Product: Mortgage

Dear Consumer Finance Protection Bureau : This is my sixty day response to claim XXXX. 
First Id like to thank JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ( Chase ) for responding in part to its obligation as a financial institution and responding to my complaint which I was granted permission to file with the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) under their jurisdiction in regards to its financial banking institution lease agreement and its acquisition of the prior mortgager as a financial banking institution for the property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. in  XXXX, Illinois ( the premises ). 

The loan that Chase acquired from XXXX is only one part of the subject of the complaint filed with the CFPB, and Chase is attempting to dismiss the complaint by deconstructing my complaint and only providing responses for what they feel is necessary for them to rebuke. They failed to address in full the details of my complaint, which are as follow : Chases lease as a banking institution at the property, and through its acquisition of the mortgage loan from XXXX, created for Chase a dual role as both lender and mortgagee, thereby creating a conflict of interest and a monopoly which favors Chase financially. 

Chase had no contractual right to terminate the lease. Chase was in its first five-year option in its banking financial institution lease which was prepared and signed by XXXX XXXX, Chases assignor, and submitted a wrongful notice of termination in XX/XX/XXXX on the grounds that the lease was not binding through the term on the five-year option. If this lease were ambiguous, as Chase claims, then Chase bears the responsibility for any ambiguity with respect to this termination right, being that XXXX XXXX, Chases predecessor, wrote the lease. However, I am taking the position that the lease was not and is not ambiguous. 

Chase states in its response letter that I am requesting an exorbitant amount for my damages where Chase failed to restore the property in accordance with the lease, and admits this breach of contract to the CFPB in its letter. Please see the attached photos that depict the condition of the property when I was given possession. 

Chases response letter also states that I am not being represented by counsel where I, XXXX XXXX, have been continuously represented by counsel in both the mediation and foreclosure proceedings, as well as the preparation for arbitration proceedings now that the term of the lease have expired as of XX/XX/XXXX. 

Chases breach of its lease directly impacted my ability to service my mortgage loan with Chase. As a result I was forced into foreclosure with accelerated principal and default interest, along with substantial fees incurred for receivership and legal counsels. Chase surrendered the keys to the property and notified my council that they wanted to go back into the premises to continue restoration of the property for which they exhibited a non-workmanship manner, and not agreeing to pay any additional rent for the premises. My council and I refused. Chases failure to restore the property as provided for as in the lease left the property with the absence of an occupancy certificate in accordance with the XXXX Building Department. I was forced to sell under duress at a price well below market value whereas I had never before intended to sell the property. Despite Chases attempt to separate these two issues, the contract breach and foreclosure are integral to my complaint against this banking financial institution. 

Presently, the foreclosure mortgage lien has been satisfied to the plaintiffs benefit, whereas the defendant still has ongoing litigation in regards to the receiver and is anticipating additional counterclaims in court.