Consumer complaint received 2019-12-13
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Onity Group Inc. (FL)

This complaint regards Breach of Mortgage Contract by Ocwen ; XXXX XXXX ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ; XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX ; XXXX XXXX  XXXX. ; and PHH Mortgage ( hereinafter collectively referred to as 'PHH ' ). 

Under a cloud of non-disclosure, with concealment of material facts, without the borrower 's knowledge and consent, and without additional consideration to or for the borrower, PHH unilaterally modified the borrower 's mortgage Contract ( inclusive of both the Note and Mortgage ) by converting it from a regulated residential mortgage contract into an unregulated commercial investment contract, which may be referred to as securitization. The title company may also be a co-conspirator in the non-consensual conversion and, thus, breach of the borrower 's contract. By breaching the borrower 's mortgage contract, the contract is legally void or voidable from the beginning. 

During the securitization transaction, the original Note and Mortgage were destroyed, also without the borrower 's knowledge and consent. There were absolutely NO Terms or Conditions in the mortgage contract that legally permitted PHH to convert and, thus, breach the mortgage contract including, but not limited to, without compensating the borrower with additional consideration. By illegally converting the mortgage contract absent the borrower 's knowledge and consent, PHH committed fraud including by subsequently filing a libelous foreclosure complaint against the borrower into the public record on or around XX/XX/2017. As a result of the non-authorized unilateral modification of the borrower 's mortgage contract by PHH, the Note has already been paid in full one or more times by third-party payers, to wit, credit default swap side bets and/or default insurance payments and/or title insurance payouts and, as a result, the borrower is not now and never has been in default, and PHH and its representatives and affiliates knew or should have known this. PHH is refusing to disclose the name ( s ) of the investor ( s ) /lender ( s ) claiming an alleged right to payment or profit from mortgage payments so that the borrower may serve the investor ( s ) /lender ( s ) with legal process to ascertain if the investor ( s ) /lender ( s ) has already been paid in full. Because it has recently been discovered by the borrower per a public document that the borrower is, in fact, a Party to the securitization transaction ( which was also concealed from the borrower ), PHH and the investor ( s )  /lender ( s ) has also failed to compensate the borrower from funds/profits received resulting from the transaction, amounting to a contractual lack of additional consideration to the borrower in exchange for converting the mortgage contract into an investment contract without the borrower 's written, signed authorization, knowledge and consent. Basically, the borrower was illegally and fraudulently cut out of the deal and has been defrauded of profits derived from the securitization transaction. On information and belief, PHH may be in violation of Federal RICO laws pursuant to a cursory review of the XXXX Clerk of Court 's Forensic Examination of the Real Records and the Circuit Court Records, XXXX County, Florida which may be viewed here : XXXX : XXXX PHH intentionally and knowingly BREACHED XXXX 's Mortgage Contract. In an act of non-disclosure and concealment of material facts, misrepresentation, without meeting of the minds, without acceptance by XXXX of any additional Terms or Conditions, and without any additional consideration in XXXX 's favor, PHH egregiously and illegally unilaterally modified XXXX 's mortgage contract by converting the so-called loan from a regulated, residential mortgage Contract into an unregulated, commercial investment Contract, and multiple material issues in connection with the non-consensual conversion were never disclosed to XXXX, neither did PHH obtain her signed authorization and consent for PHH to modify her mortgage contract, and neither did XXXX show any legal intent for her mortgage contract to be modified. Again, XXXX XXXX  has publicly stated in one of its official documents that the borrower is a Party to the MBS transaction unless, of course, XXXX XXXX is committing fraud by concealing if the true, legal definition of 'borrower '. XXXX was never presented with an addendum containing additional Terms or Conditions to the original mortgage contract for her review and negotiation and which contained the additional consideration she would receive and in what form she would receive the consideration should she have agreed to the modification of her mortgage contract. A mortgage contract that is unilaterally modified by one party without the knowledge and consent of the other party is void or voidable from the beginning and unenforceable.