Date Received: 2018-02-24
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Consumer Complaint: I have provided the following information to XXXX, XXXX, and OCWEN Loan Servicing LLC : I am writing to dispute the following information in my file. I have circled the items I dispute on the attached copies of the reports I received from XXXX and XXXX. This item, OCWEN Loan Servicing LLC, Home Equity Line of Credit is inaccurate because the date of first delinquency ( DOFD ) is either missing or inaccurate. As a result, the negative information associated with this specific tradeline is listed in my consumer file longer than legally permissible. The XXXX report does not specify a DOFD. The XX/XX/XXXX report indicates a Last Payment Made of XX/XX/XXXX. More than ten years ago. In addition, the property securing the Home Equity Loan was foreclosed on in XX/XX/XXXX. I have enclosed a copy of the Foreclosure Deed as additional proof. The Foreclosure Deed was recorded in New Jersey with the XXXX County Clerk on XX/XX/XXXX. I am requesting that the information in your records be corrected and that the item be removed from my XXXX and XXXX credit reports to correct the information in my file. I have disputed this item with XXXX and XXXX and have not been given an explanation as to why the file has not been corrected. Enclosed are copies of the Foreclosure Deed and the relevant portions of my XXXX and XXXX credit reports along with the disputes which support my position. Please reinvestigate this matter and delete the disputed item as soon as possible. OCWEN is providing incorrect information to XXXX and XXXX. There were no payments made in XXXX. The last payment date shown by XXXX is XX/XX/XXXX. The date of first delinquency is over ten years ago. In fact the property securing the loan was foreclosed on and the foreclosure deed recorded on XX/XX/XXXX. Nearly nine years ago.
Company Response:
State: MA
Zip: 026XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-24
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-24
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Ocwen loan servicing is running a unorganized white collar crime operation using forgery and fraud, malicious threats, violations, so-called prior XXXX XXXX XXXX increased loan modifications with my forged signature and initials, manufactured documents, rubber stamping, violations of notary laws, void assignment, manufactured note, intentionally waiting out statues, slander of title, credit reporting violations, prior manufactured force place insurance policies, false principal balance, false payment history, and then cozied up with corrupt fraudulent cozy XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX using insider relationship using robo authorized agents and crooked lawyers who commit fraud claiming to have looked at all the manufactured documents having personal knowledge assisting cozy pretender lender loan servicer can embezzle my property I own free and clear so the pretender lender loan servicer to temporally increase its revenue. I sent crooked young shady lawyer XXXX XXXX many emails requesting loss mitigation options because I am unable to communicate with fraudulent troubled white collar crime incompetent Ocwen Loan Servicing. XXXX XXXX intentionally failed to respond to my many request for mitigation option to avoid fraudulent trustee sale only to help his white collar crime client embezzle my property I own free and clear. The authorities are involved in my matter as we speak. The pretender lender loan servicer slandered my title once again recording another fraudulent notice of sale. Due to the fact that shady XXXX XXXX XXXX intentionally recorded fraudulent trustee sale on my birthday and crooked lawyer failed to respond to my many requests for assistance to avoid fraudulent sale, I am forced to litigate my matter in bankruptcy court.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 91709
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-26
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-24
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: On XX/XX/XXXX after completing the 3 month trial payment, forbearance plan, ( repayment plan ), I received the loan modification agreement had excessive fees of over {$100000.00}. My regular principle balance was to go from {$96000.00} to {$160000.00} and my deferred principal balance was to go from {$96000.00} to {$140000.00}. I was to sign the agreement and have it back with in 3 days. I called my mortgage service provider on these excessive charges and was given an answer that my loan was figured out at 40 year payoff. I also brought up that it couldn't be correct since a balloon payment was expected in 18 years. I denied the modification, paid the arrears in full and mailed it XX/XX/2018. Received a letter from them on XXXX, dated XXXX, stating that all monies submitted were put in a forbearance suspense account and that {$250.00} of the remaining funds are applied toward the suspense ( partial payment-credit account ). I requested that any overage in payment are to go to my interest bearing principal.
Company Response:
State: NV
Zip: 89512
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-24
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-22
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Ocwen LN XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX Short sale package was submitted to Ocwen XX/XX/18. Ocwen has requested 4 sets of documents, and continually cancels the short sale after each and every one of these requests. Each time we send documents in to Ocwen we have to request the short sale to be reopened. This has happened 4 times in the last several weeks. Ocwen is refusing to postpone the auction date of XX/XX/XXXX claiming that the multiple doc request and closing/opening the short sale were simply miscommunications. They are stating they have sent communications to the borrower offering workout option " some time ago ''. However they are unable to provide any kind of evidence or tell us the dates as to when those communications were sent to the borrower. Isnt this the same type of miscommunication that got Ocwen fined over $ 2million already? We just want this to be reviewed as requested in the beginning. The sellers are getting divorced and Ocwen were notified of this in the beginning of the short sale, and there is no evidence whatsoever that workout options have been offered to either of the sellers.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-22
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Subissue: Debt is not yours
Consumer Complaint: My name is XXXX XXXX, and I am disputing a debt through HUD, that I feel OCWEN is responsible for. I have attempted to contact OCWEN and HUD many times. I am in the process of disputing this loan through the treasury department. When the property was sold, the attorney, XXXX XXXX was provided one loan number through OCWEN and I was never notified that an additional payment was due. I was never contacted by HUD representative during the time I owned the property. I feel that I am a victim of predatory lending and in immediate need of assistance as the next steps are garnishing wages. Please contact me as soon as possible.
Company Response:
State: CT
Zip: 06095
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-22
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: As the servicer for XXXX XXXX, Ocwen Loan Servicing directed and continued these fraudulent actions that led to a wrongful foreclosure on my property after purchasing by an void/invalid alledged promissory note to my property in XX/XX/XXXX : I attempted to work out a modification with XXXX XXXX XXXX but as the only borrower on the loan was told the bank would not use my spouse 's income. During this time I learned that no legally valid transfer of her Assignment of Deed of Trust to my property had taken place. The mortgage has been securitized and the real holder of her note while not readily identifiable is not XXXX XXXX. Further, the bank filed an Assignment of Deed of Trust executed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a known Robo-signer who signed as a XXXX vice president, a false and deceptive practice. See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX. Further, XXXX lacked standing as they have never proven holdership of the note at any time and can not transfer something it doesn't possess. Further the bank executed the Assignment of the Deed of Trust in XX/XX/XXXX, having initiated the foreclosure in XX/XX/XXXX for XXXX XXXX a defunct company since XXXX. The alleged " promissory note '' is included in the class action settlement of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, et al., v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, et al., as a stock certificate and bank is a New York based company, subject to the laws of New York. I have attached the complaint filed by Attorney General XXXX XXXX ; people of the state of XXXX v. XXXX XXXX ( No. XXXX ), ( Exhibit 1 ) that outlines the exact same fraud committed on my mortgage beginning on page 25 and clearly shows that the bank has no holdership rights to my property. The bank claims via Assignment of the Deed of Trust filed in the XXXX County Court House that XXXX allegedly transferred my mortgage to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, As Trustee Rali XXXX, but as stated by Attorney General XXXX in the complaint ( page 23 thru 41 ), " XXXX concedes in its own procedures manual that it " can not transfer the benefits right to the debt and its terms of membership acknowledge that the XXXX system is not a vehicle for creating or transferring beneficial interest in mortgage loans. '' Thus, the assignment executed by XXXX and its certifying officer XXXX XXXX who is an employee of the servicer XXXX XXXX XXXX lacked the authority to transfer the note to the foreclosing party. See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX , Index No. XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX Order ( N.Y. Sup. Ct. ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( N.Y. Sup . Ct. XX/XX/XXXX ). Where the presiding judge stated " MERS can not transfer something it never proved it possessed. '' ( People of the State of N.Y. v. XXXX XXXX ( No. XXXX ), pg. 25 ). The Assignment of the Deed of Trust on the borrowers property filed by the bank bears this same false transfer of assignment. ( Exhibit 2 ). As a further example of a false and deceptive practice on page 25 of Attorney General XXXX 's Complaint, XXXX XXXX XXXX was the Servicer and their employee executed the problematic transfer assignment as a XXXX certifying officer. The original Notice of Foreclosure action initiated on my property was XX/XX/XXXX, but the date the " retroactive assignment '' was filed ( executed ) by the Defendant was XX/XX/XXXX. However, the bank was granted an Order to foreclose never proving XXXX had possession of my promissory note or the right to transfer it. ( pg. 25 ). The Defendant is subject to the laws of New York and there are numerous decisions where the state of New York has vacated a judgment of foreclosure and sale where a " XXXX '' certifying XXXX executed a retroactive mortgage assignment. ( See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Dept. XX/XX/XXXX ) ( No standing where MERS executed assignment at least XXXX months after foreclosure action filed. ), the date of filing is controlling. Attorney XXXX spells out how this behavior deceives borrowers as well as the courts. The assignment was filed approximately 2 years after the bank-initiated foreclosure with a retroactive assignment of the deed of trust execute XX/XX/XXXX. Foreclosure action was initiated XX/XX/XXXX. The date of the assignment is the controlling factor ( pg. 27 ). The complaint goes on to list multiple examples of fraudulent and unfair and deceptive trade practices that exist in my mortgage and make it clear that XXXX XXXX has no interest in my property or that they legally possess the right to foreclose. The banks assignment of transfer where XXXX purports to act as nomine for XXXX XX/XX/XXXX when the transfer was executed in XX/XX/XXXX, but XXXX XXXX was defunct as of XX/XX/XXXX. Here the Defendants use of " XXXX '' to transfer the assignment of the property has no validity as neither XXXX nor the entity they purport to act on behalf of had any interest in the mortgage at the time of the alleged assignment. ( People of the State of N.Y. v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), pg. XXXX, # XXXX ). See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). See XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( N.Y. Sup . Ct. XX/XX/XXXX ) pg. 27 # XXXX. These unfair and deceptive acts culminated in an Appeals hearing on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX I was told by Judge XXXX on day 2 of an Appeals hearing that this was no longer an Appeals hearing but a new trial and that he would not consider the evidence from the hearing that was being appealed and that any errors or mistakes made in the Clerks office no longer applied. On day one of that trial Attorney XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX began passing out new mortgage documents claiming that they were now the new certified original copies of promissory note and mortgage documents with undated allonges. These were not the same documents used to obtain the order to foreclose on XX/XX/XXXX and despite my objections, XXXX XXXX ruled that this was " fine ''. Also note the alleged Allonges presented by the bank don't properly identify the property or borrower and both are undated. ( Exhibit 3, Witness Statement ). The Clerks office made multiple errors of law and denied my due process rights, allowing the Lender to send an attorney to a hearing on XX/XX/XXXX that was not affiliated with their firm or the case to act as if she were the trustee. I pointed this out to the Clerk as both the Trustee and Lender failed to appear, defaulting as they had done multiple times before over a 3-year period and were granted ex-parte continuances, I requested to be heard on a Motion to Dismiss and the Clerk refused to hear it and forced us to attend a continued hearing on XX/XX/XXXX, where the same clerk allowed the bank to use this fraudulent documentation and granted them the order to foreclose. ) See Clerks continuance where he states, " The Lender directed this case was cancelled or on hold ''. It appears the clerk acted under the direction of the bank. Further, I submitted a forensic report which supports our claim that the bank has no holdership of our property and that the fraud committed is identical to the fraud in Attorney General XXXX 's complaint. Further, as XXXX XXXX is subject to the laws of New York it appears they knowingly crossed state lines and continued actions that have been ruled invalidated multiple times in New York. Further, Plaintiffs have noted cases in North Carolina with the same or less evidence that the bank lacked holdership such as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, Dated XX/XX/XXXX, Recorded in Book XXXX, Page XXXX in the XXXX County Registry. XXXX County XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX v. XXXX XXXX in North Carolina, in these cases the borrowers prevailed. These violations are covered under North Carolina G.S. 75-1.1, GBL 349, Executive Law and 63 ( 12 ). The bank executed false, deceptive or legally invalid or defective mortgage assignment in this foreclosure proceeding. That is invalid in both New York and the state of North Carolina. The bank used a non-employee XXXX " certifying officer '' to execute a foreclosure related document on the behalf of XXXX. The evidence is clear that the defendant has no legally valid holdership of my property.
Company Response:
State: FL
Zip: 33409
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-22
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Ocwen Loan Servicing acquired my loan from another lender and the amount they claimed I owed was incorrect. I contacted them on numerous occasions to get this matter corrected but they insisted that their numbers were correct and proceeded to foreclose on my property. I filed complaints against them in court and they wrongfully foreclosed on the property in 2016. I am still living in the property due to court filings. I hired a legal consultant " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' in XXXX Ga to assist me with purchasing my property back from the Ocwen, but the attorneys for Ocwen refused to submit my offer to the bank, because they want to drag it out in court -- in a effort to get more legal fees. Additionally, I offered the full market value for the property along with a purchase contract and pre-approval letter. I am asking for assistance from your agency because I am being discriminated against and they are trying to take my home, that rightfully belongs to me. Ocwen has a checked past when it comes to wrongful foreclosures, after they acquire it from other lenders. Please see attached letter.
Company Response:
State: GA
Zip: 30152
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-21
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: ocwen is attempting to foreclose on my home with a fraudulent assignment. the assignment is robo signed and was conveyed after the cut off date of the trust filed with the united stated securities exchanged. i contacted them for a modification they sent a work out package i sent it back in as instructed by the relationship manager. i called them and they said they were reviewing for assistance. Nonetheless the didn't modify the loan and trying to foreclosure before even giving me an answer on the loan mod. this is dual tracking. i have a fraud affidavit on the assignments being used
Company Response:
State: GA
Zip: 303XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-21
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-21
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: called ocwen loan servicing after receiving notice mortgage going up {$40.00} per month amount requested for escrow was {$470.00} i sent {$570.00} mortgage still went up asked what amount i could sent to keep mortgage same as it was {$730.00} no one answers question calledXX/XX/XXXXXX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX.spoke to same person5 times names given XXXX XXXX XXXX ( male ) XXXX said continue paying original amount i asked for written statement saying that have not received anything.i now have surplus in escrow. i just want to know money needed to keep mortgage sameXXXX i'm just getting run around
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NJ
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-21
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2018-02-22
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: The home is part of an Estate the homeowner passed away.The family did go to Surrogate Court. We have submitted the documents to Ocwen Loan Servicing they refuse to talk to us or help us. We want to save the homes.This home has a sale date for XX/XX/2018 and we have no idea when it started no was served any of the documents or notices concerning a foreclosure sale. Ocwen refuse to speak to us in spite of the fact that we have sent proof to Ocwen from the Surrogate 's Court. Please help us.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 119XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2018-02-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A