Specialized Loan Servicing LLC Mortgage Complaint

Specialized Loan Servicing LLC Mortgage department,

Home equity loan or line of credit Loan servicing, payments, escrow account California

Beginning -, 2009, a cadre of financial institutions have improperly posed as the creditor, i.e. the party to whom the mortgage debt is owed, in connection with debt encumbering real property of my estate. After years of litigation, and battling absurd arguments such as, " we can enforce the debt even if we stole it, it 's a bearer instrument under UCC 3, '' it is clear that none of the financial institutions present own or have a right to enforce the debt instruments. The Court has now finally determined that the Note at issue is not negotiable instrument, and therefore not subject to UCC 3, and thus the institutions can not enforce the debt, " even if they stole it. '' After changing the identity of the creditor numerous times, the institutions most recently asserted the owner of the debt as, " the Bank of New York Mellon as Trustee for - -, asserts the right to enforce the Note as the owner of a bearer instrument, '' and then when I proved that was an impossibility, the institutions pivoted to assert the exact opposite, " the Bank of New York Mellon as Trustee for - - agrees it


debt on behalf of the Bank of New York Mellon as Indenture Trustee for - - ( BONYM ), with BONYM asserting it is attempting to collect the debt on behalf of " - note holder holders '' of - -. However during their deposition testimony, BONYM admitted it has no idea who the - noteholders are or how they are paid. Contradicting this testimony, are the documents filed with the SEC in connection with - - establishing that the indenture trustee is to certify with its signature, each note issued, and is responsible for paying the note holders. If BONYM does not know who the note holders are then they are not collecting payments from me on behalf of the - purported note holders of - -. Finally, during the recent summary adjudication proceedings, the servicing institutions and BONYM now assert that - - - is the owner of the instruments as Owner Trustee of - - ( - -. However - and its key executives are under criminal indictment for their conduct in connection with mortgage backed securities and did not assert a claim against my estate. Further, the documents filed with the SEC in connection with - - establish that the owner trustee, -, is the only party that can engage in litigation in connection with assets of the trust. It 's clear that -, did not, and is not asserting a claim against my estate, that - is improperly using the name - - as cover to fraudulently assert a claim against my estate. Defendants ' counsel in the matter, has improperly asserted it is representing all the Defendants, when their actual client is -, in order to collect fees and keep covered the issue that the note holders of - - are owed no amounts from me. As this agency is aware, when - - -, - - - - - was the servicing agent their conduct was particularly egregious as summarized in the attached communications to them. After the CFPB and FTC consent judgment was issued, - - immediately became - for obvious reasons but continues its deplorable conduct in my case. The overall issue is set out in my attached third amended complaint, which will have to be amended once again now that BONYM 's misrepresentations of ownership were revealed during the summary adjudication proceedings.