As an additional matter, we have performed a review of the current loan activities with your company. Needless to say, we are alarmed with the manner in which we have been treated by your company 's representatives. Your representatives have made blatant misrepresentations causing us serious damages, including the potential foreclosure of our home. The above-mentioned violations subject you to sanctions and nullification of the loan and the substantial nature of this claim may exceed the policy limits on any and all insurance policies issued that cover these types of risks. Following is a summary of our Procedural findings : There are many legal issues here ; LACK OF CLARITY AS TO REAL PARTY IN INTEREST WITH STANDING TO FORECLOSE The Deed Must Follow the Note : Physical Separation of the Promissory Note From the Deed of Trust, Necessarily Results in the Permanent Severance of the Relationship between the XXXX Instruments, and Any Previous Ability of XXXX to Produce Any Causal Effect upon the Other is Extinguished We believe and allege in good faith the all foreclosure actions being presently carried out against us and our property is invalid. Assignment of Deed of Trust, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " G '' XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX Deed XXXX XXXX, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " H '' ), that purportedly assigned all beneficial interests under the original Deed of Trust ( Exhibit " A '' ) to the purported foreclosing beneficiary, the XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX, was invalid by the very contractual rules that govern deposits of XXXX XXXX XXXX and Notes into this Securitization Trust. Also, this assignment would have resulted in the permanent separation of the Promissory Note from the Deed of Trust, and thereby converted the debt on the XXXX into unsecured debt. Chain of title in this case is unclear to say the least. The right to foreclose appears to sit with more than XXXX party but in actuality belongs to no part involved with this case. ( XXXX ) The first possibility is that only the Deed of Trust was assigned via either the Assignment of Deed of Trust, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " G '' ) or the XXXX XXXX XXXX Deed XXXX XXXX, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " H '' ), and not the note. The pooling and servicing agreement ( Exhibit " P '' ), which created the trust, does not allow ANY individual transfers into the trust after 720 days after the closing date ( Exhibit " P '', pp. XXXX ). The closing date on this XXXX XXXX was XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibit " G '', pp. XXXX ). This would extend the maximum allowable time for the deposit of both the Deed of Trust and the Note, together, into this trust to about XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. This Assignment of Deed of Trust, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " G '' XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX Deed XXXX XXXX, dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and recorded XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( Exhibits " H '' ) were not executed until XXXX and XXXX respectively. These dates are XXXX and XXXX years after the outermost deadline allowed under the contractual terms of the pooling and servicing agreement. A proper, timely, and lawful transfer of this property into this securitization trust is a contractual and factual impossibility. Therefore, only the Deed of Trust was transferred and thus the XXXX only has possession and ownership of the Deed of Trust, not the note. The Deed of Trust alone is a nullity and has no authority to foreclose. In this case XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX did not possess the Deed of Trust in a timely manner it has no claim against this property.