Product: Mortgage

On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received XXXX XXXX on my right XXXX  to repair XXXX XXXX and XXXX. Shortly thereafter, on or ab out XX/XX/XXXX, I was admitted into the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX after experiencing XXXX related issues. I was placed in the intensive care unit for a number a days and thereafter, released from the hospital. Thereafter, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I was wrongfully terminated from my place of employment that I held for approximately ten years. 

After experiencing three major life-changing experiences and being unemployed, I continued to make my mortgage payments via my personal savings. Thereafter, I requested assistance from then Washington Mutual, which was later purchased by JP Morgan Chase Bank and or Chase Home Financing all to no avail. I was instructed to continue making my mortgage payments and received absolutely no assistance from either bank! Thereafter, I learned that Chase Bank and or Chase Home financing signed a " Servicer Participation Agreement for the Home Affordable Modification Program '' ( " the HARP contract '' ) on XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX ( see-attached document labeled exhibit A ) on information and belief Chase Home Finance, LLC also signed a HAMP contract with XXXX   XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. 

With this newfound knowledge, I demand assistance from JP Morgan Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance with negative results. Over 95 % of the time I attempted to contact Chase by telephone, I faced long periods of holding time and whenever I attempted to leave a message with their assigned representative, the service providers mailbox would inform me that it was " full '' and can not accept any messages. In addition, Chase routinely gave false statements by stating that my documents were never received, but failed to specify what documents. 

Chase Home Finance stated in a letter to Plaintiff, " A review of our records indicates that Chase made numerous, unsuccessful contact attempts in order to try and facilitate a short sale. '' However, Plaintiff taped recordings tells a different story. The recordings shows Chase Home Finance had Plaintiffs correct telephone number, but intentionally and deliberately called the wrong number to prevent Plaintiff from receiving any assistance. 

Their criminal practice carried on routinely and I submitted overwhelming documents and taped telephone conversations to prove that Chase Bank intentionally and deliberately failed to assist me. They continuously and repeatedly lied by alleging they did not receive any of the my documents TO AVOID PROVIDING THE ME WITH ANY RELIEF OR APPROVE A SHORT SALE BECAUSE SERVICING THE MORTGAGE WAS MORE LUCRATIVE TO THEM THAN PROVIDING ME WITH ANY RELIEF. 

JP Morgan Chase and/or Chase Home Finance are intentionally ignoring a grave fact that I sent the requested documents and they INTENTIONALLY LIED by stating that they never received my documents. As a direct result, I was forced into bankruptcy, my property went into foreclosure and my requests for assistance were denied for alleged insufficient documentation. Although, I have records to disprove their false statements and prove that the documents were sent to the defendants via certified mail RR, express mail, postal mail and facsimile ( Please see attached ). 

Chase Home Finance also state in their letter to Plaintiff, " Indications are that the property is fire damaged. '' Plaintiff vehemently disputed defendants false accusations and obtained a letter from the City of XXXX, New Jersey Fire Chief XXXX XXXX. In his letter ( See attached ) to Chief XXXX XXXX, Chief XXXX states that there have been no responses to the property in question during the periods I owned the property. In addition, Plaintiff took numerous photographs of the property, which clearly showed that there is absolutely no evidence of fire damage. 

Continuing with their misconduct, Chase called me at my home telephone number and left a message on the evening prior to the short-sale. At XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( phonetic ) of Chase Home Finance called from telephone No. XXXX and left a message on my voicemail stating that the short sale would be declined due to insufficient documentations that were never submitted. Plaintiff sent the documents via certified mail, express mail & facsimile. ( Please see attached receipts ) Beginning in the XXXX of XXXX, the federal government instituted several measures to try to stabilize the housing and credit markets and assist troubled homeowners. In XX/XX/XXXX, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ( EESA ) was passed to promote stability and liquidity in the financial system. Among other things, EESA authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to establish the Troubled Asset Relief Program ( TARP ). TARP funds were used, in part, to promote various mortgage loan modification programs. 

These programs were, The Making Home Affordable ( MHA ) Program, Home Affordable Modification Program ( HAMP ), " The Home Price Decline Protection Incentives ( HPDP ) initiative, The Principal Reduction Alternative ( PRA ), The Home Affordable Unemployment Program ( UP ), The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program ( HAFA ), The Second Lien Modification Program ( 2MP ), The FHA-HAMP Program, The Treasury/FHA Second-Lien Program ( FHA2LP ), The FHA Refinance for Borrowers with Negative Equity ( FHA Short Refinance ) Program, Housing Finance Agency Hardest Hit Fund ( HHF ) Despite the voluminous number of programs available, Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance did not recommend nor offer any of the programs. Instead, they allowed me to go further into debt, foreclosure and then bankruptcy, while defendants continued profiting from servicing Plaintiffs mortgage and receiving credit from the United States Government. 

Furthermore, Chase Home Finance states, " Chase did not receive the necessary documents in order to conduct a short sale review. '' Once again, Chase Home Finance intentionally and deliberately gave false statements in order to manipulate their requirements of the signed contract agreement with XXXX XXXX and other signed consent agreements with the United State government and the state of New Jersey. However, the facts will show that Chase Home Finance received their requested documents via express mail, certified mail and facsimile ( see attached documents ). 

Chase Home Finance also state in their letter, " Indications are that the property is fire damaged. '' Once again, this is a false statement. Attached hereto is a letter ( See attached document ) from the City of XXXX, New Jersey Fire Chief XXXX XXXX to Fire Official XXXX XXXX. In his letter to Chief XXXX XXXX, Chief XXXX states that there have been no responses to the property in question during the periods I owned the property. More importantly, I have taken numerous photographs of the property, which clearly shows that there is absolutely no evidence of fire damage. 

To make it appear as though they made an effort to provide me with relief, Chase Home Finance called me at my home telephone number and left a message on the evening prior to the short-sale. At XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( phonetic ) of Chase Home Finance called me from telephone No. XXXX left a message on my voicemail stating that the short sale would be declined due to insufficient documentations that were never submitted. However, Mrs. XXXX statement that documents were never submitted is contradicted by my attached documents that prove otherwise. 

On or about XX/XX/XXXX, the City of XXXX, New Jersey adopted a vacant property registration ordinance in which they began charging fees to register vacant homes ( See attached ). Unbeknownst to me, I paid the City of XXXX {$500.00} for the first initial registration fee, and {$1500.00} for the second registration fee. ( See attached documents ). 

On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I responded to City of XXXX, NJ, spoke with Mrs. XXXX XXXX XXXX, and advised her that I could no longer afford to make the vacant property registration payments. Mrs. XXXX advised me to submit my statements in a letter addressed to her and as she requested, the letter was sent to her via priority mail. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from a City of XXXX, New Jersey official, XXXX XXXX from the Department of Economic Housing Development Department. Mr. XXXX wrote to enquire about my payment of the vacant property registration fee. ( See attached ) I responded to Mr. XXXX email ( See attached ) and advised Mr. XXXX of the following : Attached hereto is a copy of the letter I sent to your office via priority mail # XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX. It is in response to a letter from your office dated XX/XX/XXXX. Thereafter, I receive a telephone call from your office stating that Chase Bank is responsible for making the vacant property payments and that I would be receiving a refund. Since then, I have NOT received a refund or call from your office in regards to my refund, except your email in regards to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on or about XX/XX/XXXX. 

I am XXXX and CAN NOT afford to make the payments, in addition, Chase Bank REFUSES to liquidate the property and they have refused to make the REQUIRED vacant property payments and somehow, your office is deciding to go after the XXXX person with NO FUNDS and Chase Bank has BILLIONS of dollars and refuses to pay! 

Please help/assist me in resolving this matter because I can not afford these payments. In addition, I am anticipating a refund from your office, not a notice to payment with penalties. 


Coincidently, Chase Bank released their lien to the property ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ ) on or about XX/XX/XXXX, in order to avoid paying the City of XXXX, New Jersey the vacant Property registration fee. Unfortunately, I was not given notice from Chase Bank until AFTER XX/XX/XXXX. 

Chase Bank is fully aware they are responsible for making the vacant property registration payment with the City of XXXX, New Jersey, however they intentionally failed to do so. I received numerous tickets on the property and made numerous court appearances because Chase Bank refused to maintain the property. 

I filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, more succinctly on or about XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached ) Chase Bank responded with THREE separate letters addressed to me, admitting they owed XXXX XXXX {$2000.00}. We previously agreed to reimburse you {$2000.00} for certain fees based on the receipts you submitted in XX/XX/XXXX. WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REGISTRATION PERIODS UNTIL THE LIEN WAS RELEASED. 

Chase Bank requested that I sign a release agreement that did not include any reimbursement for my cost of cleaning up the debris, reimbursement for paid back taxes, reimbursement for travel & cost for several court appearances because Chase Bank refuse to maintain the property or have it secured, nor did the document have a date in which I would be paid for my cost, so I refused because Chase Bank was not negotiating in good faith. 

On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a Complaint, alleging various violations of New Jersey 's Consumer Fraud Act ( CFA ), which protects consumers from deceptive, false, or fraudulent business practices because Chase Bank refused to pay. The Complaint alleges that Defendants falsely, erroneously and deceptively, denied Plaintiff any relief with respect to his mortgage loan with the defendants. ( See attached ) Chase Bank responded by lying to the court and denying owing me any monies. ( See attached brief by Chase Bank outside attorneys ) Chase Bank denied owing me the money for the vacant property registration fees and they denied having a responsibility to provide me with any relief with my property DESPITE SIGNING CONSENT AGREEMENTS WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS STATING THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE HOMEOWNERS LIKE MYSELF RELIEF! INSTEAD, CHASE BANK CHOSE TO INTENTIONALLY, WILLFULLY & KNOWINGLY LIE IN A SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY. 

Furthermore, there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey Law and a servicer can not be compelled to accept a short sale. The crux of Plaintiffs Complaint appears to be loss mitigation. It is well accepted that " there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey law. '' Plaintiff also claims that Chase should be required to reimburse him for fees he paid to the City of XXXX for Vacant Property Registration and expenses paid to have the Property secured and debris removed. See Complaint, Prayer for Relief 6-7. However, Plaintiff entirely fails to present a cognizant basis as to why Chase should be responsible for these fees. 

Furthermore, there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey Law and a servicer can not be compelled to accept a short sale. The crux of Plaintiffs Complaint appears to be loss mitigation. It is well-accepted that " there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey law. '' The Banks Unfair, Deceptive, and Unlawful Loan Modification and Loss Mitigation Processes Under the States consumer protection laws, Chase Bank is prohibited from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices with respect to consumers. 
Pursuant to HUD regulations and FHA guidance, FHA-approved mortgage lenders and their servicers are required to engage in loss-mitigation efforts to avoid the foreclosure of HUD-insured mortgages. E.g., 24 C.F.R. 203.500 et seq. ; Mortgagee Letter 2008-07 ( Treble Damages for Failure to Engage in Loss Mitigation ) ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ; Mortgagee Letter 1996-25 ( Existing Alternatives to Foreclosure -- Loss Mitigation ) ( XX/XX/XXXX ). Thus, when acting as a servicer, Chase Bank was required to refrain from foreclosing on any FHA insured mortgage where a default could be addressed by modifying the terms of the mortgage or other less-costly alternatives to foreclosure were available. 

Under the Treasurys various rescue and stimulus programs, Chase Bank received monetary incentives from the Federal government in exchange for the commitment to make efforts to modify defaulting borrowers residential mortgages. See, e.g., Making Home Affordable Handbook v.1.0, ch. 13 ( Incentive Compensation ) ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). Under the programs, Chase Bank agreed to fulfill requirements set forth in program guidelines and servicer participation agreements. 

Chase Bank regularly conducts or manages loan modifications on behalf of the entities that hold the loans and mortgages and that hired the Banks as servicers. In the course of their servicing and oversight of mortgage loans, Chase Bank violated federal laws, program requirements and contractual requirements governing loss mitigation. 


Chase Bank attorneys statements in the briefs to the Superior Court of New Jersey Plaintiff also  claims that Chase should be required to reimburse him for fees he paid to the City of XXXX for Vacant Property Registration and expenses paid to have the Property secured and debris removed. See Complaint, Prayer for Relief 6-7. However, Plaintiff entirely fails to present a cognizant basis as to why Chase should be responsible for these fees. 

In no event shall JPMC or XXXX request or require any borrower to execute a waiver of any claims against JPMC or XXXX ( including any agent of JPMC or XXXX ) in connection with any payment or Foreclosure Prevention assistance provided pursuant to paragraphs 3 or 4 of this Order. However, nothing herein shall operate to bar JPMC or XXXX from asserting in the future in any separate litigation, or as part of a settlement related to JPMCs or XXXX XXXX foreclosure and servicing practices, any right that may exist under applicable law to offset the amounts received by a borrower through the distribution process set forth above. Nothing herein shall operate to amend or modify in any respect any preexisting settlement between JPMC, XXXX, or an affiliate of either and a borrower in the In-Scope Borrower Population. By Order of the Board of Governors. 

Loss Mitigation Requirements. 

SERVICER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO NOTIFY POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE BORROWERS OF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE LOSS MITIGATION OPTIONS PRIOR TO FORECLOSURE REFERRAL. Upon the timely receipt of a complete loan modification application, Servicer shall evaluate borrowers for all available loan modification options for which they are eligible prior to referring a borrower to foreclosure and shall facilitate the submission and review of loss mitigation applications. The foregoing notwithstanding, Servicer shall have no obligation to solicit borrowers who are in bankruptcy. 

Servicer shall offer and facilitate loan modifications for borrowers rather than initiate foreclosure when such loan modifications for which they are eligible are net present value ( NPV ) positive and meet other investor, guarantor, insurer and program requirements. 

As indicated in paragraph I.A.18, Servicer shall send a statement to the borrower outlining loss mitigation efforts undertaken with respect to the borrower prior to foreclosure referral. If no loss mitigation efforts were offered or undertaken, Servicer shall state whether it contacted or attempted to contact the borrower and, if applicable, why the borrower was ineligible for a loan modification or other loss mitigation options. 

Servicer shall ensure timely and accurate communication of or access to relevant loss mitigation status and changes in status to its foreclosure attorneys, bankruptcy attorneys and foreclosure trustees and, where applicable, to court-mandated mediators. 

Single Point of Contact 4. The SPOC SHALL, at a minimum, provide the following services to borrowers : a. Contact borrower and introduce himself/herself as the borrowers SPOC ; b. Explain programs for which the borrower is eligible ; c. Explain the requirements of the programs for which the borrower is eligible ; d. Explain program documentation requirements ; e. Provide basic information about the status of borrowers account, including pending loan modification applications, other loss mitigation alternatives, and foreclosure activity ; f. Notify borrower of missing documents and provide an address or electronic means for submission of documents by borrower in order to complete the loan modification application ; g. Communicate Servicers decision regarding loan modification applications and other loss mitigation alternatives to borrower in writing ; h. Assist the borrower in pursuing alternative non-foreclosure options upon denial of a loan modification ; i. If a loan modification is approved, call borrower to explain the program ; j. Provide information regarding credit counseling where necessary ; k. Help to clear for borrower any internal processing requirements ; and l. Have access to individuals with the ability to stop foreclosure proceedings when necessary to comply with the MHA Program or this Agreement. 
The SPOC shall remain assigned to borrowers account and available to borrower until such time as Servicer determines in good faith that all loss mitigation options have been exhausted, borrowers account becomes current or, in the case of a borrower in bankruptcy, the borrower has exhausted all loss mitigation options for which the borrower is potentially eligible and has applied. 

Servicer shall ensure that a SPOC can refer and transfer a borrower to an appropriate supervisor upon request of the borrower. 
Servicer shall ensure that relevant records relating to borrowers account are promptly available to the borrowers SPOC, so that the SPOC can timely, adequately and accurately inform the borrower of the current status of loss mitigation, loan modification, and foreclosure activities. 
Servicer shall designate one or more management level employees to be the primary contact for the Attorneys General, state financial regulators, the Executive Office of U.S. Trustee, each regional office of the U.S. Trustee, and federal regulators for communication regarding complaints and inquiries from individual borrowers who are in default and/or have applied for loan modifications. Servicer shall provide a written acknowledgment to all such inquiries within 10 business days. Servicer shall provide a substantive written response to all such inquiries within 30 days. Servicer shall provide relevant loan information to borrower and to Attorneys General, state financial regulators, federal regulators, the Executive Office of the U.S. Trustee, and each U.S. Trustee upon written request and if properly authorized. A written complaint filed by a borrower and forwarded by a state attorney general or financial regulatory agency to Servicer shall be deemed to have proper authorization. 
Servicer shall establish and make available to Chapter XXXX trustees a toll-free number staffed by persons trained in bankruptcy to respond to inquiries from Chapter XXXX trustees. 
Servicer shall consider partnering with third parties, including national chain retailers, and shall consider the use of select bank branches affiliated with Servicer, to set up programs to allow borrowers to copy, fax, scan, transmit by overnight delivery, or mail or email documents to Servicer free of charge. 

Development of Loan Portals. 

1. Servicer shall develop or contract with a third-party vendor to develop an online portal linked to Servicers primary servicing system where borrowers can check, at no cost, the status of their first lien loan modifications. 
2. Servicer shall design portals that may, among other things : a. Enable borrowers to submit documents electronically ; b. Provide an electronic receipt for any documents submitted ; Provide information and eligibility factors for proprietary loan modification and other loss mitigation programs ; and c. Permit Servicer to communicate with borrowers to satisfy any written communications required to be provided by Servicer, if borrowers submit documents electronically. 
3. Servicer shall participate in the development and implementation of a neutral, nationwide loan portal system linked to Servicers primary servicing system, such as Hope LoanPort to enhance communications with housing counselors, including using the technology used for the Borrower Portal, and containing similar features to the Borrower Portal. 
4. Servicer shall update the status of each pending loan modification on these portals at least every 10 business days and ensure that each portal is updated on such a schedule as to maintain consistency. 

Loan Modification Timelines. 

1. Servicer shall provide written acknowledgement of the receipt of documentation submitted by the borrower in connection with a first lien loan modification application within 3 business days. In its initial acknowledgment, Servicer shall briefly describe the loan modification process and identify deadlines and expiration dates for submitted documents. 
2. Servicer shall notify borrower of any known deficiency in borrowers initial submission of information, no later than 5 business days after receipt, including any missing information or documentation required for the loan modification to be considered complete. 
3. Subject to section IV.B, Servicer shall afford borrower 30 days from the date of Servicers notification of any missing information or documentation to supplement borrowers submission of information prior to making a determination on whether or not to grant an initial loan modification. 
4. Servicer shall review the complete first lien loan modification application submitted by borrower and shall determine the disposition of borrowers trial or preliminary loan modification request no later than 30 days after receipt of the complete loan modification application, absent compelling circumstances beyond Servicers control. 
5. Servicer shall implement processes to ensure that second lien loan modification requests are evaluated on a timely basis. When a borrower qualifies for a second lien loan modification after a first lien loan modification in accordance with Section 2.c.i of the General Framework for Consumer Relief Provisions, the Servicer of the second lien loan shall ( absent compelling circumstances beyond Servicers control ) send loan modification documents to borrower no later than 45 days after the Servicer receives official notification of the successful completion of the related first lien loan modification and the essential terms. 
6. For all proprietary first lien loan modification programs, Servicer shall allow properly borrower financials to be used for 90 days from the date the documents are received, unless Servicer learns that there has been a material change in circumstances or unless investor requirements mandate a shorter time frame. 

Independent Evaluation of First Lien Loan Modification Denials. 

Except when evaluated as provided in paragraphs IV.B.8 or IV.B.9, Servicers initial denial of an eligible borrowers request for first lien loan modification following the submission of a complete loan modification application shall be subject to an independent evaluation. Such evaluation shall be performed by an independent entity or a different employee who has not been involved with the particular loan modification. 

Servicer shall not, in the ordinary course, require a borrower to waive or release claims and defenses as a condition of approval for a loan modification program or other loss mitigation relief. However, nothing herein shall preclude Servicer from requiring a waiver or release of claims and defenses with respect to a loan modification offered in connection with the resolution of a contested claim, when the borrower would not otherwise be qualified for the loan modification under existing Servicer programs. 

Short Sales 1. Servicer shall make publicly available information on general requirements for the short sale process. 
2. Servicer shall consider appropriate monetary incentives to underwater borrowers to facilitate short sale options. 
3. Servicer shall develop a cooperative short sale process, which allows the borrower the opportunity to engage with Servicer to pursue a short sale evaluation prior to putting home on the market. 
4. Servicer shall send written confirmation of the borrowers first request for a short sale to the borrower or his or her agent within 10 business days of receipt of the request and proper written authorization from the borrower allowing Servicer to communicate with the borrowers agent. The confirmation shall include basic information about the short sale process and Servicers requirements, and will state clearly and conspicuously that the Servicer may demand a deficiency payment if such deficiency claim is permitted by applicable law. 

5. Servicer shall send borrower at borrowers address of record or to borrowers agent timely written notice of any missing required documents for consideration of short sale within 30 days of receiving borrowers request for a short sale. 
6. Servicer shall review the short sale request submitted by borrower and communicate the disposition of borrowers request no later than 30 days after receipt of all required information and third-party consents. 
7. If the short sale request is accepted, Servicer shall contemporaneously notify the borrower whether Servicer or investor will demand a deficiency payment or related cash contribution and the approximate amount of that deficiency, if such deficiency obligation is permitted by applicable law. If the short sale request is denied, Servicer shall provide reasons for the denial in the written notice. If Servicer waives a deficiency claim, it shall not sell or transfer such claim to a third-party debt collector or debt buyer for collection. 

Servicer shall develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that REO properties do not become blighted. 

E. Potential Violations and Right to Cure 1. A Potential Violation of this Consent Judgment occurs if the Servicer has exceeded the Threshold Error Rate set for a Metric in a given Quarter. In the event of a Potential Violation, Servicer shall meet and confer with the Monitoring Committee within 15 days of the Quarterly Report or Monitor Report indicating such Potential Violation. 
2. Servicer shall have a right to cure any Potential Violation. 
3. Subject to Section E.4, a Potential Violation is cured if ( a ) a corrective action plan approved by the Monitor ( the Corrective Action Plan ) is determined by the Monitor to have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the terms thereof ; and ( b ) a Quarterly Report covering the Cure Period reflects that the Threshold Error Rate has not been exceeded with respect to the same Metric and the Monitor confirms the accuracy of said report using his or her ordinary testing procedures. The Cure Period shall be the first full quarter after completion of the Corrective Action Plan or, if the completion of the Corrective Action Plan occurs within the first month of a Quarter and if the Monitor determines that there is sufficient time remaining, the period between completion of the Corrective Action Plan and the end of that Quarter. 
4. If after Servicer cures a Potential Violation pursuant to the previous section, another violation occurs with respect to the same Metric, then the second Potential Violation shall immediately constitute an uncured violation for purposes of Section J.3, provided, however, that such second Potential Violation occurs in either the Cure Period or the quarter immediately following the Cure Period. 

5. In addition to the Servicers obligation to cure a Potential Violation through the Corrective Action Plan, Servicer must remediate any material harm to particular borrowers identified through work conducted under the Work Plan. In the event that a Servicer has a Potential Violation that so far exceeds the Threshold Error Rate for a metric that the Monitor concludes that the error is widespread, Servicer shall, under the supervision of the Monitor, identify other borrowers who may have been harmed by such noncompliance and remediate all such harms to the extent that the harm has not been otherwise remediated. 

In conclusion, Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance has breached their contract with me, violated the terms of their various signed consent decrees with the United States and state governments and intentionally drove me into foreclosure and bankruptcy because it was more lucrative for me to fail than to provide me with any relief. 

JP Morgan Chase Bank sent me THREE SEPARATE letters admitting that they owe me the money for the vacant property registration and refuse to reimburse me for the back taxes, clean up & multiple court appearances. Thereafter, they hired outside attorneys to lie for them in the Superior Court of New Jersey and state that they do not owe me any money for vacant property fees and they do not have to reimburse me for any of my cost and expense. JP Morgan Chase Bank auctions are criminal! 

I believe I have provided overwhelming documents that proves ; Chase Bank received ALL of my requested documents and they intentionally lied and ignored my repeated request for assistance because they knew they were going to be compensated by servicing the loan AND receiving credits from the federal government. 

I am requesting full reimbursement and to be made whole for the following reason : 1. Full reimbursement for vacant property fees 2. Full reimbursement for paid taxes/back taxes 3. Full reimbursement for court appearances and parking 4. Pain & Suffering 5 Intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. Negligent infliction of emotional distress 7. Committing malice in their wrongful conduct 8. Breach of Contract 9. Lost of Property