Consumer complaint received 12/29/2015 about Mortgage (Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)) with Seterus, Inc. (NC).
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Complaint: In XXXX I paid XXXX XXXX to XXXX Mortgage to reinstate the mortgage on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX Subsequently I refinanced with XXXX closing, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX in the amount of XXXX XXXX, loan # XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX became the investor and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the servicer. Payments were made until XXXX/XXXX/XXXX through the servicer. 
In XXXX I was notified by the V A of a serious medical issue and instructed to report to the VA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX Tennessee. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I reported as instructed and remained until XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Due to the medical issues XXXX XXXX XXXX and my temporary inability to pay, the servicer began foreclosure proceedings XXXX which was fraudulent due to the use of an invalid assignment to base proceedings on. 
The assignment was executed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, assignor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the recording date XXXX/XXXX/XXXX and the alleged assigner was XXXX XXXX, assistant secretary of XXXX, who is the nominee of the deed of trust and not the note thereby overstepping any authority XXXX XXXX may have assuming that XXXX XXXX is a real person. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX 's signature is highly suspicious and was notarized by XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX appears to be a robo signer. Recording number for the Assignment : Instrument # XXXX Bk XXXX pg XXXX in the XXXX XXXX North Carolina Register of Deeds. 
Notice : the assignment is in conflict with XXXX loan look up program which shows that XXXX owns the loan with an acquisition date of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. The PSA show XXXX XXXX XXXX as a subservicer for XXXX and XXXX XXXX claims to be the assigner for XXXX however if XXXX is the Note owner of record then what is it that XXXX XXXX the alleged robo signer is assigning and with what standing? 
The assignment by XXXX XXXX is a pretense to obscure other interested parties in the transaction chain. 
The assignment does not correspond with the endorsement on the note. 
The note has been separated from the deed of trust which appears to be contrary to XXXX v XXXX and the note appears to have been securitized. 
I have been through the clerk 's hearing where the clerk allowed the servicer to bring a foreclosure action with no standing in law. I appealed to the court of appeals of North Carolina and the court decided that I had been relieved of my rights of due process. I went back to Superior Court in XXXX XXXX where the Judge disregarded the opinion of the Court of Appeals and still I have not been allowed to the rights of discovery. 
I filed yesterday XXXX/XXXX/XXXX in Superior Court as objection to the order to foreclose. 
The firm representing the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX out of XXXX, XXXX is also the owner of the firm that provided the Substitute Trustee. 
There are XXXX loan numbers on the property and they are as follows ; XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX Seterus , Inc . XXXX I have documented every interaction with the courts and the plaintiff. If you will let me know which documents would be helpful I can forward them to you.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation