Consumer complaint received 2022-02-08 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — VA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Wells Fargo who was servicing my mortgage loan for XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) from XX/XX/XXXX, through XX/XX/XXXX, at that point XXXX was declared a " failed bank '' now as that bank stopped existing as a bank and as a company stopped existing. XXXX not existing could not fulfill its obligation and was not due any payments after XX/XX/XXXX as it stop existing. XXXX is only authorized through the contract between myself and XXXX to service my loan but as XXXX after XX/XX/XXXX can not act they can not grant XXXX the ability to act. 

XXXX is saying that XXXX XXXX was the investor of my loan and they were acting for XXXX who is not an investor as it can not buy or sell a mortgage loan and did not purchase my loan debt nor did XXXX. 

XXXX did in fact have the outside law firm of XXXX XXXX XXXX create fake Notice of Default, Trustee and Assignment of Deed of Trust that made it appear that XXXX purchased the loan on or about XX/XX/XXXX from the originator of the loan XXXX XXXX XXXX  who had sold the loan 12 days after funding the loan on XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. So it impossible that anytime after XX/XX/XXXX for XXXX to sell my loan which they no longer owned. In fact it was impossible for XXXX to sell my loan after they placed my loan into their XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX did endorse in blank the Note per UCC3 and XXXX XXXX requirement as the Note was in the physical possession of XXXX with XXXX being the custodian of records. 

Now as with as many as XXXX other Dept of VA loan borrowers and XXXX victims from the XXXX and XXXX XXXX actions cases XXXX loss in XX/XX/XXXX, where from XXXX victims of XXXX  were denied HAMPs modification due to not processing the modifications correctly and granting modification guaranteed by the TARP agreement Wells signed in XX/XX/XXXX. Wells Fargo was accepting payments from me when there was not a financially interested party they were working after XX/XX/XXXX. 

As XXXX was misleading me into thinking they were the " holder in due course '' up until the last days before it was going to foreclose as I had requested the HAMP and VA HAMP which neither was underwritten as required under XX/XX/XXXX VA XXXX XXXX and protected as with the recent two class actions where XXXX did not correctly underwrite. 

XXXX was the point of contact I was made to use through this enter process of modification and foreclosure, and was proved to be guilty of denying me a VA HAMP and foreclosing as I was awarded {$6000.00} which XXXX is saying they did not pay the penalty but it came from the Independent Foreclosure Review Board which the monies for the settlement was from the banks as in XXXX among the other bank. However, as the agreed upon settlement which XXXX selected the independent review of it's loan decided XXXX wrong on its processing of my file and {$6000.00} was awarded as in the two class actions of 3,000 or so victims that the protection under TARP was uncovered for bankruptcy court filers. 

XXXX has damaged me as with the other 8,000 or so families which some in XXXX serviced borrowers there was not a valid lien against the property as XXXX the lender did not exist and could not call the debt due and with my case bring evidence of ownership of the debt per UCC9. XXXX is wrong to not have granted at the very least the VA XXXX, but the legal thing was that there was not a debt attached to the property as it stop existing when the bank stopped existing without a process to sell a debt that another in XXXX XXXX owned the Note! 

As in the XXXX v Wells Fargo and XXXX XXXX ( Missouri ) that XXXX & XXXX handled for XXXX in its loss, they could not provide the court with proof of owning the debt! Wells Fargo Bank presented itself as the owner of the debt to me and the courts when in fact it never paid a single cent for the debt and was owed nothing and did not have a right to foreclose as they or XXXX XXXX had a financial interest in the property! One that is representing another does not go to court address themself as the plaintiff when it our client you are representing as XXXX was not the plaintiff and not the actual servicer because the bank stop existing and the fact that XXXX XXXX could not accept payments anyway as they did not originate or buy any debt!

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation