Consumer complaint received 2026-01-12 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage — Changes in loan terms during the application process
Company: ALAMEDA MORTGAGE CORPORATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
From XX/XX/year> to today Plaintiff has consistently stated she never consented to occupy her property, was tricked into it, and is losing rental income. What is stated in Defendant XXXX own emails produced during discovery proves Defendant XXXX fraudulently inflated XXXX rental income to reflect three units of rental income while at the exact same time fraudulently inserting material occupancy demands resulting in the loss of FUTURE rental income from one unit because of the fraudulent material occupancy terms. Defendant XXXXXXXX was given an actual lease for the three bedroom and junior additional dwelling unit. Plaintiff has never provided a lease for the studio because Plaintiff is the first person to occupy it and moving out results in default. Defendant XXXX fraudulently inflated rental income to push this loan through and Defendant XXXX knew or should have known prior to purchase because its clearly stated in the appraisal, the appraisal sketch and the appraisal photos. Two units are occupied, two units of rental income exist, three units of rental income do not exist, there are only three units, so the appraisal fraudulently inflates one unit of rental income because three units of rental income were fraudulently used to qualify this loan. Its bank fraud plain and simple and Defendant representative XXXX XXXX chief legal counsel knew or should have known when he chose to never cancel and still holds onto interest in this fraud. It is disgusting XXXX XXXX knows about the fraudulently inflated rental income on all his own loan documents and untruthfully states here XXXX Mortgage did nothing wrong the loan is valid. He should be brought up on charges and lose his license to practice law for his ongoing involvement in mortgage fraud. XXXX XXXX would rather pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to abuse me in the judicial branch hoping to dismiss my claims on technicalities than ever cancel this fraud. 
Since XX/XX/year> I have filed complaints here, federal attorney general office, FDIC, Ca XXXX, state consumer protection agencies, Better Business Bureau, state attorney generals were crimes were in fact committed, state legislators, federal house and senate finance committee members, the federal reserve, XXXX XXXX, and was forced to file a case in civil court because nothing is being done about this obvious bank fraud loan. Defendant The Money Source and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank continue to commit bank fraud by conspiring with, acting in concert, aiding and abetting XXXX to continue bank fraud, XXXX, mortgage fraud, and countless other federal and state financial crimes against the public. XXXX  board member XXXX XXXX just doesnt care because no one is there to stop him. 
In an email from Defendant XXXX Appraisal XXXX XXXX XXXX to Defendant XXXX on XX/XX/year> Defendant XXXX ordered and possessed a third appraisal. It is critical to take note the first two appraisals state tenant occupied with three separate units of independent rental income at {$5500.00} a month. The three bedroom lease is correctly reflected at {$2500.00} a month. The junior additional dwelling unit is correctly reflected at {$1700.00} a month. I provided no lease for the studio because its brand new and I was the only person who ever lived there at time of loan origination. The appraisal incorrectly stated {$1300.00} a month rental income for the studio. The appraisal fraudulently inflates rental income by {$1300.00} AND {$1400.00} A MONTH! Defendant XXXX instigated the appraisal to fraudulently inflate rental income then applied the fraudulent amount to XXXX XXXX loan documents, the loan documents sent to Defendant XXXX, and everyone else. 
The third appraisal states owner occupied for the first time. There is no possibility Defendant XXXX missed this because prior to purchase on or about XX/XX/year> its own undisclosed underwriter demanded an original in addition to the third appraisal as a condition of purchase. Defendant XXXX own emails state Defendant XXXX made this demand because there are only XXXX units and there is an owner occupancy demand resulting in the impossibility of one units rental income. There is no lease for the studio. There is no income from the studio. It is fraudulent and XXXX XXXX knows it but just doesnt care. Before fileing my case and during discovery XXXX XXXX made sure to redact all names on all correspondence with this CFPB so that any claims of fraud will not satisfy the name requirement. Furthermore, XXXX XXXX untruthfully stated here my demands to ascertain names of CFPB authors is a threat, then he threatened me with all legal action if I continue to find out the names of the authors. That is intentional obstruction of justice. XXXX XXXX is a criminal and should be disbarred. 
In an email from Defendant XXXX Post Closing XXXX XXXX XXXX to Defendant XXXX XX/XX/year> the following conditions are stated, 1. Provide an explanation for the appraisal page 1 notation that states reported corrected to reflect owner occupied. Provide a copy of the original appraisal prior to this correction. XXXX underwriter to review once received. 2. Correspondent to provide borrower signed LOX regarding proposed additional ADU as noted on the appraisal. This noted in the building sketch and photo of additional concrete slab. It is important to note XXXX XXXX Department of XXXX and XXXX has not accepted any application for Plaintiffs movable tiny house at this time. There is no XXXX just three units under the main house. Two units are rented, one is occupied by myself so there is no rental income, no lease, just a fraudulently inflated fake dollar amount. The occupancy demand results in this loan not only being subject to bank fraud and XXXX crimes but I was forced to be at, against my will, with no reasonable means of escape false imprisonment because to leave is a default pursuant to the fraudulently inserted material occupancy contract terms. XXXX XXXX just doesnt care. He still maintains this loan is valid and Defendant XXXX did nothing wrong. He is a XXXX and a XXXX profiting off the backs of his financial crime victims. 
Through emails made available in discovery it is obvious Defendant XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the XXXX Defendant XXXX, and Defendant XXXX conspired together to fraudulent inflate Plaintiffs rental income for the purpose of increasing her interest rate on the prior loan and ensure she couldnt get a small home equity loan. Emails prove the three employees intended to require material occupancy terms from the gate because its stated in multiple emails. All the while Defendant XXXX XXXX is stating and representing to XXXX XXXX that she can leave and completely rent out the property once the loan closes. 
Emails prove these XXXX XXXX employees intended to fraudulently state three units of rental income instead of two units of actual rental income because emails state all three units of rental income are necessary. There is no possibility these three didnt know because three units are fraudulently stated on the appraisal, the XXXX XXXX XXXX docs, and everywhere. The third unit, the studio, has no rental income because I am the only person who lived there and later was forced to live in it against my will. These three employees marked, uploaded, downloaded, stated, documented, reviewed, and make certain to state three units of rental income per month on all XXXX XXXX loan documents, the three appraisals, and all documents requested by and reviewed by Defendant XXXX own undisclosed underwriter. 
Prior to purchase on or about XX/XX/year> Defendant XXXX knows or should have known that this loan fraudulently inflates rental income by about {$1400.00} a month because it's on the documents XXXX requested, obtained, and reviewed prior to purchase. Some undisclosed underwriter made the decision to service this loan despite the fact that it is obvious there is fraudulently inflated rental income, I filed a lawsuit XX/XX/year>, the first payment is for {$80000.00}, there is missing escrow money XXXX stole, homeowners insurance and property taxes were not paid by XXXX by XX/XX/year>, the right to cancel documents are blank where the last day to rescind must be filled out, additional right to cancel documents are back dated on XX/XX/year>, and this is a refi of a refi from the same lender. ALL of this is known to XXXX prior to purchase. XXXX buys the loan anyway. XXXX expects to and is paid over {$11000.00} from the {$80000.00} I returned to cancel this fraud. Because it is a refi of a refi from the same lender only the amount over the prior loan is at risk to rescission pursuant to statute. Defendant XXXX and XXXX XXXX knows this. So it seems the reason to purchase an obviously facially fraudulently inflated rental income bank fraud loan is to pocket the {$11000.00}, make monthly mortgage payments to itself out of the {$80000.00} including to a fake escrow, charge late fees, and pocket interest payments for about a year before transferring only the servicing rights back to XXXX! 
Before purchase Defendant XXXX undisclosed underwriter requested the original appraisal in addition to the third appraisal Defendant XXXX provided. All three appraisals state three units of rental income is {$5500.00} a month. Actual rental income is {$4200.00} a month from the three bedroom and the junior additional dwelling unit before property management fees and utilities. All appraisals designate monthly income per unit. All appraisals correctly reflect the three bedroom lease is {$2500.00} a month. All appraisals correctly reflect the junior additional dwelling unit lease is {$1700.00} a month. The third appraisal fraudulently states owner occupied with {$1300.00} and {$1400.00} a month rental income. All three appraisals fraudulently state the studio is rented at {$1300.00} and {$1400.00} a month at the time I was living in it. Plaintiff provided no leases for the studio because it was brand new during loan origination and she is the first person to live in it. All appraisals paid by Defendant XXXX fraudulent state total rental income is {$5500.00} a month instead of the actual monthly rental income {$4200.00}. Defendant XXXX underwriter can see there are only three units and material terms state owner occupied. Defendant XXXX underwriter can see its own documents state each units rental income separately. It is not possible the underwriter requested and possessed an appraisal designated tenant occupied in XXXX or XX/XX/year> and owner occupied in XX/XX/year> but missed the fact one of the units is stated as fraudulently inflated rental income that can not exist in the future because of the fraudulently inserted material occupancy demands. Defendant XXXX own underwriter knew or should have known Defendant XXXX fraudulently inflated rental income on the appraisals, the loan documents, XXXX XXXX documents, and all documents used to push this loan through. 
Defendant XXXX own representative and Chief Legal Counsel XXXX XXXX reviewed the loan documents by about XX/XX/year> because he signed a repurchase demand about that time. In discovery Defendant XXXX produced several Immediate Repurchase Demand letters starting about XX/XX/year>. It seems all repurchase demand letters produced are signed XXXX XXXX. In XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX XXXX repurchased amount due to Defendant XXXX is {$430000.00} but during the course of hundreds of communications XXXX XXXX blankets with privilege in his civil case privilege log the repurchase amount changes several times. There is no privilege to aid and abet, conspire, and continue to profit from bank fraud XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX knows or should know the documents in his possession and those he has access to show fraudulently inflated of rental income on their face. The appraisals, the XXXX XXXX loan file, and Defendant XXXX own underwriter documents show {$5500.00} a month in rental income from three units. It is not possible XXXX XXXX missed the material occupancy terms resulting in one unit being owner occupied or else default. XXXX XXXX can see rental income from each designated separate unit in his own documents. XXXX XXXX knows this loan fraudulently inflates rental income used as a condition to finance. XXXX XXXX knows about or should know about the fraudulently inflated rental income but just doesnt care. He is currently trying to dismiss my entire case in civil court. 
XXXX XXXX just adopted a motion to dismiss my breach of contract claims, aiding and abetting fraud claims, unfair business claims, FDCP claims, and refuses any offer of a good faith settlement. XXXX XXXX sole mission is to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to make sure he can do this again and again and again to the public. XXXX XXXX is a criminal and deserves to be disbarred for his continuation of and adoption of BANK FRAUD, XXXX, AIDING AND ABETTING FRAUD, UNFAIR BUSINESS AND HARM TO THE PUBLIC!!!

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation