Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Payment process
Company: SOUTHSTATE BANK CORPORATION
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Property : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX Company : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account No. : XXXX I hold a recorded equitable interest in the property at XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, FL XXXX ( Account No. XXXX ), as evidenced by multiple instruments recorded in the Official Records of XXXX XXXX, Florida in XX/XX/XXXX ( Book XXXX, Pages XXXX ; Book XXXX, multiple instruments ), and a perfected UCC-1 Financing Statement XXXX / XXXX with the Florida Secured Transaction Registry . Colorado Secured Transaction XXXX XXXX. Beginning XX/XX/XXXX, I sent multiple written notices to SouthState Bank , N.A . and its servicing agents via certified mail, including Notices of Subrogation, Conditional Acceptance and Demand for Proof of Claim, and formal requests for account information. All were sent to SouthState 's designated addresses in XXXX XXXX, FL and XXXX, SC with certified mail tracking numbers documenting delivery. SouthState acknowledged my identity and my recorded interest in its XX/XX/XXXX response letter, addressed to me by name and capacity at my designated address. Despite this acknowledgment, SouthState refused to provide any account information, claiming it needed " authorization from the borrower. '' Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36 ( i ) and the CFPB 's 2018 amendments recognizing successors in interest, a servicer must respond to written requests from potential successors in interest. SouthState has never provided me with a written description of documents needed to confirm my status, as required by 1024.36 ( i ). I have tendered payment to SouthState four separate times : XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : Check # XXXX tendered as accord and satisfaction. SouthState refused the payment but HAS NEVER RETURNED THE CHECK. It remains in their possession after approximately 8 months. XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : Check for {$14000.00} an amount exceeding the past due payments of {$12000.00} stated in SouthState 's own reinstatement letter sent via certified mail accompanied by a Notice of Tender and Administrative Reconciliation documenting the entire history of prior dishonored tenders and the bank 's pattern of refusing payment. SouthState has retained this check without depositing or returning it. A copy of this Notice is attached as exhibits to this complaint. XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : Check # XXXX for {$1700.00} sent with a formal Qualified Written Request under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 and 1024.36. SouthState 's foreclosure attorney, XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( Florida Bar # XXXX ), returned this check and refused to respond to the QWR, stating that RESPA " does not obligate SouthState Bank , N.A . to respond to a purported Qualified Written Request submitted by an individual who is neither a borrower nor a person authorized on the account. '' This is legally incorrect under 1024.36 ( i ). XXXX also stated she would not " engage in legal discourse with individuals who are not licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. '' A QWR is not legal discourse it is a federally mandated request for information that requires no law license to submit. Out of four tenders, SouthState returned only one ( the smallest ), deposited one, and retained two without action. An IRS Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, has been filed and accepted by the IRS for this account Amount : {$260000.00}, Event Code F, Date : XX/XX/XXXX. SouthState 's XX/XX/XXXX letter denied the existence of any XXXX and called it " wrongful and fraudulent '' but provided no evidence to support this denial. Despite this debt cancellation, SouthState continues to collect on the account, has filed foreclosure ( XX/XX/XXXX ), and continues to add fees and charges. On XX/XX/XXXX, I physically tendered payment at SouthState 's XXXX branch. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX of XXXX Assets, instructed the clerk to refused to accept the instrument yet in the same interaction, provided a written reinstatement balance. This contradictory action proves the bank can calculate the debt but willfully refuses the means of satisfaction. On XX/XX/XXXX, SouthState 's attorney sent a reinstatement letter demanding {$18000.00} but sent it only to the borrower, not to me at my designated address. This denied me the opportunity to cure the default. On XX/XX/XXXX just 17 days after filing judicial proceedings in XXXX XXXX, Florida SouthState force-placed hazard insurance at {$10000.00} annually and added the cost to the account. This notice was sent to the borrower at the property address, not to me. The premium of {$10000.00} for {$230000.00} in coverage ( 4.3 % of coverage ) is significantly above market rates. This deprived me of the opportunity to provide evidence of existing coverage as required by 12 C.F.R. 1024.37 SouthState Bank has filed judicial proceedings in XXXX XXXX, Florida in which it specifically identified the Complainant by name and capacity, demonstrating that SouthState has actual knowledge of the Complainant 's identity and recorded interest in the property. Despite this demonstrated knowledge, SouthState simultaneously claims it can not communicate with the Complainant about the account without 'borrower authorization. ' These positions are irreconcilable SouthState can not claim knowledge of the Complainant 's interest for purposes of litigation while denying that same knowledge for purposes of federal servicing obligations. SouthState Bank commenced judicial proceedings without having provided any pre-foreclosure notices to the recorded interest holder at the designated address of record. The Security Instrument governing this account expressly provides that neither the borrower nor the lender may commence or join a judicial action regarding a breach until the other party has been notified and given a reasonable period to take corrective action. SouthState sent no notice of default, no notice of acceleration, no notice of right to cure, no reinstatement instructions, and no loss mitigation communications to the Complainant at the designated address ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX at any time prior to filing judicial proceedings. The XX/XX/XXXX acceleration notice was sent to the borrower at the property address. The XX/XX/XXXX acceleration notice was sent to the borrower. The XX/XX/XXXX reinstatement letter was sent exclusively to the borrower. SouthState had the Complainant 's correct address as proven by its own XX/XX/XXXX letter sent to that exact address yet deliberately excluded the recorded interest holder from all pre-foreclosure communications. This constitutes a violation of the XXXX XXXX 's own notice provisions, a violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 loss mitigation requirements, and a violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 communication procedures. SouthState can not satisfy its pre-foreclosure notice obligations by communicating only with the borrower while ignoring the party with the largest recorded interest in the property. SouthState Bank , N.A . has failed to provide admissible evidence of a complete and unbroken chain of assignments from the original lender to the current Plaintiff. Any " blank indorsement '' or " allonge '' created after the commencement of judicial proceedings is a fraud upon the record and the court. Upon information and belief, the underlying Note was securitized into a XXXX ( Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit ) or similar trust vehicle. This process converted the Note into a " Security '' under the UCC, effectively separating the Note from the Mortgage. SouthState Bank , N.A . is acting as a mere servicer or " nominee '' without being the true Holder in Due Course ( XXXX ) or the Real Party in Interest. By selling the beneficial interest of the Note into a secondary market pool while retaining the Mortgage in its own name, the bank has " split '' the Note and Mortgage, rendering the security interest unenforceable under well-established principles of Equity and the Uniform Commercial Code. The bank has relied upon " robosigned '' affidavits and assignments executed by individuals who lack firsthand knowledge of the account history, the 1099-C discharge, or the physical location of the original instrument, constituting a fraud upon the public records Upon information and belief, SouthState Bank , N.A . has purportedly initiated an unverified judicial proceeding in XXXX XXXX, Florida, involving the subject property. The Complainant has not been properly served in any such action and does not submit to the jurisdiction of any statutory court. However, SouthStates own records and communications suggest they are attempting to utilize a public forum to enforce a debt that has been discharged via 1099-C. Upon information and belief, the Mortgage Identification Number ( MIN ) associated with this account has been moved to Inactive status in the MERS database as of XX/XX/XXXX. This deactivation follows the IRS Form 1099-C discharge event of XX/XX/XXXX, and constitutes an administrative admission that the electronic tracking of the security instrument has been terminated.By selling the beneficial interest of the Note into a secondary market pool while retaining the Mortgage, the bank has " split '' the instruments, rendering the security interest unenforceable in Equity.outhState Bank , N.A. has failed to demonstrate possession of the original " Wet Ink '' Note at the time it purportedly initiated unverified judicial proceedings in the public forum, The bank relies upon affidavits and assignments executed by individuals lacking firsthand knowledge of the 1099-C discharge, the MERS deactivation, or the physical location of the original instrument. The Respondent has failed to maintain and produce the underlying business records as mandated by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX updates. Specifically, the Respondent is relying on unverified 'System Messages ' ( LPA Feedback ) to justify an alleged default while refusing to provide the primary source documentationsuch as the actual transaction ledger required for loan verification and underwriting under the new XXXX standards SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS : Failure to respond to Qualified Written Requests ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.36 ) - Failure to implement successor in interest procedures ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( vi ) ) - Failure to provide pre-foreclosure notices to the recorded interest holder as required by the XXXX XXXX 's own notice and opportunity to cure provisions - Dual tracking proceeding with foreclosure while the recorded interest holder was actively tendering payments to cure the default ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( g ) ) - Improper first notice or filing for foreclosure ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( b ) ( 9 ) ) - Failure to provide early intervention and loss mitigation communication to the recorded interest holder ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.39 ) - Misdirection of all critical communications to borrower instead of recorded interest holder ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.38 ) - Force-placed insurance violations excessive premium, wrong address, improper notice ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.37 ) - Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) under the Dodd-Frank Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ) - Violation of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX requiring " borrower authorization '' and loan assumption as preconditions for communication ( 12 U.S.C. 1701j-3 ( d ) ; 12 C.F.R. 1024.30, 1024.31 ) - Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) failure to disclose actual creditor, inaccurate disclosures regarding account status ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) - Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) collection on cancelled debt, false representations of debt status, unauthorized fees, failure to validate debt upon written dispute ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq., including 1692e, 1692f, 1692g ) - Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) continued derogatory reporting on a debt cancelled via IRS Form 1099-C and discharged via accord and satisfaction ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., 1681s-2, 1681n ) - Retention of tendered payments without depositing or returning conversion of Trust assets ( UCC 3-420 , 4-302 ; F.S. 673.4201, 674.3021 ) - Collection on a debt cancelled via IRS Form 1099-C potential violation of 26 C.F.R. 1.6050P-1 - Contradictory conduct depositing accord and satisfaction tender then claiming debt is owed in full ( UCC 3-311 ; F.S. 673.3111 ) - Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ( FDUTPA ) equity stripping, fraudulent enrichment, contradictory positions ( F.S. 501.201-501.213 ) - Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act willful refusal to communicate with authorized representative while communicating with borrower ( F.S. 559.72 )

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation