Consumer complaint received 2020-05-28
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Closing on a mortgage — 
Company: Onity Group Inc. (FL)

1. - My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX. I own the property subject of the complaint, and I am one of the defendants in the above-styled case. I make this affidavit of my free will and based on my personal knowledge of the facts herein stated. 

2. The plaintiff can not prevail because can not show that as the date of filing of the complaint XX/XX/XXXX, it had the necessary standing to sue. Plaintiff Ocwen claims to act as a servicer for the owner of the instruments XXXXXXXX XXXX. However, records show that XXXX XXXX is the owner and XXXX  XXXX XXXX services mortgage, letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, And Ocwen acting as a collector agency. Attached as exhibits A and A1, respectively 3. Plaintiff is relying on an assignment # 1 of mortgage, MEARS designate a XXXX XXXX  to assign a XXXX XXXX assignment of mortgage, recorded on XX/XX/XXXX. Assignment manufactured at the office of XXXX XXXX and signed by XXXX XXXX. XXXX, at XXXX XXXX At XXXX. [ T ] he unexplained, undated endorsement to the Tirth party iscircumstantial evidence that Plaintiff may have not possessed the note at the time the suit was filed This assignment of mortgage is not accurate reflection of the transfer of note and mortgage to the plaintiff, especially when XXXX XXXX is stating in writing that XXXX XXXX XXXX is the servicer of the loan, see exhibit A. So, Plaintiff Ocwen who is relying on documents that may not be genuine and accurate. Please see letter from XXXX  XXXX XXXX, dated XX/XX/XXXX, showing again evidence that XXXX  XXXX XXXX is the provider of the loans documentation. Attached as exhibit B, dated XX/XX/XXXX, and assignment as exhibit C. 

4. As a fact XXXX  XXXX XXXX took over XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. How MEARS as nominee for XXXX XXXX assignment # 2 of mortgage to Ocwen Loan Services on XX/XX/XXXX, and assignment was not recorded until XX/XX/XXXX, almost a year after filing of the complaint. Again, this assignment is null and invalid because MERS had already divested itself of any interest nominal and or pecuniary. Attached assignment as exhibit D. 

5. Perhaps, a more coherent assignment, it should have been an assignment from XXXX to XXXX  XXXX XXXX, since XXXX was taking over in XXXX, by XXXX  XXXX XXXX. 

6. As stated before XXXX  XXXX XXXX took over XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. How can XXXX XXXX XXXX  continue signing assignments as the corrective assignment # 3 of mortgage to Ocwen Loan Homes and recorded on XX/XX/XXXX. Attached as exhibit E. 

7. On XX/XX/XXXX, Certificate of Title sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, for {$180000.00} and Certificate of sale vacated on XX/XX/XXXX and title and awarded to defendant XXXX XXXX XXXX. Perhaps, based on my personal understanding, this is an ethical issue ; since, XXXX XXXX already got paid zillions of dollars from XXXX  XXXX XXXX for all those fraudulent loans given from XXXX and assignments manufacture by XXXX XXXX law firm, why XXXX XXXX expose itself to buy it. Attached as exhibit F and G, respectively. 

8. Again another assignment # 4 Corporate Assignment, recorded on XX/XX/XXXX, where OCWEN assigns it to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. On my personal knowledge a Corporate Assignment perhaps is a maneuver by the plaintiff law firm to back out of an incorrect filing claim, where the wrong party in this case OCWEN who was named as the plaintiff as the outset of the action. Attached as exhibit H. 

9. Again a complementary Assignment # 5 recorded on XX/XX/XXXX, where XXXX XXXX assigns it to XXXX XXXX  XXXX as a trustee for RMAC, seeking foreclosure action and filed on XX/XX/XXXX. Now, XXXX XXXX XXXX substituted the wrong plaintiff OCWEN. Attached as exhibit I. 

10. Certainly, any plaintiff in this case can not rely on a canceled note and mortgage to seek foreclosure of the property because the documents have been canceled, dated XX/XX/XXXX and the note attached to the complaint was never transferred to XXXX  XXXX XXXX or MEERS. So, collateral rights over the property have terminated and the assignments void ad initio. See XXXX XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX, et al., XXXX, note is void ab initio, since the trust did not own the note Attached as exhibits J and K, respectively. 
Thanks, XXXX XXXX