 24 months ( not 51 as indicated in Paragraph 3 ) - Credit Acceptance has received {$9300.00}.\n\nWhat did I receive?\n\n*6 months of Cardio walking the mile and a half to and from work until I was able to save for a bicycle. \n*Another XXXX months on a bicycle until I could save enough for a cheap starter car. \n*Being turned down for countless apartments because my credit was constantly being pockmarked as delinquent despite never owing XXXX XXXX a dime. \n*Countless frustrations Everytime I attempted to 'Dispute ' these Fraudulent Charges only for them to be Rejected, and no Information provided to me. \n*An informal crash course on Consumer Rights, and finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to 'Soft Close ' the account after XXXX XXXX years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-14T00:46:44.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34207","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12465266","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-14T00:46:19.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["*An informal <em>crash</em> <em>course</em> on Consumer Rights, and finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to 'Soft Close ' the account after XXXX XXXX years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing."]},"sort":[11.647363,"12465266"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12464996","_score":11.647363,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX submitted a Response to my Complaint and you have received it as well.\n\nI've also printed it out to examine the findings carefully and to compare the details with my own notes.\n\nThere are multiple inaccuracies, not to mention the fact that they've now admitted to both the CFPB as well as to myself that they did in fact rec\neive multiple payments from the following sources : A. In Paragraph 5 CAC states that \" First, a claim was filed with your insurance carrier and proceeds of {$4.00}, XXXX were applied to your account balance. '' B. Paragraph 5 continues onto Page 2 to state : \" Second, because your vehicle was purchased in New York, you automatically qualified for New York Gap coverage. Our Insurance team processed a NY GAP claim on your behalf and a rebate of {$2.00}, XXXX was applied to your account ''. \n\nC. Once again, in Paragraph 5 they've stated that \" Third, the XXXX was cancelled upon notification of your vehicle 's total loss, and a rebate of {$860.00} was applied to your account balance. '' XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX pm I screencaptured my XXXX Credit Report under the category of Credit Acceptance which showed XXXX in the Payment Calendar and clearly showed XXXX and May with a Green Check-Mark indicating that Payment was received. Every Mark thereafter is illustrated as being 'Late ' which is likely possible since less than 2 months after I began financing the XXXX - I had to turn to have it towed for repairs after a wheel almost complely came off. Despite having VSC - the Dealer advised me NOT to use it, and to instead process the repairs through my own auto insurance which resulted in a $ XXXX deductible. While the latter matter may or may not have been on the fault of CAC specifically- they're still making fraudulent claims that I never paid anything beyond XXXX. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the Account # they've listed differs from the account Number I have on my file. They have alleged that 'My ' account # is XXXX- whereas my own records show XXXX. Which could have perhaps been construed as a simple Typo or system glitch had they previously provided me my Account Information as I asked Regardless - their own Testimonies have admitted to having received the following amounts : {$4.00}, XXXX + {$2400.00} + {$860.00} ( although it should be noted that they likely received the full $ {$1600.00} from VSC since it was never used ).\n\nThese self declared totals equals {$7900.00}. \n\nSince the only Payments I sent which qualify as Received, and according to CAC logic - Late means not received at all - than I did in fact make 2 payments of {$270.00} ( although I'm\n\ncertain that I made more which are not being counted )- this equals {$550.00}. The Total Loan Amount of {$8900.00}. I also believe that based on the fact that they stated that *I* received a 'Rebate ' of {$860.00} upon cancellation of the VSC - that they most assuredly received an additional {$780.00} from VSC which means that from a {$8900.00} loan in split terms of 24 months ( not 51 as indicated in Paragraph 3 ) - Credit Acceptance has received {$9300.00}.\n\nWhat did I receive?\n\n*6 months of Cardio walking the mile and a half to and from work until I was able to save for a bicycle.\n\n*Another 6-9 months on a bicycle until I could save enough for a cheap starter car. \n*Being turned down for countless apartments because my credit was constantly being pockmarked as delinquent despite never owing XXXX XXXX a dime. \n*Countless frustrations Everytime I attempted to 'Dispute ' these Fraudulent Charges only for them to be Rejected, and no Information provided to me.\n\n*An informal crash course on Consumer Rights, a\nnd finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to 'Soft Close ' the account after 6 3/4 years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-14T00:46:46.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34207","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12464996","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-14T00:46:19.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["*An informal <em>crash</em> <em>course</em> on Consumer Rights, a\nnd finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to 'Soft Close ' the account after 6 3/4 years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing."]},"sort":[11.647363,"12464996"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12465704","_score":11.62856,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX submitted a XXXX to my Complaint and you have received it as well. \n\nI've also printed it out to examine the findings carefully and to compare the details with my own notes. \n\nThere are multiple inaccuracies, not to mention the fact that they've now admitted to both the CFPB as well as to myself that they did in fact receive multiple payments from the following sources : A. In Paragraph XXXX XXXX states that \" First, a claim was filed with your insurance XXXX and proceeds of {$4.00}, XXXX were applied to your account balance. '' XXXX Paragraph XXXX continues onto Page XXXX to state : \" Second, because your vehicle was purchased in New York, you automatically qualified for XXXX XXXX XXXX coverage. Our XXXX team processed a XXXX XXXX claim on your behalf and a rebate of {$2.00}, XXXX was applied to your account ''. \n\nXXXX Once again, in Paragraph XXXX they've stated that \" XXXX, the XXXX was cancelled upon notification of your vehicle 's total loss, and a rebate of {$860.00} was applied to your account balance. '' XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX pm I screencaptured my XXXX Credit Report under the category of Credit Acceptance which showed XXXX in the Payment Calendar and clearly showed XXXX and XXXX with a XXXX XXXX indicating that Payment was received. XXXX XXXX thereafter is illustrated as being 'Late ' which is likely possible since less than 2 months after I began financing the XXXX - XXXX had to turn to have it towed for repairs after a wheel almost complely came off. Despite having VSC - the Dealer advised me NOT to use it, and to instead process the repairs through my own auto insurance which resulted in a $ XXXX deductible. While the latter matter XXXX or XXXX not have been on the fault of CAC specifically- they're still making fraudulent claims that I never paid anything beyond XXXX. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the Account # they've listed differs from the account Number I have on my file. They have alleged that XXXX ' account # is XXXX- whereas my own records show XXXX. Which could have perhaps been construed as a simple Typo or system glitch had they previously provided me my Account XXXX as I asked Regardless - their own Testimonies have admitted to having received the following amounts : {$4.00}, XXXX + {$2400.00} + {$860.00} ( although it should be noted that they likely received the full $ {$1600.00} from XXXX since it was never used ). \n\nThese self declared totals equals {$7900.00}. \n\nSince the only Payments I sent which qualify as Received, and according to CAC logic - Late means not received at all - than I did in fact make XXXX payments of {$270.00} ( although I'm certain that I made more which are not being counted )- this equals {$550.00}. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX XXXX of {$8900.00}. \n\nI also believe that based on the fact that they stated that XXXX received a 'Rebate ' of {$860.00} upon cancellation of the VSC - that they most assuredly received an additional {$780.00} from XXXX which means that from a {$8900.00} loan in split terms of XXXX  months ( not XXXX as indicated in Paragraph XXXX ) - Credit Acceptance has received {$9300.00}. \n\nWhat did I receive? \n\nXXXX months of XXXX walking the mile and a half to and from work until I was able to save for a bicycle. \n*Another XXXX months on a bicycle until I could save enough for a cheap starter car. \n*Being turned down for countless apartments because my credit was constantly being pockmarked as delinquent despite never owing XXXX XXXX a dime. \n*Countless frustrations Everytime I attempted to 'Dispute ' these Fraudulent Charges only for them to be Rejected, and no XXXX provided to me. \n*An informal crash course on XXXX Rights, and finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to XXXX XXXX ' the account after XXXX XXXX years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-14T00:46:46.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34207","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12465704","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-03-13T23:39:55.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["*An informal <em>crash</em> <em>course</em> on XXXX Rights, and finally - *An error riddled statement from CAC who's finally summary is to XXXX XXXX ' the account after XXXX XXXX years of dessimating my Credit for absolutely nothing."]},"sort":[11.62856,"12465704"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3501593","_score":8.006551,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I was an XXXX  military XXXX between XXXX an XXXX. I was stationed and served my country in XXXX, XXXX. I completed my education at XXXX University, XXXX XXXX then raised XXXX children including XXXX XXXX XXXX adoptions. \nIn XXXX of XXXX I set up a payment plan with ECMC for ongoing automatic payment arrangement of {$500.00} per month ongoing on my student loan. At the time, I disputed the balance and did not agree that it was accurate but knew that I needed to make payments. I set up an automatic payment method. That payment was processed through ECMC ten times between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX when ECMC stopped the automatic payments with no notice to me. In XX/XX/XXXX I telephone ECMC requesting information on why the payments had stopped and that I wanted to update my records. I was told there was no record to update as they had no record of my loan or a payment issue. \nIn the meantime, my family moved out of the state of XXXX to XXXX. In XXXX, I received notice through my employer in XXXX  that ECMC was garnishing my wages. ECMC knew where I was employed in XXXX yet had not tried to telephone me nor had I received a notice Prior To Wage Withholding. I disputed the garnishment immediately and believed that they were garnishing on an incorrect debt amount. I sent numerous letters requesting a hearing, disputing the garnishment, the rehabilitation and all the fees they had added onto the loan. ECMC denied my requests for a hearing and proceeded with the garnishment. \nI eventually learned that ECMC had rehabilitated my student loan without my consent. This is why ECMC stopped the ongoing payment arrangement and automatic payment I had made perfectly with them. We also learned that because I knew nothing of this new loan it was now in default and ECMC had added on new fees for that default, large fees for something I never authorized and after I was making perfect payments. What originated as a {$32000.00} XXXX Ive probably paid more than that already ) loan was then in XXXX {$190000.00}. \nI was told by ECMC there was nothing they could do to help me or about the fees. I searched everywhere I could trying to find some help and eventually found an Ombudsman from the Department of Education. With the help of the Ombudsman, ECMC agreed that some of the fees were not accurate. According to their accounting it should be {$140000.00}. This included fees in the amount of for the rehabilitation and new loan default I was completely unaware of and had not authorized. \nIn XXXX ECMC noted that my balance should have been {$89.00}, XXXX. See page 2 of letter dated XX/XX/XXXX from ECMC, paragraph 3. The economy crashed, I was not paid by my employer at that time and therefore could not make a large payment on my student loan at that time. I have a large family with XXXX kids. ECMC did not offer to me an alternative to reduce my payments at that time. I of course went into default. \nFour years later, in XXXX, ECMC said your loan was repurchased by XXXX XXXX for {$180000.00}. Even according to ECMCs accounting, that is a different of {$90000.00} in fees in five years time for a defaulted loan when I was making perfect payments. ECMC did drop the balance and fees down when reviewed by the Dept of Education Ombudsman to {$130000.00}. See page two of letter date XX/XX/XXXX, paragraph five. That means, after an adjustment during review by the Department of Education Ombudsman, ECMC charged me a fee of {$42000.00} for their error in selling my loan to XXXX XXXX without my consent. The Ombudsman from the Department of Education said he couldnt help with review of the rehab issue because ECMC said that they had my signature on file for a rehabilitation that authorized them to allow XXXX XXXX  to repurchase my loan even though I said that wasnt possible. \nI notified ECMC that I wanted the loan rehabilitation they completed without my consent to be honored since the one they did wasnt authorized. The request was left unanswered. I sent numerous requests to ECMCs legal team requesting a hearing to go over the disputed fees and my right for a loan rehabilitation. My requests for a hearing were denied and my last request received no response. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX I learned from my employer that ECMC had given them an Order Of Withholding dated XX/XX/XXXX for {$260000.00}. No validation notice or itemization on how ECMC arrived at this new balance was provided to me. This was the first I had heard from ECMC for quite some time though they had my place of employment and work number. I immediately disputed the garnishment and requested a hearing. Notice was sent by fax of my request for hearing and dispute of the balance. ECMC confirmed receipt of my dispute on XX/XX/XXXX. I spoke with them numerous times and continue to do so. My wages were garnished a few days later and are still being garnished. I have received no response to my request for a hearing on the garnishment and dispute sent to ECMC on XX/XX/XXXX and confirmed as received by ECMC on XX/XX/XXXX as of todays date, XX/XX/XXXX. \nSince I became aware of ECMCs intent to garnish in XX/XX/XXXX, I have spoken to their representatives numerous times about the fees charged for a loan rehabilitation, sale to XXXX XXXX  and default that I was not aware of at the time and did not authorize. I was told by ECMC these fees were added by the Department of Education and there was nothing they could do to reduce those fees. However, on XX/XX/XXXX when I spoke with the Department of Education I was told ECMC purchased the loan for $ XXXX XXXX dollars ( for $ XXXX loan debt ). There is a balance of {$0.00} with the Department of Education. I was also told by the Department of Education that all of the fees ECMC has said were coming from the Department of Education are actually coming from ECMC. \nI believe at the most my student loan balance should be is what it was prior to ECMCs error in rehabilitating my loan without my consent, selling it to XXXX XXXX  and charging fees for default on a loan I did not authorize and was unaware of at the time. Even according to ECMCs accounting from letter dated XX/XX/XXXX that would have been {$89.00}, XXXX, not the $ {$260000.00} they are garnishing for at this time. \nI believe ECMC has shown me unfair and deceptive debt collection practices by : Converting my payment arrangement to loan rehab without my consent. \nCharging exorbitant fees on default loan I did not authorize Stopped payment arrangement without my consent Refused right to hearing on balance and fees Moving forward w/ garnishment I requested hearing on, disputed balance and was not verified. \nFailing to provide itemization on how ECMC arrived at {$260000.00} Garnishment on {$260000.00} which was not validated & was highly disputed Misleading by saying fees added on loan were from Department of Education I was paying on this loan regularly and want to pay on this loan but would like to be treated fairly, have the ability to REHABILITATE this loan like ECMC did without my consent, come to agreement on a balance that is fair and stop garnishment immediately due to the fact that the balance garnished was not validated. I believe ECMC has treated me unfairly and shown deceptive collection practices. Ive voiced my concern with them and have been told my only option is to complete a loan consolidation for the full amount of {$260000.00} and dont know what to do. This situation has caused my family undue stress and hardship and is affecting my ability to continue supporting my daughter so that she can stay in college. I don't know what to do. I hope you can help me.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-01-19T06:26:41.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"91361","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3501593","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ECMC GROUP, INC.","date_received":"2020-01-19T00:52:54.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Don't agree with the fees charged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In XXXX ECMC noted that my balance should <em>have</em> been {$89.00}, XXXX. See page 2 of letter dated XX/XX/XXXX from ECMC, paragraph 3. The economy <em>crashed</em>, I was not paid by my employer at that time and therefore could not make a large payment on my student loan at that time. I <em>have</em> a large family with XXXX kids. ECMC did not offer to me an alternative to reduce my payments at that time. I of <em>course</em> went into default."]},"sort":[8.006551,"3501593"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8461336","_score":7.1717443,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XXXX XXXX  and while sitting and listening to the computer keyboard get repeatedly clicked by XXXX  while she (twice due to my idea to request check images) completed four, I believe, account statement requests for me that I did not get to witness, observe or confirm in the process, I did what was was required, turns out, to simply ask one question which would have taken XXXX minutes, to the Merrill Lynch representative, who was in the branch at the time, and instead, we compliantly but outside of any posted or agreed-upon rules, terms or regulations, and while doing this was against my rights and will, scheduled an appointment for the next day, at XXXX, which would have been, and was to be with the Merrill Lynch Manager of that BOA office XXXX XXXX XXXX I told XXXX, who works for BOA and NOT Merrill Lynch the simple and only reason why I wanted to talk with the ML guy. No, gotta come back the next day at a time they say. Notably, he was not the only ML person, I do not think, and nor was there a line by or outside XXXX  door for anyone waiting to talk or meet with him. I can only imagine why that was the case, but anyway, the next day at appx. XXXX!!!, not XXXX  when the bank ruthlessly, pointlessly and without any explanation, required I be there and when he could meet, I arrived and walked back to his door, though I did not even know that is where the meeting was to be held, or that it was even to be held with him, including sinc there are XXXX other offices right next to him. His murky-glassed door was closed, and no one was inside expect him, who was seated at his desk far back at the opposite side of the rectangular-shaped office. I do not believe he had a sign outside the door either, that said ML or his name or both. WEIRD...so, I tapped on the glass and he strolled across the rectangular office where he sat at the back and that was mostly surfaced with carpet and not anything else, and he opened the door and said: \"XXXX?\" \"Yeah, that's me.\" And he turned and began walking back to his desk and, with that being the only extent of the verification, began talking over his left shoulder began telling me account information! He also said that he tried to call both numbers on the account, but neither worked. HUH? He did not even ask me the number, or numbers, or give me a chance to correct or clarify, perhaps, any outdated numbers that might have been the issue, if there even was one. But, also, I had an email that they had, which is proven by the statement requests they sent me the day before, so if XXXX was so obsessively condemning and blaming of a failed telephonic communication situation, then why did he not offer to discuss or correct the phone number situation, if there even is one which I question, or if that's not enough, email me? Why did XXXX  not email me, and what in the world was he going to email me about, and why did he try to call? Regarding the phone numbers, I replied to XXXX  that: \"The \"whole thing is old\", years old, and the accounts have been 'asleep'.\" I also said that \"I have new info about which I told the lady, which was XXXX  (see complaint #1)\" yesterday about.\" He did not ask about that or all of that information. Big deal!!...I thought, can we just talk about your company, Merrill Lynch and my reason, from me that is, for being in the office? XXXX  did not know me, I had been told of the requirement which was to meet with XXXX, or ML, so what was he doing calling me, or trying to call me he alleged, let alone if he had email at his access and disposal. But he seemed to not care at my response about the phone. No, he kept on about me and the accounts. THIS GUY WAS WAY OUTSIDE THE RULE BOOK! Oh, I thought, so he verifies by first name? That, folks, is what he did and what happened, but I am not in charge, do not know what they do during their required, schedule meetings and also in this eery and seemingly-undisciplined branch. \"Yeah, that's me.\" again was the identity confirmation...He said that he looked and all I have, not all he could find, but all I have, is what he said, is an XXXX account with Merrill XXXX. I sat down, and watched as he chaotically and in a greatly-scattered fashion, laughably to me sloppily and immaturely tried as he did, attempted to wrangle and direct the appointment, but I also had not even talked about the inquiry, yet!! From me, at least, he had no idea why I was there, or what was the request...unless he had talked to people in XXXX  and also outside of XXXX. Did people in XXXX  with Merill Lynch try and run and end-around play and influence this man's normal way, possibly of thinking, but, or of dealing with customers and doing his own licensed, albeit also in another state, work? I told him I am not here to talk about the Merrill XXXX XXXX account, and I never mentioned or asked about it...Creepy, possibly highly illegal what really was going on. But he crashed the conversation again, and didn't even pay attention to the point I was trying to make, which was so simple and easy, and said, and again this is also while and after never verifying me, and at that point he released a not-nice, very disturbing grin, so he became thrilled or enticed at something, clearly. Well, nothing was funny to me.. Again he said, \"But XXXX, what I am saying is all you have is an XXXX. I am trying to help you.\" HA! He said he is trying to help me, yet he did not verify me, we never met, and not only had I told XXXX  the reason and purpose for the meeting, but Dude, himself, had not asked me why I was there, what he COULD do to assist, or what account(s) I wanted to talk or learn about, possibly even open. How did he know I did not want to open an account, transfer XXXX to an account, or under what or whose authority did he go digging throughout my BOA - not Merrill Lynch - accounts? XXXX  did not work for, or at Bank of America, yet he only blared that all I had, or what he could not find, was the XXXX   Account. Finally, I broke the convolusion and unprecedented trickery and conspiracy of sorts, and through the simply rotten and bad service I had received there till then, as well, and said similar to XXXX  \"Sir, you have not let me even ask anything or tell you why I am here.\" And he did not even take that, no it was like he may have known all along what I sought, and what information I sought but aggressively and poorly, too, kept trying to keep us away from that area or even account. \"I just want to know about the company XXXXK, that I had with the XXXX XXXX  of XXXX and then XXXXXXXX XXXX which I know was with Merrill Lynch. I had to tell him to \"Please stop\" in the midst of all this and before I even was allowed to get to that point. Stunned and feeling royally abused by this maniacal treatment and unhinged, licensed broker who works with retirement accounts so someone, in their old age can pay medical bills and survive aging and golden years, I stated again: \"This is the only point, I had a XXXXK with Merrill Lynch. It was expertly managed, I think subject to generous contributions and...\"XXXX, I am trying to help you.\" Me, something just like: \"No, sir, you are not; you are not acknowledging, you are cutting off and are not answering the question. He replied, \"Yes I am.\" He actually condemned and accused me of being wrong about why I was there and that we had not even talked about, which we had not, two words: Merrill Lynch. How dare him not acknowledge or comment on a twice-stated purpose for being there, and inquiry that I verbally presented, and tell me that though he flew right past it and aggressively refused to \"go there\" that \"he was trying to help\"...Help with what, by the way, he is only doing what is required by law or the bank is paying him to do. It wasn't like I was trying to log into a portal that wasn't working, and then when you sit at one of those desks in such an appointment, I am most curious: What type of \"help\" could even be, broadly speaking, mustered or provided. Plus, from XXXX  and noone, I had not even asked for \"Help\", for crying out loud. I had stated, twice at that point to just XXXX, but also XXXX times in the bank, and previously once to Merrill Lynch in XXXX, what information I was seeking, if not demanding. Just after I point out to him that he was not answering the question, he started motioning with his hands toward me and getting, oddly and so unprofessionally, animated. At that point, and truly feeling a form of being tricked, imprisoned and entrapped, if not worse, I decide for my safety I need to quickly retreat and leave. He can't wipe or resist the sinister grin, and again gets animated with his hands...while sitting at his desk. Wow....I vacate the office and, in the process, ask for the XXXX  MANAGER. IMPORTANT, I had an appointment, vacated the office and, in the process of doing so which was also within the mandated and required appointment, asked for a Branch Manager. XXXX\"S REPLY: \"I CAN\"T HELP YOU.\" Once again, with the word \"help.\" Oh, so now with no account resolution or willingness, which was available to many extents and he must, hopefully, have known that he throws around the word \"Help\" Hmmmmm. He was saying something I think, but anyway be that, for the moment so to speak, as it may, I said he cannot \"help\" with a XXXX MANAGER. Why, XXXX? What prevents you from going to the counter and asking, like I could or like any staff could, for a person? Of course he could have done that, and he even could have called a superior with Merrill Lynch in the process. Nope, neither happened. I had not slowly left his office, no I split with a quick dart and escape to safety, and then went and sat in the chairs, probably XXXX  from his door, that are in the main lobby. Astoundingly and for the ensuing ten minutes, as I recall, I just sat in the lobby. XXXX  can't stop...he says things loudly from his office even at that point, and then a tall lady, who had dealt with a strange-acting fellow, it wasn't XXXX, the day before with a safety box and that I had complimented her about with what she told him, which was: \"You need to talk to your attorney.\", walked up and asked me in response to my seeking Management, what was going on. This is unreal, XXXX  shouted at her - XXXX  - from, at that point, not 30' but 40' while seated at his desk (remember the square, mostly carpet office): \"DONT WORRY ABOUT IT.\" There were customers around, he did not work for BOA, either, and he is shouting at a person, a female nonetheless and he is a male, and then from XXXX  away, too? Interesting, no sooner as I fled his office, he followed me out and, basically after I had told him, which I think I did, that I don't feel comfortable or safe with this and/or to leave me alone which I would have said, and think I did, just before exiting the door threshold after he wouldn't stop yapping and diligently trying to flip the script, and refuse and manipulate service, too. But, while I was in what I considered a safe, or no, safer, or no more open space, which proved equally unsafe, he walked right up to my face and, confrontationally, almost attacked me is what I thought, physically and with possible force of some kind; what was he was considering, wanting, or was he going to do? Was he trying to provoke me, trying to provoke an uncomposed or undisciplined, anything but inappropriate, let alone possibly physical, or \"usable\" reaction by me? He had the wrong person, wrong guy and I did all this, still, while he had mowed past a XXXXtime, simply-stated inquiry. Was that what XXXX  wanted was trouble? I put my arm out, and stepped away in defense, physically and protectively, for myself. And this is in a bank.... After that, and I exclaimed to both him and the Associate who was onlooking from her desk in a dazed stare, but with a tad bit more volume so she could hear, but certainly with restraint and poise, yet also in a manner of asking for help, too, what a loud scene of madness he was causing and exhibiting right in front of the customers, despite my request to be left alone, also his BOA co-workers, which are not ML so technically are not co-workers, and the cameras and, of course, too. What a fool!, he was not leaving me alone or honoring or respecting my prior, fervent request for no more of him, verbally or physically. In fact, I also told both of them why I left the office, yet he still wants to so-called run me down...So, I sat there in silence in the lobby and with no one coming up to for about ten minutes. Finally, I said I request a Branch Manager - THE Branch Directing, top-boss Manager. They go back, and I think it was both XXXX and the Associate from the day before, but within a few more minutes, one returned and said that \"She's gonna give you a call.\" I replied that, \"No, that is not going to work.\" For one, I am here by ML and BOA requirements, which is for an appointment for ML, and overall for an appointment, so now while at the appointment and in order to conduct business for the appointment, is still underway (I said that) I have to leave to get a call, but not by ML but BOA, and BOA is not ML? Secondly, who is \"she\" one might wonder, because the Agent did not say and just said that \"She is going to give you a call.\" What a sick and horrific, totally against the idea of customer service, promoting and earning business and profits, mess of deranged conduct and behavior I was being forced to deal with, that it all was, after all I had been required to schedule and appointment and was there for the appointment, but they did not get that most-fundamental element of the equation. Yet I had an appointment, huh? Please oblige what is allowed, constitutes or can or cannot occur in an appointment? Later, I told XXXX  or XXXX, and I recall both: how for example did XXXX  not know I was asking XXXX  for a XXXX  because I had a XXXX, or that I was not feeling well or that I wanted to make a deposit with BOA? Truth be told, how did XXXX  know, or not know that I was saying, or wasn't saying, that I was having chest pain or cold sweats, or feeling light-headed and to please call an ambulance? \"DONT WORRY ABOUT IT.\"...is what XXXX  had shouted, despite my still being there for a schedule meeting, for a meeting and for unprovided information, from afar. Eventually, after I had been sitting there for many minutes, the taller lady, XXXX  from the day before, walks up and says that she is going to get an Associate to help. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX First, I did not ask for an associate, next I did not ask for BOA service, and also I was there and had been there for ML, obviously, so what in the world was the BOA up to, or trying to do. What was the Associate, actually a non-ML but also a young female, for the record which I think should be noted, going to do, answer ML account questions or provide ML account information through or with a computer or record system that the Associate could not access and for a banking entity, ML, that the Associate did not even work for? Just the day before, as the Branch Manager knew, I had expressed the reason for seeking ML information, and the BM knew the subject and content. What exactly was the \"associate's\", again a young female which should be noted in this report for other concerning reasons, role either for BOA, ML, or for my ML appointment, then? Plus, I repeated to XXXX, as I had done to XXXX, that I sought the Branch Manager...At XXXX XXXX  - truly whoever this lady is who never stated her reason or purpose for talking with me, or her title, or whether she was with ML or BOA, asked - without stated purpose or reason - for my name and phone number, which I did not provide to her. What does she care? She's not the XXXX Manager, is with Bank of America and not ML, and did not tell me why she sought or requested (but obviously did not need) such information. I tell XXXX that the Dude, no not in the XXXX XXXX, had unsafely and errantly begun, verbally and aggressively, full account and customer-identifying discussions despite no verification, did not ask how he could \"help\" - important point: No, He never asked how he could \"help\" or what the reason for my being there or the appointment was, but he also refused physically to stay away from me in the lobby, and encroached in my face, too. Also, he criticized without verification, confirmation or effort to correct the alleged phone number obsession he apparently also had, and the fact that he \"tried to call both numbers but neither worked.\" Well, in my meeting with XXXX  the day before we had corrected the contact information, so there should not have been a second phone number. But, again, I had email too since apparently there are carrier-problems with the phone? At approximately XXXX  and to XXXX, the taller lady and also the safety-box lady from the day before, was told by me, again, that: \"I had a XXXXK with Merrill Lynch and want to know all about it, its contributions and if or however, it exists.\" I did tell XXXX  how commended she should be for dealing with the guy from yesterday, who had an armful of objects and items in both arms that he'd retrieved from his safety boxes, but I also told her how bad I felt for the verbal abuse that the ML unleased on the BOA staff, in the BOA building, in public. I said, despite bad or good service, you all do not deserve to have to deal with that madness. Twice during my wait for the XXXX  Director, I was told that she, XXXX  I guess, was in the back on the phone with a Client. XXXX  talked to, two of her staff told me, the Client for a long time while I sat in the chair, and also while the staff really waned me to leave and to get a phone call, instead, from XXXX, again who is not ML. Finally, and at appx. XXXX I told XXXX  that is, as I recall - but I told at least one person and it was either XXXX  and or XXXX: (with all the dilydallying and confused and overlapping staff and companies, too) I was going to have to start charging for my time. At first I asked her about minimum wage, but she did not accept or decline that, but since I was allowed to keep sitting there and with nothing happening and nothing from ML and no Manager showing up, apparently that was okay and I was operating with accepted and reasonable terms and expectations. So, maybe she didn't think there was much value or worth in that figure, and thought it should be more or less for my time and the complained abuse, and duress and emotional stress, and overall publicized staff insanity, but I was thinking I should be paid for the whole experience with a higher dollar figure, and still do. I do not know, but that is also not my purview, or decision to officially make. Nonetheless, I have documented that, as of confirmed XXXX  and while telling XXXX who was standing to my left, I placed the bank on a type of verbal notice that, at that point and assuming all that was said, happened, occurred, been refused, and even physically happened, I was charging money for my time. Oddly, while XXXX  who probably was not too fond of herself being rudely interrupted when talking to a customer, she was blurtingly and coldly, in my view, interrupted from...the Associate, XXXX. \"Sorry to interrupt, but...\" and she just begins talking without even asking her own co-worker, XXXX, if she can interrupt. Just before the interruption by the unhinged XXXX, XXXX  said that, regarding Merrill Lynch, \"the Market Manager is going to call you. The Branch Manager is still on the phone in the back.\" She does not even say who the Market Manager is, or what there name is, or whether they are with BOA or Merrill Lynch, or with the Arizona region or the Texas region, or even about what the Market Manager is going to call. I replied by saying that \"I am going only to talk to the Branch Manager, and since it'll be a couple hours before the Market Manager is going to call....\" I just chuckled, for one basic reason being that I had not strolled in but, still at at time, was only there physically for an appointment. Also what disturbed me, and I told XXXX  this, is that a XXXX XXXX worker is caught in the middle of ML shouting, Associate interruptions and repeated call-back games. Appropriately, both leave but since XXXX  did so, courtesy of the invasive Associate's interruption, I yield to BOA and ML, or BOA or ML, and my advisors what that means for the requested compensation. Moving on...Still sitting there, I walked at some point over to the Associates desk, and I walked behind her desk too, which is totally fine and not illegal particularly because that, what a joke, is where the business cards were that are for aspiring and interested customers, and picked up both of the two cards: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who is the Officer or Financial Center Assistant Manager, 2XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  I am not presently sure, but I do not think the Associate's card was behind that desk, which clearly is not for any one person but is a multi-staff station. The Associate was standing behind the counter and as I stood behind the desk, which was in the lobby and 25' away, and in plain sight of all customers included, I lifted up to show her only what I had done which was to get, drumroll, two business cards...which are not for any staff but only for customers. The staff know their contact information(s). XXXX minutes later, the Associate, XXXX, walks by me, despite my having told everyone for my reason for being there, and at that point what I requested and required, and stands over me to my left arm and says: \"Are you ready to meet?\" Wow. I asked if she was the Associate, and she replied: \"yes.\" My response while remaining seated was the instruction: \"Please leave me alone, I already asked for and only for a Branch Manager; so please and you knew that from before and know that, leave me alone.\" Finally and at XXXX XXXX walks out from the back bowels of the building, perhaps where the drive-through station actually is and/or where she had spent the last appx. XXXX minutes, and sits down. At one point I asked her if she was recording the conversations and she replied that \"no, that is not legal.\" When XXXX  walked up, which was finally after the unleashed staff had probably become exhausted amidst and amongst their inhumane, sporting and taunting and provocative activities and gigs, XXXX  said something so interesting: \"Hi XXXX, its me XXXX, the same person that met with you yesterday.\" I thought: Oh my....got it, XXXX, what does that matter, meaning an attempt at a refresher course of that, over a separate issue which involved the ordering of statements, we met yesterday. But, still, I was concerned at who, exactly, was truly the Location's manager, and I ask this because the emails said that, actually, XXXX  was not ultimately the Manager. Either way, despite all that had occurred, XXXX  first and best was to remind me, as she saw fit, that we had met yesterday. She wound up sitting down in the chair to my right, or remaining standing but still without any inquiry as to what had happened, so I repeated it. I summarized and broke down the timeline. She just gazed. Truly all signs did indicated to me, and I mean no ill-will, that even she was apathetic to, in that case, regulations, banking and customer rights, the fact that a required appointment, itself, was the only reason I was there, and any/all other factors  that had or might have legally been going with all that. Then I told her, candidly and sincerely, that I truly believe a case could be made that a bank had robbed me, I said exactly that the bank had robbed me, to name a few, of time, transparency, information, safely-guarded energy, and all of the above that was not just financial in nature. I told her that, no, \"the Market Manager cannot call me until further notice due to all that transpired today.\" I do believe I also told her about my billing for the time, but I also told her that, for all those reasons. Thank you XXXXF for being available and providing the intermediating service that you do.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-01T19:44:43.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"89101","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8461336","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2024-03-01T19:26:08.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["That, folks, is <em>what</em> he did and <em>what</em> happened, but I am not in charge, do not know <em>what</em> they do during their required, schedule meetings and also in this eery and seemingly-undisciplined branch. \"Yeah, that's me.\" again was the identity confirmation...He said that he looked and all I <em>have</em>, not all he could find, but all I <em>have</em>, is <em>what</em> he said, is an XXXX account with Merrill XXXX."]},"sort":[7.1717443,"8461336"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4003724","_score":6.2940435,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, Please find my follow up Complaint against XXXX XXXX who stole my property and my money though the chain of fictitious intermediaries who posed as Lenders ( XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX and fake Servicer Wells Fargo whose employees very professionally lie to Federal Authorities and defrauded by XXXX XXXX XXXX homeowners. \nI demand XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and Wells Fargoto provide me accounting for the money proceeds from the sale and PROOF that these money were entrusted to XXXX XXXX as Trustee and Board of Directors ; and deposited in XXXX Trust XXXX XXXX account. \nI also demand a copy of releases of ANY liens after the sale since I became a victim of another racketeering activity by fake Servicer XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX who tried to collect from me on behalf of non-disclosed creditor AFTER my stolen property was illegally sold by XXXX XXXX who did not even knew who was his clients since all instructions were provided by the same XXXX XXXX XXXX system who hired lawyers to commit fraud upon the Court and perjuries. \nUnder the law, EVEN IF the real default happened, the supposed creditor still must provide proof of any damages as well as satisfaction of the debt. None of it was ever provided to me. Not even purportedly original Note ( forged by XXXX XXXX ) Thus far, the banks have been selling property and then depositing the cash into an account controlled by a concealed investment bank notwithstanding the naming of the sham conduit claimant in whose name the foreclosure process was started. \nMy transaction with XXXX XXXX was not a loan. It was a singe-time payment for me to PERFORM SERVICES to the wit issue a Promissory Note which XXXX XXXX indefinitely sold as DATA to investors who placed BETS not backed by ANY collateral. \nI was expected to return my compensation, with interest ( involuntary servitude aka SLAVERY ) plus return the property ( theft ) back to XXXX XXXX so they can defraud another homebuyer who is not in possession of stolen from me property. \nIt is not a secret anymore that XXXX XXXX  Banks operate a giant criminal scheme, which created XXXX Crash which resulted in over {$31.00} XXXX bailouts for non-damaged parties ( like {$50.00} XXXX bailout to XXXX which in fact went to XXXX XXXX as a pure profit ) and millions of illegal foreclosures by Big Banks as additional revenue. Now they collapsed the economy again - and nobody on the Government level is even talking about it. \nThe banks have been siphoning off trillions of dollars from the US economy for over 20 years. The level of Mayhem generated by the banks is virtually beyond human comprehension. But as a reference point for the scope of their illegal activities, consider this : there is about XXXX XXXX in XXXX currency worldwide. that is all the money there is. But the shadow banking market, which had XXXX in XXXX, now is estimated by most analysts to be in excess of {$1.00} quadrillion more than 15 times all the money in the world.\n\nThat makes the banks who make a market in this nominal stuff ( but treated as cash equivalents ) in a position far beyond the ability of anyone who wants to regulate them or otherwise keep their abuses in check. And the fact that much of the money that was siphoned out of the US economy is sitting in various off-shore locations makes control over the banks virtually impossible across political borders. \nWith no control, the banks will not just do the same, they will escalate because that is what they do. It is already apparent that the availability of credit has lured workers into allowing their wages to be replaced by debt. At this point, the XXXX XXXX banks are in a position where they could and no doubt will find ways to present incentives for US consumers to take on more debt that in actuality is a wage for services rendered. The service rendered by consumers is issuing the necessary paperwork to establish a reference data point against which investors can place bets. The revenue from selling such bets is literally infinite. \nMeanwhile, the consumer who was lured into such transactions without knowledge of the real transaction is stuck with overpriced assets and is lured into strategies that create the illusion of delinquency, default, judgment, and sale of the property encumbered by liens. \nAll of this happens because consumers believe they are taking on loans went in fact they have become partners in a business scheme in which consumers receive none of the profits and assume all of the risk of loss. \nYet, Banks lawyer appear in the Courts when they try to get the money back that they paid to homeowners in exchange for starting a series of transactions in which unregulated securities were sold, on an infinite basis, to investors who were betting on future announcements of data performance by the issuer doing business under the name of a legally nonexistent trust because nothing had actually been entrusted to the named trustee of the named trust and LIE non-stop while none of the lawyers do not even know who is their actual clients all instructions are provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX. \nIn plain language all such assertions were false and all evidence of default was equally false. Such sales and the orders and judgments that permitted them were and remain void for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction. Such court actions are ultra vires. \n\nThese illegal acts do not ripen with time. They are still void. It is the same with any wild deed. The money proceeds from such sales were paid to parties who neither intended nor received the money to reduce any debt owed by the homeowner ( s ). This was a for profit venture that succeeded by deceit, camouflage, manipulation and fabrication of documents, and false testimony. \n\nThe courts have permitted this false securitization venture and false foreclosure venture to continue under the erroneous belief that the proceeds of foreclosure sales would eventually find their way into the hands of someone who had a loss arising from the failure or refusal of homeowners to make scheduled payments in accordance with a promissory note that was executed at the time of the closing of the transaction with the homeowners. This assumption was and remains completely and utterly false. \n\nNeither the debt nor the owner of any debt owed by the homeowner existed at the time of the foreclosure. The filing of such foreclosures was a malicious attempt to cover up a fraudulent scheme that was part direct fraud on investors and homeowners, and part Ponzi scheme. \n\nThe goal of foreclosure was XXXX a ) to perpetuate the illusion of an existing established loan account receivable on the books and records of a valid legal creditor and ( b XXXX to generate funds for the foreclosure players including but not limited to some of the securitization players. In effect, each such foreclosure was a bonus lawsuit i.e., where the proceeds were used to pay bonuses and other compensation to people and companies who assisted in the scheme. \n\nLike other institutionalized practices in this countrys history that were eventually revoked and abandoned as abhorrent to simple notions of decency, law, justice and equity, the time has come for the courts to exercise their independence from executive policy and to apply the laws as they have existed for hundreds of years. \nYet, Big Banks lawyers continue to present FALSE statements ( Lies and Perjuries ) to the Courts, along with forged documents, and in 99 % walk away with someones stolen home and all the money when they reinforce the myth that the debts exist and that there is a creditor who owns the debt. In fact, the process referred to as securitization is a process of liquidating any entry on the ledger of any company on which a receivable had appeared. \nThe money never goes to the named claimant where the alleged claim was based upon securitization of the debt because the loan, debt, note, and mortgage were never securitized. ( Securitization means breaking up an asset into component parts that are sold to investors in pro-rata shares. Such sales never occurred. Securities were sold but they did not represent an ownership interest in any asset. ) Thus, Federal Reserves unlimited purchases of Mortgage Backed Securities ( over {$2.00} XXXX ) is another lie to keep this myth floating through the Courts. XXXX, XXXX and XXXX did not purchased any loans simply because here was no one who can sell them. All their Prospectuses are based on forward-looking statements such as we will, we shall but never we did. Moreover, GSEs and other Propsectuses specifically state that their securities are not related to mortgages. \nAll so-called mortgages ( data about borrowers identity ) is processed via Federal Reserve Depository Trust Corporation who assign them to XXXX XXXX XXXX Big Banks sell BETS on performance of DATA which they control without any supervision. \nXXXX XXXX Transactions with Homeowners and other borrowers are Not Loans. \nIt is incomprehensible to most people how they could get a loan and then not owe it. It is even more incomprehensible that there could be no creditor that could enforce any alleged obligation of the homeowner. After all, the homeowner signed a note which by itself creates an obligation. \nNone of this seems to make sense. Yet on an intuitive level, most people understand that they got screwed in what they thought was a lending process. The reason for this disconnect is that most people have no reason to know what happens in the world of investment banking. \n\nFirst, every investment banker is merely a stockbroker. They do business with investors and other investment bankers. They do not do business with consumers who purchase goods and services or loans. The investment banker is generally not in the business of lending money. The investment banker is in the business of creating capital for new and existing businesses. They make their money by brokering transactions. They make the most money by brokering the sales of new securities including stocks and bonds. \n\nThe compensation received by the investment banker for brokering a transaction varied from as little as 1 % or 2 % to as much as 20 %. The difference is whether they were brokering the sale of existing securities or underwriting new securities. Obviously, they had a very large incentive to broker the sale of new securities for which they would receive 7 to 10 times the compensation of brokering the sale of existing securities. \n\nBut the Holy Grail of investment banking was devising some system in which the investment bank could issue a new security from a fictional entity and receive the entire proceeds of the offering. This is what happened in residential lending. And this way, they could receive 100 % of the offering instead of a brokerage commission. \n\nBut as youll see below, by disconnecting the issuance of securities from the ownership of any perceived obligation from consumers, investment bankers put themselves in a position in which they could issue securities indefinitely without limit and without regard to the amount of the transaction with consumers ( homeowners ) or investors. \n\nIn short, the goal was to make it appear as though loans have been securitized even know they had not been securitized. In order for any asset to have been securitized it would need to have been sold off in parts to investors. What we see in the residential market is that no such sale ever occurred. Under modern law, a sale consists of offer, acceptance, payment, and delivery. So neither the investment bank nor any of the investors to whom they had sold securities, ever received a conveyance of any right, title, or interest to any debt, note, or mortgage from a homeowner. \n\nAt the end of the day, the world was convinced that the homeowner had entered into a loan transaction while the investment banker had assured itself and its investors that it would be free from liability for violation of any lending laws as a lender. \n\nNeither of them maintained a loan account receivable on their own ledgers even though the capital used to pay homeowners originated from banks who loaned money to investment bankers ( based upon sales of certificates to investors ), which was then used to pay homeowners as little as possible from the pool of capital generated by the loans and certificate sales of mortgage-backed bonds. \n\nFrom the perspective of the investment banker, payment was made to the homeowner in exchange for participation in creating the illusion of a loan transaction despite the fact that there was no lender and no loan account. This was covered up by having more intermediaries claim rights as servicers and the creation of payment histories that implied but never asserted the existence or establishment of a loan account. Of course, they would need to dodge any questions relating to the identification of a creditor. That could be no creditor if there was no loan account. This tactic avoided perjury. \n\nOf course, this could only be accomplished through deceit. The consumer or homeowner, government regulators, and the world at large, would need to be convinced that the homeowner had entered into a secured loan transaction, even though no such thing had occurred. From the investment bankers perspective, they were paying the homeowner as little money as possible in order to create the foundation for their illusion. \n\nBy calling it securitization of loans and selling it that way, they were able to create the illusion successfully. They were able to maintain the illusion because only the investment bankers had the information that would show that there was no business entity that maintained a ledger entry showing ownership of any debt, note, or mortgage against which losses and gains could or would be posted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ( and law ). This is called asymmetry of information and a great deal has been written on these pages and by many other authors. \n\nSince the homeowner had asked for a loan and had received money, it never occurred to any homeowner that he/she was not being paid for a loan or loan documents, but rather was being paid for a service. In order for the transaction to be perceived as a loan obviously, the homeowner had to become obligated to repay the money that had been paid to the homeowner. While this probably negated the consideration paid for the services rendered by the homeowner, nobody was any the wiser. \n\nAs shown below, the initial sale of the initial certificates was only the beginning of an infinite supply of capital flowing to the investment bank who only had to pay off intermediaries to keep them in the fold. By virtue of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in XXXX, none of the certificates were regulated as securities ; so disclosure was a matter of proving fraud ( without any information ) in private actions rather than compliance with any statute. Further, the same investment banks were issuing and trading hedge contracts based upon the performance of the certificates as reported by the investment bank in its sole discretion. \n\nIt was a closed market, free from any free market forces. The theory under which XXXX XXXX, Fed Chairman, was operating was that free-market forces would make any necessary corrections, This blind assumption prevented any further analysis of the concealed business plan of the investment banks a mistake that XXXX later acknowledged. \n\nThere was no free market. Neither homeowners nor investors knew what they were getting themselves into. And based upon the level of litigation that emerged after the crash of XXXX, it is safe to say that the investors and homeowners were deprived of any bargaining position ( because the main aspects for their transition were being misrepresented and concealed ), Both should have received substantially more compensation and would have bargained for it assuming they were willing to even enter into the transaction highly doubtful assumption. \n\nThe investment banks also purchased insurance contracts with extremely rare clauses basically awarding themselves payment for nonexistent losses upon their own declaration of an event relating to the performance of unregulated securities. So between the proceeds from the issuance of certificates and hedge contracts and the proceeds of insurance contracts investment bankers were generally able to generate at least {$12.00} for each {$1.00} that was paid to homeowners and around {$8.00} for each {$1.00} invested by investors in purchasing the certificates. \n\nSo the end result was that the investment banker was able to pay homeowners without any risk of loss on that transaction while at the same time generating capital or revenue far in excess of any payment to the homeowner. Were it not for the need for maintaining the illusion of a loan transaction, the investment banks couldve easily passed on the opportunity to enforce the obligation allegedly due from homeowners. They had already made their money. \n\nThere was no loss to be posted against any account on any ledger of any company if any homeowner decided not to pay the alleged obligation ( which was merely the return of the consideration paid for the homeowners services ). But that did not stop the investment banks from making claims for a bailout and making deals for loss sharing on loans they did not own and never owned. No such losses ever existed. \n\nInvestment bankers first started looking at the consumer lending market back in XXXX. But there were huge obstacles in doing so. First of all none of them wanted the potential liability for violation of lending laws that had recently been passed on both local and Federal levels ( Truth in Lending Act et al. ) So they needed to avoid classification as a lender. They achieved this goal in 2 ways. First, they did not directly do business of any kind with any consumer or homeowner. They operated strictly through intermediaries that were either real or fictional. If the intermediary was real, it was a sham conduit a company with virtually no balance sheet or income statement that could be collapsed and disappeared if the scheme ever collapsed or just hit a bump in the road. \n\nEither way, the intermediary was not really a party to the transaction with the consumer or homeowner. It did not pay the homeowner nor did it receive payments from the homeowner. It did not own any obligations from the homeowner, according to modern law, because it had never paid value for the obligation. \n\nUnder modern law, the transfer or conveyance of an interest in a mortgage without a contemporaneous transfer of ownership of the underlying obligation is a legal nullity in all states of the union. So transfers from the originator who posed as a virtual creditor do not exist in the eyes of the law if they are shown to be lacking in consideration paid for the underlying obligation, as per Article 9 203 Uniform Commercial Code, adopted in all 50 states. The transfers were merely part of the illusion of maintaining the apparent existence of the loan transaction with homeowners. \n\nAnd this brings us to the strategies to be employed by homeowners in contesting foreclosures and evictions based on foreclosures. Based upon my participation in review of thousands of cases it is always true that any question regarding the existence and ownership of the alleged obligation is treated evasively because the obligation does not exist and can not be owned. \n\nIn court, the failure to respond to such questions that are posed in proper form and in a timely manner is the foundation for the victory of the homeowner. Although there is a presumption of ownership derived from claims of delivery and possession of the note, the proponent of that presumption may not avail itself of that presumption if it fails to answer questions relating to rebutting the presumption of existence and ownership of the underlying obligation. Such cases usually ( not always ) result in either judgment for the homeowner or settlement with the homeowner on very favorable terms. \n\nThe homeowner is not getting away with anything or getting a free house as the investment banks have managed to insert into public discourse. \n\nThey are receiving just compensation for their participation in this game in which they were drafted without their knowledge or consent. Considering the 1200 % gain enjoyed by the investment banks which was enabled by the homeowners participation, the 8 % payment to the homeowner seems only fair. Further, if somehow the homeowners apparent obligation to pay the investment bank survives, it is subject to reformation, accounting, and computation as to the true balance and whether it is secured or not. \n\nThe obligation to repay the consideration paid by the investment bank ( through intermediaries ) seems to be a negation of the consideration paid. If that is true, then there is neither a loan contract nor a securities contract. There is no contract because in all cases the offer and acceptance were based upon different terms ( and different deliveries ) without either consideration or execution of the terns expected by the homeowner under the advertised loan contract. \nPayments By Homeowners Do Not Reduce Loan Accounts Each time that a homeowner makes a payment, he or she is perpetuating the myth that they are part of an enforceable loan agreement. There is no loan agreement if there was no intention for anyone to be a lender and if no loan account receivable was established on the books of any business. The same result applies when a loan is originated in the traditional way but then acquired by a successor. The funding is the same as what is described above. The loan account receivable in the acquisition scenario is eliminated. \nOnce the transaction is entered as a reference data point for securitization it no longer exists in form or substance. \nFor the past 20 years, most homeowners have been making payments to companies that said they were servicers. Even at the point of a judicial gun ( court order ) these companies will fail or refuse to disclose what they do with the money after receipt. Because of lockbox contracts, these companies rarely have any access to pools of money that were generated through payments from homeowners. \n\nLike their counterparts in the origination of transactions with homeowners, they are sham conduits. Like the originators, they are built to be thrown under the bus when the scheme implodes. They will not report to you the identity of the party to whom they forward payments that they have received from homeowners because they have not received the payments from homeowners and they dont know where the money goes. \n* As I have described in some detail in other articles on this blog, with the help of some contributors, the actual accounting for payments received from homeowners is performed by third-party vendors, mostly under the control of XXXX XXXX. Through a series of sham conduit transfers, the pool of money ends up in companies controlled by the investment bank. Some of the money is retained domestically while some is recorded as an offshore off-balance-sheet transaction. \n\nIn order to maintain an active market in which new certificates can be sold to investors, discretionary payments are made to investors who purchase the certificates. The money comes from two main sources. \n\nOne source is payments made by homeowners and the other source is payments made by the investment bank regardless of whether or not they receive payments from the homeowners. The latter payments are referred to as servicer advances. Those payments come from a reserve pool established at the time of sale of the certificates to the investors, consisting of their own money, plus contributions from the investment bank funded by the sales of new certificates. They are not servicer advances. They are neither in advance nor did they come from a servicer. \n\nSince there is no loan account receivable owned by anyone, payments received from homeowners are not posted to such an account nor to the benefit of any owner of such an account ( or the underlying obligation ). Instead, accounting for such payments are either reported as return of capital or trading profits. In fact, such payments are neither return of capital nor trading profit. Since the investment bank has already zeroed out any potential loan account receivable, the only correct treatment of the payment for accounting purposes would be revenue. This includes the indirect receipt of proceeds from the forced sale of property in alleged foreclosures. \n\nBy retaining total control over the accounting treatment for receipt of money from investors and homeowners, the investment bank retains total control over how much taxable income it reports. At present, most of the money that was received by the investment bank as part of this revenue scheme is still sitting offshore in various accounts and controlled companies. It is repatriated as needed for the purpose of reporting revenue and net income for investment banks whose stock is traded on the open market. By some fairly reliable estimates, the amount of money held by investment banks offshore is at least {$3.00} XXXX. In my opinion, the amount is much larger than that. \n\nAs a baseline for corroboration of some of the estimates and projections contained in this article and many others, we should consider the difference between the current amount of all the fiat money in the world and the number and dollar amount of cash-equivalents in the shadow banking market. In XXXX, the number and dollar amount of such cash equivalents was zero. Today it is {$1.00} quadrillion around 15-20 times the amount of currency.\n\nIn the final analysis, if the truth was fully revealed, each foreclosure involves a foreclosure lawyer who does not have any idea whose interest he/she is representing. They may know that they are being paid from an account titled in the name of the self-proclaimed servicer. And because of that, they will often saying that they represent the servicer. They are pretty careful about not specifically saying that the named plaintiff in a judicial foreclosure or the named beneficiary in a nonjudicial foreclosure is their client. That is because they have no retainer agreement or even a relationship with the named plaintiff or the named beneficiary. Such lawyers have generally never spoken with anyone employed by the named plaintiff or the named beneficiary. \n\nWhen such lawyers and self-proclaimed servicers go to court-ordered mediation, neither one has the authority to do anything except show up. Proving that the lawyer does not actually represent the named trustee of the fictitious trust can be very challenging. \n\nIf you find the cases in which investors have sued the named trustee of the alleged XXXX trust for failure to take action that wouldve protected the interest of the investors meaning that the trustee does not represent the investors, the investors are not beneficiaries of the XXXX, and that the trustee has no authority, right, title, or interest over any transaction with homeowners. Since the named trustee has no powers of a trustee to administer the affairs of any active trust with assets or a business operating, it is by definition not a trustee. For purposes of the foreclosure, it can not be a named party either much less the client of the attorney, behind whom the securitization players are hiding because of a judicial doctrine called judicial immunity. \n\nIf you ask whether the lawyer who shows up is representing for example XXXX XXXX. Or you might ask whether XXXX XXXX is the client of the lawyer. The answer might surprise you. In some cases, the lawyer insisted that they represented XXXX or some other self-proclaimed servicer. \n\nI am writing to you because In less than XXXX days, most moratoriums on foreclosures will expire, unless they are extended. That means that hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of foreclosures will be filed or completed over the next year. And just like the XXXX meltdown, the securities brokerage firms that call themselves investment banks will be swarming like maggots over the carcass of millions of lives for demand back money received by homeowners was an inducement to enter into a concealed transaction in which the homeowner was not intended to receive any benefits. \n\nBorrowers asked for a loan but never received a loan. It was not part of a loan agreement because the money was received from players who had no intention of being lenders subject to statute and who had no intention of maintaining a loan account receivable against which payments could be received and posted. \nThe attempt to get payment from homeowners is a concealed attempt to zero out the consideration paid to the homeowner for the concealed transaction. \nIn short, the homeowner was attempting to purchase a loan with the note and mortgage but didnt get it. And the money paid to the homeowner was only temporary consideration for a concealed transaction in which the players received all the benefit and the homeowner took all the concealed risks. \nAnd just like the XXXX crash, the impact of the new wave of foreclosures and evictions based on such foreclosures will be felt for years to come. The full impact of the COVID pandemic wont be known for a long time. It could result in many more people falling into the grasp of greedy XXXX XXXX bankers.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-12-22T11:38:01.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"606XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4003724","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2020-12-10T07:30:36.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This was covered up by <em>having</em> more intermediaries claim rights as servicers and the creation of payment histories that implied but never asserted the existence or establishment of a loan account. Of <em>course</em>, they would need to dodge any questions relating to the identification of a creditor. That could be no creditor if there was no loan account. This tactic avoided perjury. \n\nOf <em>course</em>, this could only be accomplished through deceit."]},"sort":[6.2940435,"4003724"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4003729","_score":6.264202,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, Please find my follow up Complaint against XXXX XXXX who stole my property and my money though the chain of fictitious intermediaries who posed as Lenders ( XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX and fake Servicer XXXX XXXX whose employees very professionally lie to Federal Authorities and defrauded by XXXX XXXX XXXX homeowners. \nI demand XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXXto provide me accounting for the money proceeds from the sale and PROOF that these money were entrusted to XXXX XXXX as Trustee and Board of Directors ; and deposited in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account. \nI also demand a copy of releases of ANY liens after the sale since I became a victim of another racketeering activity by fake Servicer Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC who tried to collect from me on behalf of non-disclosed creditor AFTER my stolen property was illegally sold by XXXX XXXX who did not even knew who was his clients since all instructions were provided by the same XXXX XXXX XXXX system who hired lawyers to commit fraud upon the Court and perjuries. \nUnder the law, EVEN IF the real default happened, the supposed creditor still must provide proof of any damages as well as satisfaction of the debt. None of it was ever provided to me. Not even purportedly original Note ( forged by XXXX XXXX ) Thus far, the banks have been selling property and then depositing the cash into an account controlled by a concealed investment bank notwithstanding the naming of the sham conduit claimant in whose name the foreclosure process was started. \nMy transaction with XXXX XXXX was not a loan. It was a singe-time payment for me to PERFORM SERVICES to the wit issue a Promissory Note which XXXX XXXX indefinitely sold as DATA to investors who placed BETS not backed by ANY collateral. \nI was expected to return my compensation, with interest ( involuntary servitude aka XX/XX/XXXX) plus return the property ( theft ) back to XXXX XXXX so they can defraud another homebuyer who is not in possession of stolen from me property. \nIt is not a secret anymore that Wall Street Banks operate a giant criminal scheme, which created XXXX Crash which resulted in over {$31.00} XXXX bailouts for non-damaged parties ( like {$50.00} XXXX bailout to XXXX which in fact went to XXXX XXXX as a pure profit ) and millions of illegal foreclosures by Big Banks as additional revenue. Now they collapsed the economy again - and nobody on the Government level is even talking about it. \nThe banks have been siphoning off trillions of dollars from the US economy for over 20 years. The level of Mayhem generated by the banks is virtually beyond human comprehension. But as a reference point for the scope of their illegal activities, consider this : there is about XXXX XXXX in XXXX currency worldwide. that is all the money there is. But the shadow banking market, which had zero in XXXX, now is estimated by most analysts to be in excess of {$1.00} quadrillion more than 15 times all the money in the world. \nThat makes the banks who make a market in this nominal stuff ( but treated as cash equivalents ) in a position far beyond the ability of anyone who wants to regulate them or otherwise keep their abuses in check. And the fact that much of the money that was siphoned out of the US economy is sitting in various off-shore locations makes control over the banks virtually impossible across political borders. \nWith no control, the banks will not just do the same, they will escalate because that is what they do. It is already apparent that the availability of credit has lured workers into allowing their wages to be replaced by debt. At this point, the Wall Street banks are in a position where they could and no doubt will find ways to present incentives for US consumers to take on more debt that in actuality is a wage for services rendered. The service rendered by consumers is issuing the necessary paperwork to establish a reference data point against which investors can place bets. The revenue from selling such bets is literally infinite. \nMeanwhile, the consumer who was lured into such transactions without knowledge of the real transaction is stuck with overpriced assets and is lured into strategies that create the illusion of delinquency, default, judgment, and sale of the property encumbered by liens. \nAll of this happens because consumers believe they are taking on loans went in fact they have become partners in a business scheme in which consumers receive none of the profits and assume all of the risk of loss. \nYet, Banks lawyer appear in the Courts when they try to get the money back that they paid to homeowners in exchange for starting a series of transactions in which unregulated securities were sold, on an infinite basis, to investors who were betting on future announcements of data performance by the issuer doing business under the name of a legally nonexistent trust because nothing had actually been entrusted to the named trustee of the named trust and LIE non-stop while none of the lawyers do not even know who is their actual clients all instructions are provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX. \nIn plain language all such assertions were false and all evidence of default was equally false. Such sales and the orders and judgments that permitted them were and remain void for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction. Such court actions are ultra vires. \n\nThese illegal acts do not ripen with time. They are still void. It is the same with any wild deed. The money proceeds from such sales were paid to parties who neither intended nor received the money to reduce any debt owed by the homeowner ( s ). This was a for profit venture that succeeded by deceit, camouflage, manipulation and fabrication of documents, and false testimony. \n\nThe courts have permitted this false securitization venture and false foreclosure venture to continue under the erroneous belief that the proceeds of foreclosure sales would eventually find their way into the hands of someone who had a loss arising from the failure or refusal of homeowners to make scheduled payments in accordance with a promissory note that was executed at the time of the closing of the transaction with the homeowners. This assumption was and remains completely and utterly false. \n\nNeither the debt nor the owner of any debt owed by the homeowner existed at the time of the foreclosure. The filing of such foreclosures was a malicious attempt to cover up a fraudulent scheme that was part direct fraud on investors and homeowners, and part Ponzi scheme. \n\nThe goal of foreclosure was ( a ) to perpetuate the illusion of an existing established loan account receivable on the books and records of a valid legal creditor and ( b ) to generate funds for the foreclosure players including but not limited to some of the securitization players. In effect, each such foreclosure was a bonus lawsuit i.e., where the proceeds were used to pay bonuses and other compensation to people and companies who assisted in the scheme. \n\nLike other institutionalized practices in this countrys history that were eventually revoked and abandoned as abhorrent to simple notions of decency, law, justice and equity, the time has come for the courts to exercise their independence from executive policy and to apply the laws as they have existed for hundreds of years.\n\nYet, Big Banks lawyers continue to present FALSE statements ( Lies and Perjuries ) to the Courts, along with forged documents, and in 99 % walk away with someones stolen home and all the money when they reinforce the myth that the debts exist and that there is a creditor who owns the debt. In fact, the process referred to as securitization is a process of liquidating any entry on the ledger of any company on which a receivable had appeared. \nThe money never goes to the named claimant where the alleged claim was based upon securitization of the debt because the loan, debt, note, and mortgage were never securitized. ( Securitization means breaking up an asset into component parts that are sold to investors in pro-rata shares. Such sales never occurred. Securities were sold but they did not represent an ownership interest in any asset. ) Thus, Federal Reserves unlimited purchases of Mortgage Backed Securities ( over {$2.00} XXXX ) is another lie to keep this myth floating through the Courts. XXXX, XXXX and XXXX did not purchased any loans simply because here was no one who can sell them. All their Prospectuses are based on forward-looking statements such as we will, we shall but never we did. Moreover, GSEs and other Propsectuses specifically state that their securities are not related to mortgages. \nAll so-called mortgages ( data about borrowers identity ) is processed via Federal Reserve Depository Trust Corporation who assign them to XXXX XXXX XXXX Big Banks sell BETS on performance of DATA which they control without any supervision. \nWall Street Transactions with Homeowners and other borrowers are Not Loans. \nIt is incomprehensible to most people how they could get a loan and then not owe it. It is even more incomprehensible that there could be no creditor that could enforce any alleged obligation of the homeowner. After all, the homeowner signed a note which by itself creates an obligation. \nNone of this seems to make sense. Yet on an intuitive level, most people understand that they got screwed in what they thought was a lending process. The reason for this disconnect is that most people have no reason to know what happens in the world of investment banking. \n\nFirst, every investment banker is merely a stockbroker. They do business with investors and other investment bankers. They do not do business with consumers who purchase goods and services or loans. The investment banker is generally not in the business of lending money. The investment banker is in the business of creating capital for new and existing businesses. They make their money by brokering transactions. They make the most money by brokering the sales of new securities including stocks and bonds. \n\nThe compensation received by the investment banker for brokering a transaction varied from as little as 1 % or 2 % to as much as 20 %. The difference is whether they were brokering the sale of existing securities or underwriting new securities. Obviously, they had a very large incentive to broker the sale of new securities for which they would receive 7 to 10 times the compensation of brokering the sale of existing securities. \n\nBut the Holy Grail of investment banking was devising some system in which the investment bank could issue a new security from a fictional entity and receive the entire proceeds of the offering. This is what happened in residential lending. And this way, they could receive 100 % of the offering instead of a brokerage commission. \n\nBut as youll see below, by disconnecting the issuance of securities from the ownership of any perceived obligation from consumers, investment bankers put themselves in a position in which they could issue securities indefinitely without limit and without regard to the amount of the transaction with consumers ( homeowners ) or investors. \n\nIn short, the goal was to make it appear as though loans have been securitized even know they had not been securitized. In order for any asset to have been securitized it would need to have been sold off in parts to investors. What we see in the residential market is that no such sale ever occurred. Under modern law, a sale consists of offer, acceptance, payment, and delivery. So neither the investment bank nor any of the investors to whom they had sold securities, ever received a conveyance of any right, title, or interest to any debt, note, or mortgage from a homeowner. \n\nAt the end of the day, the world was convinced that the homeowner had entered into a loan transaction while the investment banker had assured itself and its investors that it would be free from liability for violation of any lending laws as a lender. \n\nNeither of them maintained a loan account receivable on their own ledgers even though the capital used to pay homeowners originated from banks who loaned money to investment bankers ( based upon sales of certificates to investors ), which was then used to pay homeowners as little as possible from the pool of capital generated by the loans and certificate sales of mortgage-backed bonds. \n\nFrom the perspective of the investment banker, payment was made to the homeowner in exchange for participation in creating the illusion of a loan transaction despite the fact that there was no lender and no loan account. This was covered up by having more intermediaries claim rights as servicers and the creation of payment histories that implied but never asserted the existence or establishment of a loan account. Of course, they would need to dodge any questions relating to the identification of a creditor. That could be no creditor if there was no loan account. This tactic avoided perjury. \n\nOf course, this could only be accomplished through deceit. The consumer or homeowner, government regulators, and the world at large, would need to be convinced that the homeowner had entered into a secured loan transaction, even though no such thing had occurred. From the investment bankers perspective, they were paying the homeowner as little money as possible in order to create the foundation for their illusion. \n\nBy calling it securitization of loans and selling it that way, they were able to create the illusion successfully. They were able to maintain the illusion because only the investment bankers had the information that would show that there was no business entity that maintained a ledger entry showing ownership of any debt, note, or mortgage against which losses and gains could or would be posted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ( and law ). This is called asymmetry of information and a great deal has been written on these pages and by many other authors. \n\nSince the homeowner had asked for a loan and had received money, it never occurred to any homeowner that he/she was not being paid for a loan or loan documents, but rather was being paid for a service. In order for the transaction to be perceived as a loan obviously, the homeowner had to become obligated to repay the money that had been paid to the homeowner. While this probably negated the consideration paid for the services rendered by the homeowner, nobody was any the wiser. \n\nAs shown below, the initial sale of the initial certificates was only the beginning of an infinite supply of capital flowing to the investment bank who only had to pay off intermediaries to keep them in the fold. By virtue of the repeal of XXXX in XXXX, none of the certificates were regulated as securities ; so disclosure was a matter of proving fraud ( without any information ) in private actions rather than compliance with any statute. Further, the same investment banks were issuing and trading hedge contracts based upon the performance of the certificates as reported by the investment bank in its sole discretion. \n\nIt was a closed market, free from any free market forces. The theory under which XXXX XXXX, Fed Chairman, was operating was that free-market forces would make any necessary corrections, This blind assumption prevented any further analysis of the concealed business plan of the investment banks a mistake that XXXX later acknowledged. \n\nThere was no free market. Neither homeowners nor investors knew what they were getting themselves into. And based upon the level of litigation that emerged after the crash of XXXX, it is safe to say that the investors and homeowners were deprived of any bargaining position ( because the main aspects for their transition were being misrepresented and concealed ), Both should have received substantially more compensation and would have bargained for it assuming they were willing to even enter into the transaction highly doubtful assumption. \n\nThe investment banks also purchased insurance contracts with extremely rare clauses basically awarding themselves payment for nonexistent losses upon their own declaration of an event relating to the performance of unregulated securities. So between the proceeds from the issuance of certificates and hedge contracts and the proceeds of insurance contracts investment bankers were generally able to generate at least {$12.00} for each {$1.00} that was paid to homeowners and around {$8.00} for each {$1.00} invested by investors in purchasing the certificates. \n\nSo the end result was that the investment banker was able to pay homeowners without any risk of loss on that transaction while at the same time generating capital or revenue far in excess of any payment to the homeowner. Were it not for the need for maintaining the illusion of a loan transaction, the investment banks couldve easily passed on the opportunity to enforce the obligation allegedly due from homeowners. They had already made their money. \n\nThere was no loss to be posted against any account on any ledger of any company if any homeowner decided not to pay the alleged obligation ( which was merely the return of the consideration paid for the homeowners services ). But that did not stop the investment banks from making claims for a bailout and making deals for loss sharing on loans they did not own and never owned. No such losses ever existed. \n\nInvestment bankers first started looking at the consumer lending market back in XXXX. But there were huge obstacles in doing so. First of all none of them wanted the potential liability for violation of lending laws that had recently been passed on both local and Federal levels ( Truth in Lending Act et al. ) So they needed to avoid classification as a lender. They achieved this goal in 2 ways. First, they did not directly do business of any kind with any consumer or homeowner. They operated strictly through intermediaries that were either real or fictional. If the intermediary was real, it was a sham conduit a company with virtually no balance sheet or income statement that could be collapsed and disappeared if the scheme ever collapsed or just hit a bump in the road. \n\nEither way, the intermediary was not really a party to the transaction with the consumer or homeowner. It did not pay the homeowner nor did it receive payments from the homeowner. It did not own any obligations from the homeowner, according to modern law, because it had never paid value for the obligation. \n\nUnder modern law, the transfer or conveyance of an interest in a mortgage without a contemporaneous transfer of ownership of the underlying obligation is a legal nullity in all states of the union. So transfers from the originator who posed as a virtual creditor do not exist in the eyes of the law if they are shown to be lacking in consideration paid for the underlying obligation, as per Article 9 203 Uniform Commercial Code, adopted in all 50 states. The transfers were merely part of the illusion of maintaining the apparent existence of the loan transaction with homeowners. \n\nAnd this brings us to the strategies to be employed by homeowners in contesting foreclosures and evictions based on foreclosures. Based upon my participation in review of thousands of cases it is always true that any question regarding the existence and ownership of the alleged obligation is treated evasively because the obligation does not exist and can not be owned. \n\nIn court, the failure to respond to such questions that are posed in proper form and in a timely manner is the foundation for the victory of the homeowner. Although there is a presumption of ownership derived from claims of delivery and possession of the note, the proponent of that presumption may not avail itself of that presumption if it fails to answer questions relating to rebutting the presumption of existence and ownership of the underlying obligation. Such cases usually ( not always ) result in either judgment for the homeowner or settlement with the homeowner on very favorable terms. \n\nThe homeowner is not getting away with anything or getting a free house as the investment banks have managed to insert into public discourse. \n\nThey are receiving just compensation for their participation in this game in which they were drafted without their knowledge or consent. Considering the 1200 % gain enjoyed by the investment banks which was enabled by the homeowners participation, the 8 % payment to the homeowner seems only fair. Further, if somehow the homeowners apparent obligation to pay the investment bank survives, it is subject to reformation, accounting, and computation as to the true balance and whether it is secured or not. \n\nThe obligation to repay the consideration paid by the investment bank ( through intermediaries ) seems to be a negation of the consideration paid. If that is true, then there is neither a loan contract nor a securities contract. There is no contract because in all cases the offer and acceptance were based upon different terms ( and different deliveries ) without either consideration or execution of the terns expected by the homeowner under the advertised loan contract. \nPayments By Homeowners Do Not Reduce Loan Accounts Each time that a homeowner makes a payment, he or she is perpetuating the myth that they are part of an enforceable loan agreement. There is no loan agreement if there was no intention for anyone to be a lender and if no loan account receivable was established on the books of any business. The same result applies when a loan is originated in the traditional way but then acquired by a successor. The funding is the same as what is described above. The loan account receivable in the acquisition scenario is eliminated. \nOnce the transaction is entered as a reference data point for securitization it no longer exists in form or substance. \nFor the past 20 years, most homeowners have been making payments to companies that said they were servicers. Even at the point of a judicial gun ( court order ) these companies will fail or refuse to disclose what they do with the money after receipt. Because of lockbox contracts, these companies rarely have any access to pools of money that were generated through payments from homeowners. \n\nLike their counterparts in the origination of transactions with homeowners, they are sham conduits. Like the originators, they are built to be thrown under the bus when the scheme implodes. They will not report to you the identity of the party to whom they forward payments that they have received from homeowners because they have not received the payments from homeowners and they dont know where the money goes. \n* As I have described in some detail in other articles on this blog, with the help of some contributors, the actual accounting for payments received from homeowners is performed by third-party vendors, mostly under the control of XXXX XXXX. Through a series of sham conduit transfers, the pool of money ends up in companies controlled by the investment bank. Some of the money is retained domestically while some is recorded as an offshore off-balance-sheet transaction. \n\nIn order to maintain an active market in which new certificates can be sold to investors, discretionary payments are made to investors who purchase the certificates. The money comes from two main sources. \n\nOne source is payments made by homeowners and the other source is payments made by the investment bank regardless of whether or not they receive payments from the homeowners. The latter payments are referred to as servicer advances. Those payments come from a reserve pool established at the time of sale of the certificates to the investors, consisting of their own money, plus contributions from the investment bank funded by the sales of new certificates. They are not servicer advances. They are neither in advance nor did they come from a servicer. \n\nSince there is no loan account receivable owned by anyone, payments received from homeowners are not posted to such an account nor to the benefit of any owner of such an account ( or the underlying obligation ). Instead, accounting for such payments are either reported as return of capital or trading profits. In fact, such payments are neither return of capital nor trading profit. Since the investment bank has already zeroed out any potential loan account receivable, the only correct treatment of the payment for accounting purposes would be revenue. This includes the indirect receipt of proceeds from the forced sale of property in alleged foreclosures. \n\nBy retaining total control over the accounting treatment for receipt of money from investors and homeowners, the investment bank retains total control over how much taxable income it reports. At present, most of the money that was received by the investment bank as part of this revenue scheme is still sitting offshore in various accounts and controlled companies. It is repatriated as needed for the purpose of reporting revenue and net income for investment banks whose stock is traded on the open market. By some fairly reliable estimates, the amount of money held by investment banks offshore is at least {$3.00} XXXX. In my opinion, the amount is much larger than that. \n\nAs a baseline for corroboration of some of the estimates and projections contained in this article and many others, we should consider the difference between the current amount of all the fiat money in the world and the number and dollar amount of cash-equivalents in the shadow banking market. In XXXX, the number and dollar amount of such cash equivalents was XXXX. Today it is {$1.00} quadrillion around 15-20 times the amount of currency.\n\nIn the final analysis, if the truth was fully revealed, each foreclosure involves a foreclosure lawyer who does not have any idea whose interest he/she is representing. They may know that they are being paid from an account titled in the name of the self-proclaimed servicer. And because of that, they will often saying that they represent the servicer. They are pretty careful about not specifically saying that the named plaintiff in a judicial foreclosure or the named beneficiary in a nonjudicial foreclosure is their client. That is because they have no retainer agreement or even a relationship with the named plaintiff or the named beneficiary. Such lawyers have generally never spoken with anyone employed by the named plaintiff or the named beneficiary. \n\nWhen such lawyers and self-proclaimed servicers go to court-ordered mediation, neither one has the authority to do anything except show up. Proving that the lawyer does not actually represent the named trustee of the fictitious trust can be very challenging. \n\nIf you find the cases in which investors have sued the named trustee of the alleged XXXX trust for failure to take action that wouldve protected the interest of the investors meaning that the trustee does not represent the investors, the investors are not beneficiaries of the Trust, and that the trustee has no authority, right, title, or interest over any transaction with homeowners. Since the named trustee has no powers of a trustee to administer the affairs of any active trust with assets or a business operating, it is by definition not a trustee. For purposes of the foreclosure, it can not be a named party either much less the client of the attorney, behind whom the securitization players are hiding because of a judicial doctrine called judicial immunity. \n\nIf you ask whether the lawyer who shows up is representing for example XXXX XXXX. Or you might ask whether XXXX XXXX is the client of the lawyer. The answer might surprise you. In some cases, the lawyer insisted that they represented XXXX or some other self-proclaimed servicer. \n\nI am writing to you because In less than 2o days, most moratoriums on foreclosures will expire, unless they are extended. That means that hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of foreclosures will be filed or completed over the next year. And just like the XXXX meltdown, the securities brokerage firms that call themselves investment banks will be swarming like maggots over the carcass of millions of lives for demand back money received by homeowners was an inducement to enter into a concealed transaction in which the homeowner was not intended to receive any benefits. \n\nBorrowers asked for a loan but never received a loan. It was not part of a loan agreement because the money was received from players who had no intention of being lenders subject to statute and who had no intention of maintaining a loan account receivable against which payments could be received and posted. \nThe attempt to get payment from homeowners is a concealed attempt to zero out the consideration paid to the homeowner for the concealed transaction. \nIn short, the homeowner was attempting to purchase a loan with the note and mortgage but didnt get it. And the money paid to the homeowner was only temporary consideration for a concealed transaction in which the players received all the benefit and the homeowner took all the concealed risks. \nAnd just like the XXXX crash, the impact of the new wave of foreclosures and evictions based on such foreclosures will be felt for years to come. The full impact of the COVID pandemic wont be known for a long time. It could result in many more people falling into the grasp of greedy Wall Street bankers.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-01-05T13:22:44.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"606XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4003729","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","date_received":"2020-12-10T07:39:23.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This was covered up by <em>having</em> more intermediaries claim rights as servicers and the creation of payment histories that implied but never asserted the existence or establishment of a loan account. Of <em>course</em>, they would need to dodge any questions relating to the identification of a creditor. That could be no creditor if there was no loan account. This tactic avoided perjury. \n\nOf <em>course</em>, this could only be accomplished through deceit."]},"sort":[6.264202,"4003729"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2604955","_score":5.418499,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Alleged Account # XXXX FINAL RESPONSE TO JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NA CO MORTGAGE DEPT Reference number XXXX, XXXX : NOTICE - MOST IMPORTANT - The documents for this alleged Mortgage Assignment is nothing but forgeries and robo signing at best. NO ACTUAL FINDINGS - Within the request they the bank JPMorgan Chase NA Mortgage Co was requested to provide proof of said signatures that of the original signatures not forgeries. The signatures are proven not to be that of XXXX XXXX XXXX nor that of XXXX XXXX XXXX the real persons in flesh. Whom do not and has never given any permission to JPMorgan Chase, nor XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding. WRONG IDENTITY - JPMorgan Chase Bank has referred to XXXX XXXX XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, as well as XXXX XXXX or as in XXXX XXXX using the same address within this claim. This is completely and utterly identity theft, fraud no contract. There are no forms presented of an actual ledgers, copy of a check for payments signed by the real persons nor an accurate date or timeline of events for this loan to have taken place. What has been presented to all seen in this complaint is nothing best of forgeries, identity fraud, fraud no contract, and fraud in the inclusion! The attempts of communications with XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX are therefore cut off, and has never truly existed with the Plaintiffs/real party ( s ) in interest on in the acts of harassment. The document dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX are all forgeries as stated multiple times to JPMorgan Chase Bank to its employees, and agents as in CEOs XXXX, CFO and Representatives. Their response is internally created by former employees of XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding that of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX whom may or many not be real persons. Proof of the existence of an account of the actual establishment of debt account but the actual Sentient human XXXX XXXX XXXX and that of XXXX XXXX XXXX duly signed and written out by both parties and not any unilateral agreement. This would include but not limited to the actual agreement upon which the signature page has direct reference to the entire agreement XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX is an artificial entity, a title, of the limited liability fictitious corporation which is legal trade mark, which constitutes valuable legal interest of which all right, title and interest are reserved and of which you have filed to knotty the Caretaker and acceptance agent and supply proof of claim against the limited liability corporation. XXXX XXXX, XXXX - XXXX From XXXX XXXX dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX. The letter states that the right to cancel was received and that neither credit reporting nor a history thereof shall or has ever taken place. Please see the attachments. The original letter and envelope has been kept in good status and or shape and is ready for review by court of law and by a jury of our peers. JPMorgan Chase sues the FDIC for issues with WaMu banking issues and legal matters that pertain to this matter in fact. The Accounting documents is no ledger and is misleading at best and a false representation of the facts. On the attached documents pages 11 of this alleged accounting not a ledger rather they stated that they acquired the alleged mortgage loan on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and later a payment on XXXX XXXX, XXXX to WaMu - XXXX Mortgage, when in fact the final payment was made to XXXX Mortgage on or about XXXX XXXX, XXXX and the payoff letter sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. There was no payments made to WaMu during this time, nor was there any credit reporting agencies provide any history of such payments therefore this is a fraudulent attempt of identity theft and Mortgage Assignment fraud. This is why the credit history of JPMorgan Chase has been deleted from both XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. The Right to Cancel forms presented by JPMorgan Chase are forgeries - It has been shown as of XXXX XXXX that the signatures that appear on the Note of XXXX Mortgage XXXX. XXXX XXXX has concluded that beyond a reasonable doubt that the signatures upon the alleged documents presented by JPMorgan Chase Bank are not XXXX XXXX XXXX. An earlier signature expert presented the original signatures that on the documents in XXXX XXXX XXXX identity are not that of XXXX XXXX XXXX and are forgeries. The handwriting expert and examination was done at an earlier time in the year of XXXX. The handwriting expert completed XXXX XXXX XXXX report on XXXX XXXX. Neither signature match the original signatures of the living persons that of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The forgeries also represent misleading ideals of XXXX thereof for XXXX XXXX XXXX signs his name in full aka XXXX XXXX XXXX in most cases whenever finalizing legal contractual documents of any kind. This is not presented in there findings! The doctored up accounting document not a ledger never presented any facts of the true identity time frame of this mortgage in fact there is no history of any payments during the accounting documents presented in the year of XXXX, XXXX nor XXXX. As of XXXX payments for demanded and forced under duress as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX investigated this fraudulent action created and caused by JPMorgan Chase bank and employees. Proof of claim that You JPMorgan Chase Bank NA Mortgage Co are the original holder in due course, of the aforementioned original debt instrument, and that it is not being un-sold to another party. A copy of the actual accounting, original ledger whereby JPMorgan Chase Bank NA and XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding has incurred a loss as a result of the alleged debt. An invoice ( not a Statement ), for any amount of money allegedly owed to JPMorgan Chase NA XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX for that matter has alleged. Proof of claim that there is any money in circulation is backed by anything of value, by which any debt including this one that lends to the possibility XXXX XXXX or Department of Education might get paid by way of actual money, and that the value of the attached is not sufficient to the discharge this debt under the following laws ; Fair debt collection practices act ( FDCPA ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Title XXXX of the Consumer Credit Protection Act of XXXX. The Indentured Trust Act of XXXX HJR XXXX, XXXX Statutes at large XXXX, and XXXX, XXXX of XXXX The securities exchange act of XXXX The fair credit reporting act public law No. XXXX enacted in XXXX The Bankruptcy act of XXXX XXXX U.S.C. XXXX, XXXX. XXXX U.C.C. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX Third Party Collection agency - JPMorgan Chase is a third party collector and or creditor using the identities of XXXX XXXX and XXXX WaMu XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding and XXXX that of which the the bank JPMorgan Chase claims to have acquired as of these dates XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and that of XXXX XXXX. Rather the Mortgage XXXX XXXX was created XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX years thereafter the alleged acquisition. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CUSP # XXXX - JPMorgan Chase Bank stated that XXXX confirmed that XXXX has not found any records indicating that XXXX XXXX XXXX or his company, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, were customers of XXXX XXXX or JPMorgan Chase. The documents we received with your correspondence, the year XXXX XXXX shows that at that time he was a customer of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which cleared through XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX? - Facts of the USDA XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX - this investment was not done in XXXX. The XXXX form was sent to JPMorgan Chase Bank as of the year XXXX along with other documents of history between the two parties XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX the investment documents mentioned therein their letter of denial is simply former relationship building. The investor XXXX XXXX XXXX controller/owner of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX continued thereafter XXXX building relationships with XXXX XXXX employees, brokers bankers and others therein and outside of XXXX XXXX since XXXX till the crash of the markets thereof in the year of XXXX. This letter simply states the date and time of relationship and those beginning in its investment stages. The USDA XXXX XXXX CUSP # XXXX is a hedge fund investment the so called XXXX was stocks. Relationships with XXXX XXXX employees such as XXXX XXXX and subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase Bank that of XXXX XXXX employee XXXX XXXX has provided enough evidence that within emails phone calls and physical meetings dates times phone numbers email accounts has provided enough information therein for JPMorgan Chase to acknowledge these substantial facts yet they have used information given to them by XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which is now XXXX XXXX BANK. During the 9 and half years of this dispute, complaint, or claims, JPMorgan Chase nor XXXX XXXX has ever mentioned this information. Nor have they attempted to contact XXXX XXXX XXXX in person whereas the bank ( s ) JPMorgan Chase  Bank and XXXX XXXX XXXX has his contact information. JPMorgan Chase alleges that the account information was from XXXX which has been closed since such time but never mentioned the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX therein such bank on numerous occasions a investor XXXX or XXXX has shown the XXXX NUMBER USDA XXXX XXXX # XXXX to be real and have been moved around within said bank that of JPMorgan Chase Bank. The investment of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX states in writing that this investment is within and through XXXX XXXX Co, nothing further nor anyone else mentioned therein this agreement of XXXX. XXXX XXXX employed by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX within this deal employed by XXXX XXXX, never mentioned XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which is now XXXX XXXX XXXX during its conversations, during meetings, nor in emails or text messages. XXXX XXXX, XXXX JPMorgan Chase received another offer to pay discharge this alleged debt in the form of a Money Order ( bond ) in its full payment in the amount of {$460000.00} plus any interest if any is allowed within both federal and state laws. Therefore no response to such payment has been given in acknowledgment within said information of XXXXreasury Direct Account information Bill Of Exchange Act 34 of XXXX [ Assented to XXXX XXXX XXXX ] [ Date Of Commencement : XXXX XXXX XXXX ] ( Afrikaans text signed by the State President ) as amended by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX Act XXXX of XXXX Bills of Exchange Amendment Act 56 of XXXX Act. To consolidate and amend the law relating to bills of exchange, cheques and promissory notes. XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX homeowner XXXX XXXX XXXX how and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX etc, .. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FARMS MI XXXX Corporate number - XXXX Dissolved XXXX, please advise how is it possible to file a corporate title lien when this corporation was dissolved as of XXXX and agains in Michigan via Delaware as of XXXX? XXXX XXXX, XXXX company type is XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX assigned to this business is XXXX and state of formation is DE. This company business address is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX De XXXX. Mailing address is XXXX Mortgage, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX XXXX Ca XXXX. You can find this business by geo coordinates : XXXX XXXX ' XXXX '' XXXX, XXXX XXXX ' XXXX '' XXXX There are no public or private records of any agents or officers of this alleged corporation and its dealings at this time. XXXX XXXX, XXXX was incorporated on Monday XXXX XXXX XXXX, so this company age is twelve years, two months and XXXX days. Current company status of this company is XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX is XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX Of XXXX.. According to Maryland business register this business is not in good standing. Definitions 46. Notice of dishonor and effect of falter to five such notice subject to the provisions of this Act, if a bill has been dishonored by non-acceptance or by nonpayment, notice of dishonor must be given to the drawer and each endures, and any drawer of endorser to whom such notice is not given is discharged : Provided that ( a ) if a bill is dishonored by a non-acceptance, and notice of dishonor is not given, the right of the holder in due course who became such a holder subsequent to the omission, shall not be prejudiced by the omission ; ( b ) if a bill is dishonored by a non - acceptance, and due notice of dishonor is given, it shall not be necessary to give notice of a subsequent dishonor by nonpayment, unless the bill was accepted in the meantime. Proof of the existence of an account of the actual establishment of debt account but the actual Sentient human XXXX XXXX XXXX duly signed and written out by both parties and not any unilateral agreement. This would include but not limited to the actual agreement upon which the signature page has direct reference to the entire agreement XXXX XXXX XXXX is an artificial entity, a title, of the limited liability fictitious corporation which is legal trade mark, which constitutes valuable legal interest of which all right, title and interest are reserved and of which you have filed to knotty the Caretaker and acceptance agent and supply proof of claim against the limited liability corporation. Proof of claim that You XXXX XXXX or Department Of Education are the original holder in due course, of the aforementioned original debt instrument, and that it is not being un-sold to another party. A copy of the actual accounting, original ledger whereby JPMorgan Chase XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding has incurred a loss as a result of the alleged debt. An invoice ( not a Statement ), for any amount of money allegedly owed to XXXX XXXX or Department of Education XXXX XXXX XXXX for that matter has alleged. Proof of claim that there is any money in circulation is backed by anything of value, by which any debt including this one that lends to the possibility XXXX XXXX or Department of Education might get paid by way of actual money, and that the value of the attached is not sufficient to the discharge this debt under the following laws ; Fair debt collection practices act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C 1692 et., 1978 Title VII of the Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1978.\nThe Indentured Trust Act of 1939 HJR 192, 112 Statutes at large 48, and P.L., 73.10 of 1933 The securities exchange act of 1934 The fair credit reporting act public law No. 91-508 enacted in 1970 The Bankruptcy act of 1933 12 U.S.C. 411, P.L. 97-280 U.C.C. 1-103, 1-308, 2-221, 2-104, 3-415-419, 3-500-510 The aforementioned was done at the will of The administrator, no further solicitation for contracting will be permitted. This correspondence is produced under the full reservation of any and all secured rights, and without recourse. All patients shall be presented to the XXXX via prepaid debit card and or cashiers check only! If any attempt is made to provide payment in any other fashion and or form we must express that is must comply with title XXXX XXXX. XXXX, and XXXX statute at large chapter XXXX. Also provide these further items if associated with this matter in any fashion and or form Federal Reserve form S3 registration statement, Federal Reserve form 424 ( b ) ( 5 ) prospectus, Federal Reserve for FR 2046 balance sheet ( s ), Federal Reserve for FR 2049 balance sheet ( s ), Federal Reserve form 2099 balance sheet ( s ), The Deed Of Trust.\nChain Of Custody This is al lawful request in accords with the aforementioned and the following : U.C.C. - Article 3 - Negotiable Instruments.. Part 5. Dishonor UCC 3-501. Presentment.\nPursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.\nU.C.C. - Article 3 - Negotiable Instruments .. Part 5. Dishonor 3-501. Presentment.\nPresentment means a demeaned made by or on behalf of a person entitled to enforce an instrument ( i ) to pay the instrument made to the drawee or a party obligated to pay the instrument or, in the case of a note or accepted draft payable at a bank, to the bank =, or ( ii ) to accept a draft made to the drawee.\nThe following rules are subject to Article 4, agreement of the parties, and clearing - house rules and such the like : ( 2 ) Upon demand of the persons to whom presentment is made, the person making presentment must ( i ) exhibit the instrument, ( ii ) give reasonable identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person, reasonable evidence of authority to do so, and ( iii ) signed a receipt on the instrument for any payment made or surrenderer the instrument in full payment is made.\nBy refusing to supply you will be violating the law and my rights under UCC. Once Again this is not a request for a verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for a VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section ( as well as another laws both federal and local ). It is respectfully requested that your offices provide competent evidence that there is any legal obligation to pay in accords with the aforementioned laws. Please provide and or furnish the following : What money your say owed is ; Explain and show how your offices calculated what allegedly is owed ; Provide a certified copy of the original signed instrument that shows agreement to pay what is owed ; Provide a verification or certification copt of any judgement of applicable ; Identify the original creditor in this matter and the contractual agreement emptying your company.\nProof that the statute of limitation has not expired on this account Show that your licensed to collect in the state of California Provide verification of your license number EIN and registration agent. It comes of necessity and obligation to inform you that if your offices have reported information to any of the credit agencies such action will be construed as fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Further if any negative marks are found on any portion of the credit files associated with this matter by your company or the company that you represent it will come necessary to bring legal action against you for the following : Violation of the Fair Debt Credit Reporting Act Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Defamation of Character and may include any of the following means ; administrative reviews, SEC Hearing, Lien and or Law suit.\nIf you and your offices are able to provide the proper documentation ( originals wet signatures and or certified copies of verified documents with signatures and a copy of check payments etc, .. and such the like of all verified documents ) as requested in the forgoing Declaration, it will revive a prompt response, however at least 45 days will be needed to investigate and review the validity of the information prove and during such time all collection activity is requested cease and desist in good faith. Further during this validation period, should any action be undertaken which could be construed as detrimental to any portion of the credit files related hereto, it will constitute a breach and will result in consultation with legal counsel and action thereafter. This includes any listing of any information to any credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalid or verifying an account as accurate when in the there is no certified valid proof that is it so. Notice the XXXX Release Mortgage Assignment is title RELEASE from XXXX whom was paid by JPMorgan Chase and or XXXX XXXX XXXX to file this fraudulent document dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX, recorded XXXX XXXX, XXXX with the XXXX XXXX XXXX. This is a fraudulent document due to its nature and lack of information therein. There is no dollar amount owed, there is no date to which the third party debt collector JPMorgan Chase acquired loan, its titled RELEASE! t is believed that this loan was created in XXXX thereafter XXXX XXXX XXXX obtained investments within the Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX Co. Which is now or have been acquired by JPMorgan Chase NA as of the year XXXX. The Documents where prepared by XXXX XXXX XXXX of JPMorgan Chase Co NA she is also the alleged Secretary for MERS? As well the Beneficiary and Nominee for XXXX XXXX WaMu XXXX is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX LA XXXX phone number XXXX XXXX she prepared this fraudulent document on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and had paid XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, to record it with XXXX XXXX XXXX Recorder Registrar on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) years after the alleged acquisition of XXXX Chase Bank well after again XXXX years after XXXX Mortgage was no longer in business within XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX and the State, Of California. This document was not mailed to the halls property thereafter the recording of this fraudulent document nor was it on record as of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX when both XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX visited the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX office. This was the first time the halls made an appearance to do a property title search since owning and living on and in their home property of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA [ XXXX ]. Now was any permission given for anyone to record such documents on the halls behalf during such time. It is also stated that XXXX XXXX XXXX alleges that XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX recorded alleged said deed of trust on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. This is completely false. Further more as stated on 99 % of mortgage assignments there is an amount owed to the assignee rather on the alleged assignment there is no amount recorded. I believe its is due to no amount recorded therein there is no amount owed. Since this alleged loan was created, to avoid and hide the investment funds USDA FUNDS was CUSIP Number CUSIP # XXXX worth $ XXXX maturity date XXXX XXXX, XXXX, originated XXXX XXXX. The final maturity date for this investment is XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Therefore XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX owner and CEO of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is the only recipient of said funds. Therefore the issue at hand is the alleged mortgage loan created documents, DEED Title instrument used to create illusion of the actual funds of XXXX NUMBER CUSIP # XXXX. This is the issue at hand. More over we have emails from JPMorgan Chase that indicates other forgeries that of family members and former friends or associates. The documents are doctored up some are newly created and are nothing but a false representation of banking should be to and for the people. The fraudulent mortgage assignment was created 10 years after JPMorgan Chase Bank alleges to have acquired the note from XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding thereafter alleged acquisition by WaMu. JPMorgan also contradicts itself by stating that they acquired the loan from WaMu XXXX XXXX a letter sent XXXX XXXX, and again in XXXX XXXX in form of another letter this year XXXX XXXX. THE LAW ON THE BILL OF EXCHANGE ACT - Bill Of Exchange Act 34 of 1964 [ Assented to 11 May 1964 ] [ Date Of Commencement : 15 May 1964 ] ( Afrikaans text signed by the State President ) as amended by Suretyship Amendment Act 57 of 1971 Bills of Exchange Amendment Act 58 of 1977 Finance Act 77 of 1986 Bills of Exchange Amendment Act 56 of 2000 Act. To consolidate and amend the law relating to bills of exchange, cheques and promissory notes. XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX homeowner XXXX XXXX XXXX how and XXXX XXXX XXXX Nominee Secretary Beneficiary MERS etc, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FARMS MI XXXX Corporate number - XXXX Dissolved XXXX, please advise how is it possible to file a corporate title lien when this corporation was dissolved as of XXXX and agains in Michigan via Delaware as of  XXXX? XXXX XXXX, XXXX company type is XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX assigned to this business is XXXX and state of formation is DE. This company business address is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX De XXXX. Mailing address is XXXX Mortgage, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX XXXX Ca XXXX. You can find this business by geo coordinates : 39 9 ' 28.7 '' N, 75 31 ' 19.3 '' W. There are no public or private records of any agents or officers of this alleged corporation and its dealings at this time. XXXX XXXX, XXXX was incorporated on Monday XXXX XXXX XXXX, so this company age is XXXX years, XXXX months and XXXX days. Current company status of this company is XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Of XXXX According to Maryland business register this business is not in good standing. Definitions 46. Notice of dishonor and effect of falter to five such notice subject to the provisions of this Act, if a bill has been dishonored by non-acceptance or by nonpayment, notice of dishonor must be given to the drawer and each endures, and any drawer of endorser to whom such notice is not given is discharged : Provided that ( a ) if a bill is dishonored by a non-acceptance, and notice of dishonor is not given, the right of the holder in due course who became such a holder subsequent to the omission, shall not be prejudiced by the omission ; ( b ) if a bill is dishonored by a non - acceptance, and due notice of dishonor is given, it shall not be necessary to give notice of a subsequent dishonor by nonpayment, unless the bill was accepted in the meantime. Proof of the existence of an account of the actual establishment of debt account but the actual Sentient human XXXX XXXX XXXX and that of XXXX XXXX XXXX duly signed and written out by both parties and not any unilateral agreement. This would include but not limited to the actual agreement upon which the signature page has direct reference to the entire agreement XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX is an artificial entity, a title, of the limited liability fictitious corporation which is legal trade mark, which constitutes valuable legal interest of which all right, title and interest are reserved and of which you have filed to knotty the Caretaker and acceptance agent and supply proof of claim against the limited liability corporation. Proof of claim that You JPMorgan Chase Bank NA Mortgage Co are the original holder in due course, of the aforementioned original debt instrument, and that it is not being un-sold to another party. A copy of the actual accounting, original ledger whereby JPMorgan Chase Bank NA and XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Funding has incurred a loss as a result of the alleged debt. An invoice ( not a Statement ), for any amount of money allegedly owed to JPMorgan Chase NA XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX for that matter has alleged. Proof of claim that there is any money in circulation is backed by anything of value, by which any debt including this one that lends to the possibility XXXX XXXX or Department of Education might get paid by way of actual money, and that the value of the attached is not sufficient to the discharge this debt under the following laws ; Fair debt collection practices act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C 1692 et., 1978 Title VII of the Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1978.\nThe Indentured Trust Act of 1939 HJR 192, 112 Statutes at large 48, and P.L., 73.10 of 1933 The securities exchange act of 1934 The fair credit reporting act public law No. 91-508 enacted in 1970 The Bankruptcy act of 1933 12 U.S.C. 411, P.L. 97-280 U.C.C. 1-103, 1-308, 2-221, 2-104, 3-415-419, 3-500-510 The aforementioned was done at the will of The administrator, no further solicitation for contracting will be permitted. This correspondence is produced under the full reservation of any and all secured rights, and without recourse. All patients shall be presented to the Estate via prepaid debit card and or cashiers check only! If any attempt is made to provide payment in any other fashion and or form we must express that is must comply with title 12 U.S.C. 411, and 112 statute at large chapter 48.\nAlso provide these further items if associated with this matter in any fashion and or form Federal Reserve form S3 registration statement, Federal Reserve form 424 ( b ) ( 5 ) prospectus, Federal Reserve for FR 2046 balance sheet ( s ), Federal Reserve for FR 2049 balance sheet ( s ), Federal Reserve form 2099 balance sheet ( s ), The Deed Of Trust.\nChain Of Custody This is al lawful request in accords with the aforementioned and the following : U.C.C. - Article XXXX - Negotiable Instruments.. Part 5. Dishonor UCC 3-501. Presentment.\nPursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.\nU.C.C. - Article 3 - Negotiable Instruments .. Part 5. Dishonor 3-501. Presentment.\nPresentment means a demeaned made by or on behalf of a person entitled to enforce an instrument ( i ) to pay the instrument made to the drawee or a party obligated to pay the instrument or, in the case of a note or accepted draft payable at a bank, to the bank =, or ( ii ) to accept a draft made to the drawee.\nThe following rules are subject to Article 4, agreement of the parties, and clearing - house rules and such the like : ( 2 ) Upon demand of the persons to whom presentment is made, the person making presentment must ( i ) exhibit the instrument, ( ii ) give reasonable identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person, reasonable evidence of authority to do so, and ( iii ) signed a receipt on the instrument for any payment made or surrenderer the instrument in full payment is made. By refusing to supply you will be violating the law and my rights under UCC. Once Again this is not a request for a verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for a VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section ( as well as another laws both federal and local ). It is respectfully requested that your offices provide competent evidence that there is any legal obligation to pay in accords with the aforementioned laws. Please provide and or furnish the following : What money your say owed is ; Explain and show how your offices calculated what allegedly is owed ; Provide a certified copy of the original signed instrument that shows agreement to pay what is owed ; Provide a verification or certification copt of any judgement of applicable ; Identify the original creditor in this matter and the contractual agreement emptying your company.\nProof that the statute of limitation has not expired on this account Show that your licensed to collect in the state of California Provide verification of your license number EIN and registration agent.\nIt comes of necessity and obligation to inform you that if your offices have reported information to any of the credit agencies such action will be construed as fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Further if any negative marks are found on any portion of the credit files associated with this matter by your company or the company that you represent it will come necessary to bring legal action against you for the following : Violation of the Fair Debt Credit Reporting Act Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Defamation of Character and may include any of the following means ; administrative reviews, SEC Hearing, Lien and or Law suit.\nIf you and your offices are able to provide the proper documentation ( originals wet signatures and or certified copies of verified documents with signatures and a copy of check payments etc, .. and such the like of all verified documents ) as requested in the forgoing Declaration, it will reviv","date_sent_to_company":"2017-08-15T05:11:30.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"93536","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2604955","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2017-08-15T03:53:49.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There are no forms presented of an actual ledgers, copy of a check for payments signed by the real persons nor an accurate date or timeline of events for this loan to <em>have</em> taken place. <em>What</em> has been presented to all seen in this complaint is nothing best of forgeries, identity fraud, fraud no contract, and fraud in the inclusion!"]},"sort":[5.418499,"2604955"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9924592","_score":5.2743855,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I met a person named XXXX XXXX XXXX, who appeared to be a very hardworking person and had a company called XXXX XXXX. She conducted import transactions of fruits and products from XXXX XXXX. \n\nThis person started to build a friendship with me. She is from XXXX and began to be my friend. Over time, I learned that XXXX XXXX no longer belonged to her because her partner had allegedly decided to remove her. However, it seems that this person also stole her capital and used her identity to make transactions, as XXXX does not have documents in this country. \n\nXXXX lived in New Jersey, and aside from wanting to realize her idea as an entrepreneur, she worked as a supply XXXX for a construction company in New Jersey. Initially, she talked to me about various businesses, and I avoided all of them. However, there was an occasion where she convinced me to join her new project called XXXX XXXX, a company that needed a good investment of money to start operations with supposedly good returns and profits for the investor. XXXX was a person who mysteriously moved houses many times, and for some reason, the last time she was evicted from her home in XXXX XXXX fine apartment located in a luxurious area of XXXX, NJ. \n\nThe first time she started asking me for certain investments was in XXXX, which is where my tragedy beganinvestments of {$5000.00}, then {$10000.00}, and so on. I only knew about the operation superficially, and nothing concrete was ever shown to me because this business has the disadvantage of being difficult to control and not 100 % visible. Subsequently, these investments increased, and the most incredible part was that she began to give me supposed profits by depositing them into my account, but very cleverly, she would take them back by asking for more investment. using my chase bank account. \n\nThese investments were related to fruits and other products, but to be exact, I never saw invoices or anything concrete, just communications with a supposed broker ( who I assume is part of the scam ) who handles selling the product and managing the payment collection from the client. The broker would take their commission and deliver the money to the people or investors. \n\nMy initial investment reached a point where it bled me financially to the extent of bankrupting my company due to the lack of working capital, and I barely survived. I began a lawsuit thanks to the contracts and agreements that were electronically signed by XXXX, which were clear and well-drafted ( this lawsuit is currently in court ). \n\nThe total of the first investment, after calculating interest and supposed profits, was approximately {$220000.00}. This money was the fruit of my labor when I had my construction business. After some time, I learned there was a way to recover this money, or at least part of it, because there had been a loss, and the merchandise was damaged during the trip when it arrived in XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nAnd then, coincidentally, XXXX had an accidenta car hit her. And supposedly, there was no one to inspect or take care of the cargo because the airline did not apply the required refrigeration for that shipment of pitahaya or dragon fruit. XXXX spent a long time recovering from the accident and operations, unfortunately, as I considered her my friend. \n\nI had never had any problems with banks, and fortunately, these were my savings and a large part of my working capital. So, during that time, I remained in contact with XXXX because her business model was profitable, but she liked to deceive people. I didnt realize this until later. Now, the second investment was practically forced on me ; otherwise, she would not give me the documents to collect that insurance and recover my money or at least part of it. \n\nAfter spending XXXX years in this situation trying to recover my money, I also suffered a fatal car accident on XX/XX/XXXX, where a driver crashed into my parked vehicle while I was waiting for the light to change from red to green. This accident destroyed my vehicle and left both me and my girlfriend injured. It literally paralyzed my life, and I desperately sought solutions because I could only survive with what little I made since I was not allowed to work due to the accident. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX contacted me, telling me she had found part of the documents to collect the insurance, and she mentioned a very good business involving granadilla and basil, along with other plants. I took the precaution of having her sign another document, and this is where my tragedy began because I had a loan from XXXX XXXX. Since I was organized with my credit and tax obligations, she then told me about these businesses, saying there was already a client, etc., etc. \n\nShe said we needed to pay the supplier, a certain XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX who belonged to a company called XXXX XXXX S.A.S. and XXXX XXXX. Curiously, my loan had matured, and there was no more money. XXXX began to pressure me psychologically, saying that the payment had to be made as soon as possible. She would call me up to XXXX times a day or more. At that time, she was still in New Jersey. \n\nThe pressure and desperation were so intense that I finally gave in and managed to get approximately {$25000.00}. She told me to charge the card for a payment in my company, and in this way, I would access cash immediately because, according to her, she had no credit and did not want to miss this opportunity with XXXX XXXX and other clients who urgently needed the product. XXXX had a strange appointment in XXXX and came to New Jersey because she was supposedly living in Ohio, helping some friends with some businesses, from where she also mysteriously fled. \n\nI met with her because I picked her up at the airport, and she explained her new business to me. She said, \" Remember, we are going to recover the previous losses with this business. The client needs many weekly orders, and this will help us recover. '' Obviously, this was where the scam started.\n\nI managed to process the payment ; the money from my business credit card was deposited in two transactionsone for {$15000.00} and another for {$7600.00}, along with some smaller payments for FDA licenses, overdrafts, and transaction fees between banks. I have proof of all this. XXXX agreed and told me that to show that this was a transparent negotiation, I would have control over the bank account of her business, XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe surprise came when I saw the accounts had many pending charges, which I ended up assuming as the investor in this scam project. Besides that, she would send me countless XXXX conversations, supposedly with cargo managers, suppliers, brokers, and clients, along with many XXXX sheets with supposedly financial information. It was quite convincing, and she was now living in XXXX, Illinois, where she supposedly still resides. One detail to remember is that one of her past partners, a young man named XXXX, of Turkish origin, who was supposedly her star salesman and in charge of the company 's image and marketing, had control of the website and lived with her. After some time, I learned they had a terrible falling out, which led me to believe she also robbed him. \n\nThis man closed the website and limited his contacts completely, seriously affecting XXXX 's image in the market. I don't know how many people XXXX has robbed or scammed, but I do know she has moved to several countries and mysteriously disappeared from them. Without any reason, she pretends to be a supply chain XXXX and an expert in imports and exports. Heres the surprise : after forcing me to pay the amounts for the XXXX, which could never enter the country because it did not meet FDA or Global GAP requirements to be brought from XXXX to the XXXX. \n\nIt was almost {$15000.00} for the payment of that cargo, where I sent the money I could obtain from the credit card. I never received purchase orders, invoices, or anything to guarantee that I had paid for this product. I received some pro forma invoices with stamps and logos from a company called XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX, and another for a payment of almost {$9000.00} that I made to XXXX XXXX. XXXX said that one company would be the supplier and the other the handler or the one who would pack and ship the cargo to the carrier. Everything perfectly fit the scam.\n\nI had already paid more than {$25000.00}, which wasnt even mine, and now I find myself paying off that debt. I learned that in the hotel where she was staying, they were going to evict her because the house she was supposed to rent as an office was not given to her. Another sign that XXXX is a shameless person who takes advantage of peoples goodwill. \n\nThe granadilla could not reach the XXXX, and once the supplier from XXXX, XXXX XXXX, told me that it needed to be moved as soon as possible because it was going bad. Thats when I started discovering more nonsensical things : neither XXXX had the super experience nor the logic in this business, and she didnt even investigate how products could be accessed in a country as demanding as the XXXX XXXX \n\nStrangely, the last conversation I had with the supplier was aggressive because I confronted both of them to see who was telling the truth. Of course, XXXX was caught in all the lies, but I had already paid, and there were no more options. There was one last card to playthe basilbecause it was accepted everywhere. But another situation arose : the basil hadnt passed the quality tests required by the United States, so it couldnt be shipped. This issue dragged on until this date, and the cargo handlers didnt have space, etc.\n\nNow the question is : if it were a big client, would they wait almost XXXX months to receive their product? Of course not. This money was also lost. There was no refund, no supplier, no client. this money was paid with my credit card from chase bank, and some money from my personal account i have never received any product i had purchased. \n\n\n\nI tried to outsmart her and found a company that handles international collections, including various types of insurance claims. This company claimed it could pursue the international collection of this debt against XXXX XXXX. However, my problems only worsened, as I was now entangled in an uncollectible matter, making me responsible for another obligation and introducing a new level of stress. The company had this case for almost XXXX months and resolved nothing. If the case was withdrawn, they would charge a high cancellation fee. Something tells me XXXX knew this person and that they were part of the scam. \n\n\n\nXXXX is someone whose appearance is perfect for manipulating and scamming others. Collecting this money was not easy, and the situation worsened as I still hadnt received any money, yet the credit card bills and the deterioration of my finances continued. This situation has been extremely painful, leaving me mentally destroyed and desperate, but I tried to stay calm and think of another strategy. \n\n\n\nI met some clients from XXXX, a serious and well-structured company called XXXX XXXX XXXX which coincidentally needed granadilla for export to XXXX and XXXX. XXXX contacted her suppliers in XXXX, claiming they had the required certifications for export to XXXX. However, another scam was brewing, as XXXX complicit supplier lacked the certifications for granadilla and only had them for other products. XXXX intended to make them pay a 70 % advance for the goods, which were to be shipped under the CIF incoterm. \n\n\n\nThe scam almost went through until the clients partners met and discovered that the certification process would take XXXX months, which would be a huge problem. The shipment was approximately XXXX pallets, worth about USD XXXX, the same amount she scammed me out of. XXXX has since remained out of contact, not answering phone calls or responding to any communications, even after promising to start making payments this month. She feels untouchable and seems to think that U.S. laws are a joke, as she didnt even bother to attend the court hearing for the lawsuit for the more than USD XXXX she owes me. \n\n\n\nWhen I think about how many people she has scammed, I estimate it could be around XXXX individuals. Additionally, I filed a complaint against her with the New Jersey police. \n\n\n\nI can provide any proof you need. I know she is making moves, and there is a way to recover my money and bring her to justice, preventing her from causing further harm to society. I sincerely ask for your help ; I dont have the means to pay for an investigator or a lawyer. Just the support of this entity would be a great help in catching these manipulators, fraudsters, and scammers. \n\n\n\nLucky the company XXXX XXXX took enough security measures and avoid a new scam starred by XXXX and her company XXXX XXXX. and right now I am struggling financially and besides of that I dont have any source of income due to this huge mistake and scam.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-25T00:42:07.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"07093","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9924592","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-08-25T00:28:14.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I sincerely ask for your help ; I dont <em>have</em> the <em>means</em> to pay for an investigator or a lawyer. Just the support of this entity would be a great help in catching these manipulators, fraudsters, and scammers. \n\n\n\nLucky the company XXXX XXXX took enough security measures and avoid a new scam starred by XXXX and her company XXXX XXXX. and right now I am struggling financially and besides of that I dont <em>have</em> any source of income due to this huge mistake and scam."]},"sort":[5.2743855,"9924592"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3344343","_score":4.441425,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB :\n\nPlease find this Amended Complaint; Qualified Written Request; Validation of Debt; and Request for Adequate Assurance from Bank of America  (“BOA”) and XXXX XXXX, Inc. (XXXX XXXX”) aka XXXX  XXXX XXXX   (“XXXX”) for their mortgage fraud; fraud with XXXX XXXX securities; forgery; unlawful collection  and violations of all possible laws. \n\nWhile BOA’s sham conduit XXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX  (“XXXX”) who pretend to be “owner/investor” (now merely “servicer”) repeatedly stated that I have right to dispute my debt, at the same time they deprived me from  this right  and now illegally  try to accelerate my payments by threats  with a foreclosure – without proper validation or any Assurances, solely based on a poorly forged by XXXX XXXX Allonge to the Note (without any endorsements) where XXXX is not even mentioned. BOA relentless fraud, extortion  and scary tactic placed me under extreme emotional distress which caused severe damages to my health condition since I have to take strong pain killers and sleep medication because I lost my night sleep dealing with BOA and their co-conspirators criminal conduct and violations of all laws.  \n\nI received additional evidence from  XXXX which  clearly indicates that neither XXXX or XXXX are not the real party who actually own my debt but rather fake conduits for Bank of America who illegally cashing my mortgage payment checks without guaranteeing that upon completion of my loan I will successfully own my title. This evidence also shows that my “lender” is simply a front for BoA whose ultimate goal with my loan is to push me into foreclosure through murky collection practices and fees while the bank enriches itself through reselling my loan through securities known as CDO (derivatives). \n\nThis evidence further shows that my performing loan was internally defaulted by BOA to illegally remove it from XXXX  XXXX custody by abusing a XXXX XXXX rule that give issuers the option to buy back their loans if the loans are 90 days delinquent or more; and resell for profits . \n\nBoth XXXX  and XXXX  merely  impersonate as \"servicer\" and \"owners/investors\" to defraud me about the real identity of the party – BOA - who collects my mortgage payments as their handsome income  while they want me to think I repay the debt to legitimate investors; as well as about the real party who sends me threatening Notices – XXXX  XXXX. \n\nMy conclusion is based on  XXXX  respond  on XX/XX/XXXX where they sent me a copy of poorly forged Alonge to the Note which lacked any chain of Assignments in violation of all applicable laws; and threatened me with a Payoff demand – while I never refused to pay my mortgage to the  lawful owners of my debt as soon as the debt is validated. \n\nPlus, it appears that onXX/XX/XXXX XXXX   promptly changed its payment mailing address from XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX  TX to XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX XXXX   CA, so I don’t even know where my mortgage payments should be mailed and who actually collected them in XXXX, TX where neither XXXX or XXXX  have no officers nearby. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I emailed  a Complaint to Michigan Senator XXXX  asking for help and intervention. I included in this email Bank of America’s top executives. \n\nThe very same day,XX/XX/XXXX XXXX,  who during last three months  was not able to located any documents related to my loan,  suddenly \"found\" the whole closing package (!) which was emailed to them by someone else ( XXXX  XXXX) via large PDF file. \n\nYou can see from the attached documents, the top and the bottom of each page has a line \"Generated by XXXX XXXX\" (on top); and \"click here to unlock XXXX\" (on the bottom). This PDF file was sent by someone, aka XXXX  XXXX, owned by Mr. XXXX, XXXX, who also owns XXXX. While one part of Mr. XXXX business – XXXX XXXX fka XXXX XXXX XXXX /XXXX – operates a sophisticated forgery mill of  mortgage Notes to defraud borrowers and investors; another part – XXXX   XXXX  – issues property Title insurances for fatally damaged by  XXXX XXXX Titles\n\nXXXX  mailed this  package to me by overnight XXXX   about XXXX XXXX the same day, XX/XX/XXXX, apparently without even reviewing included  documents. Bear to repeat, I requested these documents since XXXX   XXXX  and XXXX  was not able to locate it until I included Senator XXXX  into this dispute.  Otherwise they would notice that the Note is not endorsed at all; and the Allonge is very poorly forged by someone who has NO authority to sign Notes or transfer them. \n\nXXXX   merely  separated XXXXt file in two parts and put one part on front of their package - such as a  copy of my Note without ANY endorsements and a copy of a very poorly forged Allonge  prepared by XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX  who on XX/XX/XXXX (!) the same day as my loan was signed, passed it to XXXX XXXX XXXX   while XXXX claimed that they received it on XX/XX/XXXX. It was unclear if Mr. XXXX  worked for XXXX or XXXX   at the time when he signed Allonge  to this Note which Mr. XXXX  had no authority to sign under ANY circumstances. \n\nThis is a glaring violation of all endorsement rules, plus Collateral Shipper XXXX  (who worked for whom?) had NO authority to sign anything to XXXX, he merely must obtain an authorized signature. XXXX XXXX or any Trust was not mentioned at all, as well as Mortgagee XXXX or “owner/investor” XXXX  (who is a FAKE Servicer) . \n\nI suspect that this Allonge was  prepared on a  rush basis on the same day, XX/XX/XXXX by  – Mr. XXXX - who had no idea about anything regarding my loan -  when XXXX   received it (XX/XX/XXXX); XXXX as a mortgage, ect. Someone (aka XXXX  XXXX) merely had someone (posing  as XXXX XXXX)  to sign an obviously fraudulent document. \n\nMr. XXXX signature is not a wet ink signature and appears to be an electronically forged signature which can be placed by anybody – thus, a modernized variation of robo-signing. \n\nIn the middle of the document pile XXXX  put billing documents received probably from XXXX. The don't have PDF file on the bottom and top (see XXXX  Sequence of documents)\n\n At the end XXXXc  attached  all documents related to origination, including Appraisal, photos, ect. Total over 100 pages (speaking about \"broad and burdensome\" request to give me a name of the Trust and proof of the valid Transfer with  value paid). Obviously, XXXX  wanted to make an impression that all these documents were originally in their files and kept in  consecutive chronological order while they were obviously not. \n\n Again, the front  and back parts of these documents were the same voluminous PDF file received by XXXX  via email from XXXX  XXXX  for the first time on XX/XX/XXXX while documents in the middle came from some other sources. \n\nNone of these documents mentioned  XXXX as an \"owner/investor\" (now XXXX claims to be merely \"servicers\" while Servicers are NOT owners of the loans, thus XXXX made false statements to mislead me about their “ownership” ).\n\nHere is  no proof of any valid transfer or any value paid by XXXX to XXXX or by XXXX to XXXX from whom XXXX received my loan from XXXX via  Allonge transfer on XX/XX/XXXX while XXXX insisted that they obtained my loan from XXXX onXX/XX/XXXX.  According to endorcement rules,  must use the NOTE space first before they attach any allonges. \n\nAccording to the Rules: The note must be endorsed to each subsequent owner of the mortgage unless one or more of the owners endorsed the note in blank. The last endorsement on the note should be that of the mortgage seller. The mortgage seller must endorse the note in blank and without recourse. \n\nThe only endorsement on the Allonge is “Pay to XXXX   XXXX  XXXX, Inc without recourse” was made on XX/XX/XXXX while XXXX claimed they are next servicers who receive my loan onXX/XX/XXXX for servicing purposes and owner/investor is XXXX  XXXX. No other endorsements are  present – neither to XXXX  XXXX   although they must be listed on the Note; nor to XXXX. \n\nThe Rules also specify using an Allonge for the Endorsement.   The endorsement must appear on the note. An allonge  may be used for the endorsement as long as the following requirements are met: The form and content of the allonge used must comply with all applicable state, local, or federal law governing the use of allonges and result in an enforceable and proper endorsement to the note.  The allonge must be permanently affixed to the related note and must clearly identify the note by referencing at least the name of the borrower(s), the date of the note, the amount of the note, and the address of the security property.  The note must clearly reference the attached allonge. XXXX XXXX status as a “holder in due course” must not be impaired. \n\nOnce again, here is NOTHING on the Note referencing to XXXX  XXXX; or XXXX or Allonge itself which was prepared by collateral shipper Mr. XXXX  who does not have authority to assign any Notes. \n\nIn other words, my Note and Allonge are a glaring example of modern documents forgery committed by the same companies who flooded US Courts with forged robo-signed foreclosures. These companies changed their names to XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX but their criminal practices are the same. \n\nBear to repeat, after I asked why both servicers  - XXXX   and XXXX receive my payments in the same post Office in XXXX TX, XXXX  promptly changed payment mailing address from XXXX XXXX  in XXXX TX to XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX  XXXX  CA .\n\n So, where I should pay my mortgage? Why XXXX   demanded my XXXX, XXXX and XXXX payments to be mailed to XXXX TX if they don’t even have offices in TX? Whom I paid my debt when I mailed my payments to XXXX  TX?  \n\nWhen I spoke with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX around XXXX how they  deposited   my payments (this conversation was  witnessed by XXXX banker XXXX   XXXX  who processed my check  to XXXX), XXXX   representative Mr. XXXX said that XXXX deposited it in THEIR account with Bank of America. \n\nAccording to the refund check XXXX  mailed me on XX/XX/XXXX from their Oklahoma XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, OK XX/XX/XXXX, this BOA location is in Georgia and routing number is XX/XX/XXXX. It does not make any sense for XX/XX/XXXXwhose place of business is in Oklahoma, to collect my payments in XX/XX/XXXX TX and issue me refunds from BOA account located in XX/XX/XXXX GA while process my payments with a different BOA location. If XX/XX/XXXX used BOA location in GA, it would be reasonable to deposit my payments on the same account. \n\nBased on XXXX XXXX  MBS Guide, my payments should be handled by a Trustee (apparently XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX) and distributed to XXXX XXXX investors. None of it present.\n\nBut my payments were processed by BOA in TX (where neither XXXX or XXXX  do not have any offices nearby) and Bank of Final Deposit had routing number XXXX, which belonged to XXXX XXXX XXXX   which merged with BOA\n\nThe name of the Trust is not mentioned but the XXXX XXXX pool is supposedly XXXX. XXXX XXXX pools have different abbreviations; and I was not able to locate any XXXX Trusts.\n\nNow XXXX  said that they prepared a PayOff Demand letter, apparently trying to demand me to pay them FULL amount of my loan, in violation of all applicable laws, while I never refused to pay my debt and lawfully requested Validation of Debt and Adequate Assurance during which time I have right to suspend my performance.\n\nXXXX on XX/XX/XXXX for the first time provided me a copy of my Note – without ANY assignments; and poorly forged Allonge to the Note while the Note has no references to any Allonges or XXXX what-so-ever; and now XXXXXXXX wants me to pay them the ENTIRE amount of my loan, which is a text book fraud; wrongful collection; violation of FDCPA and racket under RICO Act.\n\nSo, the delay with payment was caused not by my refusal to pay ( I am willing and able my debt to legitimate investors) but by XXXX  violation of all applicable laws.\n\nI really don't know that to do about since these criminals have no limits in their violations of the law and I am consented they can illegally foreclose even though I have all evidence of their fraud and they cannot accelerate payments during validation period. \n\nI contacted XXXX XXXX (who emailed XXXX  PDF file on XX/XX/XXXX)  Here is that they said: “Ms. XXXX, Thank you for your correspondence.  This matter does not involve XXXX   XXXX business activities and any questions that you may have should be directed to the current servicer of your loan. Sincerely”\n\nThis is a blatant lie. First, XXXX XXXX ordered a copy of the FEMA map acting on behalf of XXXX as their client. \n\nSecond, anyone who knows about securitization of residential debt knows that the only way the banks could succeed is if they had a central repository and central command center from which all documents were fabricated and all instructions were issued. \nFor nearly all loans the central command was XXXX, aided by XXXX. \n\nWhile XXXX is technically defunct and XXXX XXXX went to jail taking one for the team, the functions of XXXX  remained the same.\n\nXXXX  changed its name to XXXX  XXXX  who in fact is owned and operated by XXXX   and Me. XXXX XXXX, and in a PR coup transformed itself into the publisher of what is largely viewed as comprehensive data on mortgage lending and foreclosures. Hence it went from the purveyor of false, fraudulent, forged documentation to the purveyor of data perceived as reliable and thence became a trusted source whose data is considered worthy of legal presumptions.\n\nSystems at XXXX/XXXX XXXX  include data processing on virtually all residential loans subject to claims of securitization many of which are represented by data on the XX/XX/XXXX  Platform which is a workaround to hide separate split transfers of the debt, the note and the mortgage or deed of trust. The systems on XXXX/XXXX   XXXX are designed for the express purpose of presenting consistent data in foreclosure claims. As such it also enables the rotation of apparent servicers, none of whom perform bookkeeping functions even if some of them interact with borrowers as if they were actually the servicers.\n\nThe rotation of servicers comes with the false representation and illusion of boarding in which the process is falsely represented as meaning that the new servicer inspected, audited, reviewed and input the data into their own system. None of that occurred. Instead the new servicer merely gained access to the same XXXX   system as the last servicer with a new login and password.\n\nAll evidence shows that the functions for fabricated, forging and robosigning documents continue to be performed under the direction of XXXX/XXXX XXXX (in fact, by XXXX under leadership of XXXX XXXX XXXX) ) which receives all instructions from various investment banks who have each started their own securitization scheme masking apparent trades in the secondary market for loans and trades in the shadow banking market where “private contracts” are regularly traded without any securities regulation.\n\n Far from dropping their connection with XXXX/XXXX the major banks have completely embraced this central repository of all loan data, all of which is subject to manual and algorithmic manipulation to suit the needs of the banks; thus they produce a report that creates the illusion of credibility, reliability and even independence even though none of those things are true.  This is why the claims of a “Boarding process” are pure fiction, because the records are always kept in the same place and never move. \n\nThis is obvious in my situation with fake Servicers XXXX   and XXXX  who have no documents pertaining to my loan. \n\nXXXX was the place where most of not all document fabrications took place including signatures that were forged or robosigned. Fabrication means that they were creating documents that did not previously exist. Those documents did not exist for only one reason, to wit: there was no transaction to document so the document was never prepared until it was necessary to fake it for the purposes of foreclosures.\n\nXXXX XXXX  is now used as a trusted source of information about mortgages and foreclosures despite being the central entity (operating through third party contractors) from which false documents are created and used in foreclosures.\n\nIt was necessary to fake it because under the law, it isn’t enough to allege or assert that a borrower failed to pay. Failure to pay is only a breach as to the owner of the debt who is entitled to receive the payment because he/she/it paid money for the debt and the rights to enforce. But no such payment ever occurred. If there is no rebach there is no claim.\n\nSo in order to cover-up the illusions created by fabrications of documents, it was necessary to fake the sending, filing and serving of process of documents. The secrecy  was accomplished by sending the notices not from the central repository, XXXX XXXX, which would make it obvious that it was all coming from one place, but from different locations around the country — hundreds of them.\n\nSo in my  example, XXXX agrees to let XXXX XXXX   use its name for notices, and Bank of America agrees to have the notice sent from one of its thousands of locations. In reality the notice came from XXXX XXXX (aka XXXX).\n\nAgain, it is very evident in my loan where XXXX  XXXX   was secretly  involved from the beginning when XXXX   XXXX ordered a Flood Insurance Map from FEMA acting on behalf of their “client” XXXX, the purported “Lender”. \n\n The  massive PDF file to XXXX was emailed on XX/XX/XXXX  by XXXX  XXXX  who did not even bother to prepare somehow legitimately-looking assignment or  include XXXX into it. Thus, Mr. XXXX   XXXX, who forged an Allonge, shall be held for document forgery and fraud against Federal Government from who Mr. XXXX  STOLE my loan and the Note which he “assigned” to XXXX, not XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX  evasive and incomplete responses regarding essential documents related to my debt – a copy of my Note with full chain of transfer and a receipt of sale/purchase,  leaves only one possible conclusion, to wit: that the loan origination was only one part of a much larger undisclosed scheme, the existence of which was intentionally obscured and withheld from the borrower, whose name, signature reputation and home were not just material, but absolutely essential requirements for the success of the scheme, which includes huge  tax evasion and money laundering. \n\nThe intent was clearly not to receive repayment of a loan. In fact all evidence currently available suggests that any money that has been received as a result of the “loans” to consumers was actually revenue disguised as principal, interest, or the proceeds of property sales – voluntary or involuntary. \n\nThe current evidence strongly suggests that there was a complete conversion of the loan receivable from the category of “asset” to “income.” In order to maintain the illusion, which required concealment of the conversion of the apparent loan receivable from asset to income, it was necessary to bring foreclosure actions on those consumers who had stopped making payments. This was true even though the parties to whom they were making payments, were not collecting on behalf of any party who owned the debt by virtue of having paid money for ownership of the debt and the rights to enforce it.\n\nBut since the loan receivable had been converted from asset to income they had to create the appearance that the conversion had never occurred. And that is why we saw widespread fabrication, forgery and Robo signing of backdated documents that referred to nonexistent transactions. In reality it is simply not possible that anyone in the chain of title could have paid any money for ownership of the debt and the rights to enforce it; this was simply because none of those parties had ever funded the origination or acquisition of the debt. All attributes of the debt and all revenue streams or profits from treating indirectly on the debt were sold for profit in which the participants in that revenue stream received at least 11 times the amount of the purported “loan.” As part of the cover-up most of the revenue stream was reported as return of capital, implying that the conversion to income had never occurred. This enabled avoidance of substantial income taxes on regular trading income.\n\nThe taxes lost to State and Federal Government were far in excess of the cost of various packages that were used to stimulate the economy after the crash caused by the very same investment bankers who had cheated the government out of the receipt of tax revenues, cheated homeowners, and cheated investors.\n \nIn the recent Complaint filed by the Department of Justice against XXXX  , the insiders who were trading digitized certificates and contracts deriving value from an index that referred to a group of loans that were not owned by any of the participants, referred to the “pooling” and the derivatives as a bag of XXXX whose value was something less then XXXX. And that is what is being enforced in foreclosure courts across the country. And somehow most homeowners continue to experience feelings of shame and regret for not giving even more revenue to players who will already profited in XXXX proportions to any money that was loaned. Those homeowners think that they are either paying a debt if they are making monthly payments, or they are giving up their house to pay a debt. If that was true, that none of the fabrication of documents, forgery or Robo signing would have been necessary. \n\nThus, a full validation of my debt to XXXX aka BOA;  and Adequate Assurance that I deal with a legitimate company, not with a bundle of the same criminals  who once crashed US economy is absolutely mandatory.  I respectfully request you to intervene and ORDER BOA, XXXX, and their co-conspirators to compensate me for ALL damages, in the amount no less that (1) 15% royalties from trades on my name, signature and reputation; (2) treble damages for fraud and forgery;( 3) treble damages for racket; (4) damages for extreme emotional distress while dealing with BOA RICO enterprise who as of today is engaged in a wide-spree crimes. \n\nBOA found it lucrative to gamble with lives and homes  of veterans like myself, with gross disregard to all damages their criminal conduct can cause. The laughable settlements paid by BOA with other people money only made fraud more attractive since BOA acts with total impunity and not afraid to defraud borrowers as much as they want. \n \nRegards. XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-08-21T13:07:36.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"490XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3344343","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2019-08-18T12:47:05.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is obvious in my situation with fake Servicers XXXX   and XXXX  who <em>have</em> no documents pertaining to my loan. \n\nXXXX was the place where most of not all document fabrications took place including signatures that were forged or robosigned. Fabrication <em>means</em> that they were creating documents that did not previously exist."]},"sort":[4.441425,"3344343"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5830796","_score":3.4153247,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint ID # XXXX What date did the federal government, ( using tax payers dollars ), bailout the banks in the great housing market fraud crash of XXXX, including Bank of America , fka Countrywide Home Loans? \n\nThe Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of XXXX, often called the \" bank bailout of XXXX  '', was proposed by Treasury Secretary XXXX XXXX, passed by the 110th United States Congress, and signed into law by President George W. Bush. It became law as part of Public Law 110-343 on XX/XX/XXXX, in the midst of the financial crisis of XXXX. It created the {$900.00} billion Troubled Asset Relief Program ( TARP ) to purchase toxic assets from banks. The funds were mostly redirected to inject capital into banks and other financial institutions while the Treasury continued to examine the usefulness of targeted asset purchases. \n\nThe glaring problem? In their rush to, so-call Save the Banks- the Federal Government ignored the largely innocent, completely unaware and disadvantaged homeowners, ( whos backs, - lets face it this bailout fell on and injured the most ). \n\nAll as a result of the devastation caused by the deceptive fraud and greed in lending, appraisal, as well as servicing practices committed by gigantic financial institutions such as Countrywide Home Loans, currently known as Bank of America N.A. Home Loans. \n\nWednesday, XX/XX/XXXX Contact : ( XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX https : //oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/brown-sues-countrywide-mortgage-deception On XX/XX/XXXX, California Attorney General XXXX XXXX XXXX sues XXXX XXXXXXXX, its chief XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, for engaging in deceptive advertising and unfair competition. \n\nEVIDENCE : * * * 1 ) The lawsuits described a vast \" conspiracy '' in which Countrywide provided financial incentives to large networks of brokers in exchange for their duping borrowers into taking out toxic loans. \n\n2 ) For several years, the scam worked. Countrywide grew from originating {$62.00} billion in loans in XXXX  to more than {$460.00} billion in XXXX, 3 ) while the lenders securities trading volume more than quintupled, from {$640.00} billion in XXXX  to {$3.00} trillion in XXXX.\n\n4 ) The companys CEO, the flashily dressed and perma-tanned XXXX XXXX XXXX became one of the highest-paid executives in the nation, with an influence on markets approaching that of XXXX XXXX. \n\n5 ) The state lawsuits expose just how Countrywide built its sprawling empire.\n\n6 ) One common loan product that came under harsh criticism in the lawsuit was the hybrid adjustable-rate mortgage, or ARM, in which mortgage rates were fixed for two to three years while borrowers made interest-only payments.\n\n7 ) Afterward borrowers got hit with \" payment shock '' when mortgage principal was added onto their monthly payments just as the starter interest rate converted to a variable rate that could shoot up to as high as 15 percent. \n\n8 ) XXXX lawsuit charges that Countrywides goal was to generate loans that paid the highest possible interest ratenot loans that offered the best deal for their customers. \n9 ) Low-income, first-time homebuyers became some of the best targets : the riskier the loan, the higher the interest rate. \n10 ) Countrywide packaged many of these loans into mortgage-backed securities and sold them to XXXX XXXX for windfall profits. \nXXXX ) Securities comprising Countrywide loans were in turn used to structure collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, the implosion of which almost brought down the US financial system.\n\n12 ) Risky Countrywide loans were linked to some of the most toxic CDOs. \n\n13 ) On XX/XX/XXXX, when XXXX announced in a call with XXXX XXXX bankers that housing prices would collapse on a scale not seen since the Depression, widespread panic ensued. By the end of XXXX, according to Countrywides own estimates, a staggering 27 percent of the lenders subprime loans were delinquent.\n\n14 ) Once disaster struck, a quick settlement with the state attorneys general, under which Countrywide accepted no guilt and faced little financial liability, was not such a bad deal for the company. \n\n15 ) The settlement required Countrywide to make only XXXX loan modifications nationwide and did not set a dollar amount on how much these modifications had to save borrowers. \n16 ) Most of the loans covered by the settlement fell into one of two major types issued between XXXX and XXXX, at the height of the housing boom. \n17 ) One was the notorious pay-option ARM, in which the loan balance increased each month for borrowers who made only the minimum payment. \n17A ) Countrywide absurdly classified these loans as \" prime '' productseven though many of them went to borrowers with very low credit scoresmaking it easier to sell them on the secondary market. \n18 ) The other was the subprime ARM, which had a fixed interest rate for a set period and then an adjustable rate for the remainder of the term. \n* * * 19 ) To comply with the settlement, Bank of America set up the Countrywide XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a vehicle for providing relief. \n20 ) And the deal appeared, at first, to provide it. \n21 ) Eligible borrowers, according to XXXX analysis of the deal, may be considered for a range of modifications. \n22 ) Those with pay-option ARMs can reduce their outstanding balance to 95 percent of their homes current value, getting them out from under water.\n\n23 ) 24 ) But Countrywide has no obligation to offer these terms to any particular eligible borrower. \n\n\nCOMPLICIT GOVERMENTAL CORRUPTION : 25 ) A key weapon in BofAs arsenal is something called a foreclosure avoidance budget, which gives the bank the option of foreclosing on homeowners whenever, in the judgment of the banks analysts, more money can be recouped by foreclosing than by modifying the loan. \n26 ) Housing advocates speak with frustration of how BofA often refuses to grant modifications to eligible borrowers, based solely on the banks analysis of its foreclosure avoidance budget. \n27 ) Yet bank officials have refused to make public how they calculate that budget. \nXXXX ) XXXX XXXX, a lawyer with XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, an XXXX nonprofit, says she repeatedly attempted to obtain that information from BofA. \" One of the things we kept asking, '' she says, \" is, Can we see those analyses? Can we see the foreclosure avoidance budget? \n29 ) The answer was always no. '' In the end, she simply gave up on using the Countrywide settlement as a means of helping borrowers. \n30 ) Even information on how many homeowners are facing foreclosure under the foreclosure avoidance budget is not publicly available. \n31 ) I requested these numbers from the California attorney generals office, which directed me to Bank of America, which refused to divulge the data. \n\n32 ) Last XXXX I interviewed XXXX XXXX, Bank of Americas senior vice president for public relations and communications, at a meeting between BofA executives and distraught homeowners in a church in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) he said something telling : \" We dont call it a settlement, but our agreement with the attorneys general. '' Apparently BofA doesnt believe it owes anybody anything. \n\n34 ) Despite XXXX  XXXX XXXX failure to help hundreds of thousands of homeowners ruined by Countrywide, 35 ) the bank claims it is on track to fulfill its obligations under the settlement. \n36 ) According to the one publicly available page of a quarterly compliance report the bank is required to file with the state attorneys general, as of the end of the second quarter of XXXX, BofA had modified a total of XXXX loans under the settlement, achieved an expected interest and principal savings for borrowers of {$3.00} XXXX and provided {$170.00} XXXX in relief to people who had lost their homes to foreclosure. \n\nXXXX ) These numbers look impressive, at first glance. \nXXXX ) But a XX/XX/XXXX study by XXXX of the loans covered by the settlement projected that 50 percent of the modified loans are so untenable they will re-default within a year. \nXXXX ) The terms being offered are so bad that many lawyers are not bothering to seek relief, says XXXX XXXX, an attorney representing underwater borrowers northeast of XXXX XXXX. \n40 ) XXXX estimates that in the past three years he has worked with about 1,000 clients seeking modifications, half of them from Countrywide. \n41 ) He projects that for borrowers who get the five-year, interest-only payments, there is going to be major trouble down the line. \" We havent seen the effect yet, '' he says. \" They took them out of one loan that was a ticking time bomb and put them into another loan with ticking time bomb features. '' 42 ) Bank of America officials concede that re-default is a major threat, projecting a rate of XXXX percent. \n43 ) But they claim most of these defaults will be a product of growing unemployment, not unfair loan modifications. \n44 ) Housing counselors and attorneys tell a different story. \nXXXX ) They say the modifications BofA is offering under the settlement are not sustainable even for many borrowers with jobs. \n46 ) \" As far as I know, none of our clients have gotten a modification under this program, '' says XXXX XXXX, an attorney and director of the XXXX XXXX, a nonprofit community development corporation based in XXXX. \n47 ) \" The offers I have seen so far are basically a low-interest-only, fixed rate for five years, and then the loan converts to a principal and interest, which of course, depending on the total amount due, could be a huge jump in the persons total monthly payment ''. \n\n* * * PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PENSION FUNDS INVESTED HEAVILY IN COUNTRYWIDES CDOs : 48 ) As it turns out, BofA has had good reason not to make its modifications affordable for mortgages now owned by a third party, such as the public employee pension funds that invested heavily, and disastrously, in Countrywides mortgage-backed securities. \n49 ) From XXXX to XXXX, the years covered by the settlement, Countrywide sold most of its first-lien subprime loans as mortgage-backed securities or loan packages, 50 ) but it generally kept the lucrative servicing contracts. \n51 ) BAC Home Loan Servicing ( formerly Countrywide Home Loans Inc. ), Countrywides servicing arm, acts as a bill collector, gathering mortgage payments from borrowers and distributing these payments to the investors who actually own the mortgages. \n52 ) Servicers earn a small percentage of mortgage payments, but what has made the business especially profitable are late fees and other ancillary costs such as property inspections, collected from borrowers in delinquency and in default. \n\n53 ) Those revenues will be lost through the settlement with the state attorneys general, 54 ) which requires BofA to waive outstanding late fees for delinquent Countrywide borrowers who receive a modification. \n55 ) But BofA can start the lucrative late-fee gravy train all over for all the borrowers who re-default on modified loansa staggering number, if the XXXX projections prove to be accurate. \n56 ) When these financially exhausted borrowers finally go into foreclosure, any outstanding late fees can be tacked onto the bill BofA submits to investors. \n\n57 ) Only about 12 percent of the first-lien loans initiated by Countrywide remain on BofAs books 58 ) Investors in mortgage-backed securities, including major pension funds like XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX own the other 88 percent, 59 ) and it is these investors who will bear most of the expense of complying with the settlement, in the form of permanently reduced principal and interest payments on their bond holdings. \n60 ) Believe it or not, this aspect of the deal was overlooked by the settlement. \n61 ) XXXX XXXX, attorney general of Connecticut, one of the original parties to the suit, seems to have missed it entirely, claiming in his XX/XX/XXXX announcement, \" This settlement will cost BofA as much as {$8.00} XXXX, but no cost, not a dime, to taxpayers.? '' 62 ) In fact, as it turned out later, much of the settlements cost would be covered by taxpayers. \n63 ) Bank of America is allowed to use federal incentives under President Obamas {$75.00} XXXX Home Affordable Modification Program ( HAMP ) toward the loan modifications it is required to make as the mortgage servicer for the Countrywide portfolio. \n64 ) In total, of its entire Countrywide financial servicing portfoliowhich goes beyond the loans covered by the settlementBofA is eligible for as much as {$4.00} XXXX in federal incentives for completed modifications, according to an analysis by the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as reported in XXXX XXXX. Thats a hefty government rebate. \n\n65 ) There are indications that Bank of Americas slow progress on loan modifications is intentional. \n66 ) Many service providers on the front lines of the crisis were unaware of the settlement more than a year after it took effect. \n67 ) Take XXXX XXXX, a team leader in the housing department of XXXX XXXX XXXX, a HUD-approved counseling agency in XXXX XXXX XXXX Of the hundreds of Countrywide borrowers, hes tried to obtain loan modifications for, \" not one of them has mentioned anything regarding the attorneys general modification, '' he says. \n\n68 ) Why dont borrowers know about the settlement?\n\n69 ) If they received a notification letter like the one Bank of America officials gave me after weeks of prodding, they would have no clue they were one of the covered homeowners. \n\n70 ) Nowhere in the letter is there explicit mention of the settlement. Theres no mention of borrowers rights, such as waiving of late fees for those who qualify for modification.\n\n71 ) And the letter fails to mention the settlements most attractive modification option : principal write-down, the only measure that could make a significant difference to borrowers who have seen the value of their homes decline by 50 percent or more. \n\n\n71 ) Bank of Americas opaque public outreach apparently passes muster with the California attorney general. \n\n72 ) An official in the AGs office who declined to be named told me the notification letter \" is not necessarily going to reference the settlement. '' 73 ) He went on to express concern about the plaintiffs themselves, the very people the settlement was designed to protect. \n\nNOW WHEN IT COMES TO HOMEOWNRES - THEIR WORRIED ABOUT MORAL HAZARD? \nIN THE FACE OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF SWINDELED LOSSES COMMITTED BY CORRUPT BANKING AND MORTGAGE INSTITUTIONS, AS WELL AS CORRUPT GOVERNMENATL REGULATION AND SO-CALLED OVERSIGHT! \nALL - AT THE ULTIMATE EXPENSE OF HOMEOWNERS AND INVESTORS 74 ) \" There is a moral hazard problem with all of this, which is that you dont want to encourage borrowers who can afford their loans to default, or borrowers who dont believe they were victims of fraud to default, '' he says. \n75 ) \" So, there is a fine line that had to be walked in figuring out how to publicize, announce and communicate with borrowers. '' * * * 76 ) The settlements most fatal flaw may be its failure to cover second liens. Bank of America still owns a large number of Countrywides second liens outright, including its once popular Home Equity Lines of Credit ( HELOCs ). \n\n77 ) Today the bank is the largest holder of second-lien loans in the country, which are valued at {$140.00} XXXX. ( Second-lien loans, which are tacked onto the original first-lien mortgage, include home-equity loans used to finance everything from home improvements to hospitalization to coverage of 1520 percent of the purchase price of a house. ) 78 ) XXXX alleges that Countrywide employees broke the same laws in selling those loans as they did in selling first liens. \n79 ) According to the XXXX lawsuit, Countrywide loan officers \" further [ ed ] their deceptive scheme '' by \" urging borrowers to encumber their homes up to 100 % ( or more ) of the assessed value ; and placing borrowers in piggyback second mortgages in the form of higher interest HELOCs while obscuring their monthly payment obligations. '' 80 ) A settlement that covered second liens would have improved the prospects for victims of Countrywides predations. \n81 ) Federal officials and mortgage analysts have identified second liens as a major factor in at least half the mortgages in danger of default. Such a loan works against borrowers in several ways. \n\n82 ) Not only does it stick them with a greater debt burden ; it also stands in the way of principal reduction on the first mortgage, since a second lien must usually be wiped out before principal can be written down on the first loan. \n\n83 ) The attorneys general seem to have left this gaping loophole for pure expediency. \n84 ) \" We do allege misconduct related to the origination of second liens and HELOCs, '' says the XXXX AG official. \" However, for purposes of settling the case, we wanted to craft a settlement that, while not perfect, would have the most effective chance of saving homeowners as quickly as possible. We were in a situation where the housing crisis was expanding by the moment. They [ Bank of America ] could have dragged out the negotiations for two years, during which time innumerable residents of California and other states could have lost their homes to foreclosure. '' 85 ) Earlier this year Bank of America finally indicated some willingness to address the second-lien issue XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX the bank announced to much positive press that it was the first servicer to sign up for a resuscitated federal effort known as the Second Lien Modification Program, which the Obama administration had been trying to get off the ground since spring XXXX. \n\n86 ) In XXXX, facing additional legal action over Countrywides predatory lending practices, Bank of America reached another settlement, this one with Massachusetts. \n87 ) Under that deal, the settlement XXXX negotiated was expandedBank of America would now offer principal reductions to about 45,000 severely underwater Countrywide borrowers. Notably, BofA will offer these principal reductions only to borrowers who qualify for HAMP, under which the bank gets bailed out by taxpayers. \n\n\n88 ) The Countrywide settlement, says XXXX XXXX, associate director of the XXXX XXXX XXXX, a statewide organization that advocates for low-income communities, has failed to protect homeowners who were the victims of predatory lending on an epidemic scale. \n89 ) \" Fraud and predatory lending really created this crisis we are in, and nobody is taking that into account, '' says XXXX. \" That was a concern we had with the original settlement. They dont admit any fraud. \"? \n\n\n90 ) Now state attorneys general might finally have an opportunity to help the thousands of defrauded Countrywide borrowers who have fallen through the cracks. \n91 ) On XX/XX/XXXX Bank of America announced that it was temporarily suspending foreclosures in all fifty states in response to revelations of false or fraudulent documentation and at least one BofA \" robo-signer '' who approved thousands of foreclosure papers without proper review. \n92 ) Even so, BofA appears confident that it has done nothing wrong. \" We will stop foreclosure sales until our assessment has been satisfactorily completed, '' states a BofA press release. \n93 ) \" Our ongoing assessment shows the basis for our past foreclosure decisions is accurate. We continue to serve the interests of our customers, investors and communities. Providing solutions for distressed homeowners remains our primary focus. '' Its up to the attorneys general, in their newly announced investigation, to hold BofA to its word. \n\n\nCountrywide exploited the American dream of homeownership and then sold its mortgages for huge profits on the secondary market, Attorney General XXXX said. The company sold ever-increasing numbers of complex and risky home loans, as quickly as possible. Countrywide was, in essence, a mass-production loan factory, producing ever-increasing streams of debt without regard for borrowers who were ripped off by Countrywides deceptive scheme.\n\nDespite receiving numerous complaints from borrowers claiming that they did not understand their loan terms, Countrywide ignored loan officers deceptive practices and loose underwriting standards. Countrywide also pushed its borrowers to serially refinance, repeatedly urging borrowers to obtain home loans to pay off their current debt. \n\nhttp : //ag.ca.gov/contact/complaint_form.php? cmplt=CL People v. Countrywide XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\n\nIntentional Misrepresentations : ( Appraisal Process ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , thXXXX appraisal company used by Countrywide in my XXXX loan origination, - settled class action lawsuit accusing them of illegal appraisals regarding title and collateral valuation within their loan origination operational practices. \n\nCountrywides Mandate for Growth - Countrywide ceased acting as a conventional money lender, but instead morphed into an enterprise engaged in systematic fraud. This systematic fraud extended to the fraudulent appraisal process of a silent market fixing scheme through a policy of exercising control over appraisers including their loan origination values. \n\n1A ) Countrywides massive scheme to artificially inflate property values and fix the Real Estate Market through its wholly-owned subsidiary, XXXX XXXX authority to bind, meant to difference between being qualified for a home loan and being able to afford a home loan. \n\n1B ) Countrywide turned substantial profit through their borrowers default, - furthering their incentive to intentionally place borrowers into impossible and unaffordable home loans. \n\n1C ) Countrywide misled public and were well aware of their fraud. Countrywide intentionally misrepresented, and concealed information which they knew was highly material to the decision for a prospective customer to enter into a loan with Countrywide. \n\n1D ) Countrywides improper securitization, the foreclosing trusts had no ownership interest in homeowner Notes or Deeds of Trust under the explicit terms of their own Pooling and Service Agreements. There is no Chain of Title. Understanding MERS, - and its role in Countrywides wrongful foreclosure process. \n\n1E ) Countrywides violation of numerous other laws, and pervasive schemes of fraud and deception, ( along with many other financial institutions, such as Bank of America ), substantially contributed to the United States national housing market crash of XXXX, essentially, overnight wiping out the home values of millions of America homeowners nationwide, who were otherwise completely innocent of these events! Triggering the overnight catastrophe that resulted in the substantial devaluing of millions of American homeowner properties, which directly lead to millions of American homeowners losing their properties through foreclosure nationwide! \n\nRelationship of Bank of America to Countrywide 63. BofAs public disclosures, as reflected in its filings with the SEC, make clear that BofA considers itself both a common enterprise operating as a greater whole and without meaningful distinctions as to its operating units, and the successor to Countrywide and its subsidiaries. As stated in BofAs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended XX/XX/XXXX ( BofA XXXX XXXX K ), [ i ] n XXXX of XXXX, we made a {$2.00} XXXX investment in Countrywide Financial Corporation ( Countrywide ), the largest mortgage lender in the U.S. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, we announced a definitive agreement to purchase all outstanding shares of Countrywide... The acquisition would make us the nations leading mortgage lender and loan servicer. BofA XXXX 10-K, at XXXX. \n64. Thereafter, as stated in BofAs Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended XX/XX/XXXX ( BofA XX/XX/XXXX 10-Q ), On XX/XX/XXXX, the Corporation acquired Countrywide through its merger XXXX a subsidiary of the Corporation. BofA XX/XX/XXXX 10-Q at XXXX. \n\n- 17 XX/XX/XXXX the extent that certain Plaintiffs herein become aware of information that provides a basis for asserting the Defendants herein are liable for the origination of their loans, those Plaintiffs reserve the right to seek leave of this Court to re-assert the appropriate claims herein. \n\nCOMPLAINT Lawley, et. al. v. Bank of America, et. al. \nAgain, BofA boasts in the BofA XX/XX/XXXX 10-Q that The acquisition of Countrywide significantly improved our mortgage originating and servicing capabilities, while making us the nations leading mortgage originator and servicer. BofA XX/XX/XXXX 10-Q at XXXX. \n65. BofA further makes clear the commonality of its business enterprise with that of Countrywide, and the greater whole of its various subsidiaries and operating units, by stating again that On XX/XX/XXXX, the Corporation acquired Countrywide... creating the nations largest mortgage originator and servicer. BofA XX/XX/XXXX 10-Q at XXXX. \n66. Countrywides remaining operations and employees have been transferred to Bank of America, and Bank of America ceased using the Countrywide name in XX/XX/XXXX. \n# 6 Specific Bank of America Violations On XX/XX/XXXX, a XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Form 25 was utilized to deregister and delist Countrywides common stock, and on XX/XX/XXXX Countrywide filed Securities and Exchange Commission Form 15 deregistering its common stock under Section 12 ( b ) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.\n\n67. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that : ( 1 ) BofA and its wholly- owned and controlled subsidiaries are liable for all wrongful acts of Countrywide prior to the date thereof as the successor-in-interest to Countrywide ; ( 2 ) BofA directly and through its subsidiaries and other agents sued herein as Does have continued the unlawful practices of Countrywide since XX/XX/XXXX, including, without limitation thereof : 1 ) writing fraudulent mortgages as set forth above 2 ) concealing wrongful acts that occurred in whole or in part prior thereto, 3 ) BofA and its subsidiaries are jointly and severally liable as alter egos and as a single, greater unified whole. \n\nBank of America N.A. Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, its Assignees and Successors.\n\nIf a Trustee, Paying Agent or Registrar consolidates with, merges or converts into, or transfers all or substantially all of its corporate trust assets to another corporation, the resulting, surviving or transferee corporation without any further act shall be the successor. \n\n\n\n\n\nDear Bank of America N.A. Home Loans, - according to your own research per Department of Justice notice dated XX/XX/XXXX, Bank of America N.A. Home Loans, fka Countrywide Home Loans, my Home Equity Line of Credit, ( HELOC ), account ending in XXXX was approved for participation in a principal forgiveness program offered as a result of the Department of Justice and State Attorneys General national settlement with major mortgage services, including Bank of America. \n\nI stated, I received a full forgiveness not because of some random form of charity, or anonymous altruism, because my family is just one of literally millions of unsuspecting, Innocent homeowners who fell prey to the unbelievable scale of fraud, especially within the appraisal process engaged in by Countrywide Home Loans, currently Bank of America N.A. \n\nI am again requesting that Bank of America return in full all payments made between XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, approximately, {$5000.00}. \n\nAlso, the fraudulent reverse mortgage my mother entered into with Financial Freedom Senior Funding in December 2004, is a subsidiary of Countrywide Home Loans, and therefore with the purview and responsibility of Bank of America N.A. as successor by merger to Countrywide Home Loans LP. \n\nAlso, as I have repeatedly complained, my refinance of my parents home is riddled with fraud and abuse, especially within the XXXX XXXX process as I have repeatedly tried to draw your attention to? \n\nNot only was I at a complete disadvantage dealing with the predatory refinance department at Countrywide, but I was devastated and in severe mourning at the death of my dear and sweet mother. The refinance department at countrywide saw me coming, and took complete advantage of me, having me assume not only a {$54000.00} plus reverse mortgage that my mother had unknowing entered just 2 years prior, but also the mind numbing fact that despite my parents having paid approximately {$82000.00} from the period between XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX in mostly interest only payments, and an additional {$54000.00}, with Countrywide charging a closing fee of {$10.00}, XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX to the time of my mothers death on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI am requesting that my complaint be immediately reconsidered with a positive resolution in the favor of myself and my family for we are the horrible victims of extremely documented fraud, misrepresentation and homeowner abuse.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-08-03T16:59:26.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"89106","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5830796","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2022-08-01T05:53:37.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["of <em>course</em>, depending on the total amount due, could be a huge jump in the persons total monthly payment ''"]},"sort":[3.4153247,"5830796"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3206036","_score":2.695597,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I contact your Office to ask for protection against Wells Fargo Banks foreclosures fraud, identity theft and illegal trades on my property, name and signature without any disclosures ; and failure to comply with its promises to help wrongfully foreclosed veterans. \n\nIt is not a secret that Wells Fargo bank operates a massive Ponzi Scam in US Courts and illegal trading of void US securities ( aka XXXX non-existing REMIC Trusts mortgages ) where Wells Fargo, acting as a fake Plaintiff for a fictitious Trust, steal people 's identities ; obstructs justice and illegally foreclose while Wells Fargo received enormous profits, at least $ 3-4 million my property by secretly reselling the same loan multiply times without any disclosures to me or sharing any benefits from trades - plus got the free house and proceeds from the sale. \n\nThe entire Wells Fargo bank 's scheme depends completely on concealing the fact that the loan is the cornerstone of a much larger fraudulent scheme wherein the hidden players are going to make money in multiples of the amount loaned. In fact, borrowers, like myself who signed papers were in fact unknowingly issuing unregulated securities for the sole benefit of investment banks - without my knowledge, or consent, just by stealing my identity. \n\nA foreclosure initiated by Wells Fargo or defunct Trustees fails to comply with applicable law since none of them have the right to enforce the debt. ALL of them have received a benefit and some of them have received a windfall derived from trading on the borrowers signature on the note and mortgage in an amount far exceeding the principal amount loaned. And those benefits or trading profits were derived strictly because they were trading on the signature of the borrower, together with the borrowers name and reputation, without disclosure to the borrower of compensation to be received arising from the origination of the loan and without consent from the borrower to trade on his/her name. \n\nJudicial enthusiasm to give a free house to Wells Fargo bank via an empty nonexistent trust represented by a trustee with no trustee duties and whose authority derives from the nonexistent trust is to add insult to injury. When the market crashed none of the risk associated with this practice was absorbed by Wells Fargo or other banks that set it in motion. All of it was forced on borrowers who bailed out fraudulent banks with over {$30.00} Trillion taxpayers money even though they did not need a bailout but took it anyway. The banks ONLY concern is the preservation of the appearance of the loan as the base to a virtual tree and branches of derivatives that were traded in which WFB was not only relieved of any risk, but received trading profits equal to many times the amount loaned. All foreclosure litigation is thus a high stakes game for Wells Fargo bank who continue to conceal their true motives and intent. \n\nGovernments approval of the fundamental breach of the lenders obligation to make a viable loan seems like quackery to then give Wells Fargo bank, who is not a creditor, a free house and the proceeds of sale. Given the trading on the borrowers signature, name and reputation without disclosure much less consent, it seems like outright theft to reward them with a free house and the proceeds of foreclosure. This scheme was conceived in the context of a belief that they could get away with it and so far. The painful truth is that most people who left their keys on a clean kitchen counter were delivering a free house to a band of thieves who had already XXXX them several times. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, President Obama announced that : Thousands of service members and veterans whose mortgages were wrongfully foreclosed on, or who were improperly denied lower mortgage interest rates in the national housing crisis, can receive significant relief. It is unconscionable that members of our armed forces and their families are among those who were most susceptible to losing their homes due to the unscrupulous acts of banks and mortgage lenders. He continued : \" If you are a member of the armed forces whose home was wrongfully foreclosed, you will be substantially compensated. The same provisions were stated under the Consent Judgement of XX/XX/XXXX in case XXXX and the National Mortgage Settlement, which Big Banks like Wells Fargo failed to adhere to. Lenders promised to review all foreclosures affecting American service members from XXXX onward. Service members wrongly foreclosed on would be compensated equal to the minimum of the lost equity, plus interest, at least {$110000.00}, plus other relief. None of these promises were fulfilled. \n\nI am a XXXX XXXX of the XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, who received special recognition in the fight XXXX  XXXX XXXX. Returning to XXXX life, I found myself the victim of XXXX XXXX wrongful foreclosure filed on XX/XX/XXXX, or almost immediately after Wells Fargo and XXXX XXXX XXXX agreed to comply with the Federal Governments Orders to Cease and Desist. During last seven years, not once have I received any assistance from Wells Fargo Bank, even after I repeatedly request them to review my foreclosure. \n\nIve been subjected to endless bureaucratic and psychological torture committed by our countrys agencies as theyve failed me as a veteran, and a citizen. Again, I have never received a substantive response to my case every single response is a runaround letter. On the contrary, my foreclosure has turned into a major conflict. Wells Fargo Bank has hired an armada of lawyers, a force of two law Firms, with over 1,500 lawyers, against me, a solo ProSe female veteran. During the litigation, the enormity of our countrys corruption has been staggering. Not only does Wells Fargo have infinite resources to commit fraud against veterans, they have engaged a vast network of corrupt Illinois Court judges and politicians that aid and abet the Banks abuses against veterans. \n\nI once against respectfully request your Offices to use your authority to cease Wells Fargo Banks abuses and exploitations of American homeowners, especially veterans. I also request you to order Wells Fargo to comply with its promises under the Settlement, intervene in my case, and compensate me for other damages, including extreme emotional distress, total {$5.00} XXXX compensation requested. \n\nI also request a full audit for Natl Mortgage Settlement since Wells Fargo bank continues to operate its dark money laundering mill based on sales of illegal US securities ( aka fake REMIC Trusts XXXX ) to shady investors on foreign exchange markets, with full support from Judiciary and law enforcement authorities. \n\nStatement of Facts : On XX/XX/XXXX Wells Fargo bank acting under glimpse of XXXX Bank as Trustee for XXXX XXXX Trust, a non-existing fraudulent organization, filed a Complaint in Case XXXX where lawyer XXXX XXXX committed seven ( 7 )  perjuries on 3 pages, including a lie that XXXX was a Mortgagee for my loan with XXXX XXXX and Loan while XXXX was not a mortgagee. \n\nLawyer XXXX also lied that XXXX Bank is a Plaintiff and Trustee who is acting on behalf of Trust XXXX XXXX while XXXX Bank is not a Plaintiff, not a Trustee and this Trust is a fake which never was formed has absolutely no signs of existence. Moreover, XXXX Bank personally deny any involvement in foreclosures. In support to this fraudulent complaint lawyer XXXX ( still practices law ) submitted a forged Assignment with a separate page contained a stamped signature of long-defunct XXXX official XXXX XXXX. All Summons and Notices were intentionally served on a wrong address to prevent me from appearing in this case. \n\nThe first judge who handled this case and favorably ruled for Wells Fargo lawyers was XXXX XXXX XXXX, a well-connected judge from lawyers, bankers, realtors family, classmate with IL XXXX XXXX XXXX ( whose father XXXX XXXX is the most corrupt politician in Illinois ). XXXX ignored all violations, deficiencies, perjuries and forgeries committed by Wells Fargo lawyers ; disregarded defective service of process ( all Summons and notices were sent to unit XXXX while my unit is XXXX ) ; and favorably ruled for Wells Fargo bank whole lawyers from XXXX XXXX XXXX donated XXXX at least {$1000.00} for election. \n\nWhen I accidentally learned about this case, I appeared before XXXX and asked to vacate her void judgement, which she refused to do. Moreover, she threatened me from the bench and even sent me a criminal investigator to further scare and intimidate after I revealed her violations of the law and connections with Wells Fargo. \n\nXXXX recused herself from my case and it was assigned to XXXX XXXX XXXX, a well-connected judge who obtained his judicial seat through assignment from IL Democratic Party leader XXXX who regularly offers his patronage in distribution of judicial seats in exchange of donations and favors, of course. \n\nLawyers from Wells Fargo bank were absolutely confident that Judge XXXX ( whose son served XXXX as political aid ) will rule in their favor and ignore all laws and my evidence and documents, so on XX/XX/XXXX they recorded a Deed on my property based on void Order entered by corrupt XXXX XXXX, which is a glaring violation of my Due Process rights ( do not exist for people like myself in Illinois ). \n\nXXXX XXXX ( whose brother-in-law XXXX XXXX was Wells Fargos top lawyer from XXXX XXXX XXXX, and whose entire family is heavily involved in banking business ), didnt fail his parties of interests. \n\nHe completely ignored all my evidence and argument that the fake Plaintiff, Trust XXXX, does not exist and all evidence was forged and fabricated. XXXX was too busy cracking jokes about Murky XXXX practices while XXXX was not a mortgagee for my loan and had absolutely no relationship to this case. \n\nMoreover, XXXX refused to provide me a copy of a purportedly original document brought by Wells Fargo lawyers as a smoking gun evidence and claimed that it is exactly the same as attached to the Complaint, which was a lie. The document was not the same and lacked ANY chain of assignment, including forged stamped signature. XXXX XXXX even did not opened the Complaint to compare the documents when he ruled in favor of his parties of interests ; and criminally concealed this original document from the case records to defraud me and the Higher Courts. \n\nThe Appeal Court Justices XXXX, XXXX ( both XXXX XXXX friends who received money from WFB lawyers ) and XXXX never saw the document concealed by Judge XXXX, so they ruled that since XXXX ( not a mortgage ) assigned its interest to non-existing REMIC Trust XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, they deny my Appeal and award my property to Trust XXXX XXXX who pretended to be a Plaintiff. This is absurd and totally void decision. \n\nIllinois Supreme Court refused to handle my Petition for review ( ProSe people are not considered as equal parties by IL Court and have absolutely no chance to receive any justice since Illinois Judges only support those who hire lawyers, preferably from their Family and  Friends JustUs Club ( as IL Court system is publicly known ) ; and those who pay judges directly. \n\nSince I relied on US Supreme Court numerous rulings that fraud upon the Court vitiates the entire proceedings and can be attacked at any Court and at any time, I appeared back to Judge XXXX Room and asked to vacate his void judgment and review my case de novo. \n\nXXXX refused to vacate his void Order and attacked me with threats. He even invited a fraudulent impersonator, lawyer XXXX XXXX XXXX, a public officer who spent at least 30 minutes of his taxpayers funded time as a Real Estate Tax Bureau officer ( where XXXX XXXX racks his million lowering property taxes for his well-connected friends ) posing as a criminal prosecutor who will hold me in criminal contempt for refusing to comply with XXXX void Order. When I discovered that criminal prosecutor XXXX is a fake, it became obvious that XXXX, who just lost his judicial election, was courting a vote from XXXX hoping to be assigned as an Associate Judge through XXXX connections with XXXX XXXX, in exchange of a small favor to scare me and deprive from my rights to Justice. All my complaint to XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX were ignored or responded with runarounds since all authorities always cover for corrupt judges in our State. \n\nMy attempt to find Justice from Appeal Court also failed. Judges XXXX ( a crony to IL Supreme Court XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and XXXX, ( wife of well-connected lawyer XXXX ) denied my Motion to Stay sale due to void Judgement and my property was sold to a third party buyer who is currently in possession of stolen property. \n\nDuring all time in question Wells Fargo bank refused to communicate with me about this fraudulent foreclosure and referred to their lawyers, XXXX XXXX XXXX who also refused to talk to me hiding behind the back of their pre-paid judges. From XXXX to present time I received a binder-worth runarounds from myriad Wells Fargo bank telling me that my property was sold on XX/XX/XXXX, my foreclosure was filed in XXXX and even asking me if this foreclosure was valid. One employee  advised me that WFB does not have any documents about my foreclosure at all. \n\nAll of it is a glaring violation of the Settlement supported and enabled by judges who repeatedly abused their positions of public Trust and power to deprive me from Due Process rights and enable WFB fraud upon the Court. \n\nAt XX/XX/XXXX hearing of case XXXX, XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, et.al, XXXX XXXX XXXX continued the XXXX XXXX XXXX organized campaign of terror against a Pro Se litigant while protecting banks fraud in Illinois Court and personal interests of certain judges and politicians. At the hearing, XXXX used her position to not only to deny my Petition with prejudice but to also threaten me with armed police force by holding me in custody, against my will, without any cause and without any explanations in her court room after the hearing. XXXX, who earned her position through her personal connections, must resign from this case. My case must get a fair hearing with a judge who will not use intimidation tactics against innocent civilians in their court. \n\nBefore the hearing started, XXXX XXXX court room was entered by a Sheriff ( XXXX, as I later learned from deputy XXXX  ), who was apparently called by XXXX XXXX ( she is in control of her venue ) who went to the Judges chambers hallway and called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the next room deputy XXXX to give them instructions. \n\nWhen the hearing started, XXXX XXXX XXXX denied my Petition with prejudice, without giving me any chance to argue it. She ignored US Supreme Court authority and disregarded over 100 years of binding precedents which rule that void judgments, like mine, can be attacked at any Court and at any time. Furthermore, she declared that the Decision entered by XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX in Case XXXX IL App ( 1st ) XXXX now is the LAW, which effectively legalizes fraud in Illinois and violations of all Rules and applicable laws. To remind all of you, my case was based on flagrant fraud upon the Court and Plaintiff XXXX Banks lack of standing, forgery, perjury and obstruction of justice. The XXXX decision cited by XXXX XXXX as the LAW in my case was entered by Appeal Court Justices who never saw key evidence due to corrupt XXXX XXXX obstruction of justice when he excluded documents based on which he entered his decision from my case file. Only based on this fact my case must be reviewed de novo by an independent judge. Besides heinously declaring fraud into law, XXXX XXXX used her position to cause me emotional and physical harm by attempting to falsely imprison me. \n\nAt the end of the hearing, XXXX brought up my objection to XXXX decision by saying she was not going to address it that day and then left the courtroom. As soon as XXXX XXXX left, I was approached by deputies XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX who refused to let me leave the room and who had been stationed in the room since my arrival. All three officers were armed. \n\nXXXX XXXX demanded my drivers license, without even introducing himself. As I said above, I asked Deputies about his name, and it was given to me by deputy XXXX who said it was XXXX XXXX. I politely asked why he needed my documents. XXXX XXXX replied that he would tell me later. I asked the officers several times why I was being held in the Court room and why they needed my Drivers license, but all of them refused to give me an answer. When I asked if I could leave, I was told that I was in custody ( in fact, my custody under the law is considered as XXXX with armed force, solely with intent to scare, intimidate and coerce me to give up on my civil rights ). After about 20 minutes XXXX XXXX returned to the court room, gave me back my drivers license and left again. I asked deputies XXXX and XXXX, who continued to block the door from both sides, about what was going on and why I was in custody, they said that XXXX XXXX was searching for some warrants or any other cause to arrest me, and they will explain everything later. \n\nAbout 10 minutes later, XXXX XXXX shouted from XXXX XXXX hallway door that I was good to go without reappearing again. I asked again for an explanation for why I was detained for 30 minutes, which XXXX and XXXX just ignored. They walked away from me and left me there without any explanations, and without any apologies. It is important to note that I was alone in the room with these three armed deputies who were blocking the front door to prevent me from leaving ; and ready to arrest me in case I overreacted or attempted to fight back against their false imprisonment of me in XXXX courtroom. \n\nThe officers illegally seized my license from me in violation of 4th Amendment and under duress without any warrant or cause. They detained me while looking for a probable cause to arrest me. My record is totally clean ; there were absolutely no grounds for holding me in custody since I did not show any signs of inappropriate or suspicious behavior. All my Motions to reverse void judgement are based on the law and numerous precedents ; and I ALWAYS present them in the professional and respectful manner to judges. \n\nIt was obvious that XXXX XXXX orchestrated this false detainment ( which I consider as an aggravated XXXX to force me give up on my civil rights ) me in her courtroom, Room XXXX, for 30 minutes in an attempt to threaten and intimidate me and provoke a situation to cause mental anguish that might have instigated my arrest ; as well as intent to cause me body harm by placing under extreme emotional distress which XXXX definitely succeeded. \nXXXX malicious and intentional conduct ( since she was the only one who can call the Sheriffs and instruct them to detain me ) was heinous and beyond the standards of civilized decency or utterly intolerable in a civilized society. As the result, upon returning home I suffered from severe emotional breakdown, which I still can not recover from. \nThis was clearly an attempt by XXXX XXXX to exercise judicial terror against me to deter me from exposing the Courts corruption and judicial ties to my plaintiffs. \n\nThis was unquestionably a case of false detention, false imprisonment and XXXX where several armed individuals held another person a hostage, by fear, against her will to achieve certain unlawful goals, such as help Judges to cover for banks fraud upon the Court and  criminally and civilly deprive citizens of civil rights. \n\nLooking at XXXX XXXX record it is comes as little surprise that she is not a judge but a Mafioso in a judges robes : XXXX obtained her position as a judge through her husband, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who has publically known ties to the mafia corruption ( published in XXXX, Missing the Lifeboat?? book ), along with his long-time friends XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ; and his connections with corrupt judges like XXXX XXXX, who was closely related to the first judge in my case, XXXX XXXX XXXX who was XXXX clerk and who donated XXXX substantial amount of money. \n\nXXXX in XXXX lost her election, receiving only 22.4 % of votes, but in XXXX was appointed to her seat by the IL Supreme Court through her personal connections, specially taking into consideration Justice XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX work for XXXX husband, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as his clerk. \n\nBetween XXXX XXXX XXXX donated and loaned to herself over {$150000.00} for her election, which is synonymous to buying her seat. Some of her donors include : XXXX XXXX, uncle of XXXX XXXX who entered original void decision in my case, and who was closely connected to XXXX XXXX family, who ruled in XXXX decision. \n\nXXXX also received money from a number of lawyers from XXXX XXXX XXXX including partner XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, who represent Wells Fargo bank ( acting under glimpse of XXXX Bank ), plaintiffs in my case, and substantial amounts of money from Big Banks. XXXX has no business presiding over this case given her blatant conflict of interest with my cases Plaintiff and her corrupt history in the court. \n\nWhile Judges in other States confront Wells Fargo bank fraud in their Court rooms and protect US citizens, certain Illinois judges, especially those who obtained their positions in corrupt manner, are willing to commit fraud themselves to cover for Wells Fargo bank money laundering mill of illegal US securities in IL Courts.\n\nIllinois Judges always stood for Wells Fargo bank fraud upon the Court, in gross disregard of the law and evidence. \n\nAs an individual I have absolutely no remedies against Wells Fargo fraud and judicial corruption even though my case is a text-book fraud upon the Court and IF US Supreme Court decisions means something to IL judiciary, the decision must be revoked and my case must be reviewed de novo. \n\nI once again respectfully request your help and attention to this matter and ORDER to Wells Fargo bank for compensation for abuses. \n\nAlso, please advise does US Supreme Court still have any binding authority over local Courts or they can ignore it? When I mentioned US Supreme Court decision in XXXX  case that standing is required in every claim, Judge XXXX XXXX ( five times election loser assigned with XXXX XXXX patronage ) advised me that he is only obligated to follow IL Appeal Court decision ( based on fraud upon the Court ) and ruled in favor of Wells Fargo. \n\nSincerely XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-09T12:06:27.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Other type of mortgage","zip_code":"606XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3206036","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2019-04-09T11:42:22.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As an individual I <em>have</em> absolutely no remedies against Wells Fargo fraud and judicial corruption even though my case is a text-book fraud upon the Court and IF US Supreme Court decisions <em>means</em> something to IL judiciary, the decision must be revoked and my case must be reviewed de novo. \n\nI once again respectfully request your help and attention to this matter and ORDER to Wells Fargo bank for compensation for abuses."]},"sort":[2.695597,"3206036"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":13,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":13}]}},"product":{"doc_count":13,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":13,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Don't agree with the fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":13,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":12},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":13,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":12},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":13,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":13}]}},"company":{"doc_count":13,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":3},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Draper and Kramer Mortgage Corp.","doc_count":1},{"key":"ECMC GROUP, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":13,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"IL","doc_count":4},{"key":"FL","doc_count":3},{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"NV","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":13,"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":9}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":13,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":8},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","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":{}}}