Consumer complaint received 2016-01-29
Product: Mortgage — Other mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: Onity Group Inc. (TX)

In XXXX, I requested American Home Mortgage Servicing , Inc. to provide evidence that they had the right to foreclose on our primary residence. I received a letter from XXXX XXXX, Loan Administration Research Specialist, on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Per my request, she included a copy of the executed Note and Deed of Trust from the closing of our loan. She also stated the owner and Note holder for the loan is Option One Mortgage Loan Trust. The documents provided by XXXX XXXX did not include an allonge or any assignments or transfers of our Note or Deed of Trust to a securitized trust. We did a title search in XXXX XXXX. The title search revealed that our original lender, Option One Mortgage Corporation, was in XXXX lien position. 
In XXXX XXXX, XXXX f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation filed a fraudulent assignment of Deed of Trust in XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX retroactively attached our mortgage to a securitized trust that was closed and sold to investors 5 years earlier, the bank violated a Texas law that prohibits fraudulent real estate filings. 
Declaration from President of XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX states that XXXX XXXX XXXX is no longer engaged in the servicing of residential mortgage loans. XXXX XXXX has no servicing rights and does not own any residential real estate mortgages. 
Affidavit from XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, states that XXXX XXXX, person who signed the Assignment of Deed of Trust, is a listed on XXXX Property Analytics Approved Robo-signers list. 
OOMLT XXXX was contractually closed from conducting business after the closing date of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Any attempt to assign the subject loan to the trust after the cut-off date would be in direct contravention of the laws governing the Trust ( PSA ) and thus rendering the fraudulent assignment of deed of trust filed in XXXX XXXX in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX office void. 
We filed a lawsuit against AHMSI in XXXX XXXX. Discovery with AHMSI revealed troubling discrepancies including but not limited to the authenticity of the loan documents, the transfer of ownership of the loan, the alleged inclusion of the loan into the securitized trust, the limitations imposed by the securitized trust, and payments made on the loan. During discovery, AHMSI 's attorney produced an exhibit on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX that was to be a true and correct copy of the Note and Deed of Trust that was executed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX that relates to our Loan and Property. We could not admit that this exhibit was a true and exact copy of the Note and Deed of Trust that was executed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX because the exhibit included a blank allonge that was not present during our closing. 
Then on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, their attorney claims to have the original wet ink promissory note. At this time, they have produced an allonge that is now stamped to provide a special endorsement in favor of " XXXX, as Trustee. '' The allonge is dated the same day as our loan closing. We were able to examine the loan file a short time after. The purported allonge was not affixed to the Promissory Note and was not notarized. The allonge did not mention the securitized trust. It is unclear when the alleged allonge was changed to specially endorse the note in question to the trustee, but it does raise questions as to the veracity of the alleged special endorsement via allonge. There were also copies of XXXX assignments of deeds of trust that were not assigned to the trust. 
We made a request to Ocwen in XXXX XXXX, to provide the collateral documents that give them the authority to foreclose on our home. Ocwen submitted the Note with the alleged stamped allonge and an assignment of lien that does not reference the Deed of Trust that was signed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, which is recorded in Doc # XXXX. Ocwen also claims they are unable to provide the original wet ink documents.