Consumer complaint received 2019-02-17 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Seized or attempted to seize your property
Company: Ocwen Financial Corporation
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
This matter involve a fraudulent foreclosure against me by Ocwen Loan Servicing Company and XXXX XXXX XXXX. The sale of the property is scheduled on XX/XX/XXXX, so by the time this reaches CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, the property would have been sold. I feel the Ocwen Loan and others are providing false or misleading information to me regarding my loan. They have prepared, executed, notarized, and presented false and misleading documents, filing false and misleading documents with courts. 
There are rules that before anyone can commence foreclosure on a property, there must be clear evidence ( proof ) of a valid claim, that the party taking the action is a Real Party of Interest, that the party is a lawful Holder in Due Course and prove that they have lawful standing to foreclose.

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 17, an action must be pursued by a real party of Interest. I have ask for both Owen Loan and XXXX XXXX XXXX to verify their title of the property, I submitted evidence that they are not the owner of the title and therefore, lack subject matter jurisdiction to foreclose on my property. 
In XX/XX/XXXX, the Massachusetts Supreme Court issued a decision in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Mass. XX/XX/XXXX ), in which all the Justices unanimously agreed. For banks to be able to foreclose they must show a perfection of the chain of title both in the Deed of Trust/Mortgage and the Promissory Note. It was also ruled that a blank assignment was not acceptable proof of perfection of the title for the Promissory Note. 
I have proved with evidences that my mortgage was securitized and sold to another party away from my original lender XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. According to Financial Accounting Standards FAS-140, when XXXX XX/XX/XXXXsold my loan to a Real Estates Mortgage Investment Conduit ( REMIC ), they forever lose their ability to enforce, control or otherwise foreclose on the property. They are no longer a real party of interest. They are only servicers. This transaction ( securitization ) is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) and becomes public information. An asset declared in SEC filing is a permanent conversion ( Stock ) and there is no doubt my loan /promissory note is no more. These facts were explained to them.

I also showed that this assignment ( transaction ) was not recorded at the Recorder Office of XXXX XXXX County Maryland as required by law. Nor did they notify me of the transaction. They conspired to hide this transaction and I believe that bifurcation occurred. This fraudulent act leads to a defect in the chain of title and make the Deed of Trust/Mortgage unenforceable. According to the Pooling and Servicing agreement that created the Real Estates Mortgage Investment Conduit ( REMIC ), when the original lender sells a loan into REMIC, they are required to : 1 ) deliver my promissory note to the REMIC within 90 days. This means that the lender has to endorses the promissory note using the language pay to the order of Name Party. 2 ) They have to physically deliver the note to the REMIC. 3 ) State law requires that they record this delivery with the County Recorders Office. When any part of the above is not done this leads to a defect in the chain of title.

A representative of Owen Loan LLC claim that my loan belongs to XXXX XXXX   as an investor. However, when the investor becomes a majority Shareholder of the traded stock, they are not holders in due course or the real party in interest. Only the true and beneficial holder in due course is the real party in interest and not the investor. 
Federal Courts have ruled that the only way to prove the perfection of any security is by actual possession of the security. See Matter of XXXX XXXX. XXXX   XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir XX/XX/XXXX ). Unequivocally, the Courts rule is that in order to prove the " instrument '', possession is mandatory. 
The following courts also ruled similarly to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX. XXXX : The Defendant must show they are a real party of interest to have standing to foreclose or enforce the negotiable instrument. ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX. v XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX Dept XXXX ] ; XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX Dept XXXX ] ; XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. v XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX Dept XXXX ] ; XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX. v XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ] ). The Defendant has no foundation in law or fact to foreclose upon a property in which they have no legal or equitable interest ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. v XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX Dept XXXX ] ; XXXX v XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX Dept XXXX ] ( XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX. Ohio XXXX ) and Illinois XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX WL XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, ( XXXX ). 
The evidence that identify that there are problems with the title is revealed in the audit investigation report. It shows step by step, each allegation of fraud and the reason the title have been bifurcated. 
I received the Audit Investigation report during the month of XX/XX/XXXX and I immediately provided both Owen Loan LLC and XXXX XXXX XXXX a copy. Therefore, they have been aware of my reasons for contesting their illegal actions and I also gave them the opportunity to response to all allegations and/or engage into discovery. 
They either response falsely or not at all. Typically, when someone is silence, they are avoiding the questions. In US v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), the court rule that silence can only be equated with Fraud where there is a Legal or Moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. 
Again, I provided them with the following evidences to support the allegations of fraud. A notarized audit investigation report. Nevertheless, Owen loan have denied that the mortgage was sold. However, they failed to challenge the validity of the notarized evidence which clearly show otherwise. 
Also, evidence in my complaint show that they fail to report the transaction ( securitization ) to the XXXX XXXX County Records Office and myself as required by law. They have also refused to challenge this allegation of ( fraud ) in their arguments. They is no justice if there is any degree of fraud involved. 

As you know, this is not the first time the Ocwen Loan Servicing has been accrued of activities involving fraud with mortgage loans. The following civil action is one of many filed against them. 
In the US District Court for the District of Columbia, 50 states of the United States filed a civil action jointly with the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU against OCWEN LOAN SERVICING , LLC, see XXXX_cfpb_complaint ocwen.pdf. The complaint was file for misconduct related to the servicing of single-family residential mortgages. I am so glad you have knowledge of the misconduct. However, somehow the State of Maryland was excluded ; Why? Under misconduct of Ocwen Loan Servicing, the  following complaints were filed for fraudulent activities ; 20 ( d ) providing false or misleading information in response to borrower complaints ; 20 ( e ) providing false or misleading information to borrowers regarding loans that have been transferred from other servicers ; 20 ( p ) preparing, executing, notarizing, and presenting false and misleading documents, filing false and misleading documents with courts and government agencies, or otherwise using false or misleading documents as part of the foreclosure process ( including, but not limited to, affidavits, declarations, certifications, substitutions of trustees, and assignments ). 

Because of the size of the Audit Investigation Report, I have to mail CFPB a copy very soon. 
I ask that you would investigate my situation.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation