{"took":92,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":19,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3129131","_score":19.707853,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/2019, I saw an ad for Emollient moisturizer on XXXX that claimed a risk free use of the product if you paid the shipping fee only of {$4.00}. It was endorsed by the XXXX XXXX XXXX show personality. It said that it would show on my bank statement as XXXX XXXX as the vendor name. So I paid the shipping fee of {$4.00} and also paid for the Emollient eye cream for the same deal as the moisturizer at {$4.00} shipping fee. However, when I checked out there was a {$1.00} charge for recycling fee added to the shipping fee for the moisturizer which when I received the moisturizer it didn't even come in a box. I haven't even used the products yet because I'm waiting for my current moisturizer and eye cream to run out. So fast forward to XX/XX/2019, I look at my bank account on line and find that there is a pending charge for {$79.00} from XXXX XXXX. So I call the phone number that is on my bank statement ( XXXX ) and speak to a customer service representative that says in the fine print at the very bottom that I had 14 days to cancel my subscription for the product and get a refund for the two products that I ordered. I asked if I could return them since I had not used them yet and he informed me that it would be a restocking fee so well as two week process time and another {$10.00} for a shipping fee. I told him I had no idea that you had to cancel within 14 days not to be charged. I thought risk free meant just that -- risk free. In my research to find the website on the internet and XXXX I have found out that this is widely known scam on XXXX and that there are warnings from bloggers not to fall or buy from these sites. I would like a full refund of the {$79.00} plus the two {$4.00} charges for shipping and the {$1.00} recycling charge and I will gladly send the products back at my own cost at the address the seller provides. Thank you!","date_sent_to_company":"2019-01-19T23:42:42.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"43232","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3129131","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2019-01-19T23:05:17.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I thought <em>risk</em> <em>free</em> <em>meant</em> <em>just</em> that -- <em>risk</em> <em>free</em>. In my research to find the website on the internet and XXXX I have found out that this is widely known scam on XXXX and that there are warnings from bloggers not to fall or buy from these sites. I would like a full refund of the {$79.00} plus the two {$4.00} charges for shipping and the {$1.00} recycling charge and I will gladly send the products back at my own cost at the address the seller provides. Thank you!"]},"sort":[19.707853,"3129131"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3207399","_score":17.075691,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"My complaint is the way all three credit reporting companies ( XXXX, XXXX and Experian ) use selective data to determine an individual 's credit worthiness. My credit score was over 800 just 3 months ago and now it is XXXX with XXXX and XXXX with XXXX.The reason it fell so drasticly is because we bought some furniture and decided to take advantage of an offer for a credit card that had 0 % interest for six months. In addition, applying for this card lowered our total purchase price on all the furniture by over {$500.00}. The card company established a \" credit limit '' on the card for exactly the amount of furniture we bought which meant that when the credit reporting companies got the information, the \" furniture company '' credit card was \" maxed out '' at 100 % of available credit. This in turn made our total credit usage on two cards at 50 %. What the credit reporting agenciies don't look at are the consumers bank accounts ( we have about {$750000.00} in three separate savings accounts ) mortgage free property ( we own two homes debt free that are worth {$500000.00} ) and money ( {$300000.00} ) in a money  market account with a stock brokerage firm. I have NEVER been delinquent on a payment. I pay my credit card ( other than the furniture card ) balance in full monthly. The credit reporting companies say the \" age of my credit '' is one year. I am XXXX years old and have had stellar credit my entire life with many accounts over the years that were paid in full and then closed. \nMy credit score is very important to me and I just need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit risk. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-10T14:01:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"73120","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3207399","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2019-04-10T14:01:02.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information is missing that should be on the report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My credit score is very important to me and I <em>just</em> need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit <em>risk</em>. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX"]},"sort":[17.075691,"3207399"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3207402","_score":17.066422,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"My complaint is the way all three credit reporting companies ( Equifax, XXXX and XXXX ) use selective data to determine an individual 's credit worthiness. My credit score was over 800 just 3 months ago and now it is XXXX with XXXX and XXXX with Equifax.The reason it fell so drasticly is because we bought some furniture and decided to take advantage of an offer for a credit card that had 0 % interest for six months. In addition, applying for this card lowered our total purchase price on all the furniture by over {$500.00}. The card company established a \" credit limit '' on the card for exactly the amount of furniture we bought which meant that when the credit reporting companies got the information, the \" furniture company '' credit card was \" maxed out '' at 100 % of available credit. This in turn made our total credit usage on two cards at 50 %. What the credit reporting agenciies don't look at are the consumers bank accounts ( we have about {$750000.00} in three separate savings accounts ) mortgage free property ( we own two homes debt free that are worth {$500000.00} ) and money ( {$300000.00} ) in a money market account with a stock brokerage firm. I have NEVER been delinquent on a payment. I pay my credit card ( other than the furniture card ) balance in full monthly. The credit reporting companies say the \" age of my credit '' is one year. I am XXXX years old and have had stellar credit my entire life with many accounts over the years that were paid in full and then closed. \nMy credit score is very important to me and I just need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit risk. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-10T14:01:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"73120","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3207402","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2019-04-10T14:01:02.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information is missing that should be on the report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My credit score is very important to me and I <em>just</em> need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit <em>risk</em>. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX"]},"sort":[17.066422,"3207402"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3207316","_score":17.037971,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"My complaint is the way all three credit reporting companies ( XXXX, Transunion and XXXX ) use  selective data to determine an individual 's credit worthiness. My credit score was over XXXX just 3 months ago and now it is XXXX with Transunion and XXXX with XXXX.The reason it fell so drasticly is because we bought some furniture and decided to take advantage of an offer for a credit card that had 0 % interest for six months. In addition, applying for this card lowered our total purchase price on all the furniture by over {$500.00}. The card company established a \" credit limit '' on the card for exactly the amount of furniture we bought which meant that when the credit reporting companies got the information, the \" furniture company '' credit card was \" maxed out '' at 100 % of available credit. This in turn made our total credit usage on two cards at 50 %. What the credit reporting agenciies don't look at are the consumers bank accounts ( we have about {$750000.00} in three separate savings accounts ) mortgage free property ( we own two homes debt free that are worth {$500000.00} ) and money ( {$300000.00} ) in a money market account with a stock brokerage firm. I have NEVER been delinquent on a payment. I pay my credit card ( other than the furniture card ) balance in full monthly. The credit reporting companies say the \" age of my credit '' is one year. I am XXXX years old and have had stellar credit my entire life with many accounts over the years that were paid in full and then closed. \nMy credit score is very important to me and I just need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit risk. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-10T14:00:54.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"73120","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3207316","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2019-04-10T12:34:45.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information is missing that should be on the report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My credit score is very important to me and I <em>just</em> need to have someone explain to me how I am now only a \" fair '' credit <em>risk</em>. It seems to me the credit companies should expand their information base about an individual in my circumstances to take all the above factors into account. \nPlease let me know what my options are. \nThank you, XXXX XXXX"]},"sort":[17.037971,"3207316"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3308910","_score":11.267981,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm a XXXX person and i'm tired of calling TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX talking to the XXXX  they call representatives. They also refused to change my address in which i was told it was XXXX and XXXX. Due to my health i don't need any calls from either credit bureau i just need them to fix the issues and remove the items but they can send me emails and letters to verify these items were removed with an updated credit report. These credit bureaus keep things on your credit and when you call in you have to deal with their rude employees. Because of my health i refuse to call them anymore. These items these 3 credit bureaus have affected my credit scores and i've been denied credit several times and still being looked at as \" high risk '' because of items that are still on all 3 of my credit reports from when i filed Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy in XX/XX/XXXX which i was informed should've been removed when i filed and once it was Discharged and mine was in XX/XX/XXXX. It's not right that they see i filed yet i've disputed the items and neither credit bureau will remove the items you included in your Bankruptcy yet none of the other companies are on there i included in my Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy. The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your free credit report are meant to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion along with XXXX and XXXX who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my free copy of my credit report. Transunion, XXXX, and XXXX have also refused to remove 7 items off my credit reports that were included in my Bankruptcy when i filed in XX/XX/XXXX. I've called them several times and clearly their representatives lie to get you off the phone. Around XX/XX/XXXX an XXXX  representative told me my credit report was sent out yet as of Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX i still haven't received my credit report and i refuse to call them again waiting on hold the way i did. In XX/XX/XXXX i tried to get my XXXX  credit report and they have been refusing to send my yearly free credit report for the last 2 years. On XXXX i once again called TransUnion only to get another one of their broken English XXXX representatives. She was rude, she refused to give me her name, she rudely asked me \" then what did you call here for ''. This representative told me she would remove the 7 items yet she intentionally laid the phone down muted the phone and had me on the line so long i got sick and had to hang up. Due to a serious neck issue and multiple surgeries i'm not able to hold the phone to my ear long. I'm also since filing Bankruptcy getting more and more scam calls and things in the mail from companies i've never applied for like personal loans and auto loans. \n\n\nAccording to my resources these items should've been removed when my Bankruptcy was Discharged in XX/XX/XXXX yet TransUnion along with XXXX and XXXX refuse to remove them even though i've disputed them. \n\nThese are the 7 items i've disputed that TransUnion refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   5.XXXX XXXX 6.XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX XXXX These are the 7 items XXXX refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXX  2.XXXX XXXX XXXX  3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 5XXXX XXXX XXXX  6.XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX XXXX These are the 7 items that XXXX have also refused to remove from my credit report 1.XXXX XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXX XXXX  5.XXXX XXXX 6.XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-07-17T02:17:46.000Z","issue":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"48221","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3308910","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2019-07-16T23:58:42.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem getting your free annual credit report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your <em>free</em> credit report are <em>meant</em> to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion along with XXXX and XXXX who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my <em>free</em> copy of my credit report."],"sub_issue":["Problem getting your <em>free</em> annual credit report"]},"sort":[11.267981,"3308910"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3308906","_score":11.260042,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm a XXXX person and i'm tired of calling XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX talking to the XXXX they call representatives. They also refused to change my address in which i was told it was Equifax and XXXX. Due to my health i don't need any calls from either credit bureau i just need them to fix the issues and remove the items but they can send me emails and letters to verify these items were removed with an updated credit report. These credit bureaus keep things on your credit and when you call in you have to deal with their rude employees. Because of my health i refuse to call them anymore. These items these 3 credit bureaus have affected my credit scores and i've been denied credit several times and still being looked at as \" high risk '' because of items that are still on all 3 of my credit reports from when i filed Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy in  XX/XX/XXXX which i was informed should've been removed when i filed and once it was Discharged and mine was in XX/XX/XXXX. It's not right that they see i filed yet i've disputed the items and neither credit bureau will remove the items you included in your Bankruptcy yet none of the other companies are on there i included in my Chapter XXXX   Bankruptcy. The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your free credit report are meant to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX XXXX along with Equifax and XXXX who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my free copy of my credit report. XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX have also refused to remove 7 items off my credit reports that were included in my Bankruptcy when i filed in XX/XX/XXXX. I've called them several times and clearly their representatives lie to get you off the phone. Around XX/XX/XXXX an Equifax representative told me my credit report was sent out yet as of Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX i still haven't received my credit report and i refuse to call them again waiting on hold the way i did. In XX/XX/XXXX i tried to get my XXXX credit report and they have been refusing to send my yearly free credit report for the last 2 years. On XXXX i once again called XXXX only to get another one of their broken English XXXX representatives. She was rude, she refused to give me her name, she rudely asked me \" then what did you call here for ''. This representative told me she would remove the 7 items yet she intentionally laid the phone down muted the phone and had me on the line so long i got sick and had to hang up. Due to a serious neck issue and multiple XXXX i'm not able to hold the phone to my ear long. I'm also since filing Bankruptcy getting more and more scam calls and things in the mail from companies i've never applied for like personal loans and auto loans. \n\n\nAccording to my resources these items should've been removed when my Bankruptcy was Discharged in XX/XX/XXXX yet XXXX along with Equifax and XXXX refuse to remove them even though i've disputed them. \n\nThese are the 7 items i've disputed that XXXX refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 5.Discover XXXX 6.XXXX  XXXX 7XXXX XXXX These are the 7 items Equifax refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 5.XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX   6XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX XXXX These are the 7 items that XXXX have also refused to remove from my credit report 1XXXX XXXX 2XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  3.XXXX XXXX XXXX 4XXXX XXXX 5.TXXXX XXXX   6.XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX  XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-07-17T06:17:53.000Z","issue":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"48221","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3308906","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2019-07-17T02:17:50.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem getting your free annual credit report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your <em>free</em> credit report are <em>meant</em> to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX XXXX along with Equifax and XXXX who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my <em>free</em> copy of my credit report."],"sub_issue":["Problem getting your <em>free</em> annual credit report"]},"sort":[11.260042,"3308906"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3308908","_score":11.248798,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm a XXXX person and i'm tired of calling XXXX, XXXX, and Experian talking to the XXXX they call representatives. They also refused to change my address in which i was told it was XXXX and Experian. Due to my health i don't need any calls from either credit bureau i just need them to fix the issues and remove the items but they can send me emails and letters to verify these items were removed with an updated credit report. These credit bureaus keep things on your credit and when you call in you have to deal with their rude employees. Because of my health i refuse to call them anymore. These items these 3 credit bureaus have affected my credit scores and i've been denied credit several times and still being looked at as \" high risk '' because of items that are still on all 3 of my credit reports from when i filed Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy in  XX/XX/XXXX which i was informed should've been removed when i filed and once it was Discharged and mine was in XX/XX/XXXX. It's not right that they see i filed yet i've disputed the items and neither credit bureau will remove the items you included in your Bankruptcy yet none of the other companies are on there i included in my Chapter XXXX   Bankruptcy. The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your free credit report are meant to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX XXXX along with XXXX  and Experian who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my free copy of my credit report. XXXX XXXX, and Experian have also refused to remove 7 items off my credit reports that were included in my Bankruptcy when i filed in XX/XX/XXXX. I've called them several times and clearly their representatives lie to get you off the phone. Around XX/XX/XXXX an XXXX representative told me my credit report was sent out yet as of Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX i still haven't received my credit report and i refuse to call them again waiting on hold the way i did. In XX/XX/XXXX i tried to get my Experian credit report and they have been refusing to send my yearly free credit report for the last 2 years. On XXXX i once again called XXXX only to get another one of their broken English XXXX representatives. She was rude, she refused to give me her name, she rudely asked me \" then what did you call here for ''. This representative told me she would remove the 7 items yet she intentionally laid the phone down muted the phone and had me on the line so long i got sick and had to hang up. Due to a serious XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX i'm not able to hold the phone to my ear long. I'm also since filing Bankruptcy getting more and more scam calls and things in the mail from companies i've never applied for like personal loans and auto loans. \n\n\nAccording to my resources these items should've been removed when my Bankruptcy was Discharged in XX/XX/XXXX yet XXXX along with XXXX and Experian refuse to remove them even though i've disputed them. \n\nThese are the 7 items i've disputed that TransUnion refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 5.XXXX XXXX 6.XXXX XXXX 7.XXXX XXXXXXXX These are the 7 items XXXX refuse to remove from my credit report ... ... \n1.XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 4.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 5.XXXX  XXXX XXXX   6.XXXX XXXXXXXX 7.XXXX XXXXXXXX These are the 7 items that Experian have also refused to remove from my credit report 1XXXX XXXX 2XXXX XXXXXXXX Bank 3.XXXX XXXX XXXX 4XXXX XXXX 5.XXXX XXXX   6.XXXX XXXX 7XXXXXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-07-17T06:17:53.000Z","issue":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"48221","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3308908","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2019-07-17T02:17:50.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem getting your free annual credit report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The questions the credit bureaus ask to get your <em>free</em> credit report are <em>meant</em> to be wrong even when you know you answer them correct and when you respond that a question doesn't apply to you they claim it's wrong. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX XXXX along with XXXX  and Experian who i'll also will be filing a complaint against but they all have refused to send me my <em>free</em> copy of my credit report."],"sub_issue":["Problem getting your <em>free</em> annual credit report"]},"sort":[11.248798,"3308908"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2660979","_score":8.249197,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The Equifax Hack website does not always work, so some are unable to determine if they have been impacted. Also they can not enroll for the TrustedID protection being provided courtesy of Equifax.\nDETAILS : Today ( XX/XX/XXXX ) the local paper reported that Equifax had been Hacked onXX/XX/XXXX\nEquifax has provided a website and XXXX number for consumers to verify if they have been affected by the Hack.\nWhen you go to https : //www.equifaxsecurity2017.com/, you are instructed to first select the button \" Potential Impact ''. That takes you to a page the asks you to enter your last name and part of your SSN.\n-- I entered my last name and the site put a green check mark next to the field to acknowledge the data had been entered.\n-- I entered the last 6 digits of my SSN and received another green check mark.\n-- I pressed the \" Continue '' button, and nothing happened. After trying this several times, I checked with a tech ( personal friend ) who used a web developer 's tool to determine what was happening in the background.\nThe site wo n't work if you are using some tracking blockers ... And it has not been coded to allow tracking blocking. -- - a VERY odd concept for a company that is responsible for safeguarding your personal information ( and which has failed to do that anyway ) I called the XXXX number, received the standard \" ... your call is very important to us, please hold for the next available customer service representative ... ''. After 15 minutes of dead silence, the line disconnected.\nI called the number a second time, received same standard recorded greeting. After 15 minutes of music on hold, the line disconnected.\nI called the number a third time, same greeting, etc ... After about 7 minutes of music, someone answered the call. I explained that the website was not working, and that I wanted to verify if I was impacted. He spoke very broken English and did not understand what I was saying. Then he said he would let someone know and they might want to call be back in about 3 business days.\nWe kept getting stuck on the discussion about the broken website, even though I started saying maybe it was just me ... and could he help me with checking if I was impacted by the Hack.\nThis conversation never went smoothly because his English was not good enough for him to fully understand what I was saying or to expand on what he meant. I asked for a supervisor and he hung up on me.\nI have tried every Equifax site I can find for customer contact info so I can send an email to let them know there is a problem with the Hack site, but any time you select 'contact us ', the site fails to link. I have tried all of the Equifax phone numbers I can find listed, but everything either goes to music or disconnects immediately.\nI suspected you could get help if you log in to the Equifax member site, but you have to buy a product to get access to that.\nI called the number that actives a 90 day fraud alert. It is automated and successfully allowed me to set it up. Equifax would still not recognize me as a customer ( fraud alert is free ), and redirected me to their product page so I could select my product ( buy something ).\nI called the number that enables a credit freeze, but did not enter some information to see if it would transfer me to a person. It did transfer me to customer service, then disconnected. Tried that twice. The third time I input all the information needed and paid the {$5.00} change, but Equifax STILL would not recognize me as a customer and again sent me back to their product sales page.\nYou have to buy an ongoing credit monitoring package in order to be able to log into the Equifax site to get customer service help.\nBOTTOM LINE : If you use tracking blocker security on your browser, Equifax is not coded to work for you. The issue arises because Equifax redirects to some XXXX owned and monitored sites ( completely out of Equifax control ), and those sites want to track everything you do. XXXX has been reported to even track your physical location.\nAny business redirecting to another business 's site, has to code to allow their ( Equifax 's ) data to display on the screen. The second business ( XXXX ) will withhold the response since you are blocking their tracking.\nApparently, the use of XXXX sub-routines is considered a shortcut for web developers, and is a common practice. Coding to allow their users to block XXXX  tracking, and still be able to use the developer 's site, is also apparently a common situation for web developers.\nAlthough ... I have a serious concern with Equifax redirecting other sites, which it does not directly secure, in their processes ... and especially after 143 million people have been put at risk.\nCan you contact Equifax and let them know there is an issue with their site? I do n't run into this problem with other sites that redirect in the background to various XXXX functions.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-09-08T17:03:11.000Z","issue":"Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"44224","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2660979","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2017-09-08T15:59:22.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We kept getting stuck on the discussion about the broken website, even though I started saying maybe it was <em>just</em> me ... and could he help me with checking if I was impacted by the Hack.\nThis conversation never went smoothly because his English was not good enough for him to fully understand what I was saying or to expand on what he <em>meant</em>. I asked for a supervisor and he hung up on me."]},"sort":[8.249197,"2660979"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3682550","_score":7.660635,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/2018, the complainant expressed interest in the purchase of a car identified as a 2018 XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX dealership, located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, MA, XXXX. A Motor Vehicle Purchase Contract was drawn up and handed to him by the salesperson XXXX XXXX to present to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to process the auto loan he had requested for indicating the purchase price as {$55000.00} + Tax and Fees. XXXX bank issued a cheque worth {$35000.00} to the order of XXXX XXXX XXXX, for the vehicle. At the back of the check it was clearly indicated that \" Endorsement by licensed Dealership herein acknowledges and guarantees full payment of the vehicle described free and clear of all other liens and the amount does not exceed 120 % of the vehicle retail value ''. \nIt also stated that, \" Endorsement financial institution, acknowledges the pay-off of the loan previously secured by the vehicle described, and the subsequent release of any lien ( s ). '' However, when the check was presented to XXXX XXXX the salesperson at XXXX XXXX dealership, the complainant was made aware that the check payment had an amount that was less than what was needed to purchase the vehicle. The complainant states that he requested to get another vehicle that would fit within the amount offered by XXXX bank, since he could not afford monthly payments exceeding {$600.00}. The complainant states that XXXX the sales person assured him that he would call XXXX Bank to ask them to increase the amount offered, so that he could keep the XXXX. The complainant states that he insisted that while discussing about the increment with XXXX bank, he should remind them, that he could only afford monthly payments not exceeding {$600.00} as agreed in the contract. The Salesman XXXX left and later returned with paperwork for the complainant to sign off. The complainant states that he was told \" Brother, you are all set '', which to him he states meant \" I have spoken to XXXX Bank and they have agreed to increase the amount offered to cover the purchase of the vehicle. At this point he states that, the salesman pointed out areas on various forms for him to sign and initial. \nAfter a period of about 3 weeks, the complainant reports that he started receiving phone calls from XXXX bank inquiring about the certificate of title, which they said they had not received yet. This was followed by a written correspondence dated XX/XX/18 from XXXX Bank, stating that \" according to the terms in the loan agreement, he was required to ensure that XXXX is accurately reflected as first lien holder on the certificate of title of the vehicle ', but by the date of the letter, XXXX had not received confirmation that it was recorded in this manner on the vehicle 's certificate of title. \n\nThe complainant reached out to XXXX XXXX looking to speak to the salesperson XXXX XXXX to inquire why XXXX had not received the title yet, but was informed that he was no longer working for the company, they had let him go, and due to his limited comprehension of the English language, he states that he was not given straight answers regarding the vehicle 's certificate of title. \n\nThe complainant reports that he received bills requesting for payment from GM Financial, that he was not expecting, since he had not entered into any agreement with this institution other than for services that included XXXX XXXX  and the internet which he believed he had paid for when he made the payment on XX/XX/2018, and he states that out of frustration, he returned to the dealership and his attempts to get an explanation from the staff at the dealership where not yielding any results but just frustrating him more, so he informed them, that he was handing the vehicle back to them, and he was told they couldn't take it back and was warned that he risked having the vehicle repossessed if he did not remit payments to GM Financial, they would sell off the car and recover their money. \n\nThe complainant reached out to the General Manager XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX to try and understand why he was getting 2 bills instead of 1 bill, and also find out what was going on with the Vehicle 's certificate of title, since he had received the correspondences from XXXX bank, asking for it. The complainant was escorted by a friend to this meeting, that took place at the dealership on XX/XX/2018, and during that meeting, the General Manager asked the complainant \" where did you get that huge downpayment from '' ( referring to the {$35000.00} ) and the complainant was startled by the inquiry and the response, was \" it was not a down payment, that was an auto loan from XXXX Bank ''. The General Manager asked the complainant if he really needed the XXXX or if he was willing to choose an alternate vehicle. The Complainant replied, he was open to look at other alternatives since he had made it clear that he could only afford to pay monthly payments of up to {$600.00} according to his budget. The complainant was shown 2 different cars as options to consider on that day, a XXXX XXXX, and a XXXX XXXX. Nothing was concluded in that meeting, and a sales person who was appointed to show the complainant the other options, when asked if returning the vehicle was an option, the salesperson said no it wasn't. \n\nThe General Manager promised to be in touch with the complainant soon, and that never happened.\n\nThe Complainant hired a lawyer to help with this case, and have XXXX XXXX do the right thing of listing XXXX as the first lien holder per the endorsement clause, that bound the dealership when they cashed the check, but to no avail. Attempts to resolve this matter have spun over 18 months and the complainant has suffered a huge financial constraint, since XXXX increased the interest rate from the agreed 3.49 % to 18 % for failure to have the vehicle 's certificate of title sent to XXXX, reflecting the same bank as first lien holder. \n\nYour assistance in this matter will be highly appreciated,","date_sent_to_company":"2020-06-04T04:12:01.000Z","issue":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"02453","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3682550","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"General Motors Financial Company, Inc.","date_received":"2020-06-04T03:56:22.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["At the back of the check it was clearly indicated that \" Endorsement by licensed Dealership herein acknowledges and guarantees full payment of the vehicle described <em>free</em> and clear of all other liens and the amount does not exceed 120 % of the vehicle retail value ''."]},"sort":[7.660635,"3682550"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4391280","_score":5.361817,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I applied for a refinance ( no cash out ) of my existing mortgage on XX/XX/21 with Rocket Mortgage. The rate was locked on that day for 2.875 % for a 30 year term and an amount of {$610000.00}. Ultimately at about 110 days into the process, they allowed my rate to expire due to delays in their processes internally with their vendors and investor. They then had the audacity to present me with a new loan estimate on XX/XX/21 for a rate of 2.875 % with a loan discount fee of {$22000.00} for 3.625 points. Obviously that is not providing me a net benefit, however at this point I either need to apply elsewhere to refinance my mortgage in order to achieve the desired reduction in interest and payment or lose out on the opportunity that I'd been led to believe was possible for the last 110 days. \nHere is a more detailed timeline of events : XX/XX/21 : Applied and locked at 2.875 % for a 30 year mortgage - Loan Officer is XXXX XXXX, XXXX # XXXX XX/XX/21 : Provided all documents and met all accurate requirements within my assigned tasks. The loan officer was requesting a lease on my investment property, which I'd explained I did not have as my parents live in the home rent free. The loan officer was requesting my lease agreement for my previous home, which was not accurate as I owned the home. At this time, the loan officer ceased communication from XXXX and did not correct the tasks despite numerous texts, calls and emails. \nXX/XX/21 : Received a Notice of Incompleteness as the inaccurate tasks had still not been completed - I reached out to customer service at Quicken as I still could not get ahold of the loan officer. They simply sent me to his voice mail. Calling back I was able to get directed to his manager XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX ) who then assisted and corrected the tasks moving the loan forward. \nXX/XX/21 : The loan was conditionally approved XX/XX/21 : ( email chain is included ) I emailed the loan officer as I was being told the appraisal would not be completed until XX/XX/21 - as my rate was set to expire on XX/XX/21 I was concerned we'd not have time to close this loan - I was assured that they would extend the rate if it became a problem. \nXX/XX/21 : The appraiser was able to visit the home early and conducted the appraisal XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal - told by XXXX that they did not have it in yet, but not to worry as the loan would rapidly close once received XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal - no response XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal - told by XXXX they did not have it yet, but he'd look into it XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal, XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal, included XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX manageXXXX ) on the email - informed by XXXX that he'd reached out to XXXX and their appraisal team for an update as they still did not have the report XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal - received response from XXXX who was standing in for XXXX, no response from the appraisal relations team, but they'd let me know XX/XX/21 : XXXX asks me if I've contacted the appraiser directly - I did so by phone and the appraiser informed me he can not speak with me about the appraisal process but that it would take months - I did not agree with that timeline and relayed that to XXXX - as my rate was set to expire in days I asked for proactive communication going forward ( this never happened in the entire process - every update I received was from me asking them ) XX/XX/21 : XXXX sent a one sentence email saying he'd try, but that he can't do anything to get the appraiser to submit the report XX/XX/21 : As the rate had been locked for 90 days I was concerned about the expiration and asked about it XX/XX/21 : XXXX responded acknowledging that I did nothing to impede the process and he would see what he could do XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken - original rate lock expires XX/XX/21 : Still no update from Quicken on my loan - I reached out for a status on the rate lock and was informed the lock was extended at no cost to me until XX/XX/21 XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, inquired about the appraisal and the new rate lock approaching - informed the appraiser would not be providing the report until XX/XX/21 but that we'd be moving to closing soon after receipt XX/XX/21 : I requested the appraisal fee be waived due to the absurd amount of time it was taking to get the report complete - this request was ignored - I also asked about the rate expiration as it was the following day and no one had reached out on an update - they agreed 2 months was an unreasonable timeframe on the appraisal and would see what they could do XX/XX/21 : Finally received notice the appraisal report came in - LTV was under 50 % per the report ( $ XXXX valuation ) - emailed Quicken asking for next steps to get to close, also wanted the loan amount decreased as my principal on the existing loan was lower and I did not want cash back - informed by XXXX XXXX he lowered the loan amount and also wanted to close XX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken - requested status of the loan ( rate was expiring on XXXX ) XX/XX/21 : Response from Quicken - XXXX XXXX I'll see what I can do XX/XX/21 : Still no update from Quicken - I requested an escalation to XXXX XXXX supervisor - this never happened, I was instead connected with their Customer Care team who essentially did nothing but tell me on the phone they were sympathetic to the situation and would see what they could do. The response I received from XXXX did not address the rate lock expiration and left me believing we could still get this loan closed. ( I spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX - Resolution Advocate by phone ) I was also told by phone that for some reason the investor for the loan wanted to review the appraisal and conduct a 'desktop review ' - they finally did that on XXXX which was after the rate lock. They also arrived at the same valuation of the original appraisal from XXXX weeks prior. \nXX/XX/21 : No update from Quicken, requested update - informed the loan was in final review XXXX no mention of an issue with the rate / worst case pricing situation ) XX/XX/21 : Followed up as I also asked about service related concessions - was told the loan was already discounted XX/XX/21 : Received automated email from Quicken that my new loan estimate was ready and needed to be signed - went to my tasks and noticed the change from the original loan to now being charged a discount fee of {$22000.00}. I emailed XXXX and XXXX asking for an update and explanation XX/XX/21 : I receive a single sentence reply from XXXX, no call per my request explaining that no, I do not expect you to bring that to closing, but the loan did not close in the allotted time. I then needed to ask for clarification on what that meant to be told that yes in fact the document was accurate and no, Quicken would not be doing anything about it. As a banker of 12 years after serving in the Navy for the previous 7.5, all sorts of UDAAP alarm bells are going off in my head and I informed them as much and that I would be contacting the CFPB to look into the matter from a regulatory perspective. Both XXXX and XXXX responded with their apologies for my frustration, but did not offer any recourse to the situation. After 110 days or so I am now pursuing a refinance with a local credit union - something I should have started when I learned of the absurd appraisal delays. Beyond just UDAAP, I'd be very curious their Third Party Risk Management practices for vendors as that appraisal, which caused much of this was completely unacceptable in terms of an XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2021-05-20T07:21:19.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"782XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4391280","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","date_received":"2021-05-20T02:13:35.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Beyond <em>just</em> UDAAP, I'd be very curious their Third Party <em>Risk</em> Management practices for vendors as that appraisal, which caused much of this was completely unacceptable in terms of an XXXX"]},"sort":[5.361817,"4391280"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10981005","_score":4.6438174,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nConsumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, DC XXXX\nThis is to complain against RIA XXXX: HIGH\nIMPORTANCE: HIGH\n[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]\nI wish to practice my right as a customer of RIA to use your organisation's service, seeking a formal,\nimpartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with RIA.\nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to RIA respecting my\ncomplaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a\ndeeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and\ncomprehensive fashion.\nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these\nfraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam.\nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct\nof RIA to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service\nto look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional\nrelationship and way of working with its customers.\nDuring the complaints process with RIA, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides\ntheir conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to\nadapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a\nreal problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of\nCFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on XXXX XXXX, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX (the Fraudsters or Company).\nMoney was transferred from my account in the total amount of XXXX XXXX.\nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability; common queries\ninclude, but are not limited to, the following (i)\nwhether RIA did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material\nelements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my\nfinancial safety; (ii) whether by virtue of RIAs custodianship over my funds or by its control over them,\nthey owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached; (iii) whether RIA\npromoted the transaction(s) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction(s) in question\n(iv) whether RIA was in compliance with its own policies and procedures; (v) whether RIA owed duties\nto myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether RIA did not uphold those duties; (vi) whether\nRIAs conduct was unfair; and (vii) whether RIA has within its power the ability to, and should,\ncompensate me for the harm that has befallen me.\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member\nadequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent\nand nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant\ncriteria of fraud.\nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and\nskill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not\nturn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In\nother words, RIA must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real\npossibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have\nknown that I was dealing with a scammer.\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a\nsense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective\nelement.\nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not\naverage care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is\nreasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of\nthe evidence suggests that RIA did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers\nin this respect.\nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the\nstandard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the\npast.\nRIAs Position:\nPlease find attached all relevant evidence below.\nRIA conspicuously touts their security as a reason to use their service. Specifically, RIA writes on\ntheir website:\nWe work hard to protect you from fraud. That's why we:\n Apply best-in-class security technologies expertise to protect you 24/7, all year round.\n Secure every method of banking we offer including online, mobile, ATM and telephone\nbanking.\n Offer free security software from our trusted tech partners to download on to your devices.\n Frequently train our employees on the latest practices in cyber and physical security.\n Give you the security tips and resources you need to protect yourself from potential threats.\nRefuting RIAs arguments from a purely logical perspective:\nRIAs position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect\ninnocent and helpless victims; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are\ndoomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful\nchoice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves\neven though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint.\nIn RIAs view, it is implied that we should not home in (and consequently rely) on unwritten laws,\npracticality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when\ntaking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense\nand are wildly irresponsible.\nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make RIA morally obligated to do\nsomething is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if RIA encounter the suffering of\ntotally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree\nrequired by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as RIA.\nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by RIA carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to\nmy fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its\ndisposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to\ndetermine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to\nintervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind.\nIt is perfectly obvious that RIA, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key\nquestions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than\nits own interests.\nIt is RIA here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say,\nthat RIA adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive\nexperience compared to mine. It is RIA that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection\nto this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has\nnot been, commensurate with RIAs capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To\nreemphasize, RIAs indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a\nblind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and\ncapitalising on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity.\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all RIA has done in this regard is set up a\ndichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go\none-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, has maintained that financial institutions\ncan, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience.\nRIA is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being\nperpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the\ncustomer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is:\n particularly vulnerable, or\n if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that\nmight occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers\nwho might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary\nactions to prevent or minimise financial harm.\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a\nservice that:\n1) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it\nsets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general\npoint, it says organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and\nmethodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised\nand unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to\nthe detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organisation:\nA) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious\ntransactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following\nexamples of suspicious activity on customer accounts:\na. multiple cheque books;\nb. sudden increased spending;\nc. transfers to other accounts;\nd. multiple password attempts;\ne. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations;\nf. sudden changes to the operation of the account; Unusual transactions are\ntransactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the\neconomic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no\napparent legal justification.\ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount;\nh. a payment or series of payments to a new payee;\ni. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\nB) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the\ncustomer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the\nsuspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\nRIA are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging\nexperience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to\navert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which\nrequiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and welljustified.\nRather than empathising with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the\nexistence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of\nconsumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled,\npositively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability  RIA adopts a rather\ninsouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein.\nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to\nensue if no responsibility is adopted by RIA in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why\nthey cannot simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful\nreflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to\ndisregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts,\nthereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core.\nConclusion:\nBased on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is\nabundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall\nfraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their\nundisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital\narena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively\nnavigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in\nthis connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent\npractices.\nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that RIAs business conduct was\ninsufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and\nresponsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too\ncrucial to be taken lightly. RIAs non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice  that is, to\ncompletely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is\ninexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of\nthe patronage of clients like myself.\nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses: a)\nfinancial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b) the fraud in\nquestion was not reasonably foreseeable, or c) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming.\nIt is extremely unfortunate that RIA pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these thingsdespite\nevidence to the contrary.\nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and\ncompanywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint.\nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.\nThank you. XXXX XXXX XXXX\nXXXX  THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\nXXXX XXXX XXXX\nTo: RIA\nXXXX XXXX, California , United States\nVia Email\n[Without Prejudice]\nAttn: Complaints/Fraud Dept.\nDear Sir or Madam,\nRe: Demand Letter  Fraud\nI hope this letter has correctly found itself within your complaints/fraud department as it is essential to me that\nyou become aware of the ordeal I have had to go through.\nCommencing on XXXX XXXX I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX (the Fraudsters or Company) with the design, development, manufacturing, promoting,\nmarketing, distributing, labeling, and/or sale of illegal and outright fraudulent investment services, all of\nwhich aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding clients through a predetermined cycle of the\nclient losses to gains.\nMoney was transferred from my account in the total amount of XXXX XXXX utilizing your services.\nOVERVIEW\n This letter shall thrust into the spotlight, inter alia, the increasingly important role those financial\ninstitutions play in the fight against financial crime and fraud, and the pressing need for enhanced\nsupervision and vigilance within your organization.\n Heres an indisputable fact: had you looked at the wider circumstances surrounding the abovereferenced\ntransaction(s), this illicit transfer of wealth could have been prevented.\n Obviously, there is no consensus with respect to the degree and scope to which regulated and licensed\nfinancial institutions must intervene and block suspicious transactions, and indeed, in so doing,\nfinancial institutions may often cause payments to be slowed down unnecessarily or even some\nlegitimate payments may be rejected, however, please be noted that additional frictions such as slower\npayments (such as delaying payments or freezing funds to investigate) is beneficial to and welcomed\nby vulnerable customers and is widely considered to be a positive practice that is necessary in order to\nmaintain their financial safety, particularly for large-value and/or out of pattern.\n Executing transactions without proper authority is not only a severe regulatory offense but also an\nirresponsible and reckless disregard of the customers financial safety.\n Against this background, and without derogating any of my rights, I hereby hold you liable for\nfinancial and emotional harm as well as medical problems relating to this victimization and insist that\nyou reimburse my account in full within 14 days from the date of this letter.\nINTRODUCTION\nFinancial crimes and fraud investigations often involve a high degree of sophistication, complexity, and\nsensitiveness to detail. Accordingly, this letter aims to address the issue at hand as profoundly and fairly as\npossible, by taking into consideration contextual regulations, laws, and bylaws, as well as guidance, standards\nand rules promoted by supervisory authorities, relevant codes of practice and (where suitable) what was good\nindustry practice (GIP) at all times relevant hereto. The allegations contained herein are predicated either\nupon knowledge with respect to myself and my own experience, or upon facts obtained through investigations\nconducted by qualified third parties. I strongly believe that substantive evidence in support of the allegations\nset forth herein will be found after an appropriate opportunity for discovery. Key facts supporting the\nallegations contained herein are known only to the Company and/or are exclusively within their control.\nThe Company cleverly orchestrated a prevalent scheme of deception to lead people to invest significant sums\nwhile knowing that those would-be investors would ultimately lose the money, they had entrusted to it. The\noverall purpose of the scheme, in other words, was to target and defraud people who are often inexperienced\nand naive, in pursuance of illicit wealth through various fraudulent representations.\nI did not know, and through the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have discovered, the fraud\nthat was being perpetrated upon me by the Company. Fraud is commonly conceptualized as withholding\nfrom the weaker party in a financial transaction (e.g., an investor) information which is necessary to make an\ninformed, rational or autonomous decision.\nIn this regard, even access to adequate information is insufficient to achieve complete autonomy. A\ncomplication here is that the weaker party, amateur/unseasoned investors in particular, might have trouble\nanalyzing the data at hand sufficiently well to identify fraudulent schemes. Unfortunately, because financial\nproducts are often abstract and complex, there is no easy solution to this problem. Therefore, full autonomy of\ninvestors might not only require access to sufficient information, but also access to relevant technologies,\nknow-how, processing capabilities, and resources to analyze the information. A reasonable solution is that\nfinancial institutions would be required to promote transparent communication in which they track the\nunderstanding of its customers.\nAccording to the Federal Trade Commissions interpretations of certain terms (like the words deceptive and\nunfair), the FTC has found that a deceptive act or practice encompasses a representation, omission or\npractice that is likely to mislead the consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances, to the consumers\ndetriment.\nThe federal courts have defined a deceptive trade practice [i] as any act or practice that has the tendency or\ncapacity to deceive consumers and have defined an unfair trade practice as any act or practice that offends\npublic policy and is immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious to consumers.\nThe false representations and omissions made by the Company have a tendency or capacity to deceive\nconsumers, such as myself, into unwittingly providing funds that fueled the Companys fraudulent scheme\nand are therefore, by their very nature, jointly immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and\nsubstantially injurious to consumers.\nAs a result of the Companys deceptive trade practices, I was deceived into transferring my funds for\ninvestment returns that were never delivered. I will certainly never receive any monetary value for the\ninvestments considering the way the Company had their scheme rigged, thus causing significant economic\ndamage to me. The false statements of material facts and omissions as described above; and the fraudulent\ntransaction(s) the Company perpetrated upon me; were unfair, unconscionable, and deceptive practices which\nwould have likely deceived any reasonable person under the circumstances.\nMERCHANTS FRAUD SCHEME  ALLEGATIONS\nThe Company hired, managed, and trained personnel, and collaborated with others as accomplices to\ntheir crimes to induce fraud that resulted in my financial and psychological damages. These include,\nbut are not limited to, the following allegations, all of which involve criminal, non-regulated, and\nmalicious activities:\n1. The Company directed and instructed others to work from shell companies that were operating\nfrom various unassociated locations across the globe.\n2. The Company opened bank accounts in multiple countries and used them through their\naccomplices and strawmen from around the world to conceal and disguise the identity of\nillegally obtained proceeds so that they appear to have originated from legitimate sources.\n3. The Company intentionally committed fraudulent misrepresentation, and falsified its agent names,\ncredentials, competencies, qualifications and location. The Companys name is merely a brand name,\nofficially owned by shell corporations located offshore. In reality, the entire operation is being\nconducted from elsewhere (supposed location is evidently fictitious), and on top of that the call center,\nmarketing, and decision making, are all being performed by completely anonymous and hidden\nentities. Concealing true identities and utilizing front companies as a vehicle for a wide spectrum\nof financial maneuvers is a notorious practice of criminal organizations.\n4. The Company has blatantly violated international laws, as it has been practicing without a\nlicense and funneling enormous sums of money, through countries and jurisdictions that require\nregistration to operate.\n5. The Company provided direct investment advice - not utilizing 3rd party recommendations (e.g.,\naccording to Bloomberg TV/Investing.com)\n6. The Company offered investment services/advice not related to real market/exchange data\n(manufacturing false charts etc.). The trading platform was purposely manipulated, in a way that\neach client would ineluctably and unknowingly lose money, as the trades were simply\nconcocted. Instead, the Companys staff and its accomplices simply pocketed the money, using\nit to purchase various luxurious, non-essential items.\n7. The Company prohibited my ability to withdraw my funds.\n8. The Company was guaranteeing returns/yields (unrealistic ones).\n9. The Company furnished me with bonuses - which are not allowed to be given.\n10. My money was not held in a segregated account.\n11. The Company did not advertise/disclose/was not transparent regarding the statistical data representing\nthe percentage of total client losses at the company.\n12. The Company did not mention the commission and overnight swaps.\n13. The Company did not read the risk disclosure prior to my deposit(s).\n14. The Company used high pressure tactics and outbursts, which took a severe toll on my health.\n15. Armed with my personal details, the Companys staff seduced me into transferring all of my\nsavings to them. They utilized their knowledge of my cultural context, which stressed square\nand honorable business dealings along with honesty, in order to maliciously take advantage of\nmy trusting nature.\nPlease take notice that my funds were transferred through means of coercion and under false pretenses.\nAttached, please find supportive statements, screenshots, and further evidence.\nEXPOSING YOUR ORGANIZATIONS MISCONDUCT\nI hereby allege that your organization has completely failed to adequately investigate the circumstances\nsurrounding the transaction(s) in question and willfully blinded itself to obvious red flags.\nMany suspicions should have arisen at your organization as an issue of great concern, with respect to the\nunusual activity taking place in my account. Despite the regulatory and statutory requirements your\norganization should abide by as a licensed and regulated financial institution  and instead of detecting\npatterns, drawing certain conclusions, and taking actions accordingly you at best, merely and insufficiently\nperformed some hasty and haphazard reviews of the transaction(s) or possibly asked only minimal generic\nquestions regarding the suspicious activities, and at worst, shut your eyes completely rather than being careful,\nmethodical, and vigilant. Had you bothered, you would probably have realized that the funds were associated\nwith fraud and financial crime, rather than some other legitimate revenue/activity.\nIn light of the above, and after conducting a comprehensive review of our communication/interactions,\nit has become glaringly obvious to me that no adequate information and/or documentation were sought\nby your organization, at best, and at worst no appropriate safeguards were implemented.\nIf a financial institution executes a customer order to transfer money knowing it to be dishonestly given,\nshutting its eyes to the obvious fact of the dishonesty, or acting recklessly in failing to make such inquiries as\nan honest and reasonable individual would undergo, it would be in breach of its duty of care, even if the\npayment was made in accordance with the terms of the mandate, and the financial institution should still be\nliable for negligence resulting in damages.\nCompliance departments should ensure that staff members understand the legal requirements and where there\nare suspicions, these suspicions be communicated to all relevant personnel whilst being investigated.\nFor the avoidance of doubt, reasonable grounds should not necessarily be interpreted as proof. On the basis of\nvarious signs, you should have assumed that something suspicious was going on therefore should have\nsuspended transaction(s) until reasonable enquiries could be made to verify that the transaction(s)\nwas/were properly executed. In other words, I am a victim of your negligence for facilitating the\nmisappropriation of funds, and doing little to safeguard public financial interests. Any reasonable staff\nmember would have realized that there were many obvious, even glaring, signs that I was being defrauded.\n(XXXX XXXX XXXX (in liquidation) v XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX [XXXX] XXXX XXXX) [ii]\nYou knew or should have known that the funds being transferred through your services did not rightfully\nbelong to the recipient fraudsters. Similarly, you knew or should have known that the funds being transferred\nthrough your services serve no legitimate or lawful purpose. You turned a blind eye to the crimes that you\nhave facilitated and thus provided an array of essential money transfer services, acting as a vehicle, with the\nawareness that it was enabling the fraudsters to commit crimes and enrich themselves with the funds of their\nvictims.\nYour services undoubtedly served as a crucial element in the fraudulent scheme detailed herein, and you were\neither unaware of your complicity in the fraud, or, more worryingly, completely aware and silent. Had you\nconducted an adequate account analysis, you would have discovered the nature of the recipient, and\nsubsequently, disclosed and reported the fraudsters activities to law enforcement authorities/agencies and\nregulators. Instead, to satisfy your financial interests, you conveniently closed your eyes, even though you\nundeniably had, at all material times, the necessary controls and resources to influence, whether directly or\nindirectly, those particular transactions.\nYou also had the duty to stop those crimes, yet you refused to do so because you were more interested in\nenriching yourself, even if it meant furthering those crimes and allowing them to cause massive financial\nlosses to plenty of victims  many of whom are probably your customers. Therefore, it is clear that you did\nnot have in place adequate security measures to properly safeguard my assets  hence, you have\nirreparably harmed me and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably harm other victims as well as\ntheir loved\nones and associates. You have irreparably harmed me and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably\nharm the general public, and our society deserves better.\nA financial institution which wrongly pays money away when it has no authority to do so will usually be\ntreated as if it had paid using its own funds, not those of its customer.\nWhen discussing the responsibilities that a financial institution might incur, it is crucial not to forget the fact\nthat a legitimate complaint by, or cause of action on the part of, a client might generate/give rise to further\nstatutory cause of action and/or additional liabilities beholden by a financial institution to the relevant\nregulatory authority. Obligations/duties beholden by a financial institution to a regulator are distinct from\nthose beholden to the customer. Moreover, you may be held liable to more than one regulator.\nAs a regulated and licensed financial institution, you have strict statutory and regulatory obligations to\nmonitor transactions and report any suspicious activities to law enforcement authorities. The importance of\nimplementing robust internal systems to detect and report money laundering and other suspicious activities\nhas been continuously emphasized in the industry in addition to having the appropriate policies, procedures\nand internal controls in place to ensure ongoing compliance in respect to the aforementioned systems. You\nshould have analysed and distinguished thereafter between that which may be normal activity and that which\ncould suggest an illegal activity. This is a well-known standard industry practice which plays a substantial role\nin preventing criminals from liquidating and laundering funds.\nFRAUD\nActual fraud can be described, inter alia, as suppression of that which is true, by one having knowledge or\nbelief of the fact. Therefore, due to your actual knowledge that such scams are so prevalent, you are liable for\ndamages. Similarly, due to the fact that you knew or were grossly negligent in not kn","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-30T09:15:06.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10981005","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ria Envia, LLC","date_received":"2024-11-30T08:54:09.000Z","state":null,"company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Offer <em>free</em> security software from our trusted tech partners to download on to your devices.\n Frequently train our employees on the latest practices in cyber and physical security.\n Give you the security tips and resources you need to protect yourself from potential threats."]},"sort":[4.6438174,"10981005"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2632595","_score":4.4774213,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I have several complaints about the manner in which my mortgage has been serviced by Midland Mortgage over the past few years, specifically regarding actions taken during and just after completion of my Chapter XXXX bankruptcy, which ended in XX/XX/XXXX, and a subsequent payment plan arrangement that I completed in XX/XX/XXXX. The separate points of complaint are outlined below. The only remedies I am requesting are : - Refund of a {$920.00} fee ( discussed in Item # 3 ) or a suitable explanation of what the fee was for and why I should have to pay it. I believe it to be a legal fee that was either already paid or one that was improperly or mistakenly applied to the mortgage account. - Correction of payment history reported to credit bureaus based on the fact that one of my monthly payments was applied to fees instead of being treated as a payment ( discussed in Items # 4 and # 5 ). The other points of complaint are included to make Midland Mortgage aware of the issues and to go on record with  regulators. If there are others with similar complaints or data suggesting improper policies or patterns of behavior, perhaps regulators will be motivated to investigate further and hold Midland Mortgage accountable for their actions. Finally, I have documented two other points of concern to make Midland Mortgage aware of serious issues affecting their customers. 1. Questionable and potentially improper procedures and disposition of Motion for Relief in XXXX. In XXXX we fell behind on our mortgage payments during our Chapter XXXX. We went through the procedures to allow direct communication between ourselves and mitigation specialists at the mortgage company. We were pre-approved for a loan modification which had to be approved by the bankruptcy court. However, while this process was underway the mortgage companys legal representatives were pursuing a Motion for Relief of Stay through the bankruptcy court. We understand that this motion in itself should not directly effect the mortgage and that it would not be out of the ordinary for the mortgage company to continue trying to be relieved of the stay of bankruptcy for future proceedings should the plan not be approved. If the outcome of these proceedings were limited to a decision on the stay there would be no harm in them. However, it seems to be common practice for these motions to result in stipulations concerning payments, schedules and consequences directly relating to the loans themselves. That being the case, it would seem to be more in keeping with anti-double-tracking requirements to suspend Motion for Relief proceedings while mortgagors are known to be pursuing mortgage assistance measures rather than put in place stipulations related to the loan in order to satisfy the court and set aside the Motion for Relief before or while mortgagors are establishing a mitigation plan through other channels. In my case, the last paragraph of the notice of the outcome of the hearing ( Attachment # 1 ) states that our future payments ( for unspecified duration ) would be under STRICT COMPLIANCE ORDER, such that if we were XXXX dollar short or one day late we would have 10 days to cure the default or an Order Lifting the Automatic Stay will be issued by the Judge without any further hearing or notice, and your property will be foreclosed upon. This seems to suggest that the outcome of the hearing became broader than simply covering whether or not the stay would remain in place and expanded into the handling of the mortgage itself. It is unclear how this would have been enforced, but given that the loan modification plan has its own schedule, requirements and potential consequences ( not to mention the Dodd-Frank guidelines ), this language seems to be trying to define a separate, potentially shorter, path to foreclosure in the event that payments at some future date were late or to place additional payment schedule requirements on the loan. Obviously once the payments were caught up, making one payment a day late or a dollar short would not meet the Dodd-Frank requirements of being 120-days delinquent before proceeding with foreclosure. In this case, local hired attorneys were trying to ( perhaps over-zealously ) represent the mortgage companys interests separately and without any communication with the companys loan mitigation personnel. This opens up a concern that these Motion for Relief actions ( and perhaps other bankruptcy related filings ) are being used as a defacto form of double-tracking for mortgagors that happen to be in bankruptcy and that the dispositions go beyond just affecting the stay of bankruptcy to affecting the terms of the loan and/or foreclosure conditions. It may be worth investigating the practices of Midland Mortgage and their hired legal representatives to determine whether bankruptcy filings are being used in a manner that violates the letter, or at least the spirit, of the CFPB anti-double-tracking rules for mortgage servicing. 2. Motion for Relief filed in final weeks of bankruptcy, resulting in unnecessary fees, tasks and hearings. Over the course of our six-year bankruptcy Midland Mortgage actually filed three separate Motions for Relief of Stay. The first two were filed when three payments were 30-days past due and a fourth had come due. The final one was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, stating that three payments had been missed. ( In fact, the third payment had been already been sent and was credited on XXXX XXXX. ) The bankruptcy had actually originally been scheduled to end in XXXX, but the trustee was unhappy with the amount of overtime pay I had received for part of the bankruptcy term so it was extended around one year to be a 100 % plan. The hearing for the Relief of Stay was held on XXXX XXXX, the same day as the very last payment of six years worth of payments was credited by the trustee. Notice of Final Cure of Payment was sent on XXXX XXXX, and the bankruptcy was officially discharged on XX/XX/XXXX. When I went in to speak to my attorney about the motion I asked why the mortgage company would file for relief of a stay that was going to end with the discharge in a matter of weeks anyway. I was told that this very common, but the attorney was also surprised that the motion had been filed with the just the three payments due. It seems reasonable to conclude that the motion was filed not in spite of the impending end of the bankruptcy, but rather because of it. I am not sure why a mortgage company would accelerate this process at the end of a bankruptcy, but there must be a reason it is common. Filing the motion came with a large legal fee of {$1000.00}. ( Maybe this is a make-work exercise for underfunded legal departments? ) There was also an apparent attempt to add additional fees to the bankruptcy ( item # 3 below ). This also resulted in additional time away from work to make phone calls and attorney visits, not to mention extra work for the attorneys, staff and additional tasks for the courts. In the end, my attorneys negotiated a six-month payment agreement to pay the missed payments and all the fees, even though the agreement would stand only for the six weeks or so until the end of the bankruptcy, at which point I would be free to work out arrangements directly with Midland Mortgage on the amount remaining. In my case, the trustee payments were a large percentage of my income and no longer having to make them opened up a considerable amount of available extra money I could use to catch up payments. I imagine this is not always the case with many mortgagors coming out of bankruptcy, and these last-minute actions, with the additional fees and unexpected urgency in catching up payments, might be enough to precipitate foreclosures. Or ( as it turned out in my case ) to force borrowers into mitigation programs ( for which there may be government-funded incentives? ). This practice may already be well known to regulators, but if it is not I recommend looking closely at data related to mortgagors coming out of Chapter XXXX to see if there is a pattern of questionable last-minute actions taken against them that may be intended to make them more vulnerable to actions that benefit the lenders. A Chapter XXXX plan is a long, difficult struggle. Its completion should mark a time for moving forward and rebuilding, not a time for creditors to precipitate or exploit weaknesses. 3. Attempt to charge unexplained, possibly duplicate fees to bankruptcy in last days that were carried over to loan when apparently rejected by bankruptcy trustee. As I was nearing the end of my bankruptcy I was carefully watching the posting of payments to my account on the XXXX XXXX XXXX web site. On XX/XX/XXXX I signed in to find that an additional fee of {$920.00} had been added to the total amount due ( Attachment # 3, Claim No. XXXX on line XXXX ). This was not present when I had last signed on to the XXXX site on XXXX XXXX ( Attachment # 2 ). Of course this was frustrating because it would add at least one more bi-monthly payment to the term of the bankruptcy. I called my attorneys to see of they could find out more about the fee. I knew it to be the exact amount of the legal fee charged for the Motion for Relief filed in XXXX. But I knew I had paid this fee in two installments per the XXXX agreement that came out of that hearing. ( Attachment # 5 ). The fee for the XXXX motion was {$100.00} more and was being integrated into the payment plan agreement from that hearing, so I knew that this one should not be added to the bankruptcy. On XXXX XXXX the fee dropped off of the XXXX account ledger ( Attachment # 4 ). I  asked my attorneys why this would have occurred and I was told that maybe the mortgage company had tried to add the fee but that the trustee had rejected it due to the total amount of the bankruptcy being nearly paid off. I wrote it off as a potential mistake that had been corrected. But then that exact amount turned up as a fee charged to the mortgage itself and was included in pre-foreclosure notices received from Midland Mortgage as well as in the paperwork for the payment plan I entered into after the bankruptcy was discharged. I questioned this fee during the application process for the mitigation plan because I knew I had paid or made other arrangements for all of the legal fees associated with all of the Motion for Relief proceedings. I was never offered any explanation for what the fee was or why it had been added. I still have seen no documentation of this fee and believe it to be a mistake. I am requesting that Midland Mortgage credit this amount back to my account or provide sufficient documentation to justify it. 4. Improper application of payment towards legal fees, leaving loan an additional payment behind, forcing us to seek relief again to avoid foreclosure. According to our repayment agreement defined in the XX/XX/XXXX Motion for Relief of Stay hearing and documented on XX/XX/XXXX ( Attachment # 1 ) we were to pay one of the payments of {$1000.00} immediately and begin making regular timely payments of {$1000.00} beginning XXXX XXXX. On XXXX XXXX we sent certified funds by overnight mail of {$1000.00}. This was credited to our mortgage account as our XX/XX/XXXX payment on XX/XX/XXXX as shown in the transaction log on the web site. ( Attachment # 6 ) We mailed in the payment due for XXXX XXXX. On XXXX XXXX the payment was credited to the log, but was not applied as a payment, despite the fact that it was sent with a payment stub and was for the exact payment amount of {$1000.00}, which included principal, interest and escrow for the XX/XX/XXXX periodic payment. It should have been credited as the XX/XX/XXXX payment. Instead it was allocated to Unapplied funds. On XXXX XXXX a fee of {$1000.00} was applied to the account ( the legal fees for the XX/XX/XXXXRelief of Stay filing, separate from the {$920.00} discussed in Item # 3 above ). On XXXX XXXX the {$1000.00} was removed from unapplied funds and used to pay a {$100.00} fee, and a {$920.00} fee ( totaling to the {$1000.00} amount of legal fees for the Motion for Relief ). I called several times to point out the issue and was told by customer service staff that there was no error. Applying this payment towards fees instead of treating it as my XXXX monthly payment seems to directly contradict the guidelines for mortgage servicing ( 12 CFR 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( i ) ) as well as the terms of the repayment agreement. Further, in mid-XXXX I made the first of the mid-month additional half-payments scheduled in my payment plan from the Motion for Relief hearing in XXXX, and at the end of XXXX I made a full payment due for XXXX XXXX according to the plan. However, there are apparently administrative delays in transferring accounts internally at Midland Mortgage ( from bankruptcy to regular accounts ) and the XXXX XXXX payment was not credited until XXXX XXXX. The half-payment remained in unapplied funds ( appropriately ). Meanwhile, on XXXX XXXX Midland sent a letter ( Attachment # 6 ) indicating that I was more than four full payments behind ( despite the fact that they had misapplied one payment and already had another in their hands ). I was also contacted by staff at Midland Mortgage involved in handling foreclosures to discuss the situation. By XXXX, I had made what should have been counted as my XXXX payment ( which was applied as fees XXXX. I had made a full payment ( credited late ) that should have been counted as my XXXX payment. I had made one half of my XXXX payment that was waiting in unapplied funds. And I had the second half of my XXXX payment ready to send. If this additional half payment were sent and posted it would have meant that I was actually under 30 days late on regular mortgage payments. But by now my bankruptcy was ended, my payment plan was invalid, the stay was no longer in place and the mortgage company was threatening foreclosure based on the assumption that I was four payments behind, plus extensive fees ( including the questionable {$920.00} from Item 3 above ). Not wanting to risk proceeding to foreclosure I contacted the delinquency assistance department at Midland and began the process of setting up a payment plan to catch everything up. They advised me not to send anything else while the account was in the foreclosure status and we were working on an assistance plan, so I held onto the second half-payment and waited to get the payment plan established. On XXXX XXXX I was sent a conflicting Your Account Status letter that more accurately reflected the amounts paid, but still showed three payments behind. I understand that, with the exception of the contested {$920.00}, the same number of dollars needed to be paid to fully catch up the account ( once all paid amounts had been properly credited ), however the XXXX XXXX payment was applied. But there is a big difference between being a month or so behind and informally paying extra amounts when possible to catch up fees and being compelled to enter into a formal mortgage assistance plan to avoid foreclosure. Nothing I experienced throughout this process leads me to believe that this was a simple error related to just my own account. Instead I believe this issue to be a product of policy. I think it is likely that my experience is commonplace and that Midland Mortgage has adopted these practices not just to prioritize collection of fees, but also compel customers to catch up payments and enter into formal plans and assistance programs, some of which may offer publicly funded incentives. It may also help accelerate foreclosures for problem accounts.\nOf all of my complaints this one seems like the clearest violation of mortgage servicing guidelines. I would recommend that regulators look into whether Midland Mortgage routinely took and continues to take this harmful action against other mortgagors. 5. Reporting of loan as 90+ days past due ( due to item 4 above ) to credit bureau, damaging credit history. Once our payment plan was complete Midland Mortgage reported the payment history to the credit bureaus as they had it in their own records, indicating that we were 90+ days late for several months during the course of the payment plan when this should not have been the case. This is especially damaging to the credit records of people emerging from lengthy Chapter XXXX cases because it represents a large part of the very limited credit history left when most past accounts have dropped off. We understood and accepted that credit reporting would continue throughout the payment plan and that it would reflect the status of our payments. However, due to the misapplication of a payment towards fees Midland Mortgages records were in error and this erroneous information is what is reflected in our credit reports. We were at least 30 days behind at the time of the bankruptcy discharge, and we might have been counted as 60 days late, depending on reporting dates and the lag in crediting payments. However, applying one of our payments to fees instead of counting it as a payment accounts for a full 30 days worth of late reporting. In addition, had everything been handled promptly and properly there should not have been a strong reason to enter into a mitigation plan at all, which came with additional payment schedule delays and extended by at least one the number of months for which payments were reported as late. I am requesting that Midland Mortgage correct their credit bureau reporting to accurately reflect our account status, counting the misapplied payment as a regular monthly payment and allowing for the delays driven by its own actions. At minimum this should mean reducing the time in arrears by 30 days for each month reported from XXXX through XXXX of XXXX. In addition to the formal complaints above, the following informal observations are included to highlight serious customer service failings that could and probably do contribute to very negative outcomes for Midland Mortgage customers. A. Confusing and contradictory mailings sent throughout payment plan term, as well as low level of support from representatives by phone. After making a payment plan arrangement to catch up my mortgage payments and fees I continued to receive multiple regular pieces of mail from Midland Mortgage concerning my account. The information in these letters seemed contradictory and some of them did not seem to reflect the terms of the plan. I assume that Midland Mortgages automated systems and procedures trigger these mailing under particular conditions and that some of the processes are not aware that mitigation arrangements are in place. - Can we help? mailings ( Attachment # 8 ) At the begging of each month I received a letter bearing the title Can we help?, which provided a list of the months for which payments had not been received, a total due on the loan, and the message, This is a very serious matter that requires your attention. The package included forms and documents needed to apply for a mortgage assistance program. Receiving these mailings can be alarming when you are already in such a program. It makes you think something has gone wrong and your existing assistance program is no longer in effect. - Mortgage Statement ( Attachment # 9 ) In the middle of each month a regular mortgage statement came in the mail. This document showed an Amount Due block at the top with the total amount ( all missing payments and outstanding fees added together ) and a payment due date if the first of the next month. Just looking at the top of this document it appears that you are expected to pay this full amount and not the amount scheduled in your payment plan. You have to look at the payment coupon attached to the bottom of the document to see the actual payment amount and scheduled date from your payment plan. This is very confusing. There are different amounts and dates showing on the very same piece of paper.\n- Late Charge Letters ( Attachment # 10 ) Also around the middle of the month I received a letter saying that my payment for a particular month had not been received on time and that I should add the amount of the late charge to the payment. These letters showed the amount of the regular payment, late charge and regular payment date ( not the agreed upon payment amount and date from the payment plan ). - Your Account Status letters ( Attachment # 11 ) Around the third week of each month I received a letter titled Your Account Status. This letter referenced the payment plan and the presented data seemed to reflect the actual status of the payment plan more accurately than any of the other documents. I am sure that all of these documents make perfect sense to Midland Mortgage staff ( or maybe not ), but to customers, especially taken all together, they are very confusing. Customers must think, Is my plan still in place? Am I supposed to pay this amount by this date? If I dont, will my home be foreclosed? It doesnt seem like it should be that hard for Midland Mortgage to send out a single statement each month reflecting the terms and status of the customers mitigation plan and including the expected payment and due date according to the plan. Other statements and offers of help should be suspended for the duration of the plan. This makes me very concerned for mortgagors trying to go through mitigation plans who might be elderly, less-educated or otherwise less able to keep up with plan schedules and requirements. These multiple and conflicting notices must create a great deal of undue stress and confusion. It is not hard to imagine that this could lead to people losing their homes over missed deadlines, improper payments or simply by throwing up their hands and giving up. I know a lady in my neighborhood that was facing foreclosure ( I do not know with what mortgage company ) and just started ignoring everything about her situation until officers came to her house and put all of her stuff out on the lawn. She was a foreign national and non-native English speaker. Was she overwhelmed and confused by multiple, conflicting statements like these? B. Slow reporting of positive status to credit bureaus, resulting in unnecessarily long waits with apparent but not actual negative credit history. I completed my payment plan in XX/XX/XXXX. However, my credit reports reflected that I was still in a payment plan until XX/XX/XXXX when current status of the account was finally changed to on time. Midland Mortgage has reported the account as on time regularly every month since then. I understand that there may be somewhat of a delay in transitioning accounts from payment plans to current status, but it should not take three months after completion of a payment plan for Midland Mortgage to begin reporting an account as current to credit bureaus. Mortgage account status is one of the most significant factors affecting peoples credit scores, and Midland Mortgage surely knows this. If this delay in updating the reported status of accounts is purely internal inefficiencies, then Midland Mortgage should address this for the benefit of their customers. However, it may also be worth also investigating whether this delay is a deliberate policy. There must be advantages to temporarily suppressing customer credit scores in certain situations, such as reducing loan risk by preventing customers from adding other credit obligations and perhaps preventing or delaying mortgage refinancing with other lenders. Perhaps Midland Mortgage intentionally waits to the end of the period within which they are obligated to report a change to positive credit status, which may be perfectly legal but is unethical and damaging to borrowers.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-08-12T18:23:10.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"30144","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2632595","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MIDFIRST BANK","date_received":"2017-08-12T18:07:03.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In the end, my attorneys negotiated a six-month payment agreement to pay the missed payments and all the fees, even though the agreement would stand only for the six weeks or so until the end of the bankruptcy, at which point I would be <em>free</em> to work out arrangements directly with Midland Mortgage on the amount remaining."]},"sort":[4.4774213,"2632595"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4043077","_score":4.344896,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, Please find my demand to extend until XX/XX/XXXX, as provided by CARES Act, forbearance on repayment of my COMMISSION for involuntary servitude ( unpaid labor or slavery ) to Big Investment Banks each of whom operate a Ponzi Scheme with Pension Funds and other investors by selling BETS on securitized information based on my identity ( aka identity theft and identity trafficking ) for unjust enrichment masqueraded as a repayment of mortgage debt. \n\nI submit this request through PennyMac, a fictitious servicer and fake owner of my purported debt since the REAL parties - XXXX XXXX with whom PennyMac has numerous repurchase agreements ; who is currently controls PennyMac by \" buying '' most it its \" shares '' and where Mr. XXXX XXXX worked in XXXX before he was called back to action to cover XXXX XXXX fraud with derivatives ; XXXX  XXXX XXXX who cash my payments ; and other Wall Street stockbrokers want to hide behind a chain of fictitious intermediaries who call themselves servicers I also submit this request to the REAL servicers, XXXX XXXX ( former XXXX XXXX ) and XXXX who actually collect my repayments of commission via third-parties lockbox companies XXXX and its branch XXXX to forward them to Wall Street Stockbrokers as tax-free revenue while PennyMac  never touched a cent from money they purportedly \" collect '' from me. \n\nBear to repeat, PennyMac appeared in XX/XX/XXXX and started to lie non-stop that they purchased my loan and now investors and owners of my obligation. When I asked PennyMac who SOLD them my loan - PennyMac was never able to respond ; and nobody confirmed to be a Seller of my so-called \" loan '' to PennyMac. No need to say, all my demands to identify the Seller, provide me prove of sale as required by UCC Art 9, 203 ; and provide me a release of lien by the prior \" owner '' are ignored,. \n\nWhen I asked PennyMac why my mortgage payments are pocketed by XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX branch of Federal Reserve, PennyMac lied that they collect money to pass it to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a Trustee for a fictitious Trust ( obviously created by Mr. XXXX XXXX from his sick imagination ) XXXX   purportedly pass my payments to investors - who according to another respond is PennyMac. ALL of these statements are absurd blatant lies but since Wall Street Banks control American Government and flooded all public offices with its Bankers ( like Mr. XXXX, former XXXX XXXX employee and CEO of XXXX XXXX  ; Mr. XXXX, former OCC and XXXX CEO ; Mr. XXXX, OCC and former XXXX CEO ; Mr. XXXX, who defrauded investors from over {$5.00} XXXX as XXXX XXXX CEO and who lied to Senators Peters about Issuer XXXX ) - nobody is willing to do anything, Yet, neither VA or XXXX XXXX or anyone else can identify THE SELLER of my loan to PennyMac ; as well as no one can tell which Company has my so-called loan on their account receivable as an asset and to whom they purportedly guarantee my payments In XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX filed a legal case against PennyMac for theft of proprietory secrets - such as stealing borrowers DATA from XXXX XXXX MSP to use it for its own unjust enrichment. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX PennyMac was removed from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( which is exclusively used by all GSEs, particularly VA to whom XXXX XXXX provide information about DATA related to some non-existing loan accounts, thus without access to this system PennyMac can not service aka see data about any loans. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX my property taxes are paid by XXXX ( who along with XXXX XXXX are forging documents for illegal foreclosures which they pass to mill lawyers who present this fraud in all Courts ). All my repayments of one-time commission ( mislabeled as loan ) still collected by XXXX  XXXX XXXX - but obviously not for benefit of any investors ; and even more definitely PennyMac does not have any relationship to servicing anyones accounts, they merely pose as Servicers, for a fee. \n\nThese servicers like XXXX and PennyMac ( aka XXXX  ) are working for a fictitious entity that had not paid for nor did it own any loan nor the underlying obligation, The servicer had been inserted to imply the existence of a loan account receivable in order to foreclose. \n\nFORECLOSURE is the real purpose of EVERY home purchase in America since it helps to produce a windfall of profits on Investment Banks like XXXX XXXX and XXXX ; cover for fatally damaged Titles and initiate a new securities scheme by selling stolen properties to new buyers, N o servicer has ever asserted or demonstrated that it was the bookkeeper for the accounting statements of the party named as a claimant in a foreclosure. They could neither state the identity of anyone who owned the underlying obligation nor could they tell us who received the money that I was paying. In fact, neither of the fake Servicers - XXXX and PennyMac - were neither receiving any money nor were they keeping the books. this was all funneled to thrid-party vendors mostly controlled by XXXX XXXX. \n\nForeclosure is the method by which the myth of the existence of a loan transaction was reinforced. Because the labels were consistently applied by the conduits, sham entities, and lawyers employed by the investment banks, and because the true nature of the deal had been consistently concealed, everyone believed the false narrative that the transactions with homeowners had been loans and that the holders of certificates were investors in those loans. \n\nThe concealment was successful and so millions of Americans were forced out of their homes by a void foreclosure process that resulted in revenue distributed to the various players in the foreclosure scheme and the various players in the securities scheme. But not all of them were forced out. Many, if not most, simply left the biggest asset of their lives because they did not understand that the money they had received was not a loan, it was a payment for their participation in launching the securities scheme that netted millions of dollars for each so-called loan. \n\nAnd continuing collection and foreclosure in that context is cruel and inhumane. On average homeowners were paid around 8 % of the total revenue which seems fair. But then the deal was disguised as a loan which meant that the payment for their services had to be returned by the homeowner. This leaves the homeowner with negative consideration for sponsoring a securities scheme that made unconscionable profits through fraud and deceit. \n\nIf the investment bank wants that money back then they are admitting they never had any intent to honor any contract with the homeowner. They are seeking to leave the homeowner with negative consideration for the deal loss of equity because of inflated appraisals and nonviable payback schemes, plus loss of the only consideration they received from the investment bank, plus the interest paid, leaving all homeowners in a deeply negative position. \n\nThe loan agreement was no enforceable partly for the same reason that the securities deal is not enforceable. As a result of concealment, there could be no meeting of the minds the most basic element of an enforceable contract. And here again, consideration was totally absent. The investment bank was operating through sham conduits to lure the homeowner into what was labeled as a loan. but the investment bank had no lending intent nor any intention of establishing a loan account receivable on the accounting ledgers of any company or business entity. the loan simply did not exist to the investment bank. It only existed in the minds of the homeowner who accepted the label of borrower. \n\nThe homeowner borrower then issued a note and mortgage and the signature on other loan documents because of the belief that everyone involved was telling the truth and was operating in compliance with lending laws and common sense for lending transactions. In other words, the homeowner was operating under a false assumption created by lies, deceit, and concealment. The homeowner was not purchasing a loan product as you have seen above. There was no loan product. The homeowner was issuing the note as payment for something he/she never received. \n\nWhen I contacted VA, XXXX XXXX and HUD representative, nobody can answer to WHOM they guarantee payments on my purported loan account and ALL their information about loans is based on MSP, which is a computer platform owned by XXXX XXXX ( who confirmed that they servicing 62 % of ALL loans ; and controlled by XXXX XXXX XXXX  who are the actual parties behind every home purchase. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX to present time Federal Reserve purportedly started to buy trillions worth of so-called Mortgage Backed Securities ( no-existing ) from XXXX XXXX and all GSEs. No single homeowner received any Notices about such drastic change in ownership - because all these sales are fiction to defraud investors and homeowners. \n\nFederal Reserve merely changed GSEs names with one of its owners-banks like XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, ect. as assignment - which was once again never disclosed to any homeowners. \n\nNow Federal Reserve ( a common fund owned by private families, most of whom are Wall Street Stockbrokers ) offers very low rates on return of the payment to borrowers for undisclosed participation in Wall Street Ponzi Scheme - which is another scam to create more foreclosures as profits for Big Banks. \n\nThey paid the homeowner to acknowledge the existence of a fictitious loan transaction so that the investment bank could sell securities that were unrelated to ownership of the loan. \n\nThat money is far from cheap. Big Banks will take everything we have and more. And this is that Big Banks are doing during last 20 years - defraud, steal and defraud again. All with total impunity. \n\nSince XXXX to present time Wall Street Stockbrokers RECEIVED HUGE PAYMENTS BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET THE PROPERTY TOO AS WINDFALL TO ONE OR MORE OF THESE FRAUDULENT PLAYERS. THE BORROWER IS LEFT HOLDING THE BAG WHILE EVERYONE ELSE GETS PAID The most reliable indicator of housing value came from a simple proposition : median income ultimately determines value because median income determines what people can pay. According to Federal guidelines, a transaction labeled as a loan is only viable if the payments do not exceed 31 % of household income. So do the math. {$68000.00} per year is {$5700.00} per month. 31 % percent of that is {$1700.00} the maximum amount that the household can safely afford to pay for a mortgage payment. The average 30 year fixed rate is 4 %. So that payment could service a maximum loan product of around {$360000.00}. And that is how a house zoomsup in price but not in value. \n\nThe problem with those computations is that they are riddled with fallacies and lies. It assumes that gross income can be measured by the wages of the household when the first dollars the can be spent on living are now around 20 % less than gross income. So the real viability equation would reflect median household income to be around {$4600.00} a figure to which virtually every wage earner in America can attest. That in turn reduces the highest servicing payment for a mortgage payment to be reduced to {$1400.00}. So a conforming so-called loan is actually nonviable despite the apparent compliance with Federal guidelines. In fact, that family can only afford a mortgage loan of around {$280000.00} but they have a {$360000.00} loan. \n\nSince homebuyers were already underwater at the start of the deal, they will be wiped out when the foreclosures start either directly by foreclosure or indirectly as the prices of homes come down relative to median income. \n\nMeanwhile, the Wall Street investment bank that sold them that deal and who labeled it as a loan never intended and never allowed itself to be a lender who was required to conform to requirements in lending and consumer protection laws. They paid the homeowner to acknowledge the existence of a fictitious loan transaction so that the investment bank could sell securities that were unrelated to ownership of the loan. They made at least {$4.00} XXXX on the deal with the homeowner ( reported as {$360000.00} ). \n\nSo in a rinse-repeat of XXXX-XXXX, millions of homeowners will go into foreclosure, the economy will suffer from another recession, and the investment banks will be laughing all the way to their offshore piggy banks that now amount to many trillions of dollars siphoned out of U.S. households. \n\nThis is all happening because very few people are even curious enough to learn what happened in the mortgage meltdown. While in fact people like myself homeowners must have titles and possession to their homes as just compensation for the securities scheme, while Big Banks do anything possible to make families to lose their homes in legal proceedings that are falsely labeled as foreclosures. \n\nSo why are Wall Street investment bankers giving out money on these terms? The answer is simple. first, they are making {$4.00} XXXX on the deal. Second, they are only paying a small fraction to the homeowner and they are luring the homeowner into a disguised deal that requires the homeowner to pay back the only compensation he/she ever received plus interest. It costs nothing for investment banks to get into this deal. No risk of loss. No risk of sanctions for violating lending laws because they never become lenders. No loan account receivable to charge off so nothing to report to shareholders about any losses arising from homeowners not making scheduled payments. Wouldnt you do that deal if you were in the position of the investment bank? \n\nBut since PennyMac continues to lie and all so-called consumer protection agencies continues to cover for these lies and tell the same lies from Wall Street Banks scripts - I use them as intermediaries with Big Banks to demand to extend my forbearance of repayment of my COMMISSION for involuntary servitude to Big Investment Banks ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and whoever else operates its derivatives schemes based by trading and trafficking my identity on the open markets, a full investigation, compensation for financial services at least 20 % and compensation for extreme emotional distress, total no less than {$50.00} XXXX. \n\nRegards XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2021-01-01T12:09:44.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"490XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4043077","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","date_received":"2021-01-01T11:44:08.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["No <em>risk</em> of loss. No <em>risk</em> of sanctions for violating lending laws because they never become lenders. No loan account receivable to charge off so nothing to report to shareholders about any losses arising from homeowners not making scheduled payments. Wouldnt you do that deal if you were in the position of the investment bank?"]},"sort":[4.344896,"4043077"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7455733","_score":4.118549,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The debt was discharged by order rule of law. XXXX. False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or mis- leading representation or means in connection with the col- lection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 1 ) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof.\n\n808. Unfair practices A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means too collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limit- ing the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 1 ) The collection of any amount ( including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation ) unless such amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law. 15 USC 1692g 808 15 USC 1692f 11 809 15 USC 1692g verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector ; and ( 5 ) a statement that, upon the consumers written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. ( b ) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection ( a ) of this section that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. \n809. Validation of debts ( a ) Notice of debt ; contents Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing ( 1 ) the amount of the debt ; ( 2 ) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed ; 813. Civil liability ( a ) Amount of damages Except as otherwise provided by this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this subchapter with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of ( 1 ) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure ; ( 2 ) ( A ) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding {$1000.00} ; or ( B ) ... 814. Administrative enforcement ( a ) Federal Trade Commission The Federal Trade Commission shall be authorized to enforce compliance with this subchapter, except to the extent that enforcement of the requirements imposed under this subchapter is specifically committed to another Government agency under any of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 5 ) of subsection ( b ), subject to subtitle B of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 [ 12 U.S.C. 5511 et seq. ]. 816. Relation to State laws - This subchapter does not annul, alter, or affect, or exempt any person subject to the provisions of this subchapter from complying with the laws of any State with respect to debt collection practices, except to the extent that those laws are inconsistent with any provision of this subchapter, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. For purposes of this section, a State law is not inconsistent with this subchapter if the protection such law affords any consumer is greater than the protection provided by this subchapter. \nDISCHARGE - Discharge of a contract by operation of law means that a contract is terminated due to the operation of law, without any specific act or agreement by the parties involved. In other words, the contract is discharged automatically, without any intervention from the parties. Impossibility of Performance - Impossibility of performance occurs when the subject matter of the contract becomes impossible to perform. When the performance of the contract becomes impossible due to the occurrence of an event which is beyond the control of the parties, the contract is discharged by operation of law. This is known as the doctrine of frustration. As such the tender of payment was issued by offer and denied. The impossible of performance became a major issues when different lenders claimed to be the original lender of or on the property XX/XX/XXXX. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, deals with the doctrine of frustration. It provides that a contract to do an act that becomes impossible or unlawful after the contract is made becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful. For example, if XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX enters into a contract with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, to deliver a loan and funds or money or product, for transfer of property for purchase but the product money or loan is either not presented or have been lost in tansition or transaction without verification or validation of the funds came from or destroyed due to a natural disaster, then the contract is frustrated, and both parties are discharged from their obligations under the contract. Alteration of Contract - A contract can also be discharged by operation of law when the terms of the contract are altered without the consent of all the parties involved. This is known as the 3 of 13 doctrine of novation. Section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, deals with the doctrine of novation. It provides that a contract is discharged by novation when a new contract is substituted for the old contract, with the consent of all the parties involved. For example, if A enters into a contract with B to deliver a specific product, and B later agrees to accept a different product without the consent of A, then the contract is discharged by operation of law. What is meant by this example is simple they XXXX XXXX and others began altering the document called Mortgage Assignment and Deed of Trust filed in the County of XXXX adding signatures and transferring the property without the knowledge or consent of the owners. They also added a signature of a XXXX XXXX leaving out the middle name to a newly created document filed and stamped XX/XX/XXXX. The Mortgage Assignment was challenged, the Jurisdiction of the XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX was challenged, the evidence and proof of where the funds, money and or loan comes from challenged without any response and the eviction writ of restitution was carried out without legal notice, lawful notice, service to the correct party, the woman listed in the caption heading for the case no XXXX is in the XXXXXXXX XXXX and does not live dwell nor own the property located at XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX NV [ XXXX ] Parcel No XXXX for XXXX as this property is secured by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX field with the Attorney General XXXX XXXX XXXX the secretary of state XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, getnotice.com and other online public records notices as well all parties herein received a copy and signed the XXXX RETURN PROOF OF SERVICE FORM XXXX. This is why they created the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and filed it in the Justice Court on XX/XX/XXXX and the home owners had no idea of these transaction and movements. Cc the Exhibits and attachments as to multiple lenders with different dates of origination of the alleged loan. We warned all parties of the possible fraud in XX/XX/XXXX well before the actual fraud took place XXXX years later in XX/XX/XXXX. Cc XXXX XXXX [ XXXX ] and XXXX XXXX [ b ]. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX stated that they too spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX concerning a private security contract between XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX beneficiary XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and trustee XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This is a breach of contract as to add outside parties to the privy information therein the agreement after the debt has been discharged by order of law. NEVADA XXXX - XXXX by jury ; waiver in civil cases.The right of trial by Jury shall be secured to all and remain inviolate forever ; but a Jury trial may be waived by the parties in all civil cases in the manner to be prescribed by law ; and in civil cases, if three fourths of the Jurors agree upon a verdict it shall stand and have the same force and effect as a verdict by the whole Jury, Provided, the Legislature by a law passed by a two thirds vote of all the members elected to each branch thereof may require a unanimous verdict notwithstanding this Provision.\n\nSec:4. Liberty of conscience. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship without discrimination or preference shall forever be allowed in this State, and no person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness on account of his opinions on matters of his religious belief, but the liberty of conscience [ conscience ] hereby secured, shall not be so construed, as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace, or safety of this State. Sec:5. Suspension of habeas corpus. The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus, shall not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require its suspension. Sec.8. Rights of accused in criminal prosecutions ; jeopardy ; due process of law ; eminent domain. 2. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. 3. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been first made, or secured, except in cases of war, riot, fire, or great public peril, in which case compensation shall be afterward made.TITLE THEFT - Home title theft is a type of real estate fraud where someone uses a homeowners personal information to forge a deed and steal their home. The thief may apply for a home equity loan or line of credit in the homeowners name and then fail to make payments exposing the owner to foreclosure and credit damage. \nIn the case of unoccupied homes, like secondary residences, the fraudster might sell the house without the owners knowledge or rent out the property without permission. Criminals commit home title theft in a few different ways, but the most common avenues are phishing schemes, malware, data breaches, unsecured Wi-Fi networks and mail theft. Theft can also occur if a homeowner loses sensitive documents like their deed or a mortgage statement. Heres how home title theft typically happens : Phishin. Phishing occurs when a criminal pretends to be a legitimate company or individual to get a homeowners personal information. They may do this by sending an email or letter that looks like its from a bank or government agency or by calling the homeowner and pretending to be someone theyre not.Malware - Malware is a kind of software that criminals can use to access a homeowners personal information. They may install it on the homeowners computer without their knowledge or trick them into downloading it by posing as a legitimate website or program. Data Breaches - Data breaches occur when criminals access a companys or organizations personal information database. Once they have the information, they may sell it on the XXXX market or use it themselves to commit home title fraud. XXXX IRS and XXXX data breeches. Unsecured Wi-Fi Networks - If a homeowner has an unsecured Wi-Fi network, criminals may be able to access their personal information if theyre close enough to the router. They can then use this information to commit fraud or steal the homeowners identity. Likewise, homeowners who access the Internet using unsecured public Wi-Fi are at higher risk for home title theft. Mail Theft - Home title theft can also occur through mail theft when thieves steal mail from a homeowners mailbox to obtain their personal information. Once they have personal information like birth dates and Social Security numbers, they can use it to commit fraud. Homeowners can combat this by regularly checking their mailboxes and shredding mail that includes sensitive information. Loss - Losing important documents and allowing personal information to fall into the wrong hands can lead to home title theft. If a deed or mortgage statement falls into the wrong hands, criminals can use the information to perpetrate home title theft. To the ignorant please note that the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is very real and lawful please Cc your copies of the American Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous peoples and Cc the section article covering XXXX XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-25T16:14:06.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Rental debt","zip_code":"89149","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7455733","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Aldridge Pite, LLP","date_received":"2023-08-25T15:14:35.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Private property shall not be taken for public use without <em>just</em> compensation having been first made, or secured, except in cases of war, riot, fire, or great public peril, in which case compensation shall be afterward made.TITLE THEFT - Home title theft is a type of real estate fraud where someone uses a homeowners personal information to forge a deed and steal their home."]},"sort":[4.118549,"7455733"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16247873","_score":4.1097217,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"b'Victim: XXXX XXXXAddress of job: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  FL XXXXPhone: XXXX  Email: XXXXXXXXTotal paid: $XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX check + $XXXX  XXXX  Chase bankXXXX XXXX XXXX Permit: XXXX for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  in XXXX XXXX for new driveway extended and adding half circle driveway with curve blending into new patio. All plain concrete. XXXX PSI, 4 and 6approach, fiber mesh, expansion jointsXXXXSuspectsXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  (owner, collected deposit of $XXXX  on XXXX XXXX XXXX  listed as applicant on my XXXX XXXX XXXX permit paperwork XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (qualifier of record on my XXXX permit) XXXXXXXXTimeline of EventsXXXX contacted Michael De La Rosa of Decorative Concrete Driveways & Patios LLC at XXXX XXXXHe came to my property the same day, quoted $XXXX, lowered to $XXXX, then offered $XXXX. I didnt see at the time this is a tactic to offer too good of a deal to get me to sign a contract now.\\nHe wrote a $XXXX  contract requiring: 30% deposit ($3,000), 20% after permit approval/demo, 50% at concrete pour. (Photo attached)\\nAt his request, he preferred XXXX  only, I was only able to send $XXXX  via XXXX  to XXXX and $XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX check XXXX  payable to XXXX XXXX XXXX The check was cashed the same day. (Photo attached)XXXXXXXX assistant, XXXX XXXX, came to my house for me to sign XXXX XXXX XXXX permit paperworkXXXX  asked XXXX  for a survey drawing. The drawing he sent omitted sections we had discussed. I sent him a marked photo showing the missing areas, and he confirmed in text they would be includedXXXX checked the XXXX XXXX XXXX  portal and saw a permit application submitted for my address.\\nThat evening, XXXX  called and said he wanted to start and finish the entire project the next day XXXXXXXX a text message, he stated all work would be completed in one day, including demo, framing, and concrete pour.\\nI responded, lets wait for permit approval. He did not reply Until the bank notified him the check was filed as fraud and they clawed back the $XXXX  check only. (Exhibit E  TextsXXXX paid $XXXX  permit fee directly to the XXXX XXXX XXXX.\\nThe City denied the permit for missing zoning/survey affidavit and property owner section.\\nAt XXXX  request, I signed a survey affidavit the same day. No corrected documents were filed afterward and had no updates since. Additionally I asked her to confirm the survey drawing was updated multiple times and did not hear back regarding thisXXXX texted XXXX  for updates. On XXXX she said she was meeting with XXXX  and would update me. No updates followed.XXXX XXXX XXXX confirmed nothing new has been added to my permit. Which means XXXX  did not upload the survey affidavit she asked me to sign. I also discovered there was another document needed signed per the denial which she did not have me complete. I started researching into XXXX  more and his past companies.\\nIt should be noted XXXX, and his current XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and even past dissolved XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  all have a XXXX  rating of F with multiple negative reviews and complaints showing a pattern of collecting deposits/not completing work/or disappearing. All this information was unknown at the time I gave a deposit. There were no good reviews except on his social media which he posted of a sheet of paper (my belief is these could have been created by XXXX, printed and posted).\\nAdditionally on my Permit the contractor name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Who Also has XXXX  rating of F multiple complaints. Michael lied about being licensed and insured and this  XXXX  name or company was never informed to me and I paid XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXSo at this time, I have discovered multiple negative reviews specifically naming XXXX  and his company taking deposits and not completing jobs. I also discovered dissolved XXXX  in his name with same issues and even the contractor on my permit (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXFurther researching, I learned that contractors may use stall tactics making it seem as if they are waiting on permit, when really they arent submitting corrections, waiting on the Bank deadlines to pass before completely disappearing. So then I would miss deadlines for calling check in as fraud making it harder to get my money back.XXXXHaving seen no corrections filed since XXXX, and with deposit deadlines approaching, To protect myself, I called XXXX XXXX XXXX  explained what is happening and they assisted with reporting the $XXXX  check as fraud. They placed a hold on the funds (heard this only from XXXX) since XXXX XXXX XXXX can not tell me whats the status of another persons account. But it appears the money is on hold until they finish their investigation.XXXXXXXXConfirmed with city building dept and they stated still no resubmissions since the denial of XXXX also Text both XXXX and XXXX  for updates to see if I get a response and if so I could ask why nothing has been submitted to permit- couple hours go by nothing. Last contact with XXXX at this point was him not responding to me when i saidlets wait for permit to be approved. This is a clear violation he wanted to start job in one day without permitXXXX  called me sounding angry about the bank action. He then texted: My bank just called you reported the check as fraudulent. We are ending services today fees may apply. \\nI requested a refund. He refused, including for the XXXX XXXX. I respond in text:- Based on everything Id like full refund. You wanted to start and finish work on the day permit was submitted. You said the bank took out XXXX  from you to return to me, I still paid the additional XXXX XXXX payment which needs to be refunded. No work has been started. I spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX building. There hasnt been any revisions uploaded made to permit after signing new survey document. It is also still missing additional documents. Reviews based on your name and businesses. Have numerous complaints of taking deposits and not doing work. Stalling and therefore making it harder for banks to retrieve money XXXX, The fact is I paid you XXXX XXXX  check + XXXX XXXX) no work was done, and the permit was denied with no resubmission. I need a full refund. If I dont receive it within 5 business days, Ill move forward with small claims, Attorney General and DBPR complaints, and other remedies. I waited days after your assistant said shed give me an update. You also didnt acknowledge after i said lets wait for permit , you clearly said in text you wanted to start work and complete in 1 day before permit was approved all based on your assistant said go ahead..which is a violation. The city also confirmed no revised paperwork has been submitted since the permit denial on XXXX Given the lack of communication and progress, I had no choice but to contact the bank to protect myself due to bank deadlines. I still expect a full refund of $XXXX. Just because the bank took $XXXX  out of your account doesnt mean I automatically get that til the investigation is complete. I also XXXX you $XXXX  which I need back. Im familiar with local and state laws and no work has been started. XXXXXXXX  responded via text:- Goodmorning $XXXX  Money was taken out of my account Ive had good and bad clients. I hire a permit assistant to deal with the permit and its not free. I can continue to work on the permit until its approved and we can touch base then. If you want the addresses I can send them over so you can see completed projects I dont take peoples money just to take it. I work very hard hands on. The whole process is work including the permit, all the run around\\nI respond via text:- Good morning, thank you for the response. Ive been scammed before by contractors who stalled until it was too late for me to get my money back, so I cannot take that risk again. If you are serious about completing this job, the only way forward is to start fresh. That means refunding my full $XXXX  deposit now ($XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX check). The simplest way is to XXXX  me the $XXXX  directly. Once thats complete, I will notify Bank that the matter is resolved. After the permit is approved and the job is fully completed (with no issues or mid-project demands for more money), I will pay the full balance  and to show good faith, Im even willing to increase the final payment by $XXXX  (so instead of $XXXX, it would be $XXXX). I understand most contractors use deposits, but given the history of issues and complaints, the only way I can move forward is with full payment at completion. If the only way you will do the job is with a deposit, then it must be paid by credit card so both sides are protected. If these arrangements do not work for you, then I simply need my $XXXX  refunded by WednesdayXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  responded:- The $XXXX has been depleted already from my account and its in the air because Im guessing you dont have it either so now we gotta go through a 90 day process from the bank with your permit might be approved way before then and this money still gonna be on hold so unfortunately there is nothing to return. It has already been depleted out of my account and Im still working on our side trying to get your permit approved so how is that fair? and I am not making this up. I have the proof also there was Notary that was paid for to submit your permit. XXXX  doesnt work for free either. She gets paid as well to answer your phone calls and submit the permits so unfortunately, as of right now the money is in the air and Im waiting for your permit to get approved to get demolition started and concrete. Pour as agreed upon the only problem now is the $XXXX  in the air and your permit will be approved as soon as next week or this week. I just gotta make the revisions\\XXXX  is only concerned about the $XXXX  depleted from his account. He does not acknowledge there is still a XXXX XXXX  payment. He claims to still be working on my permit but he just needs to make revisions which he has not done since we talked about the missing sections on the survey drawing on XXXX It is now XXXX  He also doesnt acknowledge starting fresh, and either yes or no on credit card or another secure form of payment. He mentioned twice now that he hired Dori as Permit assistant (later in this report, according to Dori who contradicts herself, she claims to been hired but then also not received any of my $XXXX). \\nI respond via text:- Florida Statute 489.126 requires that a contractor who takes a deposit but does not perform actual work must return the deposit. Work means tangible labor or materials on the job, not administrative tasks like paperwork or phone calls. Since no construction has begun and the City has not even received the updated survey drawing I requested, you are legally required to fully refund my $XXXX  deposit. Please XXXX $XXXX  immediately to my cell and I will notify Bank to release the hold on the check. My deadline remains XXXX XXXX XXXX  The City denied the permit on XXXX  for a missing affidavit and another document. I signed the affidavit that same afternoon, yet nothing has been resubmitted since. The updated survey drawing I texted you about on XXXX, and which you acknowledged on XXXX  with yes, has also never been filed with the City. In your own words you said you just gotta make the revisions. If thats the case, why has nothing been resubmitted since XXXX? As of today, the City still has not received the affidavit I signed on XXXX  and has never seen the updated survey drawing you agreed to include prior to the initial permit application. \\n\\nHe did not respond furtherXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX went in person to the XXXX XXXX XXXX  Building Dept.\\nStaff confirmed my file contained a XXXX XXXX XXXX  survey, not my property survey. I was told no valid resubmissions had been filed since the XXXX  denial.\\nI signed a form blocking XXXX from further changes. (Did not work see below)\\nI requested and obtained a printout showing the wrong survey attached to my permit. (Photos attachedXXXXOn Friday XXXX I send identical texts to both XXXX  and XXXXFriday XXXX  I textXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   this is XXXX  XXXX XXXXeviewed the permit paperwork you submitted to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and the survey on file is for a different property in XXXX XXXX  not my address. That means no valid permit was ever submitted for my driveway and the documents you provided are demonstrably incorrect. I paid $XXXX  ($XXXX  check and $XXXX  XXXX  payment) on XXXX for driveway work to be performed under a proper permit. To date no work has been done, no correct paperwork has been filed, and the City record proves the submission was for the wrong property from XXXX. This is evidence of misrepresentation and contractor Fraud and I will be documenting this as a Police report to be forwarded to economic crime investigators which will involve review by the State Attorneys office and comparison with other similar cases I have already located. It should be noted I have located other cases in different counties with similar fraud. Showing all your names and incomplete permit paperwork. You cannot argue that work has been done regarding the permit since it was all wrong and incorrect. I have text proof you both XXXX  and XXXX  telling me you submitted My house survey when clearly you did not. And even the survey affidavit i completed on XXXX and still that wasnt even submitted.\\n\\nUnder Florida Statute 489.126 a contractor who takes a deposit but does not perform actual work must return the deposit. I demand a full refund of $XXXX  by XXXX  to XXXX to my account no later than XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX  I do not receive the full refund by that date I will, without further notice, pursue all lawful remedies and complaints in the state of FL. This is your final opportunity to resolve this directly and avoid further legal action. I expect written confirmation of the refund and the XXXX of $XXXX  now and/or before the deadlineXXXX XXXX XXXX\\nAfter I texted XXXX  and XXXX  demanding a refund, a new survey was uploaded to my permit (Cannot confirm which survey since I wasnt there in person to get copy I only called and they told me at XXXX XXXX uploaded).\\XXXX texted (havent heard from him since XXXX XXXXnd it is now XXXX Im assuming because I included XXXX  and XXXX  in text): Youre gonna wait past XXXX  first so do what you need to do now! and again denied refund. He added peace sign XXXX\\nI responded to XXXX:- How do you think it is acceptable to keep any of the $XXXX  when no work has been performed and no valid permit was ever filed?As Ive already said: if you XXXX  the full $XXXX, I will notify XXXX XXXX XXXX that payment has been received and this matter will be considered resolved. That is the only way to avoid legal action.\\XXXX responded: AS I SAID THE FUNDS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEPLETED FROM MY ACCOUNT! Bank has your money. If the wrong survey was submitted must been a mistake from all the attachments Im sure XXXX  has from all the customers we deal with. Not all the paperwork was wrong\\nI responded to XXXX XXXX even if you want to argue the $XXXX  check is tied up in the bank dispute, the $XXXX  XXXX  is not. Under Florida Statute 489.126, you must refund the full deposit when no work has been performed.Send $XXXX  by XXXX  now to (XXXX XXXX  If you do not, I will include this refusal in my DBPR complaint, police report, and civil claim. The deadline for the full $XXXX  remains XXXX XXXX XXXX has not respondedXXXX responses:\\n\\nThe next few text threads is with XXXX  from the same text I sent on XXXX addressing all three subjects.\\XXXX  tried calling me however I asked if she meant to call in text and I stated text works for now, Im busyXXXX also texted XXXX : can you explain to me what happened? On XXXX  you didnt reply after I reached out, and Ive since found out the survey filed was for a completely different property. I need to understand why nothing correct was submitted. (Last text from her was XXXX saying will get update)XXXXXXXX  responded: Im not sure what you mean by contractor fraud. There may have been a simple mistake with uploading the wrong document, but thats unrelated to the timing of the permit submittal. I submitted all required applications when they were due.Im still waiting on XXXX  to provide specific information - Ive submitted the application on our behalf and can only move forward once he communicates back. Could you please clarify what youre referring to with contractor fraud and the XXXX deposit? From my side, theres no fraudjust a wrong document upload that I already corrected.Thank you,XXXX\\nShe acknowledged a mistake was made uploading document. She states waiting on XXXX  for info (from XXXX Even though I have asked multiple times and she was meeting with him on XXXX. She appears to be trying to distance herself once I mentioned legal action. But it is clear to me she was not going to respond to my update texts from XXXX (same date XXXX  found out I reported the check).XXXX  responded: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX confirmed to me in person that the only survey filed was for a different property in XXXX  from XXXX. That is not a simple mistake, it means no valid permit for my property was ever in review. I paid $XXXX  for work on my address under a valid permit. That has not happened. Even the affidavit I signed on XXXX  was never submitted. This is why it rises to misrepresentation and fraud under Florida law. You told me via text that my survey was submitted when clearly it was not, so you are part of the misrepresentation whether or not XXXX  gave you the documents. You both have until XXXX XXXX XXXX, to return the $XXXX  in full via XXXX. Permit paperwork is not work  Florida Statute 489.126 requires the deposit to be refunded. If the refund is not received, I will move forward with my police report, DBPR complaint, and civil claim against everyone involvedXXXX responded: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX does not have any XXXX XXXX survey on record for your application. What happened was a simple oversight on the detailed plan naming  I label all my submittals Detail Plan, and one version was misplaced. That mistake has been corrected, and the proper applications are already filed with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Original submittal XXXX XXXX to cancel, I can file the withdrawal with the city right awayXXXXShe states the XXXX XXXX XXXX does not have a XXXX XXXX survey even though I have printed copies of what she submitted under my permit. She then contradicts herself saying simple oversight labeling all her submittals detail plan. She says it has been corrected. Also it is highly unlikely she labels all submittals detail plan only because any computer would display a pop up saying file already named detail plan and therefore if its in the same folder she would have to label it different if thats the case she is claiming to have multiple files all labeled exactly the same?What i beleive she means by that is she is now trying to correct it because I called the city and they stated at XXXX she uploaded a survey (cant confirm the survey address since Im not there in person). It should be noted I was there in person this day at XXXX  and she should have been denied access.. it is my belief she is trying to correct it only now because I will be taking this to court. XXXX  had no intention of looking at my permit since XXXX (day bank notified XXXX  of fraud). XXXX responded: I confirmed with the City that a survey was uploaded today at XXXX XXXX, after I texted you about the wrong paperwork. You have not responded since XXXX This confirms there was no valid permit in review before today, despite your prior texts claiming otherwise.You also stated there was no XXXX XXXX record, but I have the printed proof. You then tried to explain it away as a naming error. Uploading a new document today does not change the fact that I paid $XXXX  on XXXX and no work was performed under a valid permit. Under F.S. 489.126, the deposit must be refunded. Deadline remains XXXX XXXX XXXX Please XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX. Do not make further submissions on my permit. Leave it alone  I will cancel it directly with the CityXXXX  responded: I was hired only for permit submittal and have no involvement with your $XXXX  payment that is strictly between you and XXXX, and I never received any of those funds. The survey is on record, and I can show you proof of the XXXX  XXXX  permit I submitted for that survey, which was accidentally attached to your permit because I was submitting both the XXXX  and XXXX  permits at the same time. The submittal with the wrong survey name was an unintentional naming error, not an attempt to mislead you. Im not perfect nor are you so I hope you can understand how that kind of mistake can happen. I will make no further submissions -  Please address payment issues with XXXX  and do not text me again.Thank you\\XXXXShe stated she was hired (just like XXXX  did claiming XXXX  needs to get paid for permit and answering my calls). She then contradicts herself saying she never received those funds. I believe she is trying to distance herself from working in concert with XXXX  committing fraud/theft otherwise why ignore my update texts?XXXXXXXX responded: Understood, XXXX. But since you are the applicant on my permit and confirmed false filings to me by text, you are part of this matter. Get with XXXX  and resolve it. If I do not receive the XXXX  refund by XXXX XXXX you will also be included in my police report, DBPR complaint, and civil claim. This is my final message to youXXXXXXXX  texted XXXX XXXX  the qualifier listed on my permit, to confirm whether he authorized XXXX  to use his license. He replied: I am looking into it I will contact you later today. He has not responded further. XXXXCurrent Status\\nAs of XXXXNo construction work has been performed at my property.\\nThe permit remains unresolved, with the wrong survey \\XXXX  refuses to refund either the $XXXX check or the $XXXX  XXXX. Or starting fresh by refunding me and taking credit card or secure payment form. \\XXXX  admits to submitting the wrong survey but distances herself from the money even though XXXX  stated he needed to pay XXXX  and XXXX  stated she was hired.\\XXXX  has not clarified his role, despite his name being on my permitXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  check #XXXX  (fraud hold in place, outcome pending investigation)\\n$XXXX   XXXX  to XXXX (Chase)  not refunded. Filing CFPB claim.\\nTotal: $XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have not responded since. No work has started and no additional permit paperwork has been worked on by XXXX XXXX XXXX. Attached is numerous court documents which are public record of XXXX  doing the same thing to others.\\n\\n I labeled texts with XXXX  #1 through #18.\\n\\nTexts with XXXX  is #19 through #26, Texts with XXXX  labeled #27 and #28'","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-29T13:08:05.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"33431","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16247873","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-09-29T12:35:41.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["If you want the addresses I can send them over so you can see completed projects I dont take peoples money <em>just</em> to take it. I work very hard hands on. The whole process is work including the permit, all the run around\\nI respond via text:- Good morning, thank you for the response. Ive been scammed before by contractors who stalled until it was too late for me to get my money back, so I cannot take that <em>risk</em> again."]},"sort":[4.1097217,"16247873"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5173414","_score":3.958889,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CAPITOL ONE BANK Representative, In XXXX of XXXX I, : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX applied for a credit card online with CAPITOL ONE BANK. I was excited to move forward with this process because it was my first time ever applying for a credit card ; so I thought. On the XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter in the mail from CAPITOL ONE stating Great News, you have had been approved for a credit card issued by CAPITOL ONE with a {$3000.00} credit limit. You should receive a Welcome Kit with your new card soon. I would soon after receive the card in the mail and begin using it. I do not recall if the card agreement came with the card or after the card arrived. However, when I did begin looking over the card agreement I needed clarification on some of the information being presented. So, I went to XXXX. How does the repayment system work in regards to a credit card? If I pay the minimum balance does that give me access to the full credit limit every month? If I pay for only what I spend, what is the difference between that and a debit card? How is an APR calculated for me? What is credit? I would soon be guided to United States Codes, bankruptcy laws, and case laws involving banks. What I discovered after weeks of researching left me feeling confused and helpless. How could I become a victim of bank fraud? I never was presented anything during the online application process that made me question CAPITOL ONES trustworthiness ; but it was not about what was presented, it was more so what was not presented that bothered me! \nI am reaching out to CAPITOL ONE bank demanding they remedy this awful fraudulent transaction they knowingly conducted. But first, let us go over what I discovered. \nWhat is credit? \nPursuant title 15 United States Code ( USC ) 1602 ( f ) -The term credit means the right granted by a creditor to a debtor to defer payment of debt or to incur debt and defer its payment. A right is something that can not be taken away or denied, unless the person who has the right allows someone to do so. A man once asked, what is the purpose of an extension cord? To plug things in to receive power, says the woman. Ok, says the man. So where does the power come from? The extension cord or the source that the extension cord is plugged into? I am the original creditor, I credited CAPITOL ONE. \nI credited CAPITOL ONE BANK when I filled out the online application and when providing my social security number. Which I also discovered pursuant 15 USC 1602 ( L ) -The term credit card means ANY card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of obtaining money, property, labor, or services on credit. What is one thing businesses require in order for consumers to be extended credit, start a phone plan, to obtain a license, acquire utilities? A social security number! Therefore, my social security number is a credit card. Crazy right? But Im sure Banks -like CAPITOL ONE- already knew that! Thats why they fabricated a lie saying the social security number was used only to identify the person applying. \nSadly, it does not end there ; I would later receive another brochure from CAPITOL ONE discussing sharing limits. It included what information of mine was going to be shared on behalf of CAPITOL ONE, and I could do about it. Included in information that would be shared, that I could not limit or stop CAPITOL ONE from sharing, was my social security number. What?! How could this be?! How can someone acquire my credit card information then tell me they are going to give out the information and there was nothing I could do about it. What kind of business transaction was this? Had I known all that I knew before applying to have credit extended through CAPITOL ONE, I wouldve reconsidered! That was not the end of the disappointment. \n\nI discovered a case, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Bank. In the case conclusion they stated, A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation. As well as XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. A bank can lend its money but not its credit. \nThen I thought, ok well is CAPITOL ONE a national bank? After speaking with A CAPITOL BANK rep. I discovered that CAPITOL BANK is a national bank. \nOk, well I applied for credit to be re-extended to me so they extended credit to me. Which meant they input numbers in their computer or books that would be put on a card given to me. As I read more of CAPITOL ONEs brochures, I noticed a section titled Making Payments which stated, Your payment must be made in U.S. dollars from a U.S. deposit account in a form acceptable to us. Why would I pay U.S. dollars when U.S. dollars were not given? Why would I pay U.S. dollars when pursuant 12 USC 582 it states, No national banking association shall hereafter offer or receive United States notes or national bank notes as security or as collateral for any loan of money. Then I thought, well they didnt loan me anything. But if they didnt loan me anything, why are they asking for me to repay it? I applied for credit to be re-extended to me not for a loan. Right? Or maybe CAPITOL ONE BANK cultivated language leading consumers to think there is difference between an extension of credit and a loan? Lets say it is a loan and I am supposed to repay. Well, what proof does CAPITOL ONE have of lending me their money? Or did they give check book money? What do I mean by check book money? Money CAPITOL ONE bank created out of thin air and is wanting me to repay in legal tender. That sounds like fraud! CAPITOL ONE never loaned anything, they just switched currencies. CAPITOL ONE risked nothing. CAPITOL ONE has denied me equal protection under the law by exchanging one currency for another and refusing to be repaid in the same type of currency deposited. Which in this case, was the credit card application. Additionally, there was never an indication as to what kind of dollar was to be given to me or was expected to be used when re-payments were to be made. Does capitol one define dollar as credit money or dollar as legal money? \nCan CAPITOL ONE tell me how much they sold my mortgage note to the federal reserve for? \n\nDuring my research I came across the phrase, ultra vires, which is derived from a XXXX word meaning beyond the powers of. In case law, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank they stated, The doctrine of XXXX XXXX is the most powerful weapon to keep private corporations within their legitimate spheres and to punish them for violations of their corporate charters, and it probably is not invoked too often. In the transaction between CAPITOL ONE and myself, CAPITOL ONE without a doubt- operated beyond their powers in various instances already laid out above and below ; making the transaction VOID. \n\nAdditional information found worthy of citing is from the Bible, If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, you are not to act as a creditor to him : you shall not charge him interest. Exodus 22:25. CAPITOL ONE sent a paper saying my APR rate would take effect in 15 months. But what are they charging interest on if they never lent legal tender? And if they did give their money, where did it come from? \n\nLets look at case law XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. The bank tried to foreclose on XXXX house due to nonpayment of a loan. XXXX stated, the bank never loaned anything the bank merely created money and credit by writing it in their bookkeeping records. The president of the bank stated that there was no United States Law of Statue which gave him the right to create money or credit out of thin air. The Justice of Peace stated, only God can create something out of nothing. And since the Banks act of creating is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, it is unconstitutional and void! XXXX XXXX XXXX would also state, the Federal Reserve Bank and National Banks exercise an exclusive monopoly and privilege of creating credit and issuing notes at the expense of the public which does not receive a fair equivalent. This scheme is obliquely designed for the benefit of an idle monopoly to rob, blackmail, and oppress the producers of wealth. He later exclaimed, these acts ( done by the federal reserve banks and national banks ) have defiled the lawfully constituted Government of the United States and are subversive to the rights of the People in their rights to life, liberty, and property. ( the last sentence he pulled from 31 USC 462 ).\n\nI am holding CAPITOL ONE bank liable for violating the following : Conspiracy of rights ( 18 USC 241 ), Deprivation of rights under color of law ( 18 USC 242 ), Civil action for deprivation of rights ( 42 USC 1983 ), conspiracy to interfere with civil rights [ 42 USC 1985 ( 3 ) ]. Action for neglect to prevent ( 42 USC 1986 ). See below for USC breakdowns.\n\nWe can go to court and I will seek {$50000.00} ( 10 thousand for each code violated plus the money I have already put towards the credit balance ), as well as any additional fees for the inconvenience this situation has or may have caused. Or if this can only be tried in small claims court I will take every representative to court that I have explained this issue to and charge them for violating title 42 USC 1986, plus any additional fees this inconvenience has caused me. As well as holding CAPITOL ONE BANK liable and will be asked for my remedy in small claims court to be disbursed in gold and silver only. Or we can remedy this without having to go to court by CAPITOL ONE BANK agreeing to the following : increasing the credit limit to {$10000.00} per month. Zeroing out the credit balance at the end of every months billing cycle. Cease the sharing on my credit card information ( social security number ). Give me a list of places, persons, corporations, businesses, entities, etc. that CAPITOL ONE has already shared my personal information with personal information including social security number. \n\nI am expecting this issue be resolved as soon as possible! This transaction between myself and CAPITOL ONE BANK has already taken away time that I could be spending with individuals who actually care and respect me. Yet, here I am discussing with frauds their fraudulent activities that they are already aware of. CAPITOL ONE BANK, you must do better. And I hope when transitioning into the crypto world you do not continue on with these deceptive trade practices. \n\nWhen can I accept the card balance to be zerod out and credit limit increased? \n\n: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nADD ON= On XX/XX/XXXX I contacted CAPITOL ONE and spoke with XXXX XXXX employee ID : XXXX ) explaining her in detail my disappointments with the company, asking her to remedy the situation. She shared, Honestly, I didnt write anything you said down because the information you presented is not relevant. If we go to court I will ne holding XXXX liable for violation of title 42 USC 1986. Also, it should be noted, if a consumer calls your company CAPITOL ONE- sharing how an error has occurred in the midst of a transaction, please train them to not say they were not paying attention. That is the biggest slap in the face. It frustrates me because these are the kinds of people you have employed to go over business matters with consumers. Ridiculous! I have the call recorded with my interaction with XXXX and the other two representatives I spoke with prior to her discussing the same issue. Its just a bad situation because XXXX is supposed to be the supervisor.\n\nTitle 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States XXXX XXXX or because of his/her having exercised the same ). \nIt further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured. \nPunishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both ; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX or an attempt to commit XXXX  XXXX XXXX, or an attempt to XXXX, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death. \nTitle 18, U.S.C., Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.\n\nThis law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or cu0stom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her XXXX or XXXX. \nActs under \" color of any law '' include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority ; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under \" color of any law, '' the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs. \nPunishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated XXXXXXXX XXXX or an attempt to commit aggravated XXXX XXXX, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. \n\nTitle 42, U.S.C., section 1983 Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights Every person who, under XXXX of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officers judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. \nTitle 42 U.S.C., section 1985 Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights ( 3 ) Depriving persons of rights or privileges If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws ; or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws ; or if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States ; or to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such support or advocacy ; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators. \nTitle 42 U.S.C., 1986 Action For Neglect To Prevent Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of this title, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented ; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case ; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action ; and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefor, and may recover not exceeding {$5000.00} damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-02-14T14:02:06.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"77021","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5173414","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2022-02-01T23:26:15.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Other problem"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CAPITOL ONE never loaned anything, they <em>just</em> switched currencies. CAPITOL ONE <em>risked</em> nothing. CAPITOL ONE has denied me equal protection under the law by exchanging one currency for another and refusing to be repaid in the same type of currency deposited. Which in this case, was the credit card application. Additionally, there was never an indication as to what kind of dollar was to be given to me or was expected to be used when re-payments were to be made."]},"sort":[3.958889,"5173414"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2759570","_score":3.205257,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint and web article is an update from XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To XXXX. XXXX : Stop Playing Games. Turn over the keys! \nAs Standing Trustee, You ALONE, are Responsible for all Matters Related to Our Assets & Property. To Not Comply is in Defiance of Federal & State Laws! \n\nTO : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Chief Executive Officer XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX, NC XXXX WARNING! \n\n\n\n\n\nTAKE HEED Who is Liable? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to Federal and State Municipal and Local Statutory Laws and Codes, that would be : YOU! \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBecause your subordinates can not be used as a shield to hide you from your legal transgressions. \n\n\n\n( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Assistant Vice President/Trustee XXXX XXXX : Assistant Vice President, Beneficiary, Bank of America, as \" Servicer '' XXXX XXXX? Mortgage Complaint Resolution ) Legal Sins that continuously and continually are causing the loss of XXXX XXXX and property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nAt a compounding cost of countless dollars and holdings. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBut not without financial and legally grave consequences. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBoth Civil and Criminal \" Civil Cases vs. Criminal Cases - Key Differences Civil cases usually involve private disputes between persons or organizations. Criminal cases involve an action that is considered to be harmful to society as a whole. Below is a comparison of the key differences between civil and criminal cases. '' ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) '' For you, it 's the calm before the storm. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI need those keys, or you 'll be forced out of seclusion by my rightful and legally permitted plan of action. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI will change the lock ( which I planned to do anywy ) and move in without further notice. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAND ... ..who 'll take the punitive damages liability, the penalty and criminal code punishment if my efforts to extend an Olive Branch to Bank of America falls through? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe Bank of America Board Chair and CEO, that 's whom. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI 've requested the keys to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , CA , but no more. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNow, I 'm demanding them AND QUICK! \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEspecially since learning that the CEO has the ability to hand over those keys because he has first hand access to the property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI will start by confronting you on your tactics, the same asXXXX XXXX XXXX, United States Senator, as he did relative to Bank of America, or should I say, \" your '' Swipe Fees? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\" First, there is no evidence that your bank could not continue to offer debit cards profitably just with the revenue you will receive under the generous maximum interchange fee rates that the Federal Reserve has established. The Fed found that it costs a bank on average around 7 cents to conduct a debit transaction, and likely far less for a bank with your economies of scale.\n\nUnder the Feds rule you will be allowed to profit handsomely by collecting around 24 cents per transaction. Your decision to charge a new monthly debit fee is an overt attempt to make even more profit off the backs of your customers. \n\n\n\nSecond, I am aware that you and your industry seek to blame swipe fee reform, which I drafted and Congress enacted, for your decision to raise fees on your customers. However, this justification does not add up. According to industry analysts your bank has 38.7 million debit cardholders. Assuming that these cardholders remain your customers and pay your new {$5.00} dollar fee, Bank of America will make an estimated {$2.00} billion annually from this fee on top of the enormous profit it will already receive under the Feds swipe fee rates. \n\n\n\nYet you recently claimed in an SEC filing that the revenue impact of swipe fee reform on your bank would be significantly less than {$2.00} billion - even if the Fed had set a XXXX cent cap rather than the XXXX cent cap they established. It appears that your new fee will result in another windfall for your bank with swipe fee reform as an excuse. \n\n\n\nI challenge you to prove otherwise. \n\n\n\n\n\nThe American people deserve to know the real story about the swipe fee system and the way big banks have colluded to profit excessively at the expense of our nations businesses and consumers. Debit and credit card swipe fees generate billions for your bank each year. But you did not earn these fees by bettering your competitors in a free market, which is how Main Street businesses have to make their money. \n\n\n\nRather, you earned these billions because the Visa and MasterCard duopoly fixed the same high swipe fee rates for your bank that they did for every other bank, thereby immunizing this revenue stream from competitive pressures that would hold fees at a reasonable level. \n\n\n\nNow that the truth about the anti-competitive swipe fee system has been exposed and the process of reform has begun, banks like yours are desperately looking to keep the money flowing like it did in the past. \n\n\n\nAnd as your new fee demonstrates, you are now looking for ways to make even more lucrative profits off of debit cards than you did before. I do not think your customers will be fooled by this. '' The \" American People '' and I, deserve and demand to know why you 're paying lip service to the approval and recording of a \" Clear Title '' Document. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nA Reconveyance indigenous to our referenced property that you knew full well and acknowledged. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThat which already has been evident since XX/XX/XXXX, thanks to a Court Ordered Discharge Decree ofa Chapter XXXX Judge and Trustee. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEspecially in light of your Mortgage racketeering history. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFirst, it was countrywide Loans, CEOXXXX XXXX XXXX illegally concocted a false claim of ownership, even though we never successfully contracted any agreement with that Company. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWhile under your Trusteeship, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX joined XXXX XXXX XXXX in a racket to swindle us of possession of our property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThis charade occurring fewer than two months before we were unceremoniously kicked out of property that you personally declared us as owners, \" Under Penalty of Perjury. '' \" Bank of America tops list of mortgage complaints by borrowers The lender has accounted for 30 % of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with two-thirds of them involving modifications. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX|By XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank of America noted that the bureau 's website shows 98 % of the problems ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. , which handles customer service on about 15 % of U.S. home loans, has accounted for 30 % of the mortgage complaints logged by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau , according to a new database made public by the federal watchdog. \n\n\n\nThe level of customer discontent far greater than at home-lending rivals XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reflects BofA 's struggles since its XX/XX/XXXX acquisition of XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\nin XXXX. Countrywide had become the No. 1 mortgage firm by specializing in subprime and other high-risk loans. \n\nBofA, which has recorded tens of billions of dollars in losses on Countrywide loans, was the object of 15,136 mortgage complaints since XX/XX/XXXX,  when the consumer bureau began taking complaints about home loans. \n\n\nThe bank noted that the bureau 's website shows that 98 % of the problems have been resolved. '' The way it looks to me, XXXX XXXX XXXX, has assumed possession of the house XXXX XXXX XXXX Stole from XXXX XXXX & XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\n\n\nIn essence, that makes you the succeeding Swindler. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThat means for each day you withhold possession from us, the more for which you shall answer. \n\n\n\n\" California Theft / Larceny Law Theft ( also calledlarceny ) is a crime against property in California. To provetheft, a prosecutor must establish the defendant 's intent to permanently take or withhold the property owner 's possession or right to the property -- in other words, thespecific intent to steal. Theft can take on many forms depending on the type of property taken as it can involve : Personal property ; Money ; Real property ; or The value of labor or services. \n\n\nCalifornia Code, Penal Code - PEN 484 | '' \" XXXX XXXX XXXX Announces Upsize and Pricing of Public Offering of Common Shares XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  Eastern Standard Time A story in XXXX, says that several Bank and Mortgage Company CEO 's have \" bought out '' XXXX XXXX, the thief who stole XXXX. \n\n\" Sometimes, it can take place entirely without the owner 's knowledge. However, theft can also occur where an owner entrusts property to another for a temporary or ongoing purpose and the recipient then fails to return the property when due. \n\n\nTheft is either classified as petty theft or grand theft in California, a difference that depends on the value of the property. Generally, grand theft exists where the property is valued above {$950.00}, but there are some exceptions, such as where the property is taken from the victim 's person or where the property taken consists of a firearm. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX  '' Or, put another way ; received Stolen Goods `` Receiving Stolen Property What Does It Mean to \" Receive Stolen Property ''? \n\n\nReceiving stolen property is acrime to purchase or accept property that you know or believe was obtained through theft.The crime is separate from robbery, extortion, or theft.Receiving stolen property is a crime in order to deter people from aiding or rewarding thieves by buying stolen property, concealing stolen property, and to deter theft in general. \n\n\n\nReceiving stolen propertymay be a misdemeanor or felony. '' This is in reference to Our home, our assetsin particular, and a plantation of homes in general. \n\n\n\" In order to be convicted of receiving stolen property, the prosecution must show Property Was In Fact Stolen : In order to be convicted of a receipt of stolen property, the property must actually be in a stolen status. \n\nThis means that the police can not set up the defendant to receive the stolen property just to bust him or her. \n\nKnowledge : The defendant must have knowledge that the property was stolen, or should have known, that the property was stolen Intent to Defraud Owner : The defendant had intent to deprive the owner of his or her property, such as by keeping it, selling it, or giving it away to another party. '' XXXX \" owned '' XXXX XXXX, which now is in the hands of several racketeers. \n\n\nAs in the house he stole from us, we have Proof Of Reconveyance, from a Court Ordered Discharge and several CEO 's. \n\n\n\nAmong them, you, as XXXX XXXX XXXX, Bank ofAmerica. \n\n\n\nHard to extend an Olive Branch to a CEO whose Vice Presidents recorded a Deed on behalf of my spouse and yours truly, and then you assume liability Trusteeship of the house ( s ) XXXX swiped. \n\n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX, BofA XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX are joint book-running managers for the offering, and XXXX XXXX XXXX is a co-manager for the offering. '' \" U.S. CodeTitle 18Part IChapter 31 641 18 U.S. Code 641 - Public money, property or records prev |next Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of anyrecord, voucher, money, or thing of value of theUnited Statesor of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for theUnited Statesor any department or agency thereof ; or Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both ; but if thevalueof such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of {$1000.00}, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. '' In some states, according to \" XXXX XXXX. XXXX, '' the prosecution must show that you intended to aid the thief by purchasing or accepting the stolen property. \n\n\nSome states also differentiate between receiving and possessing stolen property. \n\n\nWell, if we do n't get the keys to the house, or we encounter resistance when we move in, or fail to acquirewritten and literal assistance to repossess the premises, that 's the direct link to the receiving of stolen property. \n\n\n\" XXXX, Ariz. -- ( XXXX XXXX ) -- XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX : XXXX ) ( the Company ) announced today that it priced its underwritten public offering of 20,076,891 of its  common shares at a public offering price of {$32.00} per share. \n\nThe Company is offering 9,600,000 of its common shares, according toXXXX, which it says was upsized from the previously announced 8,000,000 common shares, and the selling shareholders are offering 10,476,891 common shares. '' The gross proceeds to the Company, says the article, will be {$310.00} million. \n\n\nThe Company will not receive any proceeds, it says, from the offering of common shares by the selling shareholders. \n\n\n\" The Company and certain of the selling shareholders have granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 1,505,465 common shares and 1,506,068 common shares from the Company and such selling shareholders, respectively, at the public offering price. \n\nThe offering is expected to close on XX/XX/XXXX, subject to customary closing conditions. '' By proxy of their lingering partnership in Criminal Foreclosures and other Illegal rackets, You, Bank of America CEO XXXX XXXX XXXX are joined at the hip with all the operatives named in the purchase and sale by XXXX XXXX. \n\n\" What If I Did Not Know That the Property Was Stolen? '' The answer : Bank of America is the Trustee So if my spouse an me, as owners possession of the property, then it 's stolen. \n\n\n\n\" The key factor between receiving and possessing stolen property is the timing of the knowledge that it was stolen. If the person receiving the property knew it was stolen at the time of acquisition, then the person is guilty. If the person discovered the property was stolen after accepting it, but still intends to keep it or use it for a dishonest purpose ( such as selling it to someone else ), then the person is guilty of possessing stolen property. '' Because XXXX knows his act of forgery, fraud and embezzlement have caught up to him. \n\n\n\nXXXX has said he wanted out, and now, out he goes. \n\n\n\" Trump friend XXXX XXXX cashes out of XXXX XXXX XXXX '' And just as your swipe fees caught up to you, your actions and racketeering on real estate issues are catching up too. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" Analysts have noted that the real rationale behind your new debit fee is likely not to cover debit processing costs ( which are minimal and easily covered by the Feds generous rule ) but rather to push more consumers to use credit cards whose swipe fees are still unregulated and far exceed debit swipe fees. But here competition will help provide an important check. \n\n\n\nWhen drafting my legislation I anticipated that banks would push consumers toward credit cards so I included a provision allowing merchants to offer discounts for debit versus credit. This provision will help consumers at the cash register and also will constrain your and other big banks efforts to steer customers toward credit cards with all their attendant tricks and traps. \n\n\n\nYour banks spokespeople and advocates have argued strenuously that I am responsible for your decision to charge this new fee on all but your wealthiest customers. In response to this I will simply point out that my legislation was enacted in XX/XX/XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX, the XXXX XXXX XXXX reported that your bank was preparing new fees on basic banking services for XX/XX/XXXX and that Bank of America customers who only want a low-volume checking account will likely be asked to pay for it. \n\n\n\n( End is Seen to Free CheckingXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ). In other words, it is on the record that your bank was preparing new fees just like this one well before swipe fee reform became law. '' https : //www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/letter-to-bank-of-america-ceo-XXXX. '' So now, Bank of America, as Trustee, has no defense for not coming up with those keys. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEssentially, the Bank CEO has been left holding the Bag by XXXX, as he knows that his Trustee Deed ( s ) Upon Sale, used to steal these homes, are all fraudulent. \n\n\n\n\" What are the Possible Consequences of Receiving Stolen Property? \n\n\nReceipt of stolen property is categorized as a \" wobbler '' meaning that the charge can be a felony or misdemeanor. A charge for a receipt of stolen property charge depends on the value of the property at issue. If the property has a high value, the defendant would be charged a felony. If the property value is low, the defendant would be charged as a misdemeanor. If you are found guilty, the court may do any or all of the following : Imprisonment Restitution Fines ( depending on the value of the property ) Probation '' \" Swipe fee reform is merely your latest excuse for jacking up consumer fees, just like the troubled economy was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX( Banks Boost Customer Fees to Record HighsXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), higher costs and consumers increased riskiness was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX ( Banks find ways to boost fees ; checking accounts latest targetXXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), and overdraft restrictions was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX ( Banks return to charging credit card, checking account feesUSA Today, May 18, 2010 ). \n\n\n\nYour bank has never been shy about seeking more fee revenue to add to the revenue you already receive from maintenance fees, ATM fees, overdraft fees, extended overdrawn balance fees, stop payment fees, interchange fees, research fees and other fees not to mention the interest you receive from lending out consumer deposits. But banks do not need to gouge their customers to operate successfully. \n\n\n\nBanks instead must choose whether their priority will be their customers or their profits and paychecks. You could, for example, choose to give 1.8 million of your customers a reprieve from your new fee by returning the {$9.00} million bonus you received on top of your {$950000.00} salary in XX/XX/XXXX. That choice is yours to make. '' I would agree, and so too, I submit, would my former colleague, XXXX XXXX The following article connected to the above headline is writtenByXXXX XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX, a colleague of mine at XXXX XXXX XXXX : \" XXXX XXXX, a close confidant of President Donald Trumps, haswalked away from the rental housing empire he built following the housing bust, cashing out his ownership stake in a move likely to make him hundreds of millions of dollars. '' The move came late Friday, according to XXXX XXXX, one day afterXXXX published an exposon the company he founded. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to afilingwith the Securities and Exchange Commission, says the article 's author, XXXX sold all his stock in XXXX XXXX XXXX and resigned his position as co-chairman of its Board of Trustees. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAbout the time XXXX XXXX sold his holdings, my spouse and me had filed a written complaint against him with the Consumer Financial ProtectionBureau.\n\nWe sent him a Certified package, wherein he found a  copy of Deed ( s ) of Reconveyance from Bank of America ( XX/XX/XXXX ), and a \" Release of Lien \" Letter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) from XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a \" Wholly-Owned '' subsidiary of Bank of America. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\n\nLien Release Department XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX : AZXXXX XXXX, AZ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX RE : Substitution of Trustee and Full Reconveyance Property Address XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX Dear Homeowner, Please be informed that when a mortgage or deed of trust is paid in full, the public records must be cleared using a legal document called a lien release or reconveyance. A lien release is a document which \" releases '' a lien on property included in public records. The lien release serves as notification that the borrower no longer owes that specific debt secured by an interest in the property. \n\nIn the states of California, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, the Reconveyance is combined or accompanied by a Substitution of Trustee wherein the lender or current holder/beneficiary substitutes the original Trustee with a new trustee. \n\nXXXX XXXX, XXXX, is substituted in the above referenced states to replace the original trustee for the very purpose of releasing a lien on the property. The document is accurate and properly recorded based onthe state statutory guidelines and it removes th encumbrance from your property. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, N.A., and is  responsible for preparing, executing, notarizing and sending real property lien releases on behalf of Bank of America. \n\nPaid-in-full loans are referred to XXXX XXXX, XXXX, for lien release processing, All lien releases or reconveyances are recorded with the Country Recorder 's office where the original Deed of Trust or Mortgage was recorded. Please retain for your records the lien release or reconveyance you received as that is proof that your loan is paid in full and released from public records. '' Thank you for your business XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \nLien Release Department '' In addition, we mailed within the packet, copies of Reconveyances from : b ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\nc ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( both now owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX ) d ) XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) e ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the Chapter XXXX Banruptcy Case XXXX, via a Purchase and Sale Agreement ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Contracted using the signatures of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, without our knowledge or permission. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThrough the relay racket, possession of our home was left to the clutches of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which then colluded with XXXX XXXX XXXX whose Company then was called \" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), to steal our home with a forged Trustee Deed. \n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to XXXX the phenomenon XXXX started where tens of thousands of single-family homes are bundled into giant mortgage-backed securities, creating new incentives designed, to skimp on maintenance and maximize rents, says the author, But the phenomenon XXXX started will outlive his ownership. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" XXXX, who often says he likes to befriend the bewildered, has made a career out of profiting off other peoples pain. He began buying houses in XXXX, telling an audience in XXXX that the mass purchases of homes previously foreclosed on was the greatest thing Ive ever done. \n\n\n\n\" Current tenants, however, say the company piles on onerous fees and forces them to live with chronic leaks, mold, mites and even snake infestations. '' While in action with his stolen goods, XXXX XXXX XXXX was making deals with the XXXX, so to speak, and committing acts of treachery against \" tenants '', who probably were the same homeowners from whom the properties were stolen, and converted to Rentals. '' In one county in the XXXX area, says XXXX, the company filed eviction notices against one-third of its tenants, according to a report by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\n\n\nWere just little people in his world, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, said of XXXX. \n\n\n\nTwo weeks after her family moved into a XXXX XXXX home in suburban XXXX, she said a ceiling fan fell on her bed. \n\n\n\nXXXX first signaled his intention to sell in afilingwith the SECon Wednesday, says the article, a week after XXXX contacted the company for comment andfive days after XXXX talked to XXXX by phone, telling him directly that we planned to publish an investigation into poor conditions and mass evictions by XXXX. '' And I and others like me will continue pressing for that investigation, among others, as well as writing to the courts that have Bank of America and the others under foot. \n\n\n\n\n\nNot only will we pressure them into turning on their heretofore partners, but throwing them under the bus to save their own skins. \n\n\n\n\n\nIn this upcoming example, an appeals court made a clear distinction between two separate versions of purchase and sale. \n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California. \nXXXX XXXX, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. et al., Defendants and Responde XXXX Decided : XXXX XXXX XXXX ORDER MODIFYING OPINION ; NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT. \n\nOn the court 's own motion, we modify the opinion by deleting the sentence on page 10, stating, Additionally, the debtor has the right to postpone the foreclosure sale for one day to pay off the outstanding debt. ( XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 1985 ) 165 Cal.App.3d 312, 317320. ) Whatever the Court 's opinion, the distinction they make is clear and decisive, related to mortgages and transfer of title for a sale. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" As we noted at the outset of this opinion, the Legislature has eliminated most of the legal and economic distinctions between a mortgage containing a power of sale and a deed of trust. ( XXXX, supra, 270 Cal.App.2d at p. 553 [ holding same rules are generally applied to mortgages and deeds of trust because there is little practical difference between the two instruments ]. ) However, some distinctions between the two security devices endure. \n\n\n\nProbably the most significant distinction is the execution of a mortgage involves only two parties ( i.e., he mortgagor and mortgagee ) ; whereas the execution of a deed of trust necessarily involves three parties ( i.e., the trustor-debtor, beneficiary-creditor, and trustee ) because title to the real property and the power of sale are conveyed to the third party trustee, who holds the interest for the benefit of the beneficiary-creditor. ( See XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX at p. 1510. ) '' In the case of a Title already transferred, the matter of a Deed of Trust is moot, and any purchase and sale agreement therefore is illegal. \n\n\n\n\n\nAnd if I am pushed to it, or someone challenges my demand for the keys, I will prove to them that the law ( s ) regarding refinancing, Purchase and Sale Contracts have been abused, butchered, broken. \n\n\n\n\n\nMy spouse and I have obtained transfer of the Deed of Trust to a Title all the way back to XX/XX/XXXX, in the U.S. Chapter XXXXBankrupty court ( XXXX ). \n\n\n\nThe court Discharged, our Debt and issued an order directing that the Title be transferred to my spouse and me, based on the \" Final Decree '' submitted byXXXX XXXX as U.S. Chapter XXXX Trustee in the above-referenced case. \n\n\n\n\n\" The Final Decree After the submission of a reorganization plan, the bankruptcy court conducts a hearing for confirmation. In certain cases, there may be some alteration or modification due to the interference of the interested parties. If there is no alteration or modification in the reorganization plan, the bankruptcy court initiates steps for the affirmation of the plan. \n\n\n\nAfter completion of all post-confirmation proceedings of the plan, the bankruptcy court sets time limits for filing a final report and motion for a final decree. \n\n\n\nThe Bankruptcy Code requires the court to close a bankruptcy case immediately after full administration of the real property and the discharge of the US Trustee. In short, the entry of a final decree is meant to close a bankruptcy case. '' An Order for a Deed of Reconveyance came with the Discharge. \n\n\n\nThe Order was fulfilled by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which recorded a Deed of Reconveynance on that same date : XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nIn this upcoming example, again, the appeals court made a clear distinction between two separate versions of purchase and sale. \n\n\n\n\" As the XXXX court explained, section 2932.5 's purpose is not to ensure that borrowers can identify who is holding their loans. Section 2932.5 requires the recorded assignment of a mortgage so that a prospective purchaser knows that the mortgagee has the authority to exercise the power of sale. \n\n\n\nThis is not necessary when a deed of trust is involved, as the trustee conducts the sale and transfers title. [ Citation. ] It is the trustee 's holding and transferring of title that underlies the application of different recording requirements than those required of mortgagees under section 2932.5 [ T ] he literal application of section 2932.5 to  deeds of trust would effectively require the power of sale to be transferred to the lender, contrary to the terms of the trust deed and of section 2934a which provides detailed requirements for the transfer of the power of sale to another trustee. ( XXXX, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at p. 336, fn. omitted. ) We agree with the XXXX court that the transferee of a promissory note secured by a deed of trust is not a mortgagee, or other encumbrancer to whom a power of sale is given within the meaning of section 2932.5, and such a transferee need not have a duly acknowledged and recorded interest in the promissory note before exercising the power of sale. \n\n\n\n( XXXX, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at p. 333. ) '' And if pressed to do so, I gladly will embarrass these detractors by proving their treachery, Evasion of Taxes, Embezzlement and Seizure of Assets and of Property without authority or legal standing. \n\n\n\n\" U.S. CodeTitle 12Chapter 38A 3763 12 U.S. Code 3763 - Transfer of title and possession prev|next ( a ) Delivery of deeds The foreclosure commissioner shall, upon delivery of a deed or deeds to the purchaser or purchasers ( which shall be without warranty or covenants to the purchaser or purchasers ) obtain the balance of the purchase price in accordance with the terms of sale provided in the notice ofdefaultand foreclosure sale. \n\n\nNotwithstanding anyStatelaw to the contrary, delivery of a deed by the foreclosure commissioner shall be a conveyance of the property, and constitute passage of title to the mortgaged property, and no judicial proceedings shall be required ancillary or supplementary to the procedures provided in this chapter to assure the validity of the conveyance or confirmation of such conveyance. \n\n\n( b ) Right of possession A purchaser at a foreclosure sale held pursuant to this chapter shall be entitled to possession upon passage of title under subsection ( a ) to the mortgagedproperty, subject to any interest or interests not barred undersection 3765 of this title. \n\nAny person remaining in possession of the mortgaged property after thepassageof title shall be deemed a tenant at sufferance subject to eviction under Penalty of Perjury.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-12-20T08:42:57.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"94538","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2759570","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2017-12-20T03:31:38.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( End is Seen to <em>Free</em> CheckingXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ). In other words, it is on the record that your bank was preparing new fees <em>just</em> like this one well before swipe fee reform became law. '' https : //www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/letter-to-bank-of-america-ceo-XXXX. '' So now, Bank of America, as Trustee, has no defense for not coming up with those keys."]},"sort":[3.205257,"2759570"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6681290","_score":2.9627995,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX CFPB TOP PDF XX/XX/XXXX I, XXXX XXXX. The Consumer submitted a complaint asking all credit agencies to stop violating My privacy by posting alleged debt on their private sites. ( e.g. EARLY WARNING SERVICE LLC.is a private company owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ETC. ) XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.are not Bureau 's and are only agencies of the BUREAU. When I stated the account in question in last complaint I meant \" EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT '' DEBT PAYMENT HISTORY ETC '' that XXXX XXXX XXXX continues to post I will hold the CFO personally liable as notice to agent is notice to principle. the individual who's privacy is being violated pursuant to the EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT, THE PRIVACY ACT, every transaction relies upon the \" FULL FAITH & CREDIT '' of the united states. Im invoking Consumer protection laws for : Delete, Block and Remove Listed XXXX XXXX XXXX Charge off / Closed Account Balance - {$87.00} Balance updated XXXX XXXX, XXXX Credit limit - {$500.00} Account info - Account number - XXXX Open/closed - Closed Date opened - XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX Code XXXX XXXX Definitions and application The Federal Government took away our lawful money ( silver & gold ) in XXXX but Congress had to provide the people a remedy. Public Law : Chap. 48, 48 Stat. 112 under HJR 192 is that remedy and in part states that the Federal Government will discharge all of our debts, public and private, dollar for dollar. That the giving a ( federal reserve ) note does not constitute payment. That the use of a ( federal reserve ) Note is only a promise to pay. That Legal Tender ( federal reserve ) Notes are not good and lawful money of the United States. See Rains v State, 226 S.W. 189. I can't provide exact dates because I have been trying to get this matter settled with XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, EARLY WARNING SERVICE LLC AND XXXX XXXX for many years. As they refuse to verify and/or validate the debt properly and in accordance to federal law, therefore I am submitting this complaint. I have a problem with their legal characteristic by nature, as they have not given equitable relief. \nI am submitting one Administration Judgment ( documentation ) for proof and the account should be discharged. This firm has been unlawfully and illegally trying to collect on monies already prepaid pursuant to HJR-192 of 1933. Additionally pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3123 the interest and public debt is the obligation of the United States. I must also report that it has been almost 6+ years and this firm is still continuing to report false information on the report. I have fully investigated my rights in this matter. Under the doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v Gravens ( Mo ) Imay presume that no proof of the alleged debt, nor therefore any such debt, in fact exists. I have copies of the certified letters and dates prepared to bring to court. Also, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, these disputed items may not appear on my credit report if they can not be supported by any evidence ( which they keep reporting illegally ). As a result of these blatantly reckless, wanton and intentional acts, I have suffered and continue to suffer general and specific damages. I am comprehending that the credit reporting agencies, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.And XXXX, XXXXMUST delete ALL accounts that I have reported as fraudulent regarding identity theft within FOUR ( 4 ) days of my report, and NONE OF THEM HAVE DONE SO, violating the laws that are placed to protect consumers.15 U.S. Code 1681c2 - Block of information resulting from identity theft. : ( a ) Block Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of a consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency> My reporting was NOT in ERROR, so the reporting agencies have NO right under the law to continue to \" report '' my PRIVATE information for the public corporations to see. \nBecause of this fact. I am concerned about the validity and accuracy of of the accounts that are reporting on my credit report. I am requesting a investigation because I feel the items are not being reported legally. I received a copy of my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.credit reports containing the following inaccurate and incomplete items : Delete 1- XXXX XXXX XXXX Charge off / Closed Account : - Account number - XXXX. Why are you disputing this account? Account is not accurate Reason ( s ) for dispute : 1 ) There were fraudulent charges made on this account Additional Comments : Motion Remedy Claim for Damages in Re : Pub Res No. 10 Public Law Ch 48, 48 statute 112, Pub Law 7310, HJR 192, 31 USC 3123, 5103, 5312,18 USC 8, 12 USC 411, 28 USC 1746, 42 USC 408 ( a ) 8 Penalty, Privacy Act of 1974 12 USC 3401, Right to Fianancial Privacy Act of 1978 5 USC section 552 ( a ), Third Party Summons Act Special Procedures 26 USC section 7609 Delete 2XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Account number XXXX. Why are you disputing this account? Account is not accurate Reason ( s ) for dispute : 1 ) There were fraudulent charges made on this account Addtional Comments : Motion Remedy Claim for Damages in Re : Pub Res No. 10 Public Law Ch 48, 48 statute 112, Pub Law 7310, HJR 192, 31 USC 3123, 5103, 5312,18 USC 8, 12 USC 411, 28 USC 1746, 42 USC 408 ( a ) 8 Penalty, Privacy Act of 1974 12 USC 3401, Right to Fianancial Privacy Act of 1978 5 USC section 552 ( a ), Third Party Summons Act Special Procedures 26 USC section 7609I disputed every negative items on my credit report several times, I also provided accurate information for the reasons why I'm not liable for those debts according to the law, I'm full aware that all these corporations, including this very one I'm utilizing for the complaint is using a name not associated with me, I've stated I'm not a ALL CAPITAL LETTERS CORPORATION or 14th Amendment Citizen, I'm a free National, most of those debt collectors aren't a party to the matter, they brought the debt from the original creditor, I never signed a contract with any of them, and for your organization to confirm anything from those debt collectors is fraud, because they're using a name similar to mines, who isn't me, I've also reserved my rights ... UCC 1-308, I've quoted HJR 192, and only Congress can coin and make legal tender, Credit is not legal tender, I have grounds to sue these debt collectors or any organization who uses my name without my consent, and committing fraud.According to the fair credit reporting act, all negative items must be removed once it is known as an inaccurate account. These accounts still states accurate on my report, which it is proven to be inaccurate because their was no proof of claim mailed to me. Again according to Hjr 192 the US Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act. It was also announced by the 73rd congress that the UNITED STATES was bankrupt. The passage of House Joint Resolution HJR-192 removed the ability of the public to pay debt with lawful money. This made it illegal to demand lawful money for the payment of debt.See references : 48 Statute 1, Public Law 89-719, HJR 192, Public Law 73-10, American Bar Association Unbound Volume 1938 , 31 USC 53 section 5312 ( 3 ) ( C ), 31USC5312 ( 2 ) ( r ), PL 97-258, 96 Stat. 995, PL 99-570, PL 100-690, PL 103-325, PL 107-56, PL 108-458, 1USC 1362, 6 USC 6185 ( a ), 4USC 405-409, 3USC 321 ( a ), ( b ), 359 ) ( a ), 365 ( c ), 4USC 6202 ( g ), 6203 ( b ), 100 Stat. 3207-33, 102 Stat. 4354, 4357, 108 Stat. 2247, 2252, 115 Stat.315, 328, 335, 118 Stat. 3746, PL 97-258, PL 97-452, 16USC 831 ( h ), PL 98-369, PL 101-508, PL 102-589, PL 104-134, PL 105-46, 5USC 5129 ( b ), 98 Stat. 1153, 6USC 2653 ( a ) ( 1 ), 104 Stat. 1388-287, 106 Stat. 1488, 3USC Also, according the Constitution Article 1 section 10 Article 1 section 10 No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation ; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal ; coin Money ; emit Bills of Credit ; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws : and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States ; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress. \n\nThe two provisions that empower XXXX to consider any business or agency as a financial institution the 1st is if it engages in any activity that is similar to, related to, or a substitute for any activity in which any business described above is authorized to engage. 31 CFR Section 5312 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( Y ). The second authorizes XXXX to designate any other business as a financial institution if that business has cash transactions that have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters. See 31 CFR Section 5312 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( Z ).\n\nAs is evident from the list above, the regulations and reporting requirements implemented pursuant to the BSA apply broadly to the financial activities of many businesses and not just banks. As such, the financial activities of a very broad cross-section of the economy can come under the scrutiny of the federal government. Every customer at a car dealership, travel agency, casino, insurance company, or bank is at risk of having a SAR be secretly filed about their financial activities. Given the existence of such scrutiny, all financial institutions and their customers should be cognizant of XXXX and XXXX regulations. Compliance with all regulations is critical to protecting oneself and ones business. Moreover, making finance arrangements that lessen risk, such as avoiding the use of unlicensed money transmitters, is another way to avoid unwarranted investigatory attention. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX CFPB TOP PDF XXXX CFPB BOTTOM XX/XX/XXXX Charged off accounts that are fraudulent transactions The OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY ( OCC ) And FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Were Contacted And Reports Were Generated For the Following Accounts Associated Which The Stated Banks/ Financial institutions. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX Charge off / Closed Account -Account number - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Account number XXXX In Addition There are a bunch Inquiries that need to be removed. I DID NOT AUTHORIZE All Inquiries listed on my consumer report to be removed 1XXXX main! \n2. XXXX XXXX  The doctrine of privity contract ( s ) is a common law principle which provides that a contract can not confer rights or impose obligations upon any person who is not a party to the contract. The premise is that only parties to contracts should be able to sue to enforce their rights or claim damages as such. Res Judicata : CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE FOR VALUE FOR PROOF OF CLAIM UPON XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CONTRACT, FOR DETERMINATION 'UNCONSCIONABLE CONTRACT ' AND AGREEMENT FOR COMMERCIAL DISCHARGE, I am in receipt of and conditionally accept for value ( honor ) \" Demand For Payment Of Debt '' It has come to my attention that as applied to the above matter, that there may not have been a true qualified 'meeting of the minds, ' that there may be fraud or misrepresentation on the contract and/or the contract itself may be an unconscionable contract, or other controversies that may exist within this contract/transaction.\n\nAs I want to resolve this matter as soon as possible, I am initiating this private-administrative remedy to determine such matters and I do not agree to make payment ( s ) predicated upon your claim. This Equality of Opportunity is to let the lawful record of 15 USC 1992 ( a ) Abusive practices ( b ) Inadequacy of laws ( c ) Available non-abusive collection methods ( d ) Interstate commerce ( e ) Purposes, required by FEDERAL LAW. Otherwise, anyone paying for your reporting services could fax, mail or email in a fraudulent account. FDIC Law, Regulations, Related Acts. https : //www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.html USC 1306 . The FTC 's Bureau of Consumer Protection Act ( s ). This Equality of Opportunity is to let the lawful record of The Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), reflect that you are required by federal and state law to verify through the physical verification of the original signature of consumers contract any and all accounts you post on any of my credit report. Otherwise, anyone paying for your reporting services could fax, mail or email in a fraudulent account. PROOF OF SIGNATURES AND STATUS AS HOLDER IN DUE COURSE. I demand to see Verifiable Proof of my original Consumer Contract with my Signature on the instrument you have on file of the accounts listed. Your failure to positively verify these accounts has hurt my ability to obtain credit. Under the FCRA, unverified accounts must be removed and if you are unable to provide me a copy of verifiable proof, you must remove the account ( s ) listed below. See Attached Instrument ( s ) Proof Of Claim Proof Of Delivery Rescind Debt, Discharge Debt In Accordance To HJR 192 Act of 1933. IRS codes section 1.1001-1 ( 4657 ) C.C.H. states that Federal Reserve Notes ( Dollars ) are valueless. The only lawful money of the United States Of America are gold and silver coins with 1 oz. The Business of Banking. The business of banking, as defined by law and custom, consists in the issue of notes intended to circulate as money..And defines a Bankers Note as : A commercial instrument resembling a bank note in every particular except that it is given by a private banker or unincorporated banking institution. A Person is a Financial Institution ; Unincorporated Banking Institution ; and Financial Agency pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5312 and a U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS.. Acceptance Promissory Note under ( U.C.C. 2-304 ) that states, The price can be made payable in money or otherwise. IRS codes section 1.1001-1 ( 4657 ) C.C.H. states that Federal Reserve Notes ( Dollars ) are valueless. The only lawful money of the United States Of America are gold and silver coins with 1 oz Of pure gold or silver as per Articles VIII and X of the Constitution For the United States of America. or lender promissory notes requiring legal money that is not true money such as : bank checks, cash, check, money orders, attorney checks, bank transfers, wire transfers, FEDERAL RESERVE PROMISSORY NOTE DOLLARS, cashier checks, and certified checks from a bank, attorney, or escrow company are illegal pursuant to Title 31 U.S.C. 5118 ( d ) ( 2 ) ; 31 U.S.C.A. 463 ; and Public Law 97-258 ( ). Contracts requiring legal money such as cash, check, money orders, bank transfers, wire transfers, and Federal Reserve Notes ( DOLLARS ) are illegal and unlawful by Title 31 U.S.C. 5118 ( d ) ( 2 ) ; 31 U.S.C.A. 463 ; and Public Law 97-258. All debts today are discharged by promises to pay in the future. All Federal Reserve Notes, DOLLARS, are registered securities and promise to pay in the future. FRNs are secured by the utility of alive men 's energy or labor. When quoting U.C.C. statutes, the courts require them to be quoted with State or Federal statute designation. U.C.C. codes are United Nations statutes, but are codified in every local jurisdiction. \nIn accordance with XXXX XXXX. XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, such Note instruments are national bank currency and thereby coin or currency of the United States by statutory definition and can be issued by who are banking members of the XXXX and are THE EQUIVALENT OF MONEY as per XXXX XXXX XXXX ( L ) and must be accepted by all banks and financial institutions as payoff, set off, discharge, and full settlement of all debts and loans. Failure to remove this debt will result in legal action HJR XXXX ACT OF XXXX PUBLIC LAW XXXX XXXX U.S.C. XXXX - XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX and XXXX XXXX. Payment of obligations and interest on the public debt.. Payment of obligations and interest on the public debt ( a ) The faith of the United States Government XXXX pledged to pay, in legal tender, principal and interest on the obligations of the Government issued under this chapter. ( b ) The XXXX of the Treasury shall pay interest due or accrued on the public debt. As the XXXX considers expedient, the XXXX XXXX pay in advance interest on the public debt by a period of not more than XXXX year, with or without a rebate of interest on the coupons. ( c ) ( XXXX ) The XXXX XXXX issue a bond, note, or certificate of indebtedness authorized under this chapter whose principal and interest are payable in a foreign currency stated in the bond, note, or certificate. The XXXX XXXX dispose of the bonds, notes, and certificates at a price that is at least par value without complying with section XXXX ( b ) ( d ) of this title. \n( XXXX ) In determining the dollar amount of bonds, notes, and certificates of indebtedness that XXXX be issued under this chapter, the dollar equivalent of the amount of bonds, notes, and certificates payable in a foreign currency is determined by the par of XXXX XXXX value on the date of issue of the bonds, notes, or certificates as published by the Secretary under SECTION XXXX OF THIS TITLE. ( XXXX ) The XXXX XXXX designate depositaries in foreign countries in which any part of the proceeds of bonds, notes, or certificates of indebtedness payable in the foreign currency XXXX be deposited. CITE AS : XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX requirements- XXXX ). ( F ) In order to prevent evasions of the reserve requirements imposed by this subsection, after consultation with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Federal Reserve XXXX is authorized to determine, by regulation or order, that an account or deposit is a transaction account if such account or deposit XXXX be used to provide funds directly or indirectly for the purpose of making payments or transfers to third person. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) This erroneous entrys is detrimental to my overall credit rating and has caused me severe financial and emotional distress. If you choose not to provide the above requested deletion or requested/required documentation of your investigation, I will pursue the enforcements of my constitutional rights via federal court proceedings. As you are well aware this information will come out through my formal discovery process, and necessary depositions. I have recently studied constitutional consumer protection laws along with civil/federal court procedures. I will represent myself pro-se and will formally request a jury trial. Please respond accordingly, A PERSON is a Financial Institution ; Unincorporated Banking Institution ; and Financial Agency pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5312 and a Acceptance Promissory Note under ( U.C.C. 2-304 ) tha FTC ATTACHED.\n\nThe Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Pub. L. 95-109 ; 91 Stat. 874, codified as 15 U.S.C. 1692 1692p, is a consumer protection amendment, establishing legal protection from abusive debt collection practices, to the Consumer Credit Protection Act, as Title VIII of that Act. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC ), independent U.S. government corporation created under authority of the Banking Act of 1933 ( also known as the Glass-Steagall Act ), with the responsibility to insure bank deposits in eligible banks against loss in the event of a bank failure and to regulate certain banking... The Federal Trade Commission 's Credit Practices Rule states that it is... interest in household goods to be unfair and a violation of the FTC Act. In the past, NCUA had a similar rule that was applicable to federal credit unions. The Federal Trade Commission 's Credit Practices Rule states that it is... interest in household goods to be unfair and a violation of the FTC Act. In the past, NCUA had a similar rule that was applicable to federal credit unions. The Federal Trade Commission has filed a complaint charging a mortgage spamming operation with violating federal laws by using an array of ... According to the fair credit reporting act, all negative items must be removed once it is known as an inaccurate account. These accounts still states accurate on my report, which it is proven to be inaccurate because their was no proof of claim mailed to me. Also according to Hjr 192 IN 1933! the US Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act. It was also announced to the 73rd congress that the UNITED STATES was bankrupt. The passage of House Joint Resolution HJR-192 removed the ability of the public to pay debt with lawful money. \nThis made it illegal to demand lawful money for the payment of debt.See references : 48 Statute 1, Public Law 89-719, HJR 192, Public Law 73-10, American Bar Association Unbound Volume 1938 , 31 USC 53 section 5312 ( 3 ) ( C ), 31USC5312 ( 2 ) ( r ), PL 97-258, 96 Stat. 995, PL 99-570, PL 100-690, PL 103-325, PL 107-56, PL 108-458, 1USC 1362, 6 USC 6185 ( a ), 4USC 405-409, 3USC 321 ( a ), ( b ), 359 ) ( a ), 365 ( c ), 4USC 6202 ( g ), 6203 ( b ), 100 Stat. 3207-33, 102 Stat. 4354, 4357, 108 Stat. 2247, 2252, 115 Stat.315, 328, 335, 118 Stat. 3746, PL 97-258, PL 97-452, 16USC 831 ( h ), PL 98-369, PL 101-508, PL 102-589, PL 104-134, PL 105-46, 5USC 5129 ( b ), 98 Stat. 1153, 6USC 2653 ( a ) ( 1 ), 104 Stat. 1388-287, 106 Stat. 1488, 3USC Also, according the Constitution Article 1 section 10 Article 1 section 10 No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation ; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal ; coin Money ; emit Bills of Credit ; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws : and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States ; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress. \nIn XXXX Tendered payments WERE ISSUED TO XXXX XXXX XXXX with proof of service and signatures required signed by all creditors. The law states that if the payment is not accepted then XXXX XXXX has five days to return that payment to me with lawful reason for denying it. XXXX XXXX XXXX has failed to do so. In fact it has been [ 96 ] days and the Tender of Payment has yet to be mentioned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. If the payment is not returned then it is implied that the payment was tendered and received and they collected from the US Treasury and or at Any Federal Reserve Bank. \nIt is left to be implied due to the amount of time given to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. which is well passed the five day time to respond. Attached are the FDCPA laws. ALSO, The new law states \" Under thenew law government obligations, bills of exchange, drafts, notes, trade acceptances, and bankers acceptances, because it is backed by the credit of the nation.It will represent a mortgage on all the homes, and other property of all the people of the nation. '' Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session, Congressional Record, March 9, 1933 on HR 1491 p. 83. Therefore all are hereby notified that i XXXX XXXX do hereby tender payment for the above referenced obligation of debt, and because this debt concerns property of the United States it is deemed by law and operation of statute to be a government obligation and must be handled in accord with the dictates of statute. i have accepted the obligation on behalf of the United States of America and hereby make assignment of the obligation to the United States Treasury Department on behalf of the United States of America as authorized by statute. They were to present the item ( remittance coupon ) to the United States Treasury Department or at any Federal Reserve bank to include any Federal Reserve member banks to redeem the value of the obligation. As per the terms of the contract this shall serve as my notice of change in terms of contract, cancelling and or suspending any acceleration penalties and paying the US government debt obligation for value through acceptance pledging an assignment in full. Rather it has been over [ 96 ] days and nothing has posted as paid tendered or discharged and this disables me by way of doing business employment and living free. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. has notified the Credit Reporting Agency. that i am late to a debt that was paid in full as of i have the CFPB COMPLAINT ID NUMBERS attached which is the delivery proof which is undeniable, and therefore the payment was received on time and is not late, as well the payment format was never returned to me. If XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, has decided to deny the payment then the debt obligation is DISCHARGED! So again! I am writing you about inaccuracies that are being inequitably furnished by XXXX on my Consumer Report. These inaccuracies damaged my right to extend credit. I am being discriminated against by a long list of apartment complexes solely due to harmful information on my consumer report. According to 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( 3 ), Consumer reporting agencies have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers. I hereby put your organization on notice and am informing you that I NEVER gave consent to this report being furnished by you on my behalf. I am aware of the fact that your organization ASSUMED a vital role. Because of this, my livelihood has been adversely affected. There is no law that states anything needs to be reported to a consumer reporting agency. Therefore, XXXX is liable under 15 USC 1681n. 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( 4 ), clearly states that consumer reporting agencies MUST exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and RESPECT for THE CONSUMERS RIGHT TO PRIVACY. Your organization neither exercised its responsibilities with fairness and impartiality NOR protected MY right to PRIVACY. Please show me the law where it states a credit reporting agency may report non public personal information on a consumer without consent. I called and spoke to your representatives several times to remedy this. Ive lost countless hours since XXXX to this. Ive lost sleep, nutrition, a portion of my moving money, and am STILL suffering from mental anguish and anxiety every day as a result of this. Ive been XXXX assaulted by an XXXX driver. Something that wouldve never happened if it werent for you people. \nAvailable homes I am qualified for are being rented by others as my reputation continues to be affected by these inaccuracies and without my consent. I have a deadline to move by XX/XX/XXXX and My safe livelihood is at stake and I am at risk of homelessness because of YOU not PROTECTING MY RIGHT TO PRIVACY and furnishing non-public personal information WITHOUT MY CONSENT. You should be ashamed for operating in a way that puts consumers lives at risk, blatantly committing fraud, and aggressively violating consumer rights to privacy. I am requesting proof that XXXX investigated any negative items you furnished to my consumer report. This grave step affects my reputation. Pursuant to 15 USC 1681a ( e ) an investigative consumer report would mean you conducted interviews with family and friends. You must not rely on information from a creditor. In the FCRA, 15 USC 1681a ( e ) clearly states that an investigative consumer report is ; obtained through personal interviews with neighbors, friends, or associates of the consumer reported on or with others with whom he is acquainted or who may have knowledge concerning any such items of information. However, such information SHALL NOT include factual information on a consumers credit record OBTAINED DIRECTLY FROM A CREDITOR of the consumer or from a consumer reporting agency when such information was obtained directly from a creditor of the consumer or from the consumer. Further, pursuant to 15USC 6802 ( b ) I was supposed to be given a disclosure to opt out of my non public personal information being reported by a non affiliated third party. I was not given this disclosure. Further, pursuant to 15 USC 1681b credit reporting is voluntary.\n\nI did NOT consent neither did I provide written notice to you to report account status. Pursuant to 15 USC 1666b timing of payments, a creditor MAY NOT treat a payment on a credit card under an open ended credit plan as late for ANY PURPOSE. Pursuant to 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( b ) your organization did not adopt such procedures that meet the need of commerce for consumer credit. As a result, I hereby demand you to do the following today ; Block and Delete the following XXXX XXXX XXXX Charge off / Closed Account -Account number - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  - Account number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nI the living man have demanded these accounts be VALIDATED ( not a verification ) WITH ORIGINAL CONTRACTS or DOCUMENTS WITH MY ( WET SEAL SIGNATURE ) on them on a CERTIFIED COPY OF the TRUE BILL ( not a statement ) or REMOVE ACCOUNTS IF THEY CAN'T BE VALIDATED. SEND ME PROOF BY EMAIL to XXXX and by CERTIFIED MAIL to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Georgia XXXX WITH TRACKING NUMBER I Demand that of the listed accounts update. The Trading with the ememy acct. By 28 U.S Code & 3002 / UCC 1 308, HJR 192 1933 and US Constitution Article 1 Section 10... I the living man demand that FRAUDULENT ACCT. ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Charge off / Closed Account - Account number - XXXX FRAUDULENT ACCOUNT ( 2 ) XXXX XXXX XXXX - Account number XXXX All Inquiries are Disputed as FRAUDULENT and need to be VALIDATED XXXX XXXX  Inquiry date XX/XX/XXXX. / Removal date XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  Inquiry date XX/XX/XXXX / Removal date XX/XX/XXXX I the living man wants all accounts to be VALIDATED that I the living man was giving money when it No money as the country is Bankrupt and in Bankruptcy it has, been no money snice all the GOLD & SILVER was taken and the BANKRUPT XXXX XXXX XXXX is pushing worthless paper as money when its no money so how is the living man supposed to pay with money when its no money only FIAT CURRENCY when I the living man is the Grantor and Beneficiary of the ESTATE for the ALL CAPS NAME called XXXX XXXX XXXX i'm not the ALL CAPS NAME e.g I'm the only legally Authorized Representative that can sign for the ALL CAPS NAME these accounts claim all accounts all been VALIDATED, WITH CERTIFIED COPY OF THE TRUE BILL & ORIGINAL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE MY WET SEAL SIGNATURE ON THEM I DEMAND ALL OF THIS PROOF TO BE SENT TO Either of THE LIVING MAN addresses listed. \n\nI DEMAND TO SEE THIS PROOF ASAP and I need this to be stated on the record for equity court as I the living man will file suit and make an special appearance in court to have these accounts to be VALIDATED, Certified Copy of TRUE BILL and the Original Contract & Documents that ho","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-11T16:08:11.000Z","issue":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30016","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6681290","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Early Warning Services, LLC","date_received":"2023-03-11T16:07:50.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Billing dispute for services"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As is evident from the list above, the regulations and reporting requirements implemented pursuant to the BSA apply broadly to the financial activities of many businesses and not <em>just</em> banks. As such, the financial activities of a very broad cross-section of the economy can come under the scrutiny of the federal government. Every customer at a car dealership, travel agency, casino, insurance company, or bank is at <em>risk</em> of having a SAR be secretly filed about their financial activities."]},"sort":[2.9627995,"6681290"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6681220","_score":2.9627995,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"TRANSUNION CFPB TOP PDF XX/XX/XXXX I, XXXX XXXX. The XXXX submitted a complaint asking all credit agencies to stop violating My privacy by posting alleged debt on their private sites. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.is a private company owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ETC. ) TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX INC.And XXXX, INC.are not Bureau 's and are only agencies of the BUREAU. When I stated the account in question in last complaint I meant \" EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT '' DEBT PAYMENT HISTORY ETC '' that XXXX XXXX XXXXTRANSUNION continues to post I will hold the CFO personally liable as notice to agent is notice to principle. the individual who's privacy is being violated pursuant to the EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT, THE PRIVACY ACT, every transaction relies upon the \" FULL FAITH & CREDIT '' of the united states. Im invoking Consumer protection laws for : Delete, Block and Remove Listed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance updated XXXX XXXX, XXXX Credit limit - {$500.00} Account info - Account number - XXXX Open/closed - Closed Date opened - XX/XX/XXXX 31 U.S. Code 5312 - Definitions and application The Federal Government took away our lawful money ( silver & gold ) in 1933 but Congress had to provide the people a remedy. Public Law : Chap. 48, 48 Stat. 112 under HJR 192 is that remedy and in part states that the Federal Government will discharge all of our debts, public and private, dollar for dollar. That the giving a ( federal reserve ) note does not constitute payment. That the use of a ( federal reserve ) Note is only a promise to pay. That Legal Tender ( federal reserve ) Notes are not good and lawful money of the United States. See Rains v State, 226 S.W. 189. I can't provide exact dates because I have been trying to get this matter settled with TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX for many years. As they refuse to verify and/or validate the debt properly and in accordance to federal law, therefore I am submitting this complaint. I have a problem with their legal characteristic by nature, as they have not given equitable relief. \nI am submitting one Administration Judgment ( documentation ) for proof and the account should be discharged. This firm has been unlawfully and illegally trying to collect on monies already prepaid pursuant to HJR-192 of 1933. Additionally pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3123 the interest and public debt is the obligation of the United States. I must also report that it has been almost 6+ years and this firm is still continuing to report false information on the report. I have fully investigated my rights in this matter. Under the doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v Gravens ( Mo ) Imay presume that no proof of the alleged debt, nor therefore any such debt, in fact exists. I have copies of the certified letters and dates prepared to bring to court. Also, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, these disputed items may not appear on my credit report if they can not be supported by any evidence ( which they keep reporting illegally ). As a result of these blatantly reckless, wanton and intentional acts, I have suffered and continue to suffer general and specific damages. I am comprehending that the credit reporting agencies, TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS , INC., XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXMUST delete ALL accounts that I have reported as fraudulent regarding identity theft within FOUR ( 4 ) days of my report, and NONE OF THEM HAVE DONE SO, violating the laws that are placed to protect consumers.15 U.S. Code 1681c2 - Block of information resulting from identity theft. : ( a ) Block Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of a consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency> My reporting was NOT in ERROR, so the reporting agencies have NO right under the law to continue to \" report '' my PRIVATE information for the public corporations to see. \nBecause of this fact. I am concerned about the validity and accuracy of of the accounts that are reporting on my credit report. I am requesting a investigation because I feel the items are not being reported legally. I received a copy of my TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.credit reports containing the following inaccurate and incomplete items : Delete XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Why are you disputing this account? Account is not accurate Reason ( s ) for dispute : 1 ) There were fraudulent charges made on this account Additional Comments : Motion Remedy Claim for Damages in Re : Pub Res No. 10 Public Law Ch 48, 48 statute 112, Pub Law 7310, HJR 192, 31 USC 3123, 5103, 5312,18 USC 8, 12 USC 411, 28 USC 1746, 42 USC 408 ( a ) 8 Penalty, Privacy Act of 1974 12 USC 3401, Right to Fianancial Privacy Act of 1978 5 USC section 552 ( a ), Third Party Summons Act Special Procedures 26 USC section 7609 Delete XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Why are you disputing this account? Account is not accurate Reason ( s ) for dispute : 1 ) There were fraudulent charges made on this account Addtional Comments : Motion Remedy Claim for Damages in Re : Pub Res No. 10 Public Law Ch 48, 48 statute 112, Pub Law 7310, HJR 192, 31 USC 3123, 5103, 5312,18 USC 8, 12 USC 411, 28 USC 1746, 42 USC 408 ( a ) 8 Penalty, Privacy Act of 1974 12 USC 3401, Right to Fianancial Privacy Act of 1978 5 USC section 552 ( a ), Third Party Summons Act Special Procedures 26 USC section 7609I disputed every negative items on my credit report several times, I also provided accurate information for the reasons why I'm not liable for those debts according to the law, I'm full aware that all these corporations, including this very one I'm utilizing for the complaint is using a name not associated with me, I've stated I'm not a ALL CAPITAL LETTERS CORPORATION or 14th Amendment Citizen, I'm a free National, most of those debt collectors aren't a party to the matter, they brought the debt from the original creditor, I never signed a contract with any of them, and for your organization to confirm anything from those debt collectors is fraud, because they're using a name similar to mines, who isn't me, I've also reserved my rights ... UCC 1-308, I've quoted HJR 192, and only Congress can coin and make legal tender, Credit is not legal tender, I have grounds to sue these debt collectors or any organization who uses my name without my consent, and committing fraud.According to the fair credit reporting act, all negative items must be removed once it is known as an inaccurate account. These accounts still states accurate on my report, which it is proven to be inaccurate because their was no proof of claim mailed to me. Again according to Hjr 192 the US Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act. It was also announced by the 73rd congress that the UNITED STATES was bankrupt. The passage of House Joint Resolution HJR-192 removed the ability of the public to pay debt with lawful money. This made it illegal to demand lawful money for the payment of debt.See references : 48 Statute 1, Public Law 89-719, HJR 192, Public Law 73-10, American Bar Association Unbound Volume 1938 , 31 USC 53 section 5312 ( 3 ) ( C ), 31USC5312 ( 2 ) ( r ), PL 97-258, 96 Stat. 995, PL 99-570, PL 100-690, PL 103-325, PL 107-56, PL 108-458, 1USC 1362, 6 USC 6185 ( a ), 4USC 405-409, 3USC 321 ( a ), ( b ), 359 ) ( a ), 365 ( c ), 4USC 6202 ( g ), 6203 ( b ), 100 Stat. 3207-33, 102 Stat. 4354, 4357, 108 Stat. 2247, 2252, 115 Stat.315, 328, 335, 118 Stat. 3746, PL 97-258, PL 97-452, 16USC 831 ( h ), PL 98-369, PL 101-508, PL 102-589, PL 104-134, PL 105-46, 5USC 5129 ( b ), 98 Stat. 1153, 6USC 2653 ( a ) ( 1 ), 104 Stat. 1388-287, 106 Stat. 1488, 3USC Also, according the Constitution Article 1 section 10 Article 1 section 10 No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation ; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal ; coin Money ; emit Bills of Credit ; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws : and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States ; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.\n\nThe two provisions that empower FinCEN to consider any business or agency as a financial institution the 1st is if it engages in any activity that is similar to, related to, or a substitute for any activity in which any business described above is authorized to engage. 31 CFR Section 5312 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( Y ). The second authorizes FinCEN to designate any other business as a financial institution if that business has cash transactions that have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters. See 31 CFR Section 5312 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( Z ). \n\nAs is evident from the list above, the regulations and reporting requirements implemented pursuant to the BSA apply broadly to the financial activities of many businesses and not just banks. As such, the financial activities of a very broad cross-section of the economy can come under the scrutiny of the federal government. Every customer at a car dealership, travel agency, casino, insurance company, or bank is at risk of having a SAR be secretly filed about their financial activities. Given the existence of such scrutiny, all financial institutions and their customers should be cognizant of BSA and FinCEN regulations. Compliance with all regulations is critical to protecting oneself and ones business. Moreover, making finance arrangements that lessen risk, such as avoiding the use of unlicensed money transmitters, is another way to avoid unwarranted investigatory attention. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX CFPB TOP PDF TRANSUNION CFPB BOTTOM XX/XX/XXXX Charged off accounts that are fraudulent transactions The OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY ( OCC ) And FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Were Contacted And Reports Were Generated For the Following Accounts Associated Which The Stated Banks/ Financial institutions. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX In Addition There are a bunch Inquiries that need to be removed. I DID NOT AUTHORIZE All Inquiries listed on my consumer report to be removed XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  The doctrine of privity contract ( s ) is a common law principle which provides that a contract can not confer rights or impose obligations upon any person who is not a party to the contract. The premise is that only parties to contracts should be able to sue to enforce their rights or claim damages as such. Res Judicata : CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE FOR VALUE FOR PROOF OF CLAIM UPON XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CONTRACT, FOR DETERMINATION 'UNCONSCIONABLE CONTRACT ' AND AGREEMENT FOR COMMERCIAL DISCHARGE, I am in receipt of and conditionally accept for value ( honor ) \" Demand For Payment Of Debt '' It has come to my attention that as applied to the above matter, that there may not have been a true qualified 'meeting of the minds, ' that there may be fraud or misrepresentation on the contract and/or the contract itself may be an unconscionable contract, or other controversies that may exist within this contract/transaction. \nAs I want to resolve this matter as soon as possible, I am initiating this private-administrative remedy to determine such matters and I do not agree to make payment ( s ) predicated upon your claim. This Equality of Opportunity is to let the lawful record of 15 USC 1992 ( a ) Abusive practices ( b ) Inadequacy of laws ( c ) Available non-abusive collection methods ( d ) Interstate commerce ( e ) Purposes, required by FEDERAL LAW. Otherwise, anyone paying for your reporting services could fax, mail or email in a fraudulent account. FDIC Law, Regulations, Related Acts. https : //www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.html USC 1306 . The FTC 's Bureau of Consumer Protection Act ( s ). This Equality of Opportunity is to let the lawful record of The Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), reflect that you are required by federal and state law to verify through the physical verification of the original signature of consumers contract any and all accounts you post on any of my credit report. Otherwise, anyone paying for your reporting services could fax, mail or email in a fraudulent account. PROOF OF SIGNATURES AND STATUS AS HOLDER IN DUE COURSE. I demand to see Verifiable Proof of my original Consumer Contract with my Signature on the instrument you have on file of the accounts listed. Your failure to positively verify these accounts has hurt my ability to obtain credit. Under the FCRA, unverified accounts must be removed and if you are unable to provide me a copy of verifiable proof, you must remove the account ( s ) listed below. See Attached Instrument ( s ) Proof Of Claim Proof Of Delivery Rescind Debt, Discharge Debt In Accordance To HJR 192 Act of 1933. IRS codes section 1.1001-1 ( 4657 ) C.C.H. states that Federal Reserve Notes ( Dollars ) are valueless. The only lawful money of the United States Of America are gold and silver coins with 1 oz. The Business of Banking. The business of banking, as defined by law and custom, consists in the issue of notes intended to circulate as money..And defines a Bankers Note as : A commercial instrument resembling a bank note in every particular except that it is given by a private banker or unincorporated banking institution. A Person is a Financial Institution ; Unincorporated Banking Institution ; and Financial Agency pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5312 and a U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS.. Acceptance Promissory Note under ( U.C.C. 2-304 ) that states, The price can be made payable in money or otherwise. IRS codes section 1.1001-1 ( 4657 ) C.C.H. states that Federal Reserve Notes ( Dollars ) are valueless. The only lawful money of the United States Of America are gold and silver coins with 1 oz Of pure gold or silver as per Articles VIII and X of the Constitution For the United States of America. or lender promissory notes requiring legal money that is not true money such as : bank checks, cash, check, money orders, attorney checks, bank transfers, wire transfers, FEDERAL RESERVE PROMISSORY NOTE DOLLARS, cashier checks, and certified checks from a bank, attorney, or escrow company are illegal pursuant to Title 31 U.S.C. 5118 ( d ) ( 2 ) ; 31 U.S.C.A. 463 ; and Public Law 97-258 ( ). Contracts requiring legal money such as cash, check, money orders, bank transfers, wire transfers, and Federal Reserve Notes ( DOLLARS ) are illegal and unlawful by Title 31 U.S.C. 5118 ( d ) ( 2 ) ; 31 U.S.C.A. 463 ; and Public Law 97-258. All debts today are discharged by promises to pay in the future. All Federal Reserve Notes, DOLLARS, are registered securities and promise to pay in the future. FRNs are secured by the utility of alive men 's energy or labor. When quoting U.C.C. statutes, the courts require them to be quoted with State or Federal statute designation. U.C.C. codes are United Nations statutes, but are codified in every local jurisdiction. \nIn accordance with 31 U.S.C. 5103 and 18 USC 8, such Note instruments are national bank currency and thereby coin or currency of the United States by statutory definition and can be issued by who are banking members of the fX and are THE EQUIVALENT OF MONEY as per 12 USC 1813 ( L ) and must be accepted by all banks and financial institutions as payoff, set off, discharge, and full settlement of all debts and loans. Failure to remove this debt will result in legal action HJR 192 ACT OF 1933 PUBLIC LAW 73-10 31 U.S.C. 3123 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 31. Money and Finance 3123. Payment of obligations and interest on the public debt.. Payment of obligations and interest on the public debt ( a ) The faith of the United States Government is pledged to pay, in legal tender, principal and interest on the obligations of the Government issued under this chapter. ( b ) The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay interest due or accrued on the public debt. As the Secretary considers expedient, the Secretary may pay in advance interest on the public debt by a period of not more than one year, with or without a rebate of interest on the coupons. ( c ) ( 1 ) The Secretary may issue a bond, note, or certificate of indebtedness authorized under this chapter whose principal and interest are payable in a foreign currency stated in the bond, note, or certificate. The Secretary may dispose of the bonds, notes, and certificates at a price that is at least par value without complying with section 3102 ( b ) ( d ) of this title.\n\n( 2 ) In determining the dollar amount of bonds, notes, and certificates of indebtedness that may be issued under this chapter, the dollar equivalent of the amount of bonds, notes, and certificates payable in a foreign currency is determined by the par of the exchange value on the date of issue of the bonds, notes, or certificates as published by the Secretary under SECTION 5151 OF THIS TITLE. ( 3 ) The Secretary may designate depositaries in foreign countries in which any part of the proceeds of bonds, notes, or certificates of indebtedness payable in the foreign currency may be deposited. CITE AS : 31 USC 3123. 12 U.S. Code 461 - Reserve requirements- 5 ). ( F ) In order to prevent evasions of the reserve requirements imposed by this subsection, after consultation with the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the National Credit Union Administration Board, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is authorized to determine, by regulation or order, that an account or deposit is a transaction account if such account or deposit may be used to provide funds directly or indirectly for the purpose of making payments or transfers to third person. ( TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS Inc ) This erroneous entrys is detrimental to my overall credit rating and has caused me severe financial and emotional distress. If you choose not to provide the above requested deletion or requested/required documentation of your investigation, I will pursue the enforcements of my constitutional rights via federal court proceedings. As you are well aware this information will come out through my formal discovery process, and necessary depositions. I have recently studied constitutional consumer protection laws along with civil/federal court procedures. I will represent myself pro-se and will formally request a jury trial. Please respond accordingly, A PERSON is a Financial Institution ; Unincorporated Banking Institution ; and Financial Agency pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5312 and a Acceptance Promissory Note under ( U.C.C. 2-304 ) tha FTC ATTACHED.\n\nThe Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Pub. L. 95-109 ; 91 Stat. 874, codified as 15 U.S.C. 1692 1692p, is a consumer protection amendment, establishing legal protection from abusive debt collection practices, to the Consumer Credit Protection Act, as Title VIII of that Act. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC ), independent U.S. government corporation created under authority of the Banking Act of 1933 ( also known as the Glass-Steagall Act ), with the responsibility to insure bank deposits in eligible banks against loss in the event of a bank failure and to regulate certain banking... The Federal Trade Commission 's Credit Practices Rule states that it is... interest in household goods to be unfair and a violation of the FTC Act. In the past, NCUA had a similar rule that was applicable to federal credit unions. The Federal Trade Commission 's Credit Practices Rule states that it is... interest in household goods to be unfair and a violation of the FTC Act. In the past, NCUA had a similar rule that was applicable to federal credit unions. The Federal Trade Commission has filed a complaint charging a mortgage spamming operation with violating federal laws by using an array of ... According to the fair credit reporting act, all negative items must be removed once it is known as an inaccurate account. These accounts still states accurate on my report, which it is proven to be inaccurate because their was no proof of claim mailed to me. Also according to Hjr 192 IN 1933! the US Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act. It was also announced to the 73rd congress that the UNITED STATES was bankrupt. The passage of House Joint Resolution HJR-192 removed the ability of the public to pay debt with lawful money. \nThis made it illegal to demand lawful money for the payment of debt.See references : 48 Statute 1, Public Law 89-719, HJR 192, Public Law 73-10, American Bar Association Unbound Volume 1938 , 31 USC 53 section 5312 ( 3 ) ( C ), 31USC5312 ( 2 ) ( r ), PL 97-258, 96 Stat. 995, PL 99-570, PL 100-690, PL 103-325, PL 107-56, PL 108-458, 1USC 1362, 6 USC 6185 ( a ), 4USC 405-409, 3USC 321 ( a ), ( b ), 359 ) ( a ), 365 ( c ), 4USC 6202 ( g ), 6203 ( b ), 100 Stat. 3207-33, 102 Stat. 4354, 4357, 108 Stat. 2247, 2252, 115 Stat.315, 328, 335, 118 Stat. 3746, PL 97-258, PL 97-452, 16USC 831 ( h ), PL 98-369, PL 101-508, PL 102-589, PL 104-134, PL 105-46, 5USC 5129 ( b ), 98 Stat. 1153, 6USC 2653 ( a ) ( 1 ), 104 Stat. 1388-287, 106 Stat. 1488, 3USC Also, according the Constitution Article 1 section 10 Article 1 section 10 No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation ; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal ; coin Money ; emit Bills of Credit ; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws : and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States ; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress. \nIn XXXX Tendered payments WERE ISSUED TO XXXX XXXX XXXX with proof of service and signatures required signed by all creditors. The law states that if the payment is not accepted then XXXX XXXX has five days to return that payment to me with lawful reason for denying it. XXXX XXXX XXXX has failed to do so. In fact it has been [ 96 ] days and the Tender of Payment has yet to be mentioned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. If the payment is not returned then it is implied that the payment was tendered and received and they collected from the US Treasury and or at Any Federal Reserve Bank. \nIt is left to be implied due to the amount of time given to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. which is well passed the five day time to respond. Attached are the FDCPA laws. ALSO, The new law states \" Under thenew law government obligations, bills of exchange, drafts, notes, trade acceptances, and bankers acceptances, because it is backed by the credit of the nation.It will represent a mortgage on all the homes, and other property of all the people of the nation. '' Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session, Congressional Record, March 9, 1933 on HR 1491 p. 83. Therefore all are hereby notified that i XXXX XXXX do hereby tender payment for the above referenced obligation of debt, and because this debt concerns property of the United States it is deemed by law and operation of statute to be a government obligation and must be handled in accord with the dictates of statute. i have accepted the obligation on behalf of the United States of America and hereby make assignment of the obligation to the United States Treasury Department on behalf of the United States of America as authorized by statute. They were to present the item ( remittance coupon ) to the United States Treasury Department or at any Federal Reserve bank to include any Federal Reserve member banks to redeem the value of the obligation. As per the terms of the contract this shall serve as my notice of change in terms of contract, cancelling and or suspending any acceleration penalties and paying the US government debt obligation for value through acceptance pledging an assignment in full. Rather it has been over [ 96 ] days and nothing has posted as paid tendered or discharged and this disables me by way of doing business employment and living free. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. has notified the Credit Reporting Agency. that i am late to a debt that was paid in full as of i have the CFPB COMPLAINT ID NUMBERS attached which is the delivery proof which is undeniable, and therefore the payment was received on time and is not late, as well the payment format was never returned to me. If XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, has decided to deny the payment then the debt obligation is DISCHARGED! So again! I am writing you about inaccuracies that are being inequitably furnished by Transunion on my Consumer Report. These inaccuracies damaged my right to extend credit. I am being discriminated against by a long list of apartment complexes solely due to harmful information on my consumer report. According to 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( 3 ), Consumer reporting agencies have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers. I hereby put your organization on notice and am informing you that I NEVER gave consent to this report being furnished by you on my behalf. I am aware of the fact that your organization ASSUMED a vital role. Because of this, my livelihood has been adversely affected. There is no law that states anything needs to be reported to a consumer reporting agency. Therefore, TRANSUNION is liable under 15 USC 1681n. 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( 4 ), clearly states that consumer reporting agencies MUST exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and RESPECT for THE CONSUMERS RIGHT TO PRIVACY. Your organization neither exercised its responsibilities with fairness and impartiality NOR protected MY right to PRIVACY. Please show me the law where it states a credit reporting agency may report non public personal information on a consumer without consent. I called and spoke to your representatives several times to remedy this. Ive lost countless hours since XXXX to this. Ive lost sleep, nutrition, a portion of my moving money, and am STILL suffering from mental anguish and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Something that wouldve never happened if it werent for you people. \nAvailable homes I am qualified for are being rented by others as my reputation continues to be affected by these inaccuracies and without my consent. I have a deadline to move by XX/XX/XXXX and My safe livelihood is at stake and I am at risk of homelessness because of YOU not PROTECTING MY RIGHT TO PRIVACY and furnishing non-public personal information WITHOUT MY CONSENT. You should be ashamed for operating in a way that puts consumers lives at risk, blatantly committing fraud, and aggressively violating consumer rights to privacy. I am requesting proof that Transunion investigated any negative items you furnished to my consumer report. This grave step affects my reputation. Pursuant to 15 USC 1681a ( e ) an investigative consumer report would mean you conducted interviews with family and friends. You must not rely on information from a creditor. In the FCRA, 15 USC 1681a ( e ) clearly states that an investigative consumer report is ; obtained through personal interviews with neighbors, friends, or associates of the consumer reported on or with others with whom he is acquainted or who may have knowledge concerning any such items of information. However, such information SHALL NOT include factual information on a consumers credit record OBTAINED DIRECTLY FROM A CREDITOR of the consumer or from a consumer reporting agency when such information was obtained directly from a creditor of the consumer or from the consumer. Further, pursuant to 15 USC 6802 ( b ) I was supposed to be given a disclosure to opt out of my non public personal information being reported by a non affiliated third party. I was not given this disclosure. Further, pursuant to 15 USC 1681b credit reporting is voluntary.\n\nI did NOT consent neither did I provide written notice to you to report account status. Pursuant to 15 USC 1666b timing of payments, a creditor MAY NOT treat a payment on a credit card under an open ended credit plan as late for ANY PURPOSE. Pursuant to 15 USC 1681 ( a ) ( b ) your organization did not adopt such procedures that meet the need of commerce for consumer credit. As a result, I hereby demand you to do the following today ; Block and Delete the following XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  - Account number XXXX TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS , INC . \n\nI the living man have demanded these accounts be VALIDATED ( not a verification ) WITH ORIGINAL CONTRACTS or DOCUMENTS WITH MY ( WET SEAL SIGNATURE ) on them on a CERTIFIED COPY OF the TRUE BILL ( not a statement ) or REMOVE ACCOUNTS IF THEY CAN'T BE VALIDATED. SEND ME PROOF BY EMAIL to XXXX and by CERTIFIED MAIL to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Georgia XXXX WITH TRACKING NUMBER I Demand that of the listed accounts update. The Trading with the ememy acct. By 28 U.S Code & 3002 / UCC 1 308, HJR 192 1933 and US Constitution Article 1 Section 10... I the living man demand that FRAUDULENT ACCT. ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  FRAUDULENT ACCOUNT ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX - Account number XXXX All Inquiries are Disputed as FRAUDULENT and need to be VALIDATED XXXX XXXX XXXX date XX/XX/XXXX. / Removal date XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX Inquiry date XX/XX/XXXX / Removal date XX/XX/XXXX I the living man wants all accounts to be VALIDATED that I the living man was giving money when it No money as the country is Bankrupt and in Bankruptcy it has, been no money snice all the GOLD & SILVER was taken and the BANKRUPT US AMERICA CORPORATION is pushing worthless paper as money when its no money so how is the living man supposed to pay with money when its no money only FIAT CURRENCY when I the living man is the Grantor and Beneficiary of the ESTATE for the ALL CAPS NAME called XXXX XXXX XXXX i'm not the ALL CAPS NAME e.g I'm the only legally Authorized Representative that can sign for the ALL CAPS NAME these accounts claim all accounts all been VALIDATED, WITH CERTIFIED COPY OF THE TRUE BILL & ORIGINAL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE MY WET SEAL SIGNATURE ON THEM I DEMAND ALL OF THIS PROOF TO BE SENT TO Either of THE LIVING MAN addresses listed. \n\nI DEMAND TO SEE THIS PROOF ASAP and I need this to be stated on the record for equity court as I the living man will file suit and make an special appearance in court to have these accounts to be VALIDATED, Certified Copy of TRUE BILL and the Original Contract & Documents that ho","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-11T16:07:45.000Z","issue":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30016","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6681220","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-03-11T15:39:06.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Billing dispute for services"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As is evident from the list above, the regulations and reporting requirements implemented pursuant to the BSA apply broadly to the financial activities of many businesses and not <em>just</em> banks. As such, the financial activities of a very broad cross-section of the economy can come under the scrutiny of the federal government. Every customer at a car dealership, travel agency, casino, insurance company, or bank is at <em>risk</em> of having a SAR be secretly filed about their financial activities."]},"sort":[2.9627995,"6681220"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":19,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":19}]}},"product":{"doc_count":19,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":9,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":9}]}},{"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":2},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rental debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":1},{"key":"International money transfer","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":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":19,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information is missing that should be on the report","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem getting your free annual credit report","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing dispute for services","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"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":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":1}]}},{"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":19,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":19}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":19,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":17},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":19,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":19}]}},"company":{"doc_count":19,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Aldridge Pite, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Early Warning Services, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"General Motors Financial Company, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"MIDFIRST BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ria Envia, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":19,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"MI","doc_count":4},{"key":"GA","doc_count":3},{"key":"OK","doc_count":3},{"key":"OH","doc_count":2},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":19,"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":6},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":19,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":3},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1},{"key":"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":{}}}