Consumer complaint received 2017-05-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: OR

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX I took out a loan through XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.  At the time of taking a mortgage loan I was and am still on Social Security XXXX. The loan I received was one of those No employment verification, No Income verification, No Banking verification. See the Uniform Residential Loan Application Exhibit 4. At the time I received this mortgage I had personal income from Social Security XXXX and a small pension, which amounted to approximately {$1500.00} per month. The payment for this mortgage was approximately {$1100.00} per month. My wife was not on this mortgage and her income was not included. <P/>I paid on this loan for 5 years. ( I have approx {$80000.00} into this property, loan payments, repairs, upkeep ) I quit making payments in the first quarter of XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted XXXX who is a sub servicer and OCWEN as the master servicer and asked them to take the property back and was told they could n't. I was also told that if I were to stop making payments they could probably help me with a modification. I did n't understand why stopping payments would probably help me get a modification. I told them at first, it would be easier for me to just give the property back. They said they cant take it back and it is n't that easy. They said again, if you stop making payments we can assist you in a modification. I gave them permission to send me a modification package. I finally received there package. I returned it and followed up at a later date to check the status and was told that they did n't receive it. They sent me another package and I followed up again and was told that I was missing some information. I received letters of denial dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. See Exhibit 4. <P/>During the first XXXX mandatory mediation in XX/XX/XXXX, I was also denied another modification, this time for Post Modification DTI Outside Acceptable Range. We are unable to offer you a Hamp modification for the following reason. In performing our underwriting of a potential modification, we determined that the proposed modified monthly payment which we could offer you was outside the required range of 10 % -55 % of your monthly gross income which we verified as {$2000.00}. Your modified monthly housing expense must be equal to or greater than 10 % and equal to or less than 55 % of your gross monthly income in order for you to be eligible for Hamp. See Letters from XXXX, Exhibit 4. <P/>I sent the Servicer two Qualified Written Request dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. I asked who the Holder in Due Course was and got an answer back from XXXX informing me who the Investor was, which was GMAC. I did n't ask for the investor name and they did not tell me who the holder in due course was. <P/>In those QWRs I asked the Servicer ( XXXX is the sub-servicer ) who is the current holder in due course and owner of my mortgage note that has legal standing to foreclose in the State of XXXX. I also requested the MERs Milestone reports and XXXX website for the Pooling and Service Agreement and exact name of the issuing entity along with the Master Loan Schedule. My point is, the Servicer never told me in their response to my QWRs who the holder in due course is. <P/>XXXX did not tell me who the holder in due course is and instead brought me to Mediation in XX/XX/XXXX. <P/>In order for an institution to foreclose in XXXX they must comply with the State mandatory Mediation process. The first time XXXX took me to mediation was in XX/XX/XXXX. In order for XXXX to get their Certificate of Compliance they must demonstrate to the State run mediation program that they have disclosed the Owner of Obligation, which is the same as Holder in due course. XXXX did not get their Certificate of Compliance or as its called " ( C.O.C. ) '' in the mediation that took place in XXXX. The reason they did n't get their C.O.C. is that they failed to disclose the Owner of obligation or holder in due course. XXXX would not tell me who the holder in due course was and they would n't or could n't tell me who the holder in due course is in the first Mediation. I also hired an attorney to represent me in mediation, costing around XXXX. In order for XXXX to foreclose they need to first get their C.O.C. and disclose the Holder in Due Course.  After two QWRs they failed to disclose who the owner was, and failed again during the first round of mediation. Their production of documents did not include the Certificate of No Compliance for XXXX. They did provide the XXXX Certificate of Compliance outcome in which they received their C.O.C. How does the borrower deal with a Servicer who brings you to mediation in bad faith? <P/>Mediation requires the banks to present the PSA at mediation, because it dictates on how they can modify an existing loan and work with the borrower. As we know the PSA clearly defines the entity or issuer of these trusts. <P/>The problem is that they never disclosed the Owner of Obligation as required to complete the mediation program. As a result they did n't receive their XXXX Certificate of Compliance. <P/>Jump forward to XXXX where they bring me to mediation again. ( Attorneys fees again, {$1800.00} ) This time they disclose that Ocwen is the Master Servicer and XXXX is the Sub servicer. They also state that XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX is the Trustee for this entity called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX, stating that this XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX is the owner of obligation. They now state as a fact that this Trust is the owner of obligation and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is the trustee for this particular Trust. <P/>XXXX and Ocwen finally get their C.O.C. based on the latest information that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX is the owner of obligation. <P/>Shortly after they received their C.O.C. they filed a foreclosure ( XX/XX/XXXX) lawsuit here in XXXX County naming XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as the Trustee for this XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX. <P/>I represented myself on this lawsuit until XX/XX/XXXXwhen I retained the same attorney ( XXXX XXXX ) who represented me in the 2 mediations. <P/>Through discovery and production of documents we received documents that uncovered illegal activity by Ocwen, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. <P/>I went to the SEC website and researched XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX. This is name they used in my foreclosure case! <P/>The SEC has no record of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series XXXX. <P/>Mortgage Asset-backed pass-through Certificates is actually the title of these securities ( XXXX ). <P/>The SEC does have a registered company conformed name listing XXXX  XXXX XXXX Trust listed as being Incorporated in XXXX and a business address in XXXX. <P/>This particular XXXX XXXX XXXX Trust is one of 145 separate entities ( XXXX XXXX ) listed with the SEC as being incorporated in Delaware. <P/>This particular XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is one of 145 separate entities ( XXXX XXXX ) listed with the SEC as XXXX Trust. <P/>This is where it gets real interesting.I went to the S.O.S. of XXXX  website and researched all XXXX XXXX Trust ( 145 ) of them. I also talked a Lady named XXXX XXXX from the S.O.S. of XXXX and asked her for Certified Certificates of Record on all 145 XXXX XXXX. I was informed by her that she has no record of any XXXX XXXX being registered in XXXX. She instead directed me to a form, called Certificate of No Record. She also stated that XXXX has Statues that govern what these Trust must do before they can sell securities or conduct business in XXXX. The Statues are 318.02 318.03 and 318.05. See exhibit 2.
<P/>I paid and received Certified Certificates of No Record on all 145 XXXX Trust. I also received a complete list of every trust that filed a declaration of Trust since XXXX. Each Trust needed to complete a registration process and file a declaration of Trust in order to sell securities and do business in XXXX. <P/>Each XXXX XXXX Trust must be Bankruptcy remote from all other entities, thats why each individual Trust must have its own Company Conformed Name, per SEC. There is 145 XXXX Trust which reported to the SEC as being incorporated in XXXX and a business address in XXXX. <P/>XXXX Statue 318.02 subd. 3 Powers State that any such association heretofore or hereafter organized shall have the power in its name : ( 1 )  To continue as a business trust for the time limited in its Declaration of Trust or in any amendments, or if no time limit is specified, then perpetual. ( 2 ) To sue and be sued ; ( 3 ) To adopt, use, and, at will, alter a business trust seal, but failure to affix the business trust seal, if any, shall not affect the validity of any instrument ; ( 4 ) To conduct in this State and elsewhere the business to engage in by such association and to contract and enter into obligations and do any acts necessary and incidental to the transaction of its business or expedient for the attainment of the purposes stated in its declaration of trust or any amendments. ( 5 ) To acquire including by will or gift, purchase, sell, contract for, hold, lease, mortgage, encumber, convey, transfer, or otherwise deal in and dispose of real and personal property within or without the State by and through its officers, agents or Trustees in the manner provided in its declaration of trust or in any amendments. All deeds, contracts, mortgages and other legal instruments heretofore or hereafter acquired by or executed by any such association, and whether or not recorded in the office of the county recorder in the officer of register of titles, shall have the same force and effect as a like instrument would have executed, or recorded or filed in said offices, as in the case of corporations. <P/>Subd. 4.Personal liability. No personal liability for any debt or obligation of any such association heretofore or hereafter organized shall attach to the owners of the shares of beneficial interest, beneficiaries, shareholders, or trustees of any such association heretofore or hereafter organized, or to any person or party to the declaration of trust. <P/>318.03 Sale of Securities ; Registration Before any such association may offer for sale, barter or sell any security of such association in this state, such association shall register such securities pursuant to the provisions of chapter 80A, and all acts amendatory thereof, which registration shall be applied for and granted under the same conditions as like registrations are applied for and granted to corporations. <P/>318.05 Unlawful to transact business prior to compliance. No such association organized after XX/XX/XXXX, may transact or conduct business, within this state under any declaration of Trust without first complying with the provisions and requirements of sections 318.01 ; 318.02 ; and in addition thereto complying with the provisions and requirements of sections 318.03 and 318.04 when applicable. <P/>XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) brought this lawsuit against me as a Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX. <P/>XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is not registered in XXXX XXXX  according to the S.O.S. of XXXX XXXX. The Secretary of State of XXXX, has XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX registered as a Foreign Company in XXXX, and headquartered or incorporated in XXXX XXXX. If they did n't register in XXXX XXXX like they reported to the S.O.S. of XXXX then why did they state it as a fact in the XXXX S.O.S. registration? See Exhibit 2. <P/>Ocwen is the Master Servicer and XXXX XXXX is the sub-servicer which brought this lawsuit in the name of XXXX as Trustee. <P/>XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX has failed to demonstrate through either its memorandum or evidentiary submission that there are no genuine disputes of material fact or that XXXX is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Specifically, there is a substantial question of material fact as to whether XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX is a validly constituted legal entity and whether XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX has any legal capacity to sue in the State of XXXX to foreclose on my property. <P/>XXXX law restricts foreign entities from exercise [ ing ] any powers or purposes or conduct [ ing ] any business or affairs in this state that a domestic [ company ] is proscribed from exercising, pursuing or undertaking in this state. Numerous statues in XXXX prohibit foreign entities from maintaining an action in XXXX without first obtaining a certificate of authority. <P/>STATEMENT OF FACTS I was foreclosed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee '' for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX. Plaintiff purports to be a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) in its organizing documents known collectively as the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. Id. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement ( PSA ) states that This contract shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with applicable federal laws and the laws of XXXX. The PSA also provides that it shall be governed by the laws of the State of XXXX XXXX. The PSA also provides that This agreement and the certificates shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of XXXX XXXX and obligations, rights, and remedies of the parties hereunder shall be determined in accordance with such laws. The PSA also references XXXX and XXXX as another potential state whose governing laws apply. Id. <P/>See the Declaration of XXXX XXXX. Exhibit 3 As set forth in the Declaration of XXXX XXXX, Defendants have search high and low for evidence, that Plaintiff is registered, certified, authorized or otherwise in XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX ( the three states referenced in the Plaintiffs PSA ) as well as all 47 states for registration, certification of trust, certification of existence for both the exact name of plaintiff XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AS TRUSTEE FOR XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX MORTGAGE ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, XXXX XXXX as well as numerous variations on this name ( variations include XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed-Pass-through certificates XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 2006QS14 Remic Trust ) and several other variations and have found " no evidence '' of any registration or proof of plaintiffs existence in any of the 50 states, or any United States Territory . Defendants have also searched in the Internal Revenue Services 938 Publications database which preserves registration for all XXXXs registered with the Internal Revenue Service and have searched for both the Plaintiffs full name ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX ) as well as XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX is an abbreviation of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX ( the series number for Plaintiffs Trust, and XXXX ( a shorter version of Plaintiffs series number ) in the tax years XXXX through XXXX and have found no registration with the Internal Revenue Service . See also Declaration of XXXX XXXX. Exhibit 3 Defendant and defendants counsel have searched the Secretary of States databases for all 50 states as well as the United States Territories as well as the Internal Revenue Services Form 938 registry and Defendants can find no documents indicating that Plaintiff is registered with either the Internal Revenue Service, nor with any of the 50 states or any United States Territories. Additionally, despite numerous subpoenas and discovery request on Plaintiff, Defendants can find no record of any EIN ( Employer Identification Number ) for Plaintiff. As of the date of this writing there is no evidence that Plaintiff has any authority to sue or maintain any action in the State of XXXX or any other state. It in fact appears that Plaintiff is not registered as a legal entity anywhere in the United States, including any of the states where Plaintiff claims to be registered and incorporated. <P/>Defendants have Certified Certificates of NO RECORD from the Secretary of State of XXXX showing that although, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage-Asset-Backed Pass-through Certificates Series XXXX is the name Plaintiff is using in this lawsuit, it is not the name used in reporting to the SEC . The SEC has it registered as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which is the Company Conformed Name as reported to the SEC. There are 145 separate XXXX XXXX XXXX, all of which reported to the SEC as being incorporated in XXXX and a business address in XXXX. <P/>I received Certified Certificates of NO RECORD from both XXXX and the XXXX Secretary of States. I also obtained from XXXX XXXX from the S.O.S. of XXXX a Certified list of all TRUST that are or were registered with the S.O.S. since XXXX. See Exhibit 2. <P/>The SEC has the entire XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) registered as XXXX  Trust. <P/>See Exhibit 1, which is from the SEC website. We also included in Exhibit 1 other Series Trust that were not registered in XXXX, but reported to the SEC that they were. ( XXXX series, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX ). Also these additional Trust are reported to the SEC as being incorporated in XXXX and are in fact not registered in XXXX. Total collateral of all Trust in Exhibit 1 are estimated to be around {$180.00} XXXX according to the SEC website. <P/>The SEC also has the entire XXXX XXXX listed as being registered and incorporated in XXXX. The Certificates of NO RECORD that I obtained, clearly show that NONE of these TRUST were ever registered in XXXX or XXXX. See Exhibit 2. <P/>We know that the Securities and Exchange Commission does not verify the documents registered in their database. The question would be, why did they register these trust with the SEC stating that these trust are incorporated in XXXX, when in fact they did n't register in XXXX. <P/>Why did they register with the SEC stating that these Trust are XXXX Trust, when in fact they did n't register in XXXX? <P/>Registering the Entire Series with the SEC is part of the registration process but the State of XXXX also requires filing a Declaration of Trust prior to transacting any business in this state. It is unlawful to transact business prior to compliance. No such association organized after XX/XX/XXXX, may transact or conduct business within this state, under any Declaration of Trust or Business Trust without first complying with the provisions and requirements of sections XXXX and XXXX and in addition thereto complying with the provisions and requirements of sections XXXX and XXXX when applicable. See Exhibit 2 XXXX Statues. Why would these Trust report to the SEC as being XXXX Trust? Who would collect Taxes on the sales of these securities? According to the Sec all these Trust have a combined total of {$180.00} XXXX. Who is collecting the taxes if they are not registered at any State level. <P/>Why would they elect to be a REMIC as outlined in the PSA and not follow through and register with the Internal Revenue? I.R.S. publication 938 clearly states that For the first tax year of a REMICs existence, the REMIC must timely file the first tax year of existence using Form XXXX, signed by an authorized person. Once the election is made, it stays in effect for all years until it is terminated. Pursuant to the public records available on the SEC website, Plaintiff only filed Quarterly XXXX and/or XXXX filings from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. See Exhibit 4. <P/><P/>As a REMIC, Plaintiff is obligated to make the election as a REMIC in its first taxable year, but upon a search of the ( search-able ) IRS Publication Form XXXX database for REMIC and also Collateralized Debt Obligations, no such elections were filed in the years XXXX through XXXX indicating no such issuing entity exists for the purposes of IRS election as either a REMIC or a CDO. <P/>We have hard evidence that Ocwen and XXXX filed fabricated Mortgage Assignments with our County Recorders Office. There are 3 assignments recorded in county records. The first and second XXXX XXXX  was notarized by a XXXX XXXX out of XXXX. These two documents that are recorded in public records look almost exactly alike. This is where it gets interesting ; the person she is notarizing for is XXXX XXXX. XXXX signed on both assignments days apart according to the dates, and recorded on the same day 6 months later. We received 1116 pages ( Production of Documents ) from XXXX and Ocwen. In the production of documents there are 4 different mortgage assignments. The first and second assignment were both signed and notarized by the same people. In the production of documents there was a fourth assignment, this fourth assignment looks exactly the same as the second assignment, except that this fourth assignment was not recorded in public records. This fourth assignment is notarized in blank, same signatures, except nothing is filled out. The notary notarized the signature of XXXX but she notarized a blank document. This same fourth document was later filled in, whited out, crossed out and then filed in the county land records as assignment number two.. See Exhibit 4. <P/>The third assignment ( was ordered by XXXX and Ocwen ) ( this third assignment was done by XXXX ) was recorded in XX/XX/XXXX and assigned to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX. This assignments looks a lot like the first two assignments, crossed out and a name of a company named XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who went out of business back in XXXX. XXXX XXXX is not listed with the SEC in that form, but is listed with the SEC as XXXX XXXX XXXX Trust. The name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as Trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass through Certificates Series XXXX is the name they are suing me in. We know that this name they are suing me in is not registered with the SEC. The SEC has it registered as XXXX XXXX  XXXX Trust, which by the way is the exact company conformed name listed with the SEC and reported to the SEC as being incorporated in XXXX. <P/>According to the FDIC, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX went out of business in XXXX. ( I believe XXXX took them over ) The cutoff date for any loans to go into the XXXX trust was XX/XX/XXXX. So, why would XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who went out of business in XXXX assign a mortgage to this alleged trust in XXXX and after the cutoff date? <P/>These trust filed papers with the SEC stating that all these trust are incorporated in XXXX. These Trust also filed papers with the SEC stating that these Trust are XXXX Trust. <P/>The fact is that neither S.O.S.s has any record of them registering in their State. They dont exist.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation