Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Posted on Posted in Complaints, Mortgage

review

XXXX XXXX, XXXX – XXXX Wells Fargo Home Mortgage ( WFHM ) a request for proper ” Verification ” and ” Validation ” of a presumed debt/consensual interest/mortgage in compliance with the FDCPA. The amount of the presumed debt is what is in question. Wells Fargo was unable to provide me with any ” original loan level documentation ” or accurate bookkeeping to evidence the debt. I was provided with ” data ” copied from public records that evidences a CONSUMER TRANSACTION from XXXX XXXX. WFHM equivocates in their subsequent communication with me THE CREDITOR by stating that they need more time to respond properly to my requests. As a Debt Collector or even if they were a Creditor, which they can never be, WFHM is subject to strict compliance of the FDCPA and are not to pursue any collection activity until the presumed debt is VERIFIED AND VALIDATED which, they have still yet to do and ca n’t ever accomplish.
WFHM retained a debt collector to advance a foreclosure action regarding a CONSUMER TRANSACTION FOR PERSONAL, FAMILY, OR HOUSEHOLD PURPOSES. THERE WOULD ONLY BE A DEBT IN DISPUTE AND EVEN IF THEY HAD A SECURITY INTEREST, WHICH THEY DO NOT, AN ACTION WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT UNDER THE JURISDICITON OF DEBT COLLECTION!! WFHM PROVIDED ME WITH A COPY OF MY NOTE WITH THE ALLONGE ATTACHED THAT EVIDENCES WFHM DEPOSITING THE NOTE BY SPECIAL INDORSMENT FROM THE ” LENDER ” THAT TABLE FUNDED THE TRANSACTION ( WHICH UNDER REG Z IS ILLEGAL ), AS EVIDENCE OF THE PRESUMED DEBT. MY NOTE, TO WHICH I AM THE MAKER AND HOLDER IN DUE COURSE, ONLY EVIDENCES THAT THE TRANSACTION WAS EXTINGUISHED BY WFHM DEPOSITING SAID NOTE. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT AS I HAVE RESEARCHED THESE LAST FEW YEARS I HAVE FOUND OUT THAT THE CONSUMER AGREES TO GIVE THE ” LENDER ” ( BORROWER ) A CONSENSUAL INTEREST CALLED A MORTGAGE EVIDENCED BY A ” SECURITY DEED ” ( SECURITY AGREEMENT ) IN MY STATE, WHICH IS A INTEREST RATE. AT SETTLEMENT THE PROPER DISCLOSURES ( TAX DISCLOSURES ) ARE NOT GIVEN THE CONSUMER/CREDITOR TO ALLOW THE CONSUMER/CREDITOR TO CONSUMMATE THE TRANSACTION PROPERLY. AS A MORTGAGE IS A CONSENSUAL INTEREST THAT CAN BE RESCINED AT ANY TIME AS EVIDENCED BY THE XXXX DESCISION … .THE CONSUMER IS THE CREDITOR AT ALL TIMES RELEVANT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, BECAUSE WFHM REFUSED AND IGNORED ALL OF MY DILIGENT EFFORTS TO OBTAIN PROPER VERIFICATION, VALIDATION, AND CORRECT ACCOUNTING OF SAID DEBT, I PROPERLY NOTICED WFHM THE NEW ACCOUNT DEBTOR AND THE ORIGINAL ACCOUNT DEBTOR OF THE RESCISSION. WFHM FAILED TO RESPOND WITHIN THE 20 DAYS AND BY OPERATION OF LAW THE SAID SECURITY DEED ( SECURITY AGREEMENT ) IS VOID. A MORTGAGE IS NOT A ” LIEN ”. IF IT WAS A ” LIEN ” THERE WOULD N’T HAVE TO BE A ” FORECLOSURE ” BECUASE THE ” FORECLOSURE ” IS THE PROCESS OF ” ACQUIRING ” THE LIEN. WFHM WAS ISSUED A CEASE AND DESIST AND INSTRUCTED TO TERMINATE ALL COLLECTION EFFORTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ) and 1692c ( c ) 1. WFHM ADVANCE COLLECTION OF PRESUMED DEBT OVERSHADOWING MY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ISSUED BY ME THE ” NATURAL PERSON ”. BECAUSE I ‘M DOMICILED IN A NONJUDICIAL STATE WFHM HIRED A DEBT COLLECTOR TO ADVANCE A FORECLOSURE ACTION AND NOT A DEBT COLLECTION ACTION IN COMPLIANCE WITH 15 U.S.C. 1692i. I PRESENTLY AM BRINGING ACTION AGAINST WFHM AND THE DEBT COLLECTOR.
A DEBT COLLECTOR REPRESENTING ANOTHER DEBT COLLECTOR? … ..HMMMMMM OF COURSE WFHM SAYS THE REMIC OWNS THE PURPORTED LOAN BUT TO MY KNOWLEGE A REMIC ONLY INVESTS IN ” DEBT ” NOT ” PROMISSORY ” NOTES … I HAVE YET TO RECEIVE ONE COMMUICATION FROM THE REMIC WHOM THEY SAY IS THE ” CREDITOR ” … SO HOW CAN A SERVICER, WHICH ARE DEBT COLLECTORS BRING A FORECLOSURE ACTION IN THE NAME OF THEMSELVES AND NOT THE PURPORTED ” CREDITOR ”?

Leave a Reply