Consumer complaint received 2025-09-26 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — FHA mortgage
Issue: Trouble during payment process — Fees charged
Company: CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC
State: DC

Complaint narrative:
I act as Attorney-in-Fact for XXXX XXXX XXXX under XXXX valid Limited Power of Attorney. Under Maryland Estates & Trusts 17-113, I am legally required to act with care, competence, diligence, loyalty, and in the best interests of my principal. 
This correspondence serves as formal notice that I have filed complaints with regulatory authorities, specifically the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC ), and the Maryland Office of the Attorney General, Consumer Protection Division. 
The filings concern systemic fraud by XXXX  XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX  XXXX directly partnered with FICO under the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, while XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX directly participated in the formation of XXXX XXXX, XXXX in XXXX. XXXX third purported owner, XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, never lawfully existed due to fatal defects in XXXX corporate lineage, rendering its claimed 33 % ownership void and fatally undermining the legality of XXXX formation. 
Supporting evidence consists entirely of public records, including Georgia XXXX of XXXX filings, FTC findings, federal statutes, and contracts. All exhibits have been cryptographically hashed and anchored to the XXXX XXXX, with verification recorded in the Exhibit XXXX XXXX. The full legal analysis is contained in The Illegality of FICO and XXXX, which documents the unlawful corporate lineage of XXXX  XXXX XXXX, the void formation of XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, and the illegal contracts underlying both FICO and XXXX. The record is also preserved on the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) with timestamped XXXX certificates. Thus, the evidentiary record is permanent, immutable, and legally incapable of alteration or rebuttal by any party, including your institution. 
Georgia law ( O.C.G.A. 13-8-1 ) and Delaware law ( 6 Del. C. 2706 ) both void agreements contrary to law or founded on illegality. The Supreme Court has confirmed that courts will not enforce contracts founded on illegality ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) ), and that no contract exists where the parties have not mutually assented to the same essential terms ( Raffles v. XXXX, XXXX Hurl. & XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ). Likewise, under XXXX. XXXX ( b ), no security interest can attach without a valid underlying agreement, and both Georgia law ( O.C.G.A. 51-6-2 ) and Delaware law ( 6 Del. C. 2706 ) prohibit contracts induced by fraudulent misrepresentation. In addition, under U.C.C. 3-305 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( ii ), enforcement of a negotiable instrument is barred where real defenses such as fraud in factum and illegality apply. Therefore, the alleged agreement is unenforceable. 
Furthermore, any attempt by a Carrington Mortgage Services , LLC to claim status as a holder in due course fails under U.C.C. 3-302. A holder in due course must take the instrument ( 1 ) for value, ( 2 ) in good faith, and ( 3 ) without notice of claims or defenses. Mortgage servicers generally act under servicing contracts rather than as purchasers for value, and by receipt of this Notice they now have actual knowledge of fraud, illegality, and voidness. Even absent knowledge, the real defenses under U.C.C. 3-305 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( ii ) defeat any alleged holder in due course status. Thus, no servicer may lawfully enforce or claim HIDC protection regarding the alleged mortgage note.

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