Consumer complaint received 2020-10-13
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Public record information inaccurate
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc. (NY)

Re : Filing forged documents in courts and public records & Falsifying records documents, committing fraud upon the courts by stating they are the Holder and Owner of the Note when in fact they do not own or hold the original Note, creating fictitious documents ( Lost Note Affidavits, Power of Attorney, etc. ) ; Committing perjury through misrepresentations, Wire Fraud / Mail Fraud, Conspiracy ; Fraud in the inducement ; Unjust Enrichment ; Embezzlement ; These copies are, in fact, counterfeit securities as described under 18 U.S.C. 474 and in the documentation accompanying this letter, and multiple persons have been, or are currently, in possession of multiple copies of said counterfeit securities.

I believe the original wet ink signature documents ( securities ) have been bundled and sold for profit and are not able to be produced as required by law and this is fraud being committed to steal my property through the counterfeiting of securities.

Attached to this letter is a certified ( or whatever kind you are able to acquire ) copy of the document that has been provided as proof in this matter. It is obvious it does not meet the requirements under 18 U.S.C. 474 as a copy of a security and is therefore a counterfeit security presented as evidence to attempt to defraud me.

18 U.S. Code 472 - Uttering counterfeit obligations or securities Whoever, with intent to defraud, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or with like intent brings into the United States or keeps in possession or conceals any falsely made, forged, counterfeited, or altered obligation or other security of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

I also believe that this activity has occurred through communications across state lines and I believe it falls under RICO statute violations as a result.

Accompanying this letter and attachment is much more comprehensive information with substantial legal citations of what appears to be happening in this case. It appears that this is not, by any means, an isolated situation. I believe it is your responsibility and duty to investigate this matter, immediately and completely, to identify those involved, gather evidence, and pursue whatever criminal charges may be appropriate against the individuals and entities named herein.

18 USC 241 - Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same ; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both ; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include XXXX  or an attempt to XXXX, aggravated XXXX XXXX  or an attempt to commit aggravated XXXX XXXX, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. 
18 USC 656 - Theft, embezzlement, or misapplication by bank officer or employee Whoever, being an officer, director, agent or employee of, or connected in any capacity with any Federal Reserve bank, member bank, depository institution holding company, national bank, insured bank, branch or agency of a foreign bank, or organization operating under section 25 or section 25 ( a ) [ 1 ] of the Federal Reserve Act, or a receiver of a national bank, insured bank, branch, agency, or organization or any agent or employee of the receiver, or a Federal Reserve Agent, or an agent or employee of a Federal Reserve Agent or of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, embezzles, abstracts, purloins or willfully misapplies any of the moneys, funds or credits of such bank, branch, agency, or organization or holding company or any moneys, funds, assets or securities in trusted to the custody or care of such bank, branch, agency, or organization, or holding company or to the custody or care of any such agent, officer, director, employee or receiver, shall be fined not more than {>= $1,000,000} or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both ; but if the amount embezzled, abstracted, purloined or misapplied does not exceed {$1000.00}, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

As used in this section, the term national bank is synonymous with national banking association ; member bank means and includes any national bank, state bank, or bank and trust company which has become a member of one of the Federal Reserve banks ; insured bank includes any bank, banking association, trust company, savings bank, or other banking institution, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ; and the term branch or agency of a foreign bank means a branch or agency described in section 20 ( 9 ) of this title. For purposes of this section, the term depository institution holding company has the meaning given such term in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.

18 USC 657 - Lending, credit and insurance institutions Whoever, being an officer, agent or employee of or connected in any capacity with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, any Federal home loan bank, the Federal Housing Finance Agency , Farm Credit Administration, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, the Secretary of Agriculture acting through the Farmers Home Administration or successor agency, the Rural Development Administration or successor agency, or the Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation, a Farm Credit Bank, a bank for cooperatives or any lending, mortgage, insurance, credit or savings and loan corporation or association authorized or acting under the laws of the United States or any institution, other than an insured bank ( as defined in section 656 ), the accounts of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or by the National Credit Union Administration Board or any small business investment company, or any community development financial institution receiving financial assistance under the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, and whoever, being a receiver of any such institution, or agent or employee of the receiver, embezzles, abstracts, purloins or willfully misapplies any moneys, funds, credits, securities or other things of value belonging to such institution, or pledged or otherwise in trusted to its care, shall be fined not more than {>= $1,000,000} or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both ; but if the amount or value embezzled, abstracted, purloined or misapplied does not exceed {$1000.00}, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Whoever, being an officer, director, agent or employee of any Federal Reserve bank, member bank, depository institution holding company, national bank, insured bank, branch or agency of a foreign bank, or organization operating under section 25 or section 25 ( a ) [ 1 ] of the Federal Reserve Act, without authority from the directors of such bank, branch, agency, or organization or company, issues or puts in circulation any notes of such bank, branch, agency, or organization or company ; or Whoever, without such authority, makes, draws, issues, puts forth, or assigns any certificate of deposit, draft, order, bill of exchange, acceptance, note, debenture, bond, or other obligation, or mortgage, judgment or decree ; or Whoever makes any false entry in any book, report, or statement of such bank, company, branch, agency, or organization with intent to injure or defraud such bank, company, branch, agency, or organization, or any other company, body politic or corporate, or any individual person, or to deceive any officer of such bank, company, branch, agency, or organization, or the Comptroller of the Currency, or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or any agent or examiner appointed to examine the affairs of such bank, company, branch, agency, or organization, or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ; or Whoever with intent to defraud the United States or any agency thereof, or any financial institution referred to in this section, participates or shares in or receives ( directly or indirectly ) any money, profit, property, or benefits through any transaction, loan, commission, contract, or any other act of any such financial institution. Shall be fined not more than {>= $1,000,000} or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. As used in this section, the term national bank is synonymous with national banking association ; member bank means and includes any national bank, state bank, or bank or trust company, which has become a member of one of the Federal Reserve banks ; insured bank includes any state bank , banking association , trust company, savings bank, or other banking institution, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ; and the term branch or agency of a foreign bank means a branch or agency described in section 20 ( 9 ) of this title. For purposes of this section, the term depository institution holding company has the meaning given such term in section 3 ( w ) ( 1 ) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.

1. Pursuant to the newly amended and revised NY RPA & P 1302 ( a ), the new law now provides that a defendant in a foreclosure action may challenge the standing of a Plaintiff up to the date of sale of the real property involved, and in some cases after. ( SEE : NY RPA & P 1302 ( a ) ).

2. This Motion to Dismiss is timely made under the requirements of NY RPA & P 1302 ( a ).

3. Plaintiff lacks standing to initiate or proceed in any way against the Defendant in this case for lack of standing under NY UCC 3-307, because the Plaintiff is not the holder in due course of an original, wet-inked signature Note or any other original wet-inked security instrument that is enforceable upon its face against the Defendant. ( SEE : NY UCC 3-307 ).

4. Specifically, the Defendant denies that the signatures upon the documents submitted by the Plaintiff, and which signatures are purported by the Plaintiff to be the original and genuine signatures of the Defendant, are her actual signatures. Said disingenuous documents were relied upon by the Plaintiff to initiate these foreclosure proceedings.

5. Plaintiff has failed to meet the burden of establishing the signatures are valid and that the security instruments Plaintiff relies upon are enforceable under the requirements of NY UCC 3-307.

6. Plaintiff has failed to meet the Notice requirements as set forth under NY RPA & P 1303 ( 1 ) ( a ), ( 3 ) ( a ), ( 4 ), ( 5 ), ( 6 ), & ( 7 ), failing and refusing to notify the Defendant of the sale of her property. See Attachment ( 1 ) 7. Defendant avers that the record confirms that Plaintiff has forged, replicated and presented to this court multiple and varying misrepresentative, incomplete unenforceable facsimiles of altered and disingenuous unenforceable alleged security instruments which DO NOT bear the original signatures of the Defendant as required under NY UCC 3-307, and without such authentication of the Defendant as to the veracity of her signatures, Plaintiff lacks standing to enforce the security instruments or to proceed legally in any foreclosure action against the Defendant.

8. Plaintiff has failed and refused to present any original " wet-inked '' signature bearing security instrument in this case because Plaintiff is not the holder of the original note, or the holder of any other security instrument, in due course, as required under New York law, to initiate any foreclosure action against Defendant.

9. NY UCC 3-309, which governs the " Enforcement of Lost or Destroyed Notes '', even if KeyBank is not in possession of the original security instrument it presents, requires that : " A Person seeking enforcement of an instrument under subsection ( a ) [ NY UCC 3-309 ] must prove the terms of the instrument and the person 's right to enforce the instrument. If that proof is made, [ which proof Plaintiff has FAILED to establish at all in any way ], Section 3-308 [ NY UCC 3-308 ] applies to the case as if the person seeking enforcement had produced the instrument. THE COURT MAY NOT ENTER JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE PERSON SEEKING ENFORCEMENT UNLESS IT FINDS THAT THE PERSON REQUIRED TO PAY THE INSTRUMENT IS ADEQUATELY PROTECTED AGAINST LOSS THAT MIGHT OCCUR BY REASON OF ANY CLAIM BY ANOTHER PERSON TO ENFORCE THE INSTRUMENT. Adequate protection may be provided by any reasonable means. '' 10. Plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements of NY UCC 3-309 by providing the required protection on the form of a sum certain bond, or other means, in order to enforce its forged and unauthentic instrument. Therefore, Plaintiff lacks standing.

11. The court has violated NY UCC 3-309 's requirements made upon it by entering a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff against this Defendant by failing to adequately protect the Defendant against the loss that may occur as specified in NY UCC 3-309. Therefore, as a matter of law, the court acted without jurisdiction, and in a biased manner without regard or any consideration whatsoever for the interests of the Defendant, by issuing a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant, in violation of the court 's requirements under NY UCC 3-309. 
12. Plaintiff has failed to provide to this court, or to the Defendant, any reason for its failure to produce an original, complete and enforceable security instrument which entitled Plaintiff to enter into this foreclosure action.

13. Lacking any original security instrument, with copies or alleged facsimiles submitted by a Plaintiff not sufficing, NY UCC 3-804 requires of the Plaintiff to declare its alleged security instrument to be lost or destroyed. Plaintiff has failed and refused to make such declaration.

14. NY UCC 3-804, as it applies in this case, requires even further of this court that : " the court shall require security, in an amount fixed by the court not less than twice the amount of the allegedly unpaid amount on the instrument, indemnifying the defendant, his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns against loss, including costs and expenses, by reasons of further claims on the instrument '' ( SEE : NY UCC 3-804 ). This court failed to meet the requirements placed upon it under NY UCC 3-804 by rendering its judgment of foreclosure in favor of the Plaintiff, without regard or any consideration whatsoever for the interests of the Defendant, in a clearly biased manner.

15. Based upon the foregoing Plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements of standing to proceed against the Defendant in a foreclosure action, as a matter of law, as specifically set forth above.

16. Based upon the foregoing, the court has acted without jurisdiction by issuing judgment in the form of a foreclosure order against the Defendant and in favor of the Plaintiff without regard or consideration of the laws of New York or the requirements of the New York Uniform Commercial Code, as specifically set forth above.

CONCLUSION The Defendant has validly demonstrated that under the Laws of New York, pursuant to the requirements of NY RPA & P 1301, 1302 ( a ), and 1303 ; and under the New York Uniform Commercial Code, pursuant to NY UCC 3-307, 3-309, 3-804, that the Plaintiff lacks standing in this foreclosure action and the court lacked jurisdiction in rendering a foreclosure order judgment in favor of the Plaintiff against this Defendant. As, such, this case must be DISMISSED with prejudice in the interests of fairness, equity, and as a matter of law. 
WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, the Defendant respectfully moves this court for an ORDER dismissing this foreclosure action with prejudice based upon Plaintiff 's  lack of standing and the court 's lack of jurisdiction. Respectfully submitted this XXXX day of XX/XX/XXXX, I, the Defendant XXXX XXXX XXXX, appearing pro se do hereby affirm that the foregoing is truthful and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief, under penalty of perjury. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX