Consumer complaint received 2022-07-20
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.

Complaint:
XXXX XXXX Bank and XXXX  made the false statement that XXXX was the beneficiary in the loan I first had with XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) that was sold to Washington Mutual Bank ( WAMU ) on XX/XX/XXXX, who on XX/XX/XXXX had my loan accepted into their XXXX XXXX XXXX relinquishing the Mortgage Note over to XXXX using the XXXX procedure of blank endorsement of the Note which is shown on the Mortgage Note as it reflects since the day the mortgage loan was accepted and is the last entre on the document. The Deed of Trust in this case if it were delivered and recorded by XXXX on or before XX/XX/XXXX, would be valid to be recorded as XXXX did hold the mortgage loan debt, however, after XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX was paid in full by Washington Mutual Bank ( WAMU ) who became the beneficiary and was a active member of XXXX  so there would have been the ability in that system under the recorded DOT that must have recorded first at the local level to start the XXXX  process. Even if the DOT was recorded legally ( which it was not on XX/XX/XXXX ) as XXXX by not owning the debt on XX/XX/XXXX, having sold the debt on XX/XX/XXXX to WAMU did not possess the ability to place a lien against the property. This is a real estate matter and under the DOT is about the lender and it's successors in the lending of monies on the property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( not XXXX XXXX ) which XXXX XXXX nor XXXX XXXX purchased the debt. The power of the Mortgage Note does not XXXX XXXX to foreclose as they are owners of the Mortgage Note for a lifetime because they don't possess the ability to transfer the Mortgage Note which was transferred to them under XXXX with no sale of the debt occurring so the are not entitled to repayment of a debt because they did not purchase the debt from XXXX. Now the problem occur here on XX/XX/XXXX, when XXXX who is acting as the mortgage servicer and XXXX of records but the lender they were working for due to the servicing agreement on XX/XX/XXXX, stop existing as they were declared a " failed bank '' on XX/XX/XXXX, at which point XXXX XXXX purchased the bank but could not purchase the XXXX XXXX Fed Gov backed loans of XXXX because XXXX owned the mortgage Notes and would lose the like underlying collateral for the MBS they are insuring. XXXX realizes it has a problem and instead of using in-house attorneys to handle this case, they use the foreclosure mill firm of XXXX & XXXX to handle the case to be able to deny knowledge of exact title holder in the matter. The outside law firm who's attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX also as XXXX  Assistance Secretary and creates the fraudulent Assignment of DOT which states that XXXX " paid '' value for my mortgage loan on XX/XX/XXXX of before and had it recorded that XXXX was the beneficiary and XXXX  was able to state this due to the DOT, and allowing the ability to non-judicially foreclosure. However, as XXXX did not pay value and is not a beneficiary of the debt which stopped being a collectable debt when XXXX stopped existing as they could not complete the two party only mortgage loan contract. Wells while foreclosing at first was representing itself as the lender but a few days before the foreclosure when I was asking about my XX/XX/XXXX, request of the VA XXXX was not being process, XXXX informed me that there was an investor that owned my mortgage loan but for privacy reasons could not inform me as to who was my lender. So before the foreclosure XXXX admits to no being the lender and they and XXXX  have lied on the documents they submit on XX/XX/XXXX, to XXXX XXXX XXXX of Deeds and myself that they were the lender that had paid value when in fact they had not paid value. XXXX later admits in a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, that XXXX was the owner investor they were working for and on XX/XX/XXXX, purchase the " XXXX '' from XXXX. Let understand that XXXX has already stated and acted on the non-judicial foreclosure as the owner of the debt, which non-owners don't have the ability to put themselves in the lien position to foreclose for another because they are not owe a debt. If there was an actual holder of the debt just as XXXX and XXXX are representing XXXX they would have represent XXXX or any other entity that was claiming to be the owner, as with XXXX who was not and did not have to be physically present and is not physically present at the foreclosure. Now what happens on XX/XX/XXXX, the day XXXX is talking about they purchased the " LOAN '' is the repurchasing of the debt the XXXX owes the investors of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that they borrowed against the " securities '' they invested in that XXXX is the insurer of. That the property is the collateral for the XXXX XXXX VA mortgage loan which resolved itself in with the foreclosure and VA XXXX XXXX XXXX claim and the fact that all XXXX XXXX VA mortgage loans have a non-disclosure clause the real estate matter is over and no additional monies are due from me after the foreclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, as is show over the last decade where no demand from XXXX of a delinquent balance as the XXXX XXXX VA purchased the property on XX/XX/XXXX, Now what loan that XXXX is requiring the lender/issuer of the XXXX is the loan taking out by WAMU after the mortgage loan was attached to the WAMU XXXX XXXX XXXX and that is a loan that WAMU solely was indebted too, that I was not a party too or knew anything about. Wells who does not possess any proof of ownership of the VA Mortgage Loan I was granted on XX/XX/XXXX, and is well aware that WAMU purchased that mortgage loan from XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX as they are where the mortgage servicer up until WAMU died on XX/XX/XXXX, and were responsible not only to WAMU but to myself as the servicer to ensure fraud of the account took place. XXXX can not now come and say they did not know who owned what and not mention that WAMU is in the chain of ownership when in fact XXXX was the mortgage servicer and custodian of records! XXXX and XXXX said on XX/XX/XXXX that XXXX paid value for my mortgage loan and that XXXX  was acting in behalf of XXXX and assigning the DOT to XXXX, however XXXX who sold the mortgage loan to XXXX who would have been the beneficiary but relinquish the mortgage Note to XXXX without a sale of the mortgage loan making but impossible for a non-judicial foreclosure and the need of any other party to foreclose without using the XXXX process of showing the court proof of ownership because the originator in XXXX had sold the mortgage loan to WAMU so that not an unknown fact to XXXX but is unknown to the XXXX XXXX XXXX of Deeds who at the time of allowing the DOT to be recorded on XX/XX/XXXX, was not inform that on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX sold the loan to WAMU and on XX/XX/XXXX that WAMU had endorsed the Mortgage Note in blank and relinquished to XXXX, so that when it came to XX/XX/XXXX, when XXXX  and XXXX fraudulently stated on the Assignment of DOT that there was not title exchange between XXXX and XXXX form the XX/XX/XXXX, sale and make it clear that XXXX could not sale the mortgage loan because it had already sold the loan over XXXX ago, and that the " failed bank '' in WAMU was suppose to be the last XXXX XXXX as XXXX who in possession of the Mortgage Note but the largest bank failure in the history of mankind, stop existing. So where is XXXX in this case who purchased WAMU? So we got XXXX XXXX WAMU Fed XXXX mortgage loans that had been given payoff, refinanced or foreclosed and XXXX could not give any correct payoff amounts because WAMU after XX/XX/XXXX, stopped existing. we know XXXX refused to process all the XXXX XXXX VA loan for the XXXX starting something in XXXX and refused to process the VA XXXX in XXXX, foreclosing on those for protected our Nation. As I was paid {$6000.00} because XXXX did not XXXX me a VA XXXX as with no input into the XXXX automated underwriting system, is the same crime committed to the XXXX homeowners that were in bankruptcy and had TARP protection, but XXXX enter in the wrong information into the system and denied those families of the guaranteed TARP protection. It took from XXXX to until XX/XX/XXXX for those victims to win in court, and court is where the matter of proof of ownership of my debt under XXXX would have stopped the legal foreclosure by the non-interest party in XXXX XXXX Bank! XXXX class action and XXXX class action plus XXXX v XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation