Consumer complaint received 2020-06-30 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: Old Republic National Title Holding Co.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Dear CFPB, Senate, Illinois Supreme Court, IL Attorney General, All Judges in Federal and State Court, Please find my complaint against Old Republic Title and The Florida Fund for their refusal to provide me a compensation under Title Insurance Policy XXXX for proerty located XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX IL XXXX, due to fatally defective Title and total loss of the property because of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ( formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) fraud, fraudulent transfers, conspiracy to defraud ; unjust enrichment, theft of the property and money ; identity theft and other crimes. Request for compensation under Title Policy issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX and underwritten by XXXX XXXX XXXXOld Republic Title in the amount {$170000.00} for stolen from me property. 
On XX/XX/XXXX I entered into a contract with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( now XXXX XXXX ) which was mislabeled as a loan ; and signed a Promissory Note and Mortgage. XXXX purportedly funded my home purchase. I never questioned where money came from since I reasonably believed that I am entering into a legitimate transaction and protected by the law. While I wanted and was tricked to believe that I purchase a loan that is what I thought I received, I was unaware of any larger transaction triggered by my signature. Having signed the documents that originated the disclosed transaction, under judicial doctrine, presumably constitutes a loan agreement. So the transaction was presumptively a loan of money that needed to be repaid upon the terms set forth in the note. 
In fact, I was lured into a totally different transaction, not the loan, because material information was withheld from me, such as : The prime mover in the transaction was XXXX XXXX running a securitizations scheme, the existence of which was concealed and unknown to me. The goal was to create the appearance of facially valid loan documents and transfers when no such transfer had legally occurred. 
The named originator XXXX never did and would not have made any loan because it had no money to make the loan and because it had no interest in any business plan based upon the receipt of principal and interest. The contractual intent of the investment bank was to secure my signature for the sole purpose of triggering issuance and trading of unregulated securities ( securitization ). The concealed contractual intent of XXXX XXXX was to retain no residual interest, liability or obligation in connection with the existence, administration, collection, servicing or enforcement of any homeowner obligation created by the transaction origination documents. 
The issuance, sale and trading of unregulated securities were conditions precedent and conditions subsequent to the payment to me money mislabeled as loan. This payment was never intended by XXXX XXXX as a loan and after the conclusion of the entire transaction involving my signature, name, reputation and property there was no loan on the books of any company ( i.e. there was no asset receivable either specific or generic that included the subject homeowner transaction. 
Thus, there was no meeting of the minds because XXXX XXXX and all of its intermediaries and conduits concealed the totality of the transaction from the me, who was paid for my signature in order to trigger enormous profits greatly exceeding the entire transaction, or about 184 times more per {$1.00} paid to me as a loan Since there was a failure of mutual contractual intent, and the failure was caused by circumvention of lender regulations and laws, the contract must be construed under quasi contract doctrine or quantum meruit. I was never given an opportunity to assess the transaction in the light of the enormous undisclosed profits and in the light of XXXX XXXX being the actual prime actor. The securitization scheme generated enormous revenues such that convicted felons and food delivery people with no knowledge of the financial products other than a script provided to them by the investment banks bank through intermediaries were hired to sell these defective financial products and earn hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These profits didnt come from what they had falsely labelled as a loan. And if it came from something else, that wasnt disclosed to me. And that means that I was tricked into a contract that I knew nothing about. 
XXXX XXXX, who along with XXXX. XXXX XXXX and his XXXX/XXXX XXXX were the only real parties, not only received enormous profits from trading my securitized identity on the open market ( to which I am entitled royalties under Quantum Meriut at least 20 % ) but also stole my property with forged documents filed by XXXX XXXX/XXXX acting on behalf of fictitious and non-existing parties, which resulted in total loss of my property, monetary damages and extreme emotional distress. 
On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX acting as non-existing XXXX XXXX Trust and a fake " Trustee '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( a non-existing corporation ) filed forged assignment based on robo-stamped XXXX XXXX XXXX ( now controller at XXXX ), signature. This Assignment was prepared by purportedly XXXX  who never had any legal rights to transfer any debt since XXXX   never owned it, into a fake entity XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX hired lawyers from XXXX XXXX XXXX submitted false statements and forged documents to the Court and illegally obtained possession of my property which XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX sold to third parties under glimpse of " Board of Directors '' for XXXX XXXX. 
As the result, I suffered severe damages while the new buyer is in possession of stolen from me property which I demand to return back to me, along with payments from XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  ( former XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX ( former XXXX ), plus 20 % of royalties from trades, the amount no less than {$10.00} XXXX  XXXX never was a lender. It was a sham conduit for XXXX XXXX who received a line of credit from XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) which was funded from XXXX pool of money collected from investors whom XXXX sold UNSECURED promises to pay back with interest, aka table funding, illegal in XXXX. See XXXX Prospectus which said : We may issue from time to time senior or subordinated debt securities. Neither the senior debt securities nor the subordinated debt securities will be secured by any of our property or assets or property or assets of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or its subsidiaries. Thus, by owning a debt security, you are one of our unsecured creditors. So, how UNSECURED creditors who never had any connections with homeowners can demand their homes as a repayment of some non-existing debt which borrowers never owed to XXXX or XXXX even hypothetically? Moreover, illegally foreclose the crime victims ( borrowers ) after these Investors received a full benefit they bargained for some returns from XXXX XXXX plus {$3.00} XXXX from a Settlement with XXXX XXXX where XXXX XXXX XXXX released ALL interest in any XXXX XXXX. Thus, non-existing debt was settled in XXXX. 
But Judges acting unlawful and corrupt, confiscated millions of homes from homeowners to purportedly re-pay investors XXXX XXXX XXXX who already were paid and dropped any claims after the Settlement with GS, when XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX initiated their illegal foreclosures mill, in violation of s to Cease and Desist, orders actively promoting a myth that foreclosures are conducted by investors XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

According to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX purchased from XXXX XXXX over {$11.00} XXXX in residential mortgage-backed securities ( the GSE Certificates ) issued in connection with 40 securitizations for which XXXX served as sponsor, depositor, and/or lead underwriter. It included Trust XXXX XXXX. The trick was none of these securities were backed by any mortgages because residential debt is never sold. It is a myth created by XXXX XXXX, one of main originators of this fraudulent scheme. It was a purely unsecured debt which was never pooled in any Trust ; and never regulated by any authorities ( see Prospectus ) The mortgage was not a debt but a one-time payment to me from XXXX  for very valuable financial services as an Initial Issuer of Promissory Note and Mortgage, which are a Quasi Contract and Quantum Meruit. This payment was funded by XXXX from their table funding pool, illegal in California, who used XXXX as a camouflage for other parties. 
XXXX v. XXXX XXXX said : The Registration Statements contained statements about the characteristics and credit quality of the mortgage loans underlying the Securitizations and the origination and underwriting practices used to make and approve the loans. Such statements were material to a The term Registration Statement, as used herein, incorporates the Shelf Registration Statement, the Prospectus and the Prospectus Supplement for each referenced Securitization, except where otherwise indicated reasonable investors decision to invest in mortgage-backed securities by purchasing the Certificates. Unbeknownst to XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, these statements were materially false, as significant percentages of the underlying mortgage loans were not originated in accordance with the represented underwriting standards and origination practices, and had materially poorer credit quality than was represented in the Registration Statements. The loans underlying the Certificates were acquired by the sponsor for each Securitization from non-party mortgage originators. The originators principally responsible for the loans underlying the Certificates were XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, NC XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Again, the trick was and intended by XXXX XXXX that NONE of these originators actually originated of funded any mortgages, no need to say ever sold any mortgages to XXXX XXXX or anyone else. They merely acted as sham conduits to cover for involvement of the real parties XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
According to XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, In residential mortgage-backed securitizations, the cash-producing financial assets are residential mortgage loans. This is a lie. XXXX XXXX never relied on income from loans. The cash-producing assets were derivatives sold by XXXX in astronomic proportions. Based on most recent OCC Report XXXX XXXX XXXX US has {$220000.00} XXXX in assets and {>= $1,000,000} XXXX in derivatives. In other words, about 184 times more profits from every {$1.00} XXXX  pay to the borrower for their signature on Promissory Note which borrower has to return back to XXXX with interest as a loan. My modest $ XXXX loan via XXXX produced whopping XXXX for XXXX XXXX, plus a bailout plus tax-free property and proceeds from sale. 
XXXX v. XXXX XXXX further said : A mortgage servicer is necessary to manage the collection of proceeds from the mortgage loans. The servicer is responsible for collecting homeowners mortgage loan payments, which the servicer remits to the trustee after deducting a monthly servicing fee. The servicers duties include making collection efforts on delinquent loans, initiating foreclosure proceedings, and determining when to charge off a loan by writing down its balance. The servicer is required to report key information about the loans to the trustee. The trustee ( or trust administrator ) administers the trusts funds and delivers payments due each month on the certificates to the investors. 
This is another smoke and mirrors created by XXXX XXXX and XXXX. XXXX to defraud borrowers and investors. The only party who serviced ( aka collected payments from borrowers to distribute to XXXX, declare defaults on already defaulted loans and initiate foreclosures on behalf of fake Trustees and Servicers is XXXX. XXXX, owner of XXXX XXXXt. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and Other Companies are Making False Claims as Servicers : XXXX XXXX, the king of fabricated documents is behind 62 % of all servicing records. Companies claiming to be servicers are not servicers although they perform some servicing functions as clients of XXXX XXXX. Anyone who knows about foreclosure litigation and securitization of residential debt knows that the only way the banks could succeed is if they had a central repository and central command center from which all documents were fabricated and all instructions were issued. 
For nearly all loans the central command was XXXX XXXX XXXX, aided by XXXX. While XXXX is technically defunct and XXXX XXXX went to jail taking one for the team, the functions of XXXX remained the same. XXXX changed its name to XXXX XXXX and in a PR coup transformed itself into the publisher of what is largely viewed as comprehensive data on mortgage lending and foreclosures. Hence it went from the purveyor of false, fraudulent, forged documentation to the purveyor of data perceived as reliable and thence became a trusted source whose data is considered worthy of legal presumptions. 
XXXX at XXXX XXXX include data processing on virtually all residential loans subject to claims of securitization many of which are represented by data on the XXXX. Platform which is a workaround to hide separate split transfers of the debt, the note and the mortgage or deed of trust. 
The systems on XXXX XXXX are designed for the express purpose of presenting consistent data in foreclosure claims. As such it also enables the rotation of apparent servicers, none of whom perform bookkeeping functions even if some of them interact with borrowers as if they were actually the servicers. 
The rotation of servicers comes with the false representation and illusion of boarding in which the process is falsely represented as meaning that the new servicer inspected, audited, reviewed and input the data into their own system. None of that occurred. Instead the new servicer merely gained access to the same XXXX  XXXX  as the last servicer with a new login and password. 
All evidence shows that the functions for fabricated, forging and robosigning documents continue to be performed under the direction of XXXX XXXX which receives all instructions from various investment banks who have each started their own securitization scheme masking apparent trades in the secondary market for loans and trades in the shadow banking market where private contracts are regularly traded without any securities regulation. 

Far from dropping their connection with XXXX/XXXX  the major banks have completely embraced this central repository of all loan data, all of which is subject to manual and algorithmic manipulation to suit the needs of the banks ; thus they produce a report that creates the illusion of credibility, reliability and even independence even though none of those things are true. 
XXXX XXXX is not mentioned in any transactions in part because of its prior record of criminal conduct. There is nothing like an admission that can change the course of thinking by a judge. Except for one thing : when the party not only admits the truth of the matter asserted but affirmatively alleges it in a lawsuit against someone else. It is a lawsuit by someone who professes to have no connection with the alleged servicing of any transactions that are referred to as residential mortgage loans. It is never named in any lawsuit as a servicer. It does not show up in court as the source of servicing records. It does not send any robowitness to court to say that he/she is familiar with the books and records of this company. And yet, here is XXXX XXXX, formerly XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. 
In a lawsuit against XXXX, XXXX XXXX asserts that XXXX infringed upon its proprietary system that supplies the servicing records for 62 % of all servicing performed in the U.S., and that means that in 62 % of all foreclosures, the companies that were proffered as servicers were not the servicers or at least did not perform all servicing functions especially, as you read the complaint, as to payment histories and relevant documents for foreclosure. 
So here is the only company that was ever caught red handed with fabricating, falsifying, recording, forging, robosigning false transaction documents. They changed their name but not their business model. Their business model is being the central repository of all the data that is created, stored, and manipulated with respect to 62 % of all alleged loans. That makes XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and other loan servicers liars. No document is ever produced showing that XXXX XXXX was named as servicer for any trust. That is because the trust has nothing and XXXX XXXX is not working for nothing. XXXX XXXX is working for investment banks who are the prime and only drivers of all trading, administration, collection and enforcing of contracts relating to securities and homeowner transactions. 
So when the servicer representative comes into court to testify as to the foundation of the payment history, he/she lies under oath. First, the copies he/she is attesting to are not from any system owned or controlled by his company and are not the records of the trustee or trust of any REMIC Trust. Second those records are always missing any references to what goes out. Without entries showing disbursements to creditors, the records are incomplete. Without records showing establishment of the debt as an asset of some creditor, the records are incomplete and doesnt prove a default. A default is established ONLY when proof of ownership of the asset ( Loan ) is established in the name of the claimant or Plaintiff. This never happens because there is no creditor showing the loan as an asset on its financial statements. In current securitization practices, there is no creditor that actually claims ownership under generally accepted accounting principles that require a financial transaction ( payment ) in exchange for a conveyance of ownership of the underlying debt as a required by Article 9 203 UCC as adopted by all U.S. jurisdictions. And if they are not creditors then they cant be considered lenders and therefore can claim that lender liability does not attach to them. And without any officer of the trustee or trust testifying that those are there records of test rust, the copies preferred by the foreclosure mill and the robowitness are just props to defraud homeowners and Courts. 

Besides fake Servicers and Trustees XXXX XXXX use other fictitious parties, like XXXX  who is assigned as a Mortgagee in  millions of loans to conduct purely illegal assignments. XXXX  never  owned any debt ; plus cheat Counties from billions of dollars in recording fees. MERS never signed any documents where they agreed to be an owner of my loan ; never disclosed to me in RESPA ; and never confirmed its status as a Mortgagee. Yet, purported XXXX  ( aka XXXX XXXX ) created a forged assignment to non-existing legal entity more than 4 years after this Trust was not formed. 
No document executed on behalf of XXXX  allegedly transferring ownership of a mortgage or deed of trust is legally valid in any manner, shape or form. And that is because unless the transfer of the ownership of the mortgage comes from one who legally owns it, it is a legal nullity the equivalent of a wild deed. Any document purporting to transfer ownership of the mortgage or the right to enforce the mortgage that is not accompanied by a transfer of the debt is a legal nullity. Since XXXX  NEVER touches any money and specifically disclaims any interest in any debt, note or mortgage, it can only serve as agent. Since the law ( and about 300 years of legal precedent ) requires that the mortgagee can only be one who has paid value for the debt, XXXX  has no power or right to transfer any mortgage or deed of trust unless the originator was an actual lender who owned the debt at the time XXXX  was asked to execute an assignment. Any acceptance of instructions from a self -proclaimed principal and successor in the XXXX  agency is merely a request to perform an illegal act. There are no successors unless someone acquired the originator. But nobody does because to do so would be inviting liability for lending law violations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation