Consumer complaint received 08-10-2015 about Debt collection (Mortgage) with Dyck-O'Neal, Inc. (FL).
Issue: Disclosure verification of debt
Sub-issue: Right to dispute notice not received

Complaint: I had a mortgage foreclosure by XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, with a XXXX XXXX, XXXX auction date. Fannie Mae insured the note and paid XXXX XXXX. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I received a letter from Dyck-O'Neal Inc. ( DONI ) ) stating the note has been assigned to DONI by XXXX DEFICIENCIES. The letter stated no collection efforts will occur on this account for the next 30 days. The next day, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, they filed a lawsuit for {$61000.00}. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I received a summons on this matter with twenty days to respond or be in default. 

I quickly researched the statute of Limitations ( SOL ). I found out the SOL was five years and therefore the lawsuit was beyond the SOL and did n't apply and I responded to the court as such. In XX/XX/XXXX, The state of Florida changed the SOL to one year. However, all of the old foreclosures within the five years, the Collectors had until XXXX XXXX, XXXX to file lawsuits. Hence DONI filed about XXXX lawsuits in Florida. I still thought I was outside the SOL as the foreclosure took place on XXXX XXXX, XXXX with an auction date for sale on the property set for XXXX XXXX, XXXX. When I looked up the court records I found out the sale was postponed until XXXX XXXX, XXXX, which now put me inside the SOL, hence the lawsuitI researched THE FAIR DEBT CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT ( FDCPA ) and other legal and non legal documents. In the FDCPA I noted many violations. Some of which are Section 809 ( validation of debt ) ( a ) ( 1 ), ( a ) ( 2 ), ( a ) ( 3 ), ( a ) ( 4 ), ( a ) ( 5 ) and ( b ). Section 813 ( Civil Liability ), ( a ) ( 1 ) and ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ). ( Copies of these statutes are uploaded as attachments ) In The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure ( Rule 1.070 Process ) Item ( j ) states : If the service of the initial pleading is not made upon the defendant within 120 days, the court on its own initiative or upon motion to dismiss the action ... .... In this case the plaintiff was not in compliance. Instead, they returned the summons on the 120th day, XXXX XXXX, XXXX to the court. On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, the plaintiff got a new summons from the court which was served on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. It should be noted the defendant has resided at the same address since XXXX XXXX. 

DONI has an appraisal on the foreclosed property in an amount of {$210000.00} dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. The defendant has an appraisal of {$280000.00} dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, prepared by the same appraiser used by XXXX XXXX in order to approve the note. The balance of the note up to Final Judgment of Foreclosure was {$250000.00} plus interest of {$15000.00} and late fees of {$230.00} which equals a total of {$270000.00}, which results in the DONI receiving a value of {$11000.00} in excess of what the defendant owed. In as much as XXXX received property at a value greater than what the defendant owed that amount should be paid to the defendant. 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, the plaintiff reported to the Credit Bureaus ' an Account in Collection in the amount of {$61000.00}. The defendant 's credit score dropped from XXXX ( very good ) to about XXXX ( bad ). This has had a deleterious effect on the defendant in gaining employment, her voluntary community service, difficulty in finding housing and obtaining credit

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation