Consumer complaint received 2016-07-18
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY (CA)

We took out a Note and mortgage XX/XX/2009 with XXXX XXXX XXXX. Since that time, there have been multiple transfers of only the mortgage and have been the subject of a contested foreclosure since 2009 involving Wells Fargo Home Mortgage ( Wells Fargo Bank , N.A . ). We became suspicious when a complete stranger ( Wells Fargo ) appeared out of nowhere, claiming ownership our Note and mortgage without any providing substantiating documentation. After attempting to resume payments, we realized that Wells was not interested in helping us and for reasons that are now clear. Due to the well publicized mortgage crisis, we felt it was in our best interest to challenge the validity of Wells ' claim ( see attached ). Recently, we submitted a request for validation of debt, error resolution and information request & proof of claim pursuant to RESPA, FDCPA, & the Uniform Commercial Code ( see attached ). Unfortunately, Wells has refused to furnish any information whatsoever and instead has thumbed their nose in the face of our legitimate disputes amidst continued foreclosure activity. Wells operates as if it is above the law in what appears to be a continued effort to take our home without fulfilling its lawful duties and obligations. In our research, we believe that there is a significant amount of Civil Code Violations, violations of Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, violations of RESPA, FDCPA, TILA, FCRA, falsified disclosures prior to commitment and ROBO signed instruments. 
- I believe that they violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act - There is reason to believe that WELLS does not legally own the Note and mortgage ( not endorsed to WELLS ), - The Note and mortgage were both Rescinded and do not exist ( see attached ). 
- WELLS has refused to provide ANY accounting of the alleged debt and that it does not exists. 
- We also believe that the debt was satisfied by either tax deduction, insurance claim or by bailout which would require them to work with us to resolve this matter. 
- I could be irreparably damaged by their lack of adherence to consumer protection laws. 
As stated, it has became obvious that Wells had no intention of providing the requested information and has brushed off our requests. We did not feel that this represents the behavior of a bank that claims a valid interest in our Note and mortgage. After performing further due diligence, information became available through a database search performed by a professional auditor, that our loan # and physical address were part of a securitization involving XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and a REMIC trust. This newly discovered information ( attached report for information purposes only ) pertaining to the potential ownership of our Note and mortgage was never divulged as Wells arrogantly moved forward while pushing the narrative that it was the owner of the Note and mortgage. The likely involvement of other parties, and potentially a REMIC trust, changes the dynamics of this dispute and foreclosure. It is a distinct possibility that the instruments utilized in this foreclosure could be rendered unenforceable in the state of California. 
We feel that there is sufficient evidence that Wells is in violation of the law and is pursuing an unsubstantiated claim and is engaged in illegal collection activity. Furthermore, there is evidence of shady transaction ( s ) that have been concealed to enhance the Wells foreclosure. 
Wells should be scrutinized in all foreclosures due to it 's involvement and implementation of it 's " fraud manual '' in which directions were given to it 's agents for the production of bogus documents for the purpose of foreclosure.