Consumer complaint received 2017-07-11 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional home mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage — 
Company: Community Loan Servicing, LLC (formerly known as Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC)
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
My mortgage loan servicer Bayview and investor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX recently filed a Notice of Default against my home. They did so, even though a title report search shows that the deed is still not in my name and shows that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is no longer the owner of the loan. Additionally, I was told by Bayview via letter that I was in active review for a loan modification and that they had all requested documentation. There was no further communication, and instead of informing me of an approval or denial or suspension of my request for assistance based on my financial information, they filed an NOD, in clear violation of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights which prohibits dual tracking. There is a question relating to whether these entities even have the right to foreclose because of the complicated property history. I bought this property in XX/XX/XXXX and refinanced into a negative amortization loan with XXXX in XX/XX/XXXXnot long after that my company I had worked at for 8 years went out of my business and my wife and I both lost our jobs. I worked in the mortgage business and opened a new company, but then the market crashed and I was in a downward spiral. I ended up having to short sale 5 investment properties and defaulted on all my debts. I could not afford the mortgage on this home and moved my family out and began renting. I tried to short sale the home but XXXX XXXX XXXX kept rejecting the offers -- finally they accepted the 12th offer in XX/XX/XXXX. I discovered strange activity on title -- - the property had been fraudulently transferred one month earlier ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and my name was no longer on the title. What happened was an entity from XXXX Texas named XXXX XXXX XXXX substituted itself as trustee for the first deed of trust owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. After recording this substitution, the entity then recorded another document showing that it sold the property at a trustees sale to another entity named XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. At that time XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX became the title owner of record. I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX and was soon working with their Attorney XXXX XXXX. They told me that they were working on getting the property back into my name but were concerned because the fraudulent entity had opened escrow in order to try and pull off a quick cash sale. They told me that I needed to move back into the home because if the property changed hands and someone else moved in it may be impossible to resolve. I cooperated with XXXX XXXX XXXX and their Attorney and was promised that once this was settled they would work with me to resolve the delinquent payments and to modify the loan. However, a few months later the loan was transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX -- I began helping the XXXX counsel and they told me that once the title vesting issue and fraud was settled that they would review me for a modification and would work to fix all of this since I had helped the investor save their asset. In early XXXX they said that the property had been deeded back into my name and that they could consider me for modification review so I submitted a package of financial information to them in XX/XX/XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX I was told that Bayview was reviewing my financial documents for a modification, even though I did not know the loan had been transferred to Bayview and had never submitted any documents to them. What made this even more troubling was I checked my title report and the fraudulent recording was still showing up, meaning that I was not the deed holder and also that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was not the rightful owner. Bayview never notified me of the disposition of my review, instead I received a Notice of Default, from an entity that does not have a legal right to foreclose ( per title ) and a servicer that never completed my modification review.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation