Consumer complaint received 2016-05-01
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY (MD)

Please associate this complaint with a prior complaint, No. XXXX. In that prior complaint, I accused Wells Fargo mortgage of circumventing the Maryland-mandated foreclosure mediation by pretending that a modification offer was forthcoming so that at mediation, there would be no discussion or negotiation, the administrative judge would report that the parties had n't reached agreement. That mediation occurred on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, Wells Fargo denied my modificiation, clearing the way for the court to allow a sale date to be set without meaningful mediation. Very clever and effective bait and switch. You 're currently investigating and Wells Fargo, who I imagine is having a hard time explaining themselves, has apparently requested an extension of time for their response. Meanwhile, I began putting together my appeal of Wells Fargo 's XXXX/XXXX/XXXX denials of my request under HAMP 1, HAMP 2, and as a simple internal modification. With regard to the internal modification, Wells Fargo wrote on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX that " We do not have the contractual authority to modify your loan because of limitations in our servicing agreement. '' After a few weeks of research, I learned that ( like the mediation bait and switch ) this is another maneuver Wells Fargo uses to deny modifications and streamline the taking of peoples ' homes. It 's also a flat-out lie. My research led first to a XXXX article that describes how Wells Fargo uses this excuse to steamroll borrowers to the foreclosure sale. The " investors '' that Wells Fargo is talking about are the hundreds of mortgage-backed security funds that they created in the XXXX ; the ones that crashed the national economy and were featured in " The XXXX XXXX. '' The XXXX article pointed out that most of the time, when Wells Fargo says their agreement with the " investor '' prohibits modification, it 's a lie. The article ( When Denying Loan Mods, Loan Servicers Often Wrongly Blame Investors ) can be read at XXXX. This led me to an article out of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that found that only 8 % of such agreements actually prohibited disclosure, while 60 % expressly permitted modification and 32 % were silent. So on Friday XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I asked Wells Fargo for a copy of my investor agreement, a copy of the notice they sent when the sold my loan to the investor, and the investor 's contact information. They said I 'd hear back in 24-48 hours. I never did. The Truth in Lending Act requires that they make this information available. Wells Fargo does n't care about that, or any other, Act of Congress. So I set out alone to find the investor agreement for my " investor, '' XXXX XXXX. Took some doing, but I found it deep in the bowels of the SEC 's online database. Surprise, surprise, it expressly ALLOWS modification. In fact, it REQUIRES Wells Fargo to modify if it 's in the best interests of the investor. So after Wells Fargo made a farce of the mediation Maryland law requires, ignored my request for investor documents as the Truth in Lending Act requires, it simply found it easier to lie about the investor agreement with the mortgage-backed security fund THEY created while they were busily destroying the economy in XXXX. The investor document, by the way, is at XXXX with the operative language starting at the bottom of page XXXX. If you could see my written appeal to Wells Fargo, you 'd see still more information. The gist of this supplemental complaint, however, is that Wells Fargo is continuing to perpetrate outright fraud, even in the foreclosure process. ( Did I mention their lawyer in my case was suspended from the practice of law for forging foreclosure documents? Imagine he got a healthy bonus that year ). Anyway. Thanks