Consumer complaint received 2016-03-25 00:00:00
Product: Mortgage — Conventional fixed mortgage
Issue: Loan modification,collection,foreclosure — 
Company: WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, My husband entered into a loan with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " XXXX '' ) in XXXX XXXX as the Lender ( which was registered and authorized to do business in the State of Tennessee at that time ), and he executed the promissory note ( I did not and was not requested to ) and I executed a Deed of Trust along with him at the direction of XXXX naming XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX ( " XXXX '' ), as the Beneficiary of the Deed of Trust ( See attached ). While XXXX was acting as stated " solely as the nominee for the Lender and Lender 's successors and assigns '', they are clearly stated ( in bold letters for emphasis ) to be " the beneficiary under this security instrument ''. Subsequent to the closing of the loan the same title company that acted as the initial Trustee, and conducted the closing on XXXX 's behalf and at their direction, assisted my Husband and I in transferring the title to our property into a revocable trust established for estate planning purposes for the family which my husband is not a beneficiary of, with myself serving as Trustee. 

After researching XXXX, I discovered that it functions as a private " for profit '' corporate entity providing nominee services to its " Members '' ( i.e. Lenders ) for commercial fees ( its " Members '' do not receive any dividends, as XXXX is a wholly-owned subsidiary of XXXX XXXX , XXXX, whose shareholders are a number of major banks and finance related companies ). XXXX is identified as a Delaware " for profit '' corporation ( See attached XXXX info ). In being faced with a foreclosure sale due to my Husband having allegedly defaulted in the payment of the loan, upon further research I discovered that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, was not registered or authorized to do business in the State of Tennessee at the time the Deed of Trust was executed, even though it was charging significant commercial fees for the various services it was providing to Lenders, which included acting as a nominee and beneficiary ( I am assuming it correspondingly was not paying any taxes or other required fees that other registered businesses / entities in Tennessee pay ) ( See attached Exhibit of State of Tennessee website ). I did discover that four years later, on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, did register to do business in Tennessee but their registration expired on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. 

I would assert that on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, when I executed the Deed of Trust ( although the Security Instrument was " dated '' XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) at the direction of XXXX ( the Lender ) to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, as the nominee for the Lender and the Beneficiary of the grant of a security interest by way of a " Deed of Trust '' that said Deed was void ab initio and ineffective as a legal deed of conveyance as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, did not legally exist in the State of Tennessee. I am without fault in said matter as the Lender and title company / Trustee bore the legal responsibility to verify the legal existence of the Beneficiary and failed to ratify that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX, was registered and authorized to do business and charge and collect commercial fees for providing nominee services in the State of Tennessee. 

As the Deed of Trust was ineffectual as a legal and security instrument in conveying any security interest as the Grantee/Beneficiary of the conveyance did not legally exist in the State of Tennessee, and the property is title at present in the name of the XXXX AND XXXX LIVING TRUST that I serve as sole Trustee of. The present holder-in-due-course of the Promissory Note may have both a cause of action against XXXX, as the original Lender, and my husband, as the original Borrower, but as stated I do not believe that they have a perfected security interest in my property.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation