Date Received: 2020-06-29
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Great morning Thank you for your assistance. I am the daughter of a Veteran. The ex wife of a service man. And the mother of an XXXX. I work hard with an established career of over 20 years. As with all people life happened and I got behind on my bills. This has happen in the past when my grandmother and father passed away months apart. I worked with GMAC to get to them my home. I thought that the mortgage with being extended for 5 months. It turned out my fixed 30 year mortgage signed in XX/XX/XXXX was extended to XXXX. That is not helpful to me at all. In XXXX due to everything going on. I got behind on my mortgage again. I asked for assistance from PHH. During this time PHH has reported me being behind which caused my credit score to drop extremely low. The modifications was discussed and received last week. When I found out it is a new 30 year mortgage I was XXXX. How is this helpful? I advised the PHH representative that I was not interested in starting a new mortgage. This was not my intention at all. I asked about their credit reporting stating I was $ XXXX behind. The representative advised it was due to the pandemic and them not being able to work on my request. I researched information online and discovered mortgage companies are targeting XXXX people and keeping them in mortgages not helping them as the modification should be used to. I am requesting that PHH mortgage company is looked into for these unfair practices. I do not want a new 30 year mortgage. At this point I feel like my mortgage should be considered paid in full and the title released to me.Both GMAC and PHH mortgage company fell to help me. Both companies are trying to keep me in mortgages for life.
Company Response:
State: AL
Zip: 357XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-29
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/2020, a mortgage payment was made to PHH Mortgage. The payment was made in the morning and was done through their website.The payment is not showing on the website nor in the payment history. The company did send a letter mentioning the payment made on XX/XX/2020 that is enclosed. I also enclosed copies of the statements which do not show the payment being made. The company sent back the payment twice and then called ten days later requesting another routing number stating that the routing number used is not working properly. I have had problems with the parent company in the past ( Ocwen ) who put my home in foreclosure using the same practices. I would like an investigation to look into this matter.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-29
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I received a phone call from someone claiming to be with Ocwen XXXX and was going to help me with a government modification loan. I was then asked to go to a wire XXXX and get money on a card and give them the information from the card on Friday XX/XX/2020. I was very skeptical, but they assured me it was legitimate with a ID # XXXX for Mr. XXXX. I loaded {$200.00} on a card and gave them the number from the card. I didn't have {$200.00} extra dollars, but was looking for a way to catch up my payments and have them lowered. I have since done some research and discovered I've been scammed.
Company Response:
State: VA
Zip: 244XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-29
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: My loan was sold to PHH in XXXX from XXXX XXXX. I had the forbiddance plan with XXXX XXXX. PHH offered me the forbiddance plan to defer my monthly payments for 3 months due to loss of income. They told me that in XXXX I could call to have the loan modification for the 3 months I deferred. I have been calling PHH since XX/XX/XXXX, have called probably 20 times, spoke to different people and no one can resolve my issue. They promise call backs and miss them and when they call nothing has been done. One promised that they submit the application for loan modification but I called recently that was never done. They also promised me that they sent the papers via email and mail and never did. I am worried that this will affect my credit when its not my fault. The 3 months is due on XX/XX/XXXX and I still have not resolution of what it will be done. This is a horrible company with no structure to handle peoples mortgage.
Company Response:
State: MO
Zip: 65721
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-29
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-28
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: CFPB Case Number XXXX, Case # XXXX. Ocwen Loan Servicing, llc, now PHH Mortgage Services ( " OCWEN '' ) was named as beneficiary in a limited trustee sale guarantee policy issued by XXXX XXXX. Customer Reference : XXXX Order No. : XXXX. Dated : XX/XX/2014. Name of Assured XXXX, XXXX, As Trustee, and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC as Beneficiary. Issue : A foreclosure was informed was completed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the trustee on XX/XX/2014. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX has stated under penalty of perjury that it paid off Ocwen to satisfy the obligation and the reason for the trustee sale. I am not in receipt of acknowledgment of the payoff from Ocwen specifically stating that it received the payoff. REQUIRE Ocwen and its successor PHH Mortgage Services to confirm or deny it received payment from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, trustee sometime on or after XX/XX/2014.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-28
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-27
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: When PHH MORTGAGE took over our loan from OCWEN last year, I set our mortgage payments up on auto draft so there would never be any problem with this company getting our payment on time. THEY cancelled my auto draft stating that we were not allowed to do that. The reason they gave was that we were under Chapter XXXX bankruptcy. They charged me a {$7.00} fee to make my payment that month and I had NO CHOICE to pay it because I HAVE NEVER made a late payment on this loan, ever. Since then, I have made all my payments for free online every month. I just went on their website to make a payment and now they are automatically charging me that {$7.00} fee to MAKE MY OWN PAYMENT ONLINE! HOW IS THIS FAIR??????? They refuse to take my auto draft payment and are now charging me a fee every month to make my mortgage payment. I have tried to refinance this loan but NO ONE will take our loan because the balance on it is under {$100000.00}. HELP ME PLEASE???????? This predatory lender has us bent over a barrel. I am unemployed and we are barely making it through these COVID-19 times but we ALWAYS make our mortgage payment and have NEVER MISSED IT. How can they keep punishing us like this for paying our bills in full and on time every month? What are we supposed to do?? THIS IS WRONG!!!!! Please, please help us???
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TN
Zip: 370XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-27
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-26
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: I was sent by mail the PHH Mortgage Trial Period plan XXXX. I have made all XXXX required trial payments in the amount of {$380.00}. I received a property foreclosure sale letter from the foreclosure attorney stating my property will be sold XXXX. I don't think its right that my house is going to be sold and I have made my payments. Payments were sent by XXXX XXXX, I'm attaching the receipts. I feel I'm being discriminated against because I'm a XXXX elderly man. I think that regardless of what I do per the request of the mortgage company they are going to foreclose on my home. Please Help
Company Response:
State: TN
Zip: 38116
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-26
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: By letter response dated XX/XX/XXXX and enclosed hereto as Exhibit A, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) c/o PHH Mortgage Services ( PHH ) provided the following false and deceptive statements along with forged falsely uttered evidence enclosed thereto : ( 1 ) As displayed on page five of five of the communication and throughout, XXXX and PHH continue to identify the Customer ( s ) for the above referenced account number as the " Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX '' ( See Exhibit A ), when no such estate or person exist and the Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX has no interest in the subject property or subject account number. ; ( 2 ) As displayed on page one of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH declared they were not involved in the origination of the account and therefore would not be able to comment on concerns regarding the origination. ( See Exhibit A ), which is proof that everything declared under penalty of perjury in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX pertaining to the original transaction is unsubstantiated - unauthenticated hearsay because neither XXXX or PHH have knowledge as to whether or not the original transaction is fraud in factum, the product of illegalities by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and subject to set-off and recoupment. ( 3 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated there is no single owner of the account, but rather the account is one of many in a securitized investment trust, XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series XXXX. ( See Exhibit A ), a statement that XXXX and PHH omitted in the pleadings filed in the above docket number, you omitted the names and identities of the multiple owners ( alleged ) for the subject account number in their XX/XX/XXXX communication and have yet to provide a notice of new creditor as required by federal law ( See 15 U.S.C. section 1641 ( g ) ). ; ( 4 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and / or PHH declared they are servicing the account for XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( See Exhibit A ), without presenting a power of attorney as required by N.J.S.A. XXXX in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX or within XXXX and PHHs XX/XX/XXXX correspondence ( See Exhibit A ) to prove their claims of agency. ; ( 5 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is the trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX and the alleged trustee does not own the subject account ( See Exhibit A ), which is a claim omitted from XXXX and PHHs pleadings in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ), contradicts their statements set forth within the instrument titled CORPORATE ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that they enclosed within their XX/XX/XXXX communication wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX is designated owner of the subject mortgage loan as of XX/XX/XXXX for an alleged good and valuable consideration that XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX paid to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit B ), and the alleged assignment is five years after Ocwen Loan Servicing ( Ocwen ) commenced its foreclosure action against me in Docket No. XXXX by complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX for the subject mortgage loan ( See Exhibit L ) ; ( 6 ) The XX/XX/XXXX communication from XXXX and PHH fails to include evidence demonstrating when and how ownership and possession of the subject mortgage loan was transferred from XXXX XXXX XXXX as the originator before XXXX XXXX XXXX became a chapter XXXX bankruptcy debtor on XX/XX/XXXX ( to present date ) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) ( See Exhibit C ). ; ( 7 ) XXXX and / or PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/2020communication that the loan originated with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems ( MERS ) as the original beneficiary of the Mortgage solely as nominee for the original lender its successors and assigns without presenting a power of attorney as required by N.J.S.A. 46:2B-8.2 in either their pending foreclosure action in Doc. No. XXXX or their correspondence XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit A ). ; ( 8 ) XXXX and PHH referenced on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication a MIN number that is associated with the above referenced account number without providing an authoritative copy of the transferable record as I previously requested and they are required to provide pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 7021 ( f ). ; ( 9 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that the subject account is past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payment and further claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that The Litton Payment History enclosed to their communication reflects all credits and disbursements made to the account by Litton and the resulting account status., all of which is false and they continue to omit and conceal : ( i ) the trial modification agreement offered by Litton Loan and executed by me on XX/XX/XXXX, requiring three payments of {$1900.00} for XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were all timely paid and cashed by Litton Loan ( See Exhibit D ), and the latter failed to permanently modify the transaction or apply payments to the subject account ; ( ii ) a total of {$10000.00} in payments that were made to and cashed by Litton Loan for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit E ) ; and ( iii ) a total of {$5100.00} in payments that were tendered and presented to Litton Loan for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were returned by Litton Loan for several varying reasons, the middle of which instructed me to refer to my already deceased husband on the payment ( See Exhibit F ). ; ( 10 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that It was determined that the foreclosure proceedings were initiated on XX/XX/XXXX, at that time the account was past due for XX/XX/XXXX payment, followed by their claim on the same page that the account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX. At the time of the referral, the account was past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payments. ( See Exhibit A ), and those statements are false, deceptive and contradictory because : ( i ) Litton Loan did indeed commence a foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. : XXXX which is the same day my husband died, and the underlying complaint matured the subject account number and demanded the total amount due thereunder as of XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit G ) ; ( ii ) XXXX and PHH are falsely implying in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ) and within their XX/XX/XXXX communication ( See Exhibit A ) that payments were made and applied towards the subject account for the installments due XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX when they were not ; ( iii ) they are claiming the subject account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, at which time, Ocwen was still prosecuting a foreclosure for the subject account under Docket No. XXXX declaring a default as of XX/XX/XXXX until the matter was voluntarily dismissed by Ocwen on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit H ). ; ( 11 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is their foreclosure attorney for the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX is designated plaintiff ( See Exhibit L ) while, according to a recorded telephone conversation placed to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX services on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX employees indicated that : ( i ) they have no knowledge about or ownership of the subject loan, account number or address ; ( ii ) they have no knowledge about or involvement with the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX ; and ( iii ) they have never retained XXXX XXXX to initiate and maintain the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX. ; and ( 12 ) the note instrument that NewRez and PHH enclosed with their XX/XX/XXXX communication that is certified to be a true copy remains payable to XXXX XXXX XXXX and the last page ( five of five ) is followed by a Notice of Right to Cancel ( See Exhibit I ), and is not followed by the separate forged counterfeit piece of paper that they previously caused to be electronically filed with the NJ Superior Court in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( under penalties pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1343 and other state and federal criminal statutes ) by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( Attorney XXXX ) of XXXX XXXX that is certified to be a true and correct copy of the original instrument and includes a separate piece of paper behind page five of five that bears a counterfeit and undated stamp misrepresented to be an indorsement by XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit J ), the latter of whose varying and forged signatures and stamps are documented by the Florida Office of the Attorney General Economic Crimes Division report titled Unfair, Deceptive And Unconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ) ( See Exhibit K ).
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 76543
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-07-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-26
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: By letter response dated XX/XX/XXXX and enclosed hereto as Exhibit A, XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) c/o PHH Mortgage Services ( PHH ) provided the following false and deceptive statements along with forged falsely uttered evidence enclosed thereto : ( 1 ) As displayed on page five of five of the communication and throughout, XXXX and PHH continue to identify the Customer ( s ) for the above referenced account number as the " Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX '' ( See Exhibit A ), when no such estate or person exist and the Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX has no interest in the subject property or subject account number. ; ( 2 ) As displayed on page one of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH declared they were not involved in the origination of the account and therefore would not be able to comment on concerns regarding the origination. ( See Exhibit A ), which is proof that everything declared under penalty of perjury in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX pertaining to the original transaction is unsubstantiated - unauthenticated hearsay because neither XXXX or PHH have knowledge as to whether or not the original transaction is fraud in factum, the product of illegalities by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and subject to set-off and recoupment. ( 3 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated there is no single owner of the account, but rather the account is one of many in a securitized investment trust, XXXX XXXX XXXX-NC1 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series XXXX-NC1. ( See Exhibit A ), a statement that XXXX and PHH omitted in the pleadings filed in the above docket number, you omitted the names and identities of the multiple owners ( alleged ) for the subject account number in their XX/XX/XXXX communication and have yet to provide a notice of new creditor as required by federal law ( See 15 U.S.C. section 1641 ( g ) ). ; ( 4 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and / or PHH declared they are servicing the account for XXXX XXXXt XX/XX/XXXX-NC1 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series XXXXNC1 ( XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX-NC1 ) ( See Exhibit A ), without presenting a power of attorney as required by XXXX XXXX in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX or within XXXX and PHHs XX/XX/XXXX correspondence ( See Exhibit A ) to prove their claims of agency. ; ( 5 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is the trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX-NC1 and the alleged trustee does not own the subject account ( See Exhibit A ), which is a claim omitted from XXXX and PHHs pleadings in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ), contradicts their statements set forth within the instrument titled CORPORATE ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that they enclosed within their XX/XX/XXXX communication wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXXt XXXX-NC1 is designated owner of the subject mortgage loan as of XX/XX/XXXX for an alleged good and valuable consideration that XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX-NC1 paid to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXXNC1 ( See Exhibit B ), and the alleged assignment is five years after Ocwen Loan Servicing ( Ocwen ) commenced its foreclosure action against me in Docket No. XXXX by complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX for the subject mortgage loan ( See Exhibit L ) ; ( 6 ) The XX/XX/XXXX communication from XXXX and PHH fails to include evidence demonstrating when and how ownership and possession of the subject mortgage loan was transferred from XXXX XXXX XXXX as the originator before XXXX XXXX XXXX became a chapter XXXX bankruptcy debtor on XX/XX/XXXX ( to present date ) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( See Exhibit C ). ; ( 7 ) XXXX and / or PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that the loan originated with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems ( MERS ) as the original beneficiary of the Mortgage solely as nominee for the original lender its successors and assigns without presenting a power of attorney as required by XXXX XXXX in either their pending foreclosure action in Doc. No. XXXX or their correspondence XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit A ). ; ( 8 ) XXXX and PHH referenced on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication a MIN number that is associated with the above referenced account number without providing an authoritative copy of the transferable record as I previously requested and they are required to provide pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 7021 ( f ). ; ( 9 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that the subject account is past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payment and further claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that The Litton Payment History enclosed to their communication reflects all credits and disbursements made to the account by Litton and the resulting account status., all of which is false and they continue to omit and conceal : ( i ) the trial modification agreement offered by Litton Loan and executed by me on XX/XX/XXXX, requiring three payments of {$1900.00} for XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were all timely paid and cashed by Litton Loan ( See Exhibit D ), and the latter failed to permanently modify the transaction or apply payments to the subject account ; ( ii ) a total of {$10000.00} in payments that were made to and cashed by Litton Loan for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit E ) ; and ( iii ) a total of {$5100.00} in payments that were tendered and presented to Litton Loan for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were returned by Litton Loan for several varying reasons, the middle of which instructed me to refer to my already deceased husband on the payment ( See Exhibit F ). ; ( 10 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that It was determined that the foreclosure proceedings were initiated on XX/XX/XXXX, at that time the account was past due for XX/XX/XXXX payment, followed by their claim on the same page that the account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX. At the time of the referral, the account was past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payments. ( See Exhibit A ), and those statements are false, deceptive and contradictory because : ( i ) Litton Loan did indeed commence a foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. : XXXX which is the same day my husband died, and the underlying complaint matured the subject account number and demanded the total amount due thereunder as of XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit G ) ; ( ii ) XXXX and PHH are falsely implying in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ) and within their XX/XX/XXXX communication ( See Exhibit A ) that payments were made and applied towards the subject account for the installments due XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX when they were not ; ( iii ) they are claiming the subject account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, at which time, Ocwen was still prosecuting a foreclosure for the subject account under Docket No. XXXX declaring a default as of XX/XX/XXXX until the matter was voluntarily dismissed by Ocwen on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit H ). ; ( 11 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is their foreclosure attorney for the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX-NC1 is designated plaintiff ( See Exhibit L ) while, according to a recorded telephone conversation placed to XXXX XXXX Corporate Trust services on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX employees indicated that : ( i ) they have no knowledge about or ownership of the subject loan, account number or address ; ( ii ) they have no knowledge about or involvement with the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX ; and ( iii ) they have never retained XXXX XXXX to initiate and maintain the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX. ; and ( 12 ) the note instrument that XXXX and PHH enclosed with their XX/XX/XXXX communication that is certified to be a true copy remains payable to XXXX XXXX XXXX and the last page ( five of five ) is followed by a Notice of Right to Cancel ( See Exhibit I ), and is not followed by the separate forged counterfeit piece of paper that they previously caused to be electronically filed with the NJ Superior Court in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( under penalties pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1343 and other state and federal criminal statutes ) by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( XXXX XXXX ) of XXXX XXXX that is certified to be a true and correct copy of the original instrument and includes a separate piece of paper behind page five of five that bears a counterfeit and undated stamp misrepresented to be an indorsement by XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit J ), the latter of whose varying and forged signatures and stamps are documented by the Florida Office of the Attorney General Economic Crimes Division report titled Unfair, Deceptive And Unconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ) ( See Exhibit K ).
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 76543
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-06-26
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: By letter response dated XX/XX/XXXX and enclosed hereto as Exhibit A, XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) c/o PHH Mortgage Services ( PHH ) provided the following false and deceptive statements along with forged falsely uttered evidence enclosed thereto : ( 1 ) As displayed on page five of five of the communication and throughout, XXXX and PHH continue to identify the Customer ( s ) for the above referenced account number as the " Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX '' ( See Exhibit A ), when no such estate or person exist and the Estate of XXXX XXXX XXXX has no interest in the subject property or subject account number. ; ( 2 ) As displayed on page one of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH declared they were not involved in the origination of the account and therefore would not be able to comment on concerns regarding the origination. ( See Exhibit A ), which is proof that everything declared under penalty of perjury in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX pertaining to the original transaction is unsubstantiated - unauthenticated hearsay because neither XXXX or PHH have knowledge as to whether or not the original transaction is fraud in factum, the product of illegalities by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and subject to set-off and recoupment. ( 3 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated there is no single owner of the account, but rather the account is one of many in a securitized investment trust, XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, XXXX XXXX. ( See Exhibit A ), a statement that XXXX and PHH omitted in the pleadings filed in the above docket number, you omitted the names and identities of the multiple owners ( alleged ) for the subject account number in their XX/XX/XXXX communication and have yet to provide a notice of new creditor as required by federal law ( See 15 U.S.C. section 1641 ( g ) ). ; ( 4 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and / or PHH declared they are servicing the account for XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( See Exhibit A ), without presenting a power of attorney as required by N.J.S.A. 46:2B-8.2 in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX or within XXXX and PHHs XX/XX/XXXX correspondence ( See Exhibit A ) to prove their claims of agency. ; ( 5 ) As displayed on page two of five of the XX/XX/XXXX communication, XXXX and PHH stated that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is the trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX and the alleged trustee does not own the subject account ( See Exhibit A ), which is a claim omitted from XXXX and PHHs pleadings in the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ), contradicts their statements set forth within the instrument titled CORPORATE ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that they enclosed within their XX/XX/XXXX communication wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX is designated owner of the subject mortgage loan as of XX/XX/XXXX for an alleged good and valuable consideration that XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX paid to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit B ), and the alleged assignment is five years after Ocwen Loan Servicing ( Ocwen ) commenced its foreclosure action against me in Docket No. XXXX by complaint filed on XX/XX/XXXX for the subject mortgage loan ( See Exhibit L ) ; ( 6 ) The XX/XX/XXXX communication from XXXX and PHH fails to include evidence demonstrating when and how ownership and possession of the subject mortgage loan was transferred from XXXX XXXX XXXX as the originator before XXXX XXXX XXXX became a chapter XXXX bankruptcy debtor on XX/XX/XXXX ( to present date ) in the XXXX XXXX Court for the District of Delaware under Case No. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( See Exhibit C ). ; ( 7 ) XXXX and / or PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that the loan originated with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) as the original beneficiary of the Mortgage solely as nominee for the original lender its successors and assigns without presenting a power of attorney as required by N.J.S.A. 46:2B-8.2 in either their pending foreclosure action in Doc. No. XXXX or their correspondence XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit A ). ; ( 8 ) XXXX and PHH referenced on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication a MIN number that is associated with the above referenced account number without providing an authoritative copy of the transferable record as I previously requested and they are required to provide pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 7021 ( f ). ; ( 9 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page two of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that the subject account is past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payment and further claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that The XXXX Payment History enclosed to their communication reflects all credits and disbursements made to the account by XXXX and the resulting account status., all of which is false and they continue to omit and conceal : ( i ) the trial modification agreement offered by XXXX XXXX and executed by me on XX/XX/XXXX, requiring three payments of {$1900.00} for XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were all timely paid and cashed by XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit D ), and the latter failed to permanently modify the transaction or apply payments to the subject account ; ( ii ) a total of {$10000.00} in payments that were made to and cashed by XXXX XXXX for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit E ) ; and ( iii ) a total of {$5100.00} in payments that were tendered and presented to XXXX XXXX for the installments declared due towards the subject account on XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX that were returned by XXXX XXXX for several varying reasons, the middle of which instructed me to refer to my already deceased husband on the payment ( See Exhibit F ). ; ( 10 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that It was determined that the foreclosure proceedings were initiated on XX/XX/XXXX, at that time the account was past due for XX/XX/XXXX payment, followed by their claim on the same page that the account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX. At the time of the referral, the account was past due for the XX/XX/XXXX payments. ( See Exhibit A ), and those statements are false, deceptive and contradictory because : ( i ) XXXX XXXX did indeed commence a foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX under Docket No. : XXXX which is the same day my husband died, and the underlying complaint matured the subject account number and demanded the total amount due thereunder as of XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit G ) ; ( ii ) XXXX and PHH are falsely implying in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( See Exhibit L ) and within their XX/XX/XXXX communication ( See Exhibit A ) that payments were made and applied towards the subject account for the installments due XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX when they were not ; ( iii ) they are claiming the subject account was referred to foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, at which time, Ocwen was still prosecuting a foreclosure for the subject account under Docket No. XXXX declaring a default as of XX/XX/XXXX until the matter was voluntarily dismissed by Ocwen on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit H ). ; ( 11 ) XXXX and PHH claimed on page three of five of their XX/XX/XXXX communication that XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) is their foreclosure attorney for the foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX wherein XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX is designated plaintiff ( See Exhibit L ) while, according to a recorded telephone conversation placed to XXXX XXXX Corporate Trust services on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX employees indicated that : ( i ) they have no knowledge about or ownership of the subject loan, account number or address ; ( ii ) they have no knowledge about or involvement with the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX ; and ( iii ) they have never retained XXXX XXXX to initiate and maintain the present and pending foreclosure under docket number XXXX. ; and ( 12 ) the note instrument that XXXX and PHH enclosed with their XX/XX/XXXX communication that is certified to be a true copy remains payable to XXXX XXXX XXXX and the last page ( five of five ) is followed by a Notice of Right to Cancel ( See Exhibit I ), and is not followed by the separate forged counterfeit piece of paper that they previously caused to be electronically filed with the NJ XXXX XXXX in the pending foreclosure action under Docket No. XXXX ( under penalties pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1343 and other state and federal criminal statutes ) by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( XXXX XXXX ) of XXXX XXXX that is certified to be a true and correct copy of the original instrument and includes a separate piece of paper behind page five of five that bears a counterfeit and undated stamp misrepresented to be an indorsement by XXXX XXXX ( See Exhibit J ), the latter of whose varying and forged signatures and stamps are documented by the Florida Office of the Attorney General XXXX XXXX XXXX report titled Unfair, Deceptive And Unconscionable Acts In Foreclosure Cases ( Id. at Page 61-62 of 98 ) ( See Exhibit K ).
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 76543
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-06-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A