Consumer complaint received 2017-07-25 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: Brock & Scott, PLLC
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
This is a report of conspiracy and mortgage fraud committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX located at : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX. In XXXX of XXXX I, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter Homeowner ), purchased a house located at : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX VA XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Homeowner refinanced his mortgage with XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter XXXX ), a subsidiary of the bankrupt XXXX XXXX XXXX  group of companies ( hereafter XXXX ), and signed deed of trust and a Note for {>= $1,000,000}. In XX/XX/XXXX, the original lender XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) filed Chapter XXXX in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In XX/XX/XXXX bankruptcy court in Delaware, approved sale of XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. ( XXXX ) to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) as part of the bankruptcy liquidation. To conceal the fact of acquisition, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX used name abbreviation of XXXX similar to bankrupted XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). But in XXXX of XXXX due to numerous law suits and federal investigations, XXXX changed its name to XXXX XXXX ( principal place of business in Texas ) and, eventually, inXX/XX/XXXX company was acquired by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL. In XX/XX/XXXX, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware approved liquidation plan of eight XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXXcompanies including XXXX under Chapter XXXX ( Cases No. XXXX XXXX ). Court specifically requested that servicing rights for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter XXXX ) Portfolio shall be surrendered to XXXX. ( United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. Cases No. XXXX XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX. ( page 32, 2 ( d ) ( iii ) ). Most of the loans originated by XXXX, were sold into XXXX securitized trusts even before origination or immediately after that. XXXX was a primary trustee for certain type of loans, especially the once with Adjustable Rate and Negative Amortization as the most profitable. But some of the loans were defective in its face with incurable defects. Such mortgage loans were rejected by trusts as they could jeopardies trusts REMIC status ( tax exemption ) according to trust guiding document Pooling and Servicing Agreement ( PSA ). Loans with incurable defects were satisfied and paid off during bankruptcy proceeding. Original mortgage documents were destroyed with permission of the Bankruptcy Court. Notes were paid down or liquidated through one or more reserves including but not limited to overcollateralization reserves, excess interest reserves, or interest rate cap reserves ; or paid down or liquidated through one or more credit default swaps ; or paid down or liquidated through one or more forms of insurance including but not limited to first loss reserves, LPMI policies, bulk and supplemental policies, and XXXX XXXX or XXXX policies, with any such pay down or liquidation not being subject to any right of subrogation against the borrower. The loan, originated by XXXX, was Adjustable Rate Loan with Negative Amortization which was considered to be illegal in XXXX. Just because of that, my monthly payments went up from $ XXXXmonth in XX/XX/XXXXto $ XXXX/month in XXXX, and to {$4200.00} in XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Homeowner contacted XXXX XXXX for the purpose of loan modification. Customer relation specialist suggested to stop making payments for a three-consecutive month in order to establish hardship, mandatory for loan modification. That was a legal trap, set up to catch Homeowner in default. On XX/XX/XXXX, Homeowner received a Notice of Service Transfer letter from XXXX XXXX, informing that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) is a new loan servicer. Upon receiving the Notice of Service Transfer I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and requested a proof of service. That request was blatantly ignored. A servicer must have Mortgage Servicing Right ( MSR ) from a Lender in order to service loans. MSR is a contractual agreement where the right, or rights, to service an existing mortgage are sold by the original lender to another party who, for a fee, performs the various functions required to service mortgages. After several months of struggling Homeowner filed a complaint with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) seeking help in obtaining such proof. No proof of service has ever been provided by XXXX. Instead, XXXX provided a copy of Deed and Note with incurable defects in it. By purchasing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) as part of the bankruptcy liquidation, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) / a. k. a XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX legally acquired servicing rights of XXXX customers and their records, except those belonging to XXXX XXXX XXXX and those liquidated and paid off during bankruptcy proceeding. Records of satisfied and liquidated mortgage loans have never been deleted, more than that, alleged servicers kept collecting mortgage payments on mortgages already satisfied and liquidated by court. While Homeowner questioning XXXX servicing rights, XXXX fabricated phantom obligations and chain of titles in order to conceal the unlawful collection of mortgage payments and to initiate foreclosure proceeding against the Homeowner. XXXX fabricated, fraudulently signed and recorded the following legal instruments : Assignment of Deed of Trust dated XX/XX/XXXX, Appointment of Substitute Trustee dated XX/XX/XXXX, and latest Appointment of Substitute Trustee dated XX/XX/XXXX. Fabricated chain of title. First attempt to foreclose on Homeowners property was initiated by XXXX inXX/XX/XXXX. XXXX fabricated the following chain of title : Chain 1. XXXX alleged that Homeowners loan, originated by XXXX, was securitized into Structured Asset Mortgage Investment II TrustXXXX owned by XXXX, but did not provide any documents that proved that a mortgage-backed securities trust had acquired Homeowners Mortgage. XXXX failed to present the Assignment from bankrupted XXXX to XXXX as required by trust ruling document Pooling and Servicing Agreement ( PSA ) ( see Article II, section 2.01 Conveyance of Mortgage Loans ). Further investigation revealed, that Homeowners mortgage loan was not securitized and was not found in the trust Prospectus, filed with SEC and disseminated to the investors. Chain 2. On unknown day of XXXX and seven years after Trust closing date, XXXX allegedly transferred the Homeowners Note to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) as successor-in-interest using an Allonge ( Exhibit 1 ). It is clearly shown of the left upper corner of the Allonge : when recorded mail to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, thus indicating that purported Note transfer document was prepared after XXXX sent Notice of Default to the Homeowner. That even is legally impossible as PSA explicitly prohibits transferring mortgage loans after Trust closing date. The period of operation for the REMIC Trust was limited to 90 days. Chain 3. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, in the alleged capacity of nominee for the long-bankrupt XXXX, assigned Homeowners deed of trust to XXXX ( Exhibit 2 ). Without even disputing legality of the Assignment and right of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to assign deed of trust without direct order of the original Lender, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), or bankruptcy court in custody of which Homeowners loan was during bankruptcy proceeding, or bankruptcy court ordering liquidation of the XXXX, fraud carried by XXXX includes, XXXX XXXX : a ) Mortgage assignments with signatures of XXXX XXXX XXXX - a Contract Management Coordinator for XXXX - signing as corporate officers for XXXX that never employed her. b ) Mortgage assignment with forged signature XXXX XXXX XXXX signing on behalf of the grantor. c ) Mortgage assignment notarized by XXXX XXXX also XXXX Employee, and witnessed by another XXXX Employees XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX who never witnessed the signatures that was notarized. XXXX XXXX signature does not match her signature on Notrary and Bond Applications ( see attached file ), but nevertheless, was notarized and witnessed. Chain XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX with help of default management company XXXX XXXX XXXX, North Carolina, prepared and recorded a false Appointment of Substitute Trustee that appointed Poor Substitute Trustee Ltd to conduct Trustee Sale under the Homeowners deed of trust ( Exhibit 3 ) The Appointment of Substitute Trustee signed by XXXX XXXX - a Contract Management Coordinator for XXXX in the alleged capacity of a Vice President of non-existing corporation XXXX XXXX XXXX and as attorney-in-fact for XXXX. XXXX XXXX Texas Corporation - was dissolved in XXXX of XXXX after being acquired by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Notary XXXX XXXX stated that XXXX XXXX is personally known to the her in both capacities : as a Vice President of XXXX and as an attorney-in-fact for XXXX. Therefore, no Power of attorney or any verification were required. XXXX never appointed XXXX XXXX in any capacity including Attorney in fact, ( see written response from XXXX on this matter, Exhibit 4 ). First attempt to foreclose failed because XXXX did not offer any alternative to foreclosure, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau order XXXX to postpone Trustee Sale for at least 45 days. Homeowner filed series of complaint against XXXX for fraudulent foreclosure. Homeowners constitutional rights for fair trial have been routinely impaired by either demurrer or dismissal Pursuant to 12 ( b ) ( 6 ). But dismissal of legal case despite of strong factual evidences does not make crime to go away. XXXX has no intention to stop illegal business and comply with law and orchestrated a second attempt to foreclose on Homeowners property. This time XXXX hired Brock & Scott PLLC with whom XXXX has conducted illegal foreclosures in Florida ( See Forensic Examination of the Real Property Records and the Circuit Court Records, XXXX County, Florida, issued on XX/XX/XXXX, page 160l.  XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) Chain 5. OnXX/XX/XXXX Brock & Scott PLLC prepared fraudulent Appointment of Substitute Trustee by which appointed Trustee Services of Virginia LLC as Substitute Trustee ( Exhibit 6 ). As previously, this document signed by XXXX employee XXXX XXXX Contract Management Coordinator- as an attorney-in-fact for XXXX. Needless to say, that no Power of attorney was presented before Notary Public XXXX XXXX, Contract Management Coordinator for XXXX, who certified that Carried Piebe is personally known as an attorney-in-fact for XXXX and therefore no identification ( power of attorney from XXXX ) is required. Affixing or submitting false signatures on a mortgage document is a violation of federal and state law, and those signatures are without authority to complete the transaction. According to a mortgage fraud notice prepared jointly by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the XXXX XXXX XXXX, submitting false mortgage assignments and forging signatures violates potentially eight federal criminal statutes. Specifically : ( 1 ) 18 U.S.C. 1001 - Statements or entries generally ; ( 2 ) 18 U.S.C. 1010 -  HUD and Federal Housing Administration transactions ; ( 3 ) 18 U.S.C. 1014 - Loan and credit applications generally ; ( 4 ) 18 U.S.C. 1028 - Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents ; ( 5 ) 18 U.S.C. 1341 - Frauds and swindles by mail ; ( 6 ) 18 U.S.C. 1342 - Fictitious name or address ; ( 7 ) 18 U.S.C. 1343 - Fraud by wire ; and ( 8 ) 18 U.S.C. 1344 - Bank Fraud. See FBI Mortgage Fraud Notice ( available at XXXX : XXXX ) ; see, also, Truth in Lending Act, title XXXX of the Consumer Credit Protection Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C.
False or fraudulent notary acknowledgements are also a violation of Florida law, and the underlying signature is void. Florida Statute 117.05. ( See Exhibit 5 : Conclusion of Investigation on Notary Public XXXX XXXX ). Commission of fraud, misrepresentation, or any intentional violation of this chapter, and also lie under oath on XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX side, and fraud and abuse of power from XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, which is a felony pursuant to 18 U.S.C.371 1001, 1011, 1018 ; 18 U.S.C.PART 1 CHAPTER 63 1341-1349. Last friday Homeowner spoke with XXXX customer relationship manager complaining that since XXXX of XXXX XXXX ignors my numerous requests for loan modification. XXXX representative instructed how to download a loan modification package saying that XXXX 's software restricts Homeowner 's account from modification or any other alternatives to foreclosure. Homeowner downloaded and submitted a modification package on XXXX XXXX. No acknowledgment of receipt receive from XXXX. Brock & Scott in response to Debt Verification Letter sent misleading and false information about the Homeowner 's creditor ( see attached VOD AND Brock & Scott response ) Brock & Scott informed in writing that Trustee sale is scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX, whereas placed classified ad informing about sale on XX/XX/XXXX ( see letter and classified ad ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation