Consumer complaint received 2018-07-19 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Mortgage debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit
Company: Weinstein & Riley, P.S.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received multiple certified letters from Weinstein & Riley P.S., A  XXXX WA based law firm, containing Notices Of Default for the property located at XXXX XXXX XXXX WA XXXX. 

This resulted in Weinstein & Riley, XXXX XXXX XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( mortgage servicer ) pursuing an 8 month Non Judicial Foreclosure against me. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a Rescinded Notice of Default ( # 1 ) from Weinstein & Riley P.S.  indicating that foreclosure activities had ceased. 

On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( # 2 ) requesting I contact them to speak about a possible loan modification. 

I contacted a local bank on XX/XX/XXXX( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) to open an account, and discuss possible options for keeping the home. I was informed that a foreclosure action had been initiated, resulting in an adverse action letter ( # 3 ) against my credit rating. 

This was my first notice of any new foreclosure action. 

Unknown to me at the time, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and Weinstein & Riley P.S. had instituted a Judicial Foreclosure ( # 4 ) on XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX County WA Superior Court ). 

I was finally served by local law enforcement with the complaint on XX/XX/XXXX ( # 5 ) 79 days after the Judicial Foreclosure was filed by Weinstein & Riley. 

The Principals have now filed a Request for Summary Judgment ( # 6 ) partially using the 79 day delay of service, which I believe was/is intended to deprive me of my right to meet Superior Court mandated deadlines. These actions on the surface seem to point to an attempt to deprive me of my civil rights as a resident of Washington State, in addition to depriving me of my right ( s ) of Due Process as an Citizen of The United States.

If the dates of the initial correspondence from the loan servicer to modify the loan, ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and the date of the Superior Court filing ( XX/XX/XXXX ) are correct, it seems obvious that no such loan modification or serious attempt at negotiation was ever considered. The entire process seems to have been designed at best, to lull me into a false sense of security, seeking to deprive me of my right to respond to the judicial action. At worst, convincing me to hand over money even though the foreclosure action began before the loan modification letter was sent. 

These actions began with the Rescinded Notice of Default.

Though the Principals seem to be within their rights to pursue either Non judicial, or Judicial Foreclosure, this must be a special case to merit this much consideration on what should have been an open and shut case. Per other complaints filed with CFPB, and Washington States AGs office, I have never denied owing monies, or the rights of the true note holder to foreclose.

The lack of due diligence violates Washington State HB 2057, and components of the Federal RESPA requirements that lenders work with homeowners facing foreclosure on a mediated settlement. I was never given that opportunity.

Though some of these issues will be addressed by me through civil action, some of the elements of my complaint ( if factual ) indicate fraud, and are beyond civil relief.

In addition, if elements of fraud are determined, there may be potential mail fraud violations in accordance with 18 U. S. C 1341 Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, ..

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation