Consumer complaint received 2015-11-03 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On XXXX XXXX, 2015, my wife and I mailed to our servicer JPMorgan Chase, herein referred to as Chase, a Letter or Notice of Rescission. As we understand it, pursuant to the Truth In Lending Act, our debt obligation was canceled upon mailing. Pursuant to the Act, the rescission is self-enforcing and it automatically extinguishes the lien and the liability. We also understand the delivering notification to the entity to which we are directed to send payments constitutes delivery to the creditor or any assignee and that the rescission rights are equally enforceable against original creditors and assignees. 
Chase received our Notice of Rescission on XXXX XXXX, 2015. Pursuant to the Act, Chase had twenty ( 20 ) calendar days to dispute or challenge the Notice of Rescission if they felt it was unwarranted. Chase took no such action. Instead, Chase sent us a letter informing us they received the rescission. Under the act, the security interest is void and of no legal effect irrespective of whether the creditor makes any affirmative response to the notice. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Act that gives Chase right or authority to grant or deny, with our Notice of Rescission, it is automatic. Strict construction of Regulation Z would dictate that the voiding be considered absolute and not subject to judicial modification. As previously stated, if Chase wanted to dispute the Notice of Rescission they had to have filed a declaratory action against us within twenty ( 20 ) calendar days upon receiving the notice and they failed to do it. Their failure to comply with the rescission obligations subjects Chase to liability. 
Since Chase has failed to comply with the mandatory actions within the twenty ( 20 ) day calendar period, Chase and/or the true " creditor '' has waived any and all defenses against the rescission and are now in violation of the Act. In addition, because of their failure to act, they have given up their right to make a claim for the money that allegedly was loan to us. The debt is not only unsecured, but it is eradicated starting with the rescission notice and ending with their failure to comply with the statute within the twenty ( 20 ) calendar day period. 
Given Chase 's blatant disregard and disrespect for our TILA loan rescission rights, we respectfully request that the CFPB immediately review our complaint in critical detail. There is absolutely no question that Chase is in violation. If the rescission is self-enforcing and Chase failed to file a declaratory action against us within twenty ( 20 ) calendar days, there can be no legal foreclosure action against our property on XXXX XXXX, 2015. There can not be a foreclosure on a deed of trust that has been canceled by operation of law. It is both shocking and frustrating that Chase continues to be fined for breaking the law and keeps breaking the law. This sort of blatant disregard for the law must be stopped. 
We tried year after year to modify our loan to no avail. We were denied time after time after time. We started paying attention to the news about all the problems several banks, lenders, and servicers were experiencing and took a look into our own situation. Through research we found some very disturbing things which led us to believe the rights to rescind our loan was still open. The TILA statute makes no distinction between the right to rescind in 3 days or extended as neither case nor statute give courts equitable discretion to alter TILA 's substantive provisions. Since no lawsuit was filed to challenge the rescission, Chase nor the true " creditor '' has a right or standing to challenge the rescission itself or whether it should be effective.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation