This is about a property foreclosure that was bought back by the mortgage bank at the foreclosure sale in XXXX, XXXX, and which bank turned and listed it for sale on the XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), not realizing the legal property description was flawed, so they were trying to sell property they did not legally, nor rightfully own. 

I bid on the property and my offer was accepted by the seller in XXXX, XXXX. From the beginning, I questioned the accurateness of the provided property description, and the bank ( seller ) only replied the description provided was " all they had '' in their file. I had to get a survey to find out the provided description was indeed flawed, did not represent the property the bank was trying to sell, therefore clouding the veracity of the title. 

When the bank was notified of this issue, they immediately cancelled the sale of the property. Their parting words were ( a ) demanding I release MY purchase agreement contract with them ; ( b ) their refusal to reimburse me for all the ( buyer ) expenses I had paid up to that point ( {$2800.00}, not counting my earnest money ) ; ( c ) refusing to give me " first right of refusal '' when they fixed their title issues and relisted the property for sale ; and generally, just disappeared ... meaning, NO ONE representing, acting as agent, representative or trustee for the bank would talk to me, my real estate agent or my attorney from that point on. They either were un-contactable or refused contact. 

I then set out to research the issue through court, property and tax records, internet searches, background searches and talking to neighbors to the property in question. What I found out is that : - Mr. XXXX XXXX purchased 3 lots, or 1.45 acres of property in XXXX. ( # 's 1, 2 & 4 on attached property map ) - In XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX sold to his son, Mr. XXXX XXXX approximately .61 acres of the 1.465 acres - according to the newly surveyed property description attached to the mortgage and warranty deed, which would represent 1 lot, ( # 4 ). 
- The new survey accomplished for the XXXX sale, was heavily flawed and barely depicts the description of Lot # 4, the .61 acre lot, and shows no resemblance to Lots # 1 & 2. 
- It seems the mortgage company was under the impression they were providing a mortgage loan that covered ALL 3 lots, the total 1.465 acres, but never verified the correctness of the provided survey. The flawed and uncorrected property description followed the property history through XX/XX/XXXX, when I discovered the inaccuracies. 
- When the bank foreclosed on Mr. XXXX XXXX 's mortgage in XXXX, they only legally foreclosed on the .61 lot ( # 4 ). In the tax rolls, it reflects that # 4 is owned by the bank and Lots # 1 & 2 are still in the name of the original owner, Mr. XXXX XXXX. 
- When the bank listed the property for sale, they listed .855 acres or Lots # 1 & 2, which they had no legal ownership over. 
- Therefore, for all intents and purposes, per the legal description on the seller 's Deed, they falsely listed property they do not own and tried to sell said property to me. 

I, my real estate agent and my attorney have tried repeatedly to contact the bank ( seller ) or any of its representatives, and no one will speak to us. My attorney offered an informal arbitration opportunity for everyone to get together and work things out so that I could purchase the property legally, but no reply from the seller. 

The purchase contract the seller provided that I had to sign is totally biased, protecting only the bank and excludes me the ability to go after them legally for any reason. Even though the contract requires I pay most of the purchase expenses, it protects the seller from having to reimburse those expenditures even at the fault of the bank being unable to close on the sale. 

Their ineptness and incompetence has cost me over {$5000.00} in purchase expenses and legal fees, 9 months of wasted time and energy accomplishing nothing, and the loss of my future home ( which was going to be a XXXX rehab project ). When I thought I was moving and notified my landlord, they allowed me to break my rent-controlled protected lease. But when I was forced to back-peddle and remain in my lease home, the landlord refused to allow me to sign another lease and raised my rent {$350.00} a month! So I have that additional monetary burden to shoulder since XX/XX/XXXX because of this sham real estate deal.