Product: Debt or credit management

I am reaching out to you regarding an urgent matter concerning a loan validation issue with DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC., Servicer for XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

Through thorough research and examination of pertinent documents, I have come to understand that the terms of the purported loan provided by DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC., Servicer for XXXX XXXX XXXX  may not be as straightforward as initially presented. It has become apparent to me that, rather than extending funds as a traditional loan, the bank may have utilized my promissory note as a form of deposit to facilitate transactions with third parties, such as my seller. 

Upon discovering this discrepancy, I diligently sought validation from DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC., Servicer for XXXX XXXX XXXX to substantiate their claims and provide clarity on the nature of the transaction. However, despite my repeated requests and demands, the bank has failed to comply with legal obligations to produce relevant documentation for verification. 

Now, regarding the contract in question, I've learned that for a contract to be enforced, it needs five key ingredients. These include : 1. **Offer and Acceptance : ** Clearly defined terms and an agreement between parties. 

2. **Legal Purpose : ** The contract must have a lawful purpose and can not involve any illegal activities. 

3. **Competent Parties : ** Both parties must be of legal age and mentally capable of understanding the contract. 

4. **Mutual Assent : ** Both parties must fully understand and agree to the terms of the contract. 

5. **Consideration : ** There must be an exchange of something valuable between the parties. 

I have three important questions that require clarification : 1. Where is the 1099A that was filed on my behalf that claims that I am the borrower of this transaction? 

2. Wheres the XXXX Report? 

3. Wheres the proof of funds receipt to show that Ive received funds for this particular loan? 

If you give a bank a promissory note, they are required to give you a cash receipt. They owe you that money under a RE-COUPMENT or asset. If you take the receipt back, they should give you some money. They call it an offset in accounting, but in the UCC it is called a RE-COUPMENT. Under Title 12 USC 1813 ( L ) ( 1 ) when you deposit a promissory note, it becomes a cash item. They have come out with an affidavit of a lost note or destroyed instrument. Under UCC 3-309 you have to show four elements to claim a lost instrument : 1 ) you were in possession at the that the obligor on the note is indemnified by you against and future claims ; 4 ) the loss was not due to a transfer.

The mortgage company is not applying the correct accounting entries under GAAP. They're treating the account as a trade receivable through securitization as an off balance sheet financing technique. Since they accepted the instrument that I have tendered, I have a claim or possessionary right in the instrument and its proceeds under 3-306 of the UCC. Any defense and any claim in RE-COUPMENT under section 3-305 of the UCC, which I shall exercise at my option, if they do not credit my account. The 1099-OID will identify who the principal is from, which capital and interest were taken, and who the recipient or who the payer of the funds are, and who is holding the account in escrow and unadjusted. 

By depositing the Note ( an asset of the originators/ makers of the note ) by the XXXX. XXXX, the loan, which had not yet been advanced to mortgagors by the mortgage company, was paid therefore there can not be a " holder-in-due- course '' of the Note if it has already been paid. To be a " holder-in-due- course '' of the note, the note must be held by the lender until the note is paid off by the borrower and returned to the borrower. Depositing the note, in effect, cancels the note because the lender has just been paid ( cash receipts for the deposit ) and no " receipt '' for the deposit was ever given to the borrower. The XXXX. XXXX must follow GAAP, as do all banks, and show a corresponding " liability '' for the " asset '' ( note ) they deposited. That liability is money the bank OWES to borrowers for their asset that was deposited. 

As soon as the Note was deposited, the balance due on the Note was XXXX. However, the XXXX XXXXXXXX sold the note and the transferee/assignee of the note carries the note on their books as an " account receivable '' to be collected from mortgagor and thinking they are the " holder-in-due- course '' of the Note, which is impossible. However, the assignee, thinking that they are the " holder-in-due- course '' of the note, file a foreclosure on the mortgagors when the mortgagors fail to make the payments. The transferee/assignee is not aware and does not see the " liability '' owed by the original " lender '' who deposited the note because it was entered onto another entities balance sheet. This " off-balance- sheet '' financing is illegal and a fraud but common with banks who sell mortgages and notes to investors as securities. 

The Assignee, or new possessor of the Note, has no security interest in the note and can not claim foreclosure on the note because it is not the " holder-in-due- course ''. The note has already been paid. Mortgagors want their money back that was deposited by the original mortgage bank. A mortgage is NOT a contract. It is a deposit of money by customer ( me ) to the banker. 

Only party/parties that have signed the contract may enforce the contract and my signature is the only signature on the agreement, which was designed to look like a contract. I have the rights of sovereignty over myself and property, due to this right it also gives me unlimited rights to contract.