Consumer complaint received 2015-05-27 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: Statebridge Company
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, I am filing this complaint against my servicer because they have failed to comply with my numerous Qualified Written Requests ( QWR ) and other request for information. With all the recent news and fines imposed upon various lenders and banks, I am certain that I am a victim of a faulty " mortgage-backed securities loan ''. My servicer has not complied with Federal or State law, specifically California Homeowner 's Bill of Rights ( HBOR ). Under this newly enacted law, it prohibits beneficiaries or servicers from recording robosigned documents on all mortgage-related notices of default, notices of sale, assignments of deed of trust, and substitutions of trustee, recorded in connection with a nonjudicial foreclosure, as well as declarations filed in court with respect to any foreclosure proceeding. The law further states that documents must be accurate, complete and supported by competent and relevant evidence. My servicer has failed to demonstrate that the foreclosure documents recorded against my property supports their ability and/or authority to proceed with a foreclosure. I am certain that the recorded documents recorded against my property are not accurate and are robosigned. This is in direct violation of the law. HBOR mandates that before recording or filing any mortgage-related document that it must be competent and reliable to substantiate the borrower 's default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower 's loan status and loan information. Unfortunately for me, my loan has been transferred at least XXXX or XXXX times in the last year. I am certain that my current servicer is in violation of Civil Code 2924.17 and 2924 ( a ) ( 6 ). I have no idea who the present beneficiary is of my debt obligation despite of who they tell me. Who my servicer tells me is the beneficiary does not coincide with the data I have gathered through an audit of my debt obligation. It is my belief that the Assignments of Deed of Trust recorded against my property are a complete fabrication of the truth. Despite a recent ruling that stated homeowners could challenge an assignment recorded against their properties, the California courts repeatedly rule that we do n't and choose to rely on other case law. Since when does case law take priority over law? The courts are stating that we, as homeowners, can not challenge a fraudulent assignment of deed of trust, or any instrument, recorded against our property. How can this be when we are a party to the securitized transaction and we are the homeowners? Clearly these assignments of deed of trusts are null and void because they are signed after the date these trusts have closed. No document would be valid if it was signed after the closing of the trust. Yet the lenders and the courts are repeatedly telling us we do n't have standing while the laws that are suppose to be enforced in this state tells us that we do have standing and we do have a right to challenge these recorded instruments. It seems as though new laws have been enforced to further protect homeowners but nobody is following the laws. It leaves homeowners to fend for ourselves in trying to keep our homes. We do n't have a problem in making our mortgage payments, we do, however, have a major problem making payments to an entity that is not entitled to payments or owns the underlying debt. If they are not entitled to payment they are certainly not entitled to foreclose. This is the law in California and it should be upheld. I am seeking the assistance of the CFPB and requesting that my servicer CEASE and DESIST immediately from taking any foreclosure action against my property until this matter is resolved. They are not providing me with competent and reliable evidence as the law mandates. 
Thank you and respectfully submitted.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation