Consumer complaint received 2018-03-25 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Seized or attempted to seize your property
Company: Seterus, Inc.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX To : VIA ONLINE at XXXX : XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
Washington, D.C. XXXX Re : Unfair, deceptive, and unlawful mortgage servicing, dual tracking, and foreclosure practices by Seterus, Inc. and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX pertaining to the subject property XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX ( Loan Acct. # : XXXX ) ( Foreclosure Docket No. : XXXX ) To whom it may concern, I am writing this correspondence to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to report the unfair, deceptive, and unlawful practices by Seterus, Inc. ( Seterus ) as the purported servicer for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) who Seterus claims is the owner of my mortgage loan that was originated on XX/XX/XXXX by XXXX XXXX   XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ), and was previously serviced by the infamous XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( XXXX ). I also submit this communication as an official appeal under 12 CFR 1024.41 ( h ) of Seterus denial of my modification request as of XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 1 ) considering the aforementioned discrepancies, unethical, and unlawful practices putting into question if Seterus has any right to commence the current foreclosure action on behalf of XXXX XXXX as the purported owner of my mortgage loan. 

First and foremost, I have attached to this correspondence as Exhibit 2 a note instrument that was filed with the Superior Court of New Jersey by XXXX on or about XX/XX/XXXX in Docket No. : XXXX, wherein my social security number is unredacted on page two of two, exposed to the general public, and has yet to be redacted by Seterus and or XXXX XXXX, leaving me vulnerable to identity theft and the unlawful trafficking of my personal information by any individual and or company with bad intentions. 

Furthermore, I am even more concerned with the undisputable fact that Seterus as the alleged servicer for XXXX XXXX, is basing its right to deny me modification relief or, in the alternative, continue with the Sheriff Sale of my home on XX/XX/XXXX based upon forged, falsely acknowledged, and or void instruments, of which includes : 1. A forged instrument titled ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that was created by XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a/k/a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ), and recorded by the Office of the Clerk for XXXX County, NJ ( XXXX County Clerk ) on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 4 ), wherein XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( XXXX ) as the purported nominee for XXXX  XXXX  is misrepresented as the assignor of my mortgage loan on XX/XX/XXXX, when in fact : A. XXXX never extended its monies to me because XXXX does not originate mortgage loan. ; B. XXXX never acquired my mortgage loan, and had no rights to receive payment. ; C. XXXX never acted a document custodian for my mortgage loan, and was contractually prohibited from taking any action ( i.e. foreclosure, assignment, etc. ) on my mortgage loan. ; AND D. the names and purported signatures of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX appearing as officers of XXXX, along with the acknowledged of Minnesota notary public XXXX XXXX, are each forgeries because : i. XXXX   has never ( emphasis added ) had any employees ; AND ii. XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX were at all times employees of XXXX, the latter of whom entered into a consent order with Federal Authorities on XX/XX/XXXX in In the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, et al. ( FRB Docket Nos. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX OCC XXXX XXXX XXXX ) annexed hereto as Exhibit 8, along with XXXX and its parent company in In the Matter of : XXXX XXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( OCC XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, Docket Nos. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX No. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) annexed hereto as Exhibit 9,  prohibiting their further engagement in the unsound and unsafe practices displayed within the forged instrument still being used by Seterus and XXXX XXXX to foreclose upon my home. ; AND 2. A forged and out of sequence instrument titled NEW JERSEY ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that was created by XXXX, and recorded by the XXXX County Clerk on XX/XX/XXXX, wherein XXXX XXXX is declared the assignor of only ( emphasis added ) my mortgage on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 10 ), without any mention of a transfer of the note in dispute, and without any proof as to when and how WMB as the prior assignee of record according to the aforementioned void instrument titled ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE recorded by the XXXX County Clerk on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 4 ) transfer my mortgage loan to XXXX, the latter of whom only acquired servicing ( not ownership ) from XXXX pursuant to the XX/XX/XXXX Purchase & Assumption Agreement ( P & AA ) with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC ). ; AND 3. The version note instrument last submitted to the Office of Foreclosure by Seterus as the purported authorized  servicer for XXXX XXXX, displays a suddenly appearing undated stamp ( i.e. not a blue ink signature ) purporting to be an indorsement in blank by XXXX ( See Exhibit 2 ), that did not appear upon the note instrument submitted in the same foreclosure proceeding on or about XX/XX/XXXX that was certified by a New Jersey foreclosure attorney to be a true copy of the original, bearing only one dated stamp purported to be an indorsement by XXXX XXXX paid to the order of XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 1 ). 

Additionally, the aforementioned void and out of sequence instrument titled NEW JERSEY ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE that was created by XXXX, recorded by the XXXX County Clerk on XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 10 ), and heavily relied upon by Seterus as the purported servicing agent for XXXX XXXX, displays general misrepresentations as to the alleged transfer of my mortgage loan, the names and alleged signatures of fictitious persons misrepresenting their identities and knowledge as to the whereabouts of my mortgage loan, and a false acknowledged by a notary public employed by XXXX, all of which constitutes continued violations of the prohibitions under 1. the XX/XX/XXXX consent judgment In the Matter of : XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. ( XXXX ) ( See Exhibit 11 ). ; AND 2. the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ( See Exhibit 12 ) wherein XXXX and its affiliates were prohibited from further engagement in the unfair, deceptive, and illegal practices cited by the United States of America and 49 State Attorney Generals ( including the New Jersey Attorney General ) in United States of America vXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX et al. ( Case No. XXXX ) ( See Exhibit 13 )  for which I was made a party to the action by the New Jersey Attorney General ( NJ AG ) pursuant to  consumer enforcement authorities bestowed upon the NJ AG along with parens patriae and common law. 

Next, although Seterus is claiming that XXXX XXXX is the owner of my mortgage loan, I have never ( emphasis added ) received a Notice of Sale / Transfer as required under 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ) from any party ( emphasis added ) including Seterus and or XXXX XXXX, asserting to be the new creditor for my mortgage loan that was originally made payable to XXXX XXXX 

Hence, setting aside the aforementioned grave concerns regarding my mortgage loan and if Seterus has any right to foreclose on behalf of XXXX XXXX, I am extremely concerned that Seterus denied me a modification as of XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 1 ),  and has chosen instead to proceed with the Sheriff Sale of my home scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX. 

Wherefore, I am now putting the CFPB on notice with this communication and exhibits annexed hereto in support, of Seterus unfair, deceptive, and unlawful practices including the unlawful foreclosure of my home and the unfair denial of a modification that I desperately need and deserve ( in light of the aforementioned document irregularities ) in order to prevent the unnecessary and unjust Sheriff Sale of my home scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX. 

Respectfully Submitted,

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation