Consumer complaint received 2025-10-28 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — Foreclosure
Company: Usset Weingarden & Liebo PLLP
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX created fraudulent documents hosting a highly illegal/unlawful auction XX/XX/XXXX. 

XXXX claims XXXX is the XXXX and XXXX which is impossible as XXXX appears no where on the parcel records= no jurisdiction to collect, foreclose or even interact with us. XXXX appears no where on XX/XX/XXXXcurretly shows INACTIVE and has since XXXX citing only XXXX and XXXX XXXX. 

XXXX sent men with guns to my house with the foreclosure papers made out to BORROWERS and the ATTORNEY a CORPORATION which is IMPOSSIBLE. BORROWER would mean XXXX has a contract with us and they lent money being part of the original contract, they're not, we have no contract and XXXX XXXX XXXX with his boyfriend XXXX XXXX have not shown a single wet ink signed contract or document from XXXX or their Firm. I have on XXXX XXXX XXXX tossing papers on XXXX car. 

XXXX XXXX is caught making self assignments when it's only been Servicer. This is complete Fraud and Void everything. CFPB, FBI and XX/XX/XXXX have been mailed the proof of AntiTrust Law Violations and what's attached proves my Claims. 

XXXX and XXXX XXXX has never appeard on our credit reports or XX/XX/XXXXyet claim to be Creditor/Lender and Servicer = A blatant lie proven by public record and I claim they lent nothing from their own reserves = not a lender or creditor. Show the accounting record to disporve me. 

I claim all Notes ( XXXX XXXX ) Endorsed Properly per XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX is Tender Of Payment perXX/XX/XXXXXXXX and when the Note is securitized circulating on the Stock Martket that's XXXX XXXX XXXX = XXXX as XXXX the one who sold the Note got paid so in fact XXXX got Paid and there is no Valid Debt and now this proves Double Dipping and Securities Fraud. XXXX, XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX were sent multiple letters demanding to prove Rights/Jurisdiction and they all go silent. 

XXXX claims to have STANDING with XXXX XXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Not on XX/XX/XXXX, the parcel records and never part of the original contract = No Standing at all to even collect. 

My Audit shows the note not endorsed put into a XXXX that differ than the XXXX that foreclosed yet, the XXXX trusts are never part of the chain and only there based off fraudulent assignments. 

The contracts use Grammatical Deception how? Claiming to be Creditor, Lender and Servicer It is legally impossible for any XXXX entity to be Creditor, Lender, and Servicer unless : It funded the loan at origination ( Lender ), Holds and owns the Note and Mortgage ( Creditor ), and Collects payments under its own authority ( Servicer ). 

Since XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and the Trusts fail allXX/XX/XXXX conditions, every claim of creditor, lender, or servicer is false, misleading, and void under both Minnesota law and federal law. All the employees from each Corporation are a danger and threat to society thinking they above the XXXX XXXX. 


Statement of Violations State and Federal Law Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX MN XXXX | Parcel ID : XXXX | Claimant : XXXX XXXX XXXX This Statement summarizes the state and federal violations committed through the execution and recording of the self-assignments XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX ( XXXX ), and subsequent foreclosure filings ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ). Each act collectively constitutes fraud upon the public record, lack of standing, and coordinated restraint of trade. 
XXXX XXXX Violations XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) Foreclosure may proceed only if the mortgagees interest appears of record. No XXXX assignment exists. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX of Attorney to Foreclose must be executed by an entity with recorded authority. XXXX Laws XX/XX/XXXXwas invalid. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX Only a lawful mortgagee or its successor/assignee may execute or record assignments/XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX was merely servicer. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( a ) ( XXXX ) Obtaining possession by false representation ( fraudulent self-assignment and foreclosure ). 
XXXX. Uniform Commercial Code Violations XXXX XXXX Only a person entitled to enforce ( holder in due course ) may enforce a note ; XXXX XXXX and XXXX were not holders. 
XXXX XXXX A self-assignment conveys no enforceable rights ; no XXXX link was ever recorded. 
Restatement ( XXXX ) of Contracts XXXX ( XXXX ) Assignment requires distinct parties ; XXXX XXXX XXXX is a nullity. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX Violations 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of creditor status under the FDCPA. 
15 U.S.C. XXXX ( g ) Failure to notify borrower within 30 days of assignment under XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ), ( c ) Failure to provide accurate servicing transfer notices underXX/XX/XXXX 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX violations ; assets inserted into XXXX XXXX XXXX after trust closing ( XXXX XXXX closed XX/XX/XXXX ). 
XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade among XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX entities. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX Mail and wire fraud through transmission of false instruments to seize property. 
XXXX XXXX. XXXX False statements in matters within XXXX jurisdiction. 
XXXX Conclusion Because no recorded assignment from XXXX to any foreclosing entity exists, all subsequent filings are void ab initio. These filings constitute violations of Minnesota foreclosure statutes, the XXXX, federal consumer-protection laws, and the Sherman Antitrust Act. Each document attached ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) is submitted as direct evidence of the described violations. 

Dear Recipients, This correspondence constitutes formal notice that multiple fraudulent and void mortgage assignments have been recorded against my property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX MN XXXX ( Parcel XXXX ). 
The attached Statement of Violations and Record-byXXXX XXXX details the unlawful acts and statutory breaches committed by the parties listed above. 

The original refinance ( XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ) identifies XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) as the sole lender. 
No assignment to XXXX XXXX or any trust was ever recorded. 

XXXX XXXX recorded self-assignments in XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX ( XXXX ) while already acting as servicer. 
These instruments transfer no rights under XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), and the Restatement ( XXXX ) Contracts XXXX ( XXXX ). 

Subsequent foreclosure filings ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) rely entirely on these void instruments, constituting violations of state foreclosure statutes, federal consumer protection laws, and the Sherman Antitrust Act ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ). 

The coordinated filings among XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX evidence a concerted restraint of trade that unlawfully restricts the marketability of title and deprives the rightful owner of property. 

All evidence enclosed hereinpublic-record documents, certified copies, and the Statement of Violationsis being submitted for official record and review as part of my tort claim and federal filing.

Each instrument recorded or relied upon without lawful authority constitutes fraud upon the public record and triggers both state and federal liability. 

Logical and Legal Contradiction ( Proof of Intentional Fraud ) If XXXX XXXX was Lender, they would have been named on the XXXX Note. They were not. 

If XXXX XXXX was Creditor, they would hold the endorsed Note and a recorded assignment from XXXX. None exists. 

If XXXX XXXX or XXXX were Servicer, they could only act under contract with the Creditor, not as owner or lender. 

Their self-assignments ( XXXX, XXXX ) show them transferring the mortgage to themselves, which is void under UCC XXXX and Restatement XXXX ( XXXX ). 

Recording such void instruments with the county and invoking them in foreclosure constitutes fraud on the public record, mail/wire fraud ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), and a combination to restrain trade ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ). 

The Public Record and MERS Confirm No Standing a ) The Original Contract ( XXXX XXXX Refinance ) Only XXXX appears as Lender. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and the Trusts are not named anywhere in the mortgage or note. 

Therefore, they are complete strangers to the contract. 

b )XX/XX/XXXX Database XX/XX/XXXXregistration ( as your evidence shows ) lists XXXX and marks the loan as inactive, meaning no active servicer or investor of record. 

XXXX XXXX and XXXX appear nowhere on the XXXX chain. 

When a loan becomes inactive on XX/XX/XXXX, the registration chain has terminated ; no entity can claim transfer or servicing authority through that registry. 
Any subsequent assignment using XX/XX/XXXX language or referencing that number is legally void. 

c XXXX County Parcel / Recorded Chain The XXXX XXXX parcel record confirms no assignment from XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

All later filings ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) rely on this missing link, so no recorded interest ever vested in XXXX XXXX, XXXX, or the trusts. 

Under XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ), foreclosure may proceed only if the mortgagees interest appears of record. 
If XXXX or XXXX XXXX are not on record, they have no authority to foreclose, collect, or represent themselves as creditor or lender. 

How These False Designations Violate Federal Law a ) FDCPA 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) It is unlawful to falsely represent the character, amount, or legal status of any debt or any services rendered or compensation that may be lawfully received. 

Calling themselves creditor or lender when they are only servicers is a false representation of creditor status. 
This also triggers XXXX ( XXXX ) : taking or threatening to take nonjudicial action without a present right to possession. 

XX/XX/XXXX) XX/XX/XXXX15 U.S.C. XXXX ( g ) The new owner or assignee of a mortgage loan must notify the borrower within XX/XX/XXXXdays of transfer. 

No such notice was ever issued by XXXX or any lawful owner. XXXX XXXX and XXXX can not claim both ownership and servicing without violating this notice requirement. 

XX/XX/XXXXXXXX. XXXX ( c ) When servicing rights transfer, the servicer must disclose who owns the loan. 

XXXX own correspondence identifying itself as creditor and servicer is facially contradictory and violates this provision. 

XX/XX/XXXX Claimed Roles vs. Legal Reality XXXX publicly and contractually represented itself as the Lender, Creditor, and Servicer on the XX/XX/XXXX refinance ( Doc XX/XX/XXXXXXXX ). 
However, your securitization audit and chain-of-title evidence show that : XXXX did not fund the loan from its own reserves, The Note was immediately sold, endorsed, or securitized, and The funding source was a warehouse line or investor trust, notXX/XX/XXXX capital. 

Legal consequence : XXXX could not have been the Lender or Creditor under either XXXX Article XXXX or federal lending law because it never had risk of loss or ownership of the debt instrument. 

Key citation : Under XXXX XXXX ( a ) and XXXX, only the party that pays consideration and takes ownership of a negotiable instrument becomes the holder in due course. 
If XXXX merely originated and then sold the note, it was an intermediary, not a creditor. 

XXXX. Immediate Sale = No Creditor Status My audit confirms XXXX sold or transferred the note immediately upon closing into a Fannie Mae XXXX Trust XXXX. 

a ) This proves XXXX was only a table-funded broker : XXXX used warehouse credit lines or correspondent lending agreements, meaning another institution actually provided the funds. 

Once sold, XXXX no longer owned or serviced the obligation. 

Therefore, XXXX ceased to be Lender or Creditor the moment the Note was sold. 

b ) Regulatory confirmation Table Funding Under XX/XX/XXXXXXXX. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX Definition of Table Funding ) : Table funding means a settlement at which a loan is funded by an advance of loan funds and the loan is assigned at or immediately after settlement. 

This precisely matches what my audit documents proving XXXX was never a true lender and the entire transaction was a table-funded mortgage, prohibited under certain federal programs and subject to XX/XX/XXXXdisclosure violations . 

XXXXXX/XX/XXXXServicer Claim is Also False My audit shows XXXX XXXX was designated as Servicer from inception in the securitization flow, yet XX/XX/XXXX closing package and filings continued to identify itself as Servicer. 

Under XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( i ) ( XXXX ) : The term servicer means the person responsible for servicing of a loan ( collecting and remitting payments, managing escrow, etc. ). 

If XXXX sold the note immediately, it could not have continued to collect or remit payments that duty transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX, calling itself servicer after the sale constitutes false representation under the FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) ) and misleading trade practice under XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( Consumer Fraud Act ). 

XXXX. No Consideration= No Loan If XXXX did not lend money from its own reserves, there was no lawful consideration exchanged between XXXX and i as a borrower. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX : A valid contract requires mutual consideration both sides must exchange something of value. 
If XXXX merely brokered funds owned by a third party, it was not the Lender but a facilitator or nominee. 

This also violates 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( f ) ( XXXX ), which requires any agent or nominee ( including a servicer ) to identify the true owner of the obligation upon request. 
If XXXX or XXXX failed to disclose the actual funder (XX/XX/XXXX / trust ), its non-compliance with federal law and fraudulent concealment. 

XXXX. Why This Matters for my Case Every later party ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX ) traces its supposed authority to XXXX but since XXXX never owned the note or loaned from its reserves, no subsequent entity could ever acquire lawful ownership or enforceability. 

Doctrine of XXXX XXXX XXXX Non Habet : No one can transfer what they do not have. 
( Applied repeatedly in XXXX courts in wrongful-foreclosure cases. ) Thus : XXXX never a lender, no standing to assign. 

XXXX XXXX self-assignments void. 

XXXX servicer with no owner to serve. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX downstream entities with no valid chain of title. 

XXXX Employees, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are caught in Mortgage Fraud and Wrongful Foreclosures intentionally creating fraudulent Assgiments and documents via Identity Theft and no Contracts = Prison Time Now.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation