Consumer complaint received 2017-02-17 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Application, originator, mortgage broker — 
Company: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
QUESTION # 1 ~When did it become legal to leave lender required items off a HUD ( Truth in Lending Statement ) to deceive a borrower into thinking their payment went down to mislead them into signing a loan. Nationstar has confirmed borrower was misled and provided with a Fraudulent HUD statement already ... and the elderly consumer confirmed they never would have refinanced if the HUD statement was accurate so I will again ask ... 
QUESTION # 2 ~ When did failure to properly disclose fees, payments and escrow on a loan become legal? 
QUESTION # 3 ~ Nationstar already confirmed embezzlement of escrow funds with a simultaneous illegal attempt at foreclosure. Nationstar also confirmed that if the consumer would not have done the research and found the embezzlement, the home would have been illegally seized and illegally stolen, even though the elderly owner was paying as agreed. When did it become legal to misuse or divert a person 's escrow account without their knowledge? 
QUESTION # 4 ~ When did it become legal to take funds from an escrow account without proper IMMEDIATE written notification? 
QUESTION # 5 ~ When did it become legal to hokld these illegal funds for a period of 7 months without telling the rightful owner where the money was? 
QUESTION # 6 ~ Nationstar has failed to mail monthly statements for most of XXXX. Nationstar also failed to properly credit oral agreements on the phone during this failure, deceiving the elderly homeowner. When did it become legal to stop mailing monthly statements? 
QUESTION # 7 ~ When did it become legal to mail false and misleading statements and other attempts to scare homeowners out of their homes? 
QUESTION # 8 ~ When the fraud was identified XXXX started an investigation and we had verbally agreed that loan cancellation was on the way. XXXX also stated on writing and copied to the CFPB email, that no foreclosure was happening. When did it become legal to deceive a homeowner, telling them you were not foreclosing, while simultaneously foreclosing behind the rightful owners back? 
QUESTION # 9 ~ Nationstar added thousands of dollars in illegal fees and collected principal without credit on this elderly homeowner. When did it become legal to collect more than the Federally allowed amount for a monthly late fee? 
QUESTION # 10 ~ XXXX is a {$300000.00} to {$400000.00} house that Nationstar stole and resold while defrauding the Federal Government. It was put under contract twice but unable to close because it was never properly foreclosed. This property was eventually sold bu another realtor that did n't care about laws or compliance. When did it become legal to sell a home you did not own? 
QUESTION # 11 ~ When did it become legal to deceive the U.S. Government by hiding material facts like fraud and failure to legally own an asset you are selling, while defrauding the FHA, HUD, US Government and various insurance programs like Fannie Mae. 
QUESTION # 12 ~ Fannie Mae does not own this loan nor do they own any loans yet every Nationstar drone says " Fannie Mae owns the loan '' when questioned. When did it become legal to represent yourself as the U.S. Federal Government in order to deceive consumers about things like legal rights, liabilities and proper ownership? 
QUESTION # 13 ~ Nationstar purchased this loan in XXXX. Can you confirm that when a loan or asset portfolio is purchased, that Nationstar is responsible for liabilities in addition to the assets it gains from the portfolio? 
QUESTION # 14 ~ Nationstar and XXXX has engaged in Securities and Exchange Fraud by its incorporation of criminal acts and its absolute, 100 % refusal to comply with the law when caught. When did it become legal to use crime to hide business losses? 
QUESTION # 15 ~ When did it become legal to bill a party that is not responsible for an item the full amount of the cost of that item?

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation