Consumer complaint received 2020-12-02 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
Dear CFPB, Please find my Complaint against PennyMac Loan Services , LLC, ( PennyMac ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX XXXX and other non-disclosed XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( such as XXXX XXXX go whom Federal Reserve Cartel purportedly " assigned '' over {$2.00} XXXX of so-called " XXXX XXXX  Backed Securities '' ( which XXXX never had because XXXX  never purchased anyone mortgages or Notes ), and others. 

Please be kindly advised that if CFPB and XXXX and its analyst Mrs. XXXX will continue to cover for Big Banks Ponzi Scheme ; ignore my complaints and refuse to conduct FULL investigation about WHO SOLD my loan to PennyMac, I will have no other choice but to sue CFPB, XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX individually for aiding and abetting XXXX XXXX XXXX  fraud, illegal collection ( aka racket ) ; identity theft ; unjust enrichment ; negligence ; theft of Honest Services ; reckless endangerment and other crimes, I many times demanded CFPB to ORDER XXXX and PennyMac to provide me simple information ( based on my so-called Contract for Mortgage Debt ) - such as PROOF that my Note or a part of my Note were actually SOLD, and a proof of such SALES, as required by UCC Art. 9, 203. 

Neither PennyMac or XXXX never answer the question. They simply use the opportunity to propagate the lie that a loan was securitized when in fact no sale of the loan ever occurred. Moreover, XXXX lies non-stop that they are merely " Servicers '' of my loan who assumed " servicing '' ( for WHOM? ) on XX/XX/2016 ( while PennyMac sent me XXXX to the Note forged by some " collateral shipper '' XXXX XXXX. 

Neither XXXX or PennyMac can not tell me WHO assigned them as Servicers ; and WHOM they are servicing. Because no such Masters exists. XXXX  merely dumped its non-MBS securities ( read : information about loans on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX server was switched from XXXX  to privately-owned Federal Reserve to its co-owner XXXX XXXX and other Big Banks ) XXXX and PennyMac simply following the usual playbook and read the scrip provided to them by Big Banks ( which they did as XXXX who never sold any " mortgages '' to XXXX  XXXX XXXX or anyone else, it was a typical lie to defraud the public and steal bailout money and millions of homes via illegal foreclosures. They are missed directing your question. And I pointed it MANY times to the AG office or CFPB The basic thrust of my question is the identification of the creditor who maintains an account receivable for the underlying obligation, and whether the Obligation still exists. 

Their answer Is that the word salad that they are using to label a virtual creditor ( PennyMac who can not even use XXXX XXXX 's system, is the note holder. I was not asking that. I asked WHO SOLD my loan to PennyMac if XXXX was " merely a Servicer '' and never confirmed any sales. Much less XXXX XXXX  who never funded any single mortgage. 

I am asking the same question how did PennyMac become the holder. 

A holder is someone in possession of the note with the right to enforce it. What everyone seems to forget is to ask the question of how the party in possession of the note received the right to enforce ( which can only be granted by the party who owns the obligation or who represents someone who owns the obligation ) IF nobody (!!! ) confirmed that they were SELLERS of my so-called " loan '' ( my involuntary servitude for Big Banks with negative compensation and theft of my identity which they trade by DTC ; as well as theft of my escrow money. 

Nobody gets to own an obligation just because they say so. In order to own an obligation, a party must have entered into a legally recognizable transaction in which they purchased it for value pursuant to Article 9 203 UCC as adopted by all 50 states. All states also recognize that a purported conveyance of an interest in a mortgage without a conveyance of ownership in the underlying obligation is a legal nullity. 

None of it exists. All PennyMac was able to provide - an avalanche of absurd and contradicting LIES not supported by any evidence of their so-called ownership. To the contrary, their Bosses from XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX/XXXX XXXX XXXX ) CONFIRMED in their Complaint that PennyMac are thieves who stole their information to defraud investors about trades of some bogus " securities '' purportedly backed by non-existing " defaulted debt '' PennyMac solely rely on a rebuttable presumption arising from the PURPORTED possession of the note. This legal fiction promoted by Big Banks is adopted in most states is that if you have the note in your possession, or at least if you claim to have a note in your possession, that there mustve been a delivery of the physical note along with the authority to enforce it. PennyMac never had any possession of my Note because Big Banks destroy mortgages and Notes after they are scanned and placed in XXXX XXXX database. ALL that PennyMac is able to present is some printed IMAGE of my purported Note while repeated refuse to provide legally required answered to the basic questions about existence and ownership of the underlying obligation and a proof of SALE ( including the name of the Seller ) At the end of that claimed transaction, the purchasing party must claim ownership. If it says it is the owner of the obligation, then it must have entries on its accounting ledgers and banking statements that show payment of value for the underlying debt and the establishment of a loan account receivable. 

It is possible that the entire XXXX XXXX strategy has been based upon the gamble that nobody other than accountants understands double-entry bookkeeping the only bookkeeping system legally recognized as the starting point of any claim of ownership or transaction about anything. 

Without real transactions and real entries in their ledgers, nobody can claim ownership of the obligation. And nobody can claim authority from the owner of the obligation unless that mysterious virtual creditor has entered into transactions and currently maintains ownership of a loan account receivable. 

And if CFPB, DIFS and its analyst Mrs. XXXX will continue to cover for XXXX XXXX crimes and support their Ponzi Scheme with Pension Funds, I will have no other choice by sue the Agencies and Mrs. XXXX personally for all damages I suffer from her aiding and abetting the Biggest crime committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX  ; and demand them to ORDER PennyMac and XXXX to provide me a clear answer to my simple question - who SOLD my loan to PennyMac and provide me t PROOF of the ownership and existence of the underlying obligation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation