Consumer complaint received 2018-10-18 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Mr. Cooper is the servicing company that services our loan. On XX/XX/XXXX, Mr. Cooper filed a foreclosure action under the allege investors name " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '', case no. XXXX, In the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, In and for XXXX XXXX, Florida. The foreclosure complaint must be dismiss for the following legal reasons : The complaint fails to state a cause of action. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX failed the statutory requirement of section 48.23,  therefore the Lis Pendens must be dissolved as matter of Statutory Law. XXXXXXXX XXXX   failed to provide constructive notice of its claims. The purpose of lis pendens is to notify prospective purchasers and encumbrance that any interest acquired by them in the property in litigation is subject to the decree of a court.. See XXXX v XXXX, XXXX So. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DCA XXXX ). Section 48.23, Florida Statutes ( 2005 ), governs lis pendens, and subsection ( 1 ) ( a ) provided that : No action in any of the state and federal courts in this state operates as a lis pendens on any real or personal property involved therein or be affected thereby until a notice of the commencement of action is recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county where the property is, which notice contains the names of the parties, the time of the institution of the action, the name of the court in which it is pending, a description of the property involved or to be affected, and a statement of the relief sought as to the property. If plaintiff fails to include all of the require items in the lis pendens, the lis pendens is ineffective. See XXXX v XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX DCA XXXX ). In this present action, the lis pendens is ineffective. The lis pendens misspelled the name of the only defendant involved in the suit, XXXX XXXX. The lis Pendes reflects XXXX XXXX, which incorrectly misspelled defendants first name. This defect is fatal since constructive notice in Florida is imputed only through the grantor-grantee index of the official of the official public records. See XXXX v XXXX, XXXX So. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) See also XXXX v XXXX, XXXX So. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX DCA XXXX ) Constructive notice is legal inference, and it is imputed to creditors and subsequent purchasers by virtue of any document filed in the grantor/grantee index-the official records. ) revd on other grounds, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). A search of the grantor-grantee index in the official records of XXXX XXXX would not have disclosed the name of XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX claims against XXXX XXXX thus did not impart constructive notice upon anyone. See copy of certified former marriage certificate reflecting defendants correct first name XXXX XXXX and not XXXX XXXX exhibit A. See also also copy of Florida drivers license and social security reflecting defendants correct spelling of first name XXXX XXXX, as exhibit B. 

The foreclosure attorney attached to the complaint a copy to an allege loan modification agreement. The allege loan modification agreement is a fraud for the following reasons : 1. I never signed the allege agreement furnished by Mr. Cooper, moreover, the allege loan modification agreement contains a document in particular that its not part of a legit loan modification agreement under the Home Affordable program. If you carefully notice, the allege loan agreement contains a truth in lending allegedly signed by me. A truth in lending only if is a refinance or a new purchase. A loan modification is an extension to the contract and therefore the Treasury department never incorporated a truth in lending to an allege " Home Affordable loan modification agreement ''. In fact to proves this, i have attached a loan modification agreement from an unrelated customer of Mr. Cooper, who signed a legit loan modification agreement where it reflects that a truth in lending was not provided to him in the loan documents. Why? Because a truth in lending, as stated before is not part of an allege loan modification agreement under the HAMP, it is only required on a refinance or purchase. Mr. Cooper fabricated the allege agreement, the entire lending world and the Consumer Financial Protection knows too well that a truth in lending is not part of a HAMP agreement. The loan agreement is also false for the following reason : XXXX XXXX  filed a previous foreclosure action, case no. XXXX, and on XX/XX/XXXX, filed a motion to vacate final judgment and provided the court with an allege loan modification agreement. if you notice on page 7 of 11, it is not signed by the lender. In florida a loan modification agreement is not valid until executed by both parties, see Florida section 494.00296 ( 2 ). Florida Statute 786.0304 ( 2 ) provides that a debtor may maintain inaction on a credit agreement unless the agreement is in writing, expresses consideration, sets forth  the relevant terms and conditions, and is signed by the creditor and debtor ''. On XX/XX/XXXX, the servicer attached the allege loan modification agreement but this time it was signed by the lender and dated XX/XX/XXXX. The previous allege agreement was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, yet its does not reflect the signature of the lender, and the same document suddenly signed years later and for the purpose of the foreclosure action. 
Both the note and mortgage reflect the incorrect spelling of my first name. This is a fatal title issue that must be corrected. Both the note and mortgage must be re-signed. We contacted Mr. Cooper and requested that they draft the loan documents and have refuse. Assuming that we wanted to acquire a loan modification, that would not be an option until both the note and mortgage are resigned reflecting the correction to my legal name. This title defect must be corrected, otherwise the modification would not be effective since it would reflect the incorrect spelling to the first name. In addition, XXXX XXXX filed a foreclosure action, that did not reflect any endorsement. Suddenly those endorsements appeared at a time where the original lender XXXX XXXX no longer existed. 

Mr. XXXX XXXX, if you are going to lie at least be good at it ... ...

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation