Consumer complaint received 2024-03-28 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: AK

Complaint narrative:
Bank of America stated repeatedly in their opposition to complaint in bankruptcy on XX/XX/XXXX by attorney XXXX and later that my loan is a federally backed mortgage and that it was securitized by XXXX. 
It is settled ( relevant to federally backed mortgages ) that the applicable law is federal. In a decision that has become a leading case on the question, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, arising under the National Housing Act, Title II, 12 U.S.C. 1707 ff. we held : But we do find it to be clear that the source of the law governing the relations between the United States and the parties to the mortgage here involved is federal. ( Citations omitted ) * * * It is therefore equally clear that if the law of the State of Washington is to have any application in the foreclosure proceeding it is not because it applies of its own force, but because either the Congress, the FHA, or the Federal Court adopts the local rule to further federal policy. 268 F.2d at 382.

The first question is whether the Congress adopted state law in its definition of mortgage and first mortgage. California argues that it did. The language relied upon appears in 12 U.S.C. 1736 ( a ), and reads : The term mortgage means a first mortgage on real estate, in fee simple. We rejected Californias argument in View Crest, supra, where identical language in 12 U.S.C. 1707 was relied upon. We said : The argument is that in adopting the state definition of first mortgage, Congress intended to adopt all the incidents of the mortgage relation under state law including remedies on default and the appointment of receivers. That this is not the case is clear from reading section 1713 of the same Act which defines certain acts as being in default ( part g ) and sets out certain remedies that the FHA can pursue such as institution of foreclosure ( part k ) proceedings without reference to whether or not there is such a remedy for the default described in the State where the property is located. Moreover, there is no apparent reason for assuming that Congress in incorporating by reference certain duties under state law also meant to restrict the United States to the state remedies for breach of those duties * * 268 F.2d at 382.

Therefore, Bank Of America can not foreclose nonjudicially under Alaska law when the mortgage is federally back mortgage.

Bank Of America recorded on XX/XX/XXXX a 6th noncompliant notice of default and sale for XX/XX/XXXX in blatant disregard to Congress and the federal courts that clearly determined that federally backed mortgages are under federal and not under state law unless Congress specifically adopted Alaska nonjudicial law, which Congress never did. 
All while knowing that this default is time-barred since XXXX as determined in the bankruptcy court denial of Bank Of America motion to dismiss my complaint on the sole ground that Bank of America was already time-barred in order dated XX/XX/XXXX.

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