Consumer complaint received 2015-06-30 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Other mortgage
Issue: Loan servicing, payments, escrow account — 
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
In XXXX of XXXX we received a decision from the XXXX Court of Appeals regarding a lawsuit we had filed against CitiMortgage in XXXX. 
Upon reviewing the Appeal court decision we discovered that CitiMortgage and their counselXXXX introduced fraudulent and deceptive evidence into their XXXX brief ( Addendum Volume XXXX Part XXXX pages XXXX ) that was not present in the trial court. This action amounts to fraud, falsification of public records, mortgage fraud as well as criminal fraud. 
The evidence CitiMortgage and counsel introduced into the Appeal Court record was an Affidavit by CitiMortgage employee ( alleged XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Affidavit now proffered a copy of our mortgage note with the addition of a XXXX page that contained an endorsement that was never presented during the trial court. In fact, in all prior court filings and county records, as well as XXXX Affidavit that was XXXX presented in CitiMortgage 's Motion for Summary Judgment on XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; the mortgage note contained only XXXX pages and had no endorsements. Interestingly, in the same Appeal Addendum ( Volume XXXX Part XXXX pages XXXX ) Citimortgage presents a XXXX page note with no endorsement in direct conflict with the note presented in XXXX testimony that has XXXX pages and an endorsement on pages XXXX. 
The lack of an endorsement was central to our original complaint and appeal. XXXX XXXX Affidavit, sworn under oath, was prejudicial to the outcome of our appeal, may be criminal in nature and violates Rule 60 of XXXX Civil Procedure. 
Under XXXX Civil Procedure Rule 60, amended paragraph ( 4 ) of subdivision XXXX c ) states a judgment, decree or order may be modified or set aside " [ f ] or misrepresentation or fraud ( whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic ) by an adverse party. '' The concealment or forgery of this XXXX page with endorsement to our mortgage note is evidence of fraud among other legal violations yet to be determined. Tampering with a public record is a Class D felony and is punishable by up to six years in prison in XXXX 
This fraud involves a property located in XXXX, a borrower who lives in XXXX and a mortgage servicer and employee that reside in XXXX. This deception resulted in an unfair trial and potentially the loss of a home valued at over {$300000.00}. 
This is n't the XXXX time XXXX has perjured himself. There is a XXXX case entitled XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and CitiMortgage, Inc. XXXX XXXX District Court XXXX ), where XXXX XXXX declared under the penalty of perjury, that a note that was endorsed to CitiMortgage came directly from the loan originator. Despite XXXX sworn testimony, CitiMortgage later admitted judicially that the assignment of XXXX note from MERS was a fabrication. 
Note : Although I am not certain that XXXX XXXX XXXX who use aliases XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX is the same individual, XXXX year-old XXXX XXXX from XXXX was recently arrested for XXXX and other charges. 
My dealings with Citimortgage have been rife with fraud over the past decade. Not only did Citimortgage file XXXX fraudulent proof of claims in XXXX Federal bankruptcy proceedings, but revoked an 'approved repayment plan ' when we were in compliance with the agreement. There are a myriad of other issues involving Citimortgage including standing and other fraudulent acts, but this latest illegal maneuver has resulted in a violation of due process and prejudiced the court 's decision. 
Thank you.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation