ID THEFT: Example of one person’s response

Editors’ Note: In response to my post on ID THEFT I received a number of comments and ideas. Here is one example of how someone stuck to the message and forced the issue using ID theft as a defensive tactic as well as preparing for an offensive response.

Are you reading my mind?
Out of the blue in Oct. Got a letter with my mortgage company letterhead stating “welcome to new mortgage company”. Said they changed their name. Separate letter said on Nov 6. stop making payments to them by their name and Nov. 7 start making payments to them by new name.
I know about contracts so I attempted to not contract with new name. It’s been a disaster.

1. No assignment 5 months out, in the Official Real Estate Records.
2. Real Trustee still holds title. I contacted him, but he only represents the beneficiary ‘who has the note and an interest secured in the home”.
3. Checked all three credit reports, 5 months out. Two show old name one show new name all have the same info. I disputed new name in the credit report that had it – stating I didn’t know them.
4. I disputed old name in another credit report since they are no longer exist to force identification of who is updating that report. Got copies of all.
4. Checked SEC filings. Investors bought the first name corporation in 2008. Then on Nov. 6, 2009 they merged the bank into their business. That explains why they said to stop paying one name.
5. Foreclosures under old name on file in Deed of Trust has been without assignment or transfer filings. Using Substitute Trustee. Three problems. Original Trustee still holds title. I already wrote him and know this. Deed of Trust on file has no provision for Substituting the Trustee. By virtue of the ‘merger’ they should have the original documents.
6. Spent 5 months asking them to validate their claim. They send a copy of the Certified copy of my Deed of Trust on file in the public (that does not name them), and a copy of a Certified copy of the Promissory note (that does not name them). Two problems They can’t attach to the Deed of Trust without assignment..name change or not…their name is ‘not’ the named Lender nor beneficiary in the Deed of Trust. And the Promissory Note was made out to a specific entity. You can’t possibly assume that I have to know that when you sell it, they can come up and say ‘pay me’ when the promissory note is supposed to be held by the person you promised to pay. If they sell it, that’s a different agreement between them and the other buyer, but I can’t be forced into their third party agreement as long as I agree to pay you..you stay right there and let me pay you..but don’t force me to pay someone I did not ‘promise to pay’.
7. They’ve hired a law firm (setting up for a substitute trustee situation). I contacted the firm. (not pro bono, not pro se, no attorney..just me and told them I don’t recognize the other company and I have asked them to validate and they respond with stronger demand for money.) Maybe that’s why I got the ‘copies’ I did get from the mortgage company that does not support their claim.
8. Informed the attorney of their violation of FDCPA by forwarding information to another party and by not disclosing the amount attempted to collect is in dispute.
9. I wouldn’t trust an attorney at this time. The United States is in Bankruptcy, China filed a lien for 45 Million dollars in December 2009.
10. Have a copy of a Substitute Trustee sale by this company. They never released the lien on the debtor they foreclosed on after the sale. If they had the papers they could have released the lien.
11. Once you admit there is a contract you can’t use Statue of Frauds which helps me because I have refused to contract and have refused to pay and requested validation of their claim of a debt owed to them.
Thinking seriously about filing SEC complaint and sending the ‘Communications, Notice and Order’ to the named person listed in their SEC filing and a copy of that to the law firm listed with the words “With a copy to” – in their SEC filing
My identity has been stolen by the company. When I establish an account with one firm, that does not give a right to another firm to step up and say I have the account, change the name, change the terms of your initial agreement and start paying me now because I have a ‘new name’. How can you have an account demanding payment when there is no agreement and you are really a new entity, not just a new name?
I’m learning about Statute of Frauds. It would also appear that Deceptive Trade Practices can be proven in this mess. A company who has no contract attaches to your credit report as if you’ve established business agreement with them? They have no definition in your Deed of Trust, yet they can get an attorney to represent their interest in your document and start nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings. If they have the papers it takes to change the name on the credit report, they should have the papers it takes to file an assignment/transfer and change the name on the Deed of Trust.
I’ve not paid them any money, but I have filed FTC and Attorney General complaints. Not sure if I have to pay the 5 months in arrears as Threat, Duress, and Coercion to get some action done by these public resources I’m using to filing the compliant.

9 Responses

  1. Question to anyone who knows the answer:

    Is a nonjudcial foreclosure illegal pursuant to Section 1692i of the FDCPA which requires that an action to enforce an interest in real property be brought ONLY in a judicial district?

    § 1692i. Legal actions by debt collectors
    (a) Venue
    Any debt collector who brings any legal action on a debt against any consumer shall—
    (1) in the case of an action to enforce an interest in real property securing the consumer’s obligation, bring such action only in a judicial district or similar legal entity in which such real property is located; or
    (2) in the case of an action not described in paragraph (1), bring such action only in the judicial district or similar legal entity—
    (A) in which such consumer signed the contract sued upon; or
    (B) in which such consumer resides at the commencement of the action.

  2. Again-as I posted under another tab. One has to look carefully at every doc one has signed for loan app etc.

    Go and study the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act carefully, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

    The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act allowed commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies to consolidate AND this act also contained very important laws on Privacy, Opting Out, the sharing of data with affiliates etc.

    This was written by the BANKING INDUSTRY and it really does NOT favor borrowers.

    On the surface you may read –oh it seems to protect my data — but if you really read the fine print on docs which you more than likely signed, it allows financial organization to readily share your data with other affiliates etc.

    If you can find my other post on LL, I provide a definition of non-public personal information etc.

    Here is a good starting place:
    http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/glbact/glbsub1.htm#6801

    Remember the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act pretty much allowed for securitization to move full speed ahead and for banks to be able to become investment houses too — and the sections of it on Disclosures of Non-Public Personal Information was developed to support the securitization.

    so just be careful when alleging identity theft.

    The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was signed by a President so probably trumps state laws.

  3. Joe,
    I’m not relying on anyone in this blog to help me nor satisfy my situation with their cynicism.

    Who do you represent? A bank? A servicer?

    There has to be an Assignment.
    I know what a ‘name change’ / ‘merger’ should look like in the public. This is not the first time one has been done, but it’s the first time one has been done where the Bank has no standing and has an account number and a balance. With access to one’s credit report, anyone can have a bank account and a balance. Where’s the contract that says I pay you?
    A letter, with a former company’s letterhead?
    Anyone can forge the letterhead of any company.

    If the Deed of Trust indicates the Note or partial interest can be sold, transferred, or assigned, and I know that an Assignment has to be filed, and you don’t. Then I can support my claim of Identity Theft, and you’ll have to look for something else to defend.

    When fraud is in play, there is more than one thing that is occurring, and yes, Identity Theft, is one of the areas where fraud exists.

    http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/identity-theft/

    Legal Definition of Identity Theft:::

    Identity theft is govened by federal and state criminal statutes. State laws vary, but typically define the crime to include an intent to use another’s identity to commit, aid, or abet any unlawful activity. A person commits the crime of identity theft if, without the authorization, consent, or permission of the victim, and with the intent to defraud for his or her own benefit or the benefit of a third person, he or she does any of the following:

    1. Obtains, records, or accesses identifying information that would assist in accessing financial resources, obtaining identification documents, or obtaining benefits of the victim.
    2. Obtains goods or services through the use of identifying information of the victim.
    3. Obtains identification documents in the victim’s name.

    Identity theft statutes vary by state and usually do not include use of false identification by a minor to obtain liquor, tobacco, or entrance to adult business establishments. The types of information protected from misuse by identity theft statutes includes, among others:

    * Name
    * Date of birth
    * Social Security number
    * Driver’s license number
    * Financial services account numbers, including checking and savings accounts
    * Credit or debit card numbers
    * Personal identification numbers (PIN)
    * Electronic identification codes
    * Automated or electronic signatures
    * Biometric data
    * Fingerprints
    * Passwords
    * Parent’s legal surname prior to marriage

    The following is an example of one state’s laws governing identity theft: “609.527 Identity theft.

    Subdivision 1. Definitions.

    1. As used in this section, the following terms have the meanings given them in this subdivision.
    2. “Direct victim” means any person or entity described in section 611A.01, paragraph (b), whose identity has been transferred, used, or possessed in violation of this section.
    3. “Identity” means any name, number, or data transmission that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual, including any of the following:

    1. a name, Social Security number, date of birth, official government-issued driver’s license or identification number, government passport number, or employer or taxpayer identification number;
    2. unique electronic identification number, address, account number, or routing code; or
    3. telecommunication identification information or access device.

    d. “Indirect victim” means any person or entity described in section 611A.01, paragraph (b), other than a direct victim.

    e. “Loss” means value obtained, as defined in section 609.52, subdivision 1, clause (3), and expenses incurred by a direct or indirect victim as a result of a violation of this section.

    f. “Unlawful activity” means:

    1. any felony violation of the laws of this state or any felony violation of a similar law of another state or the United States; and
    2. any nonfelony violation of the laws of this state involving theft, theft by swindle, forgery, fraud, or giving false information to a public official, or any nonfelony violation of a similar law of another state or the United States.

    Subd. 2. Crime. A person who transfers, possesses, or uses an identity that is not the person’s own, with the intent to commit, aid, or abet any unlawful activity is guilty of identity theft and may be punished as provided in subdivision 3.

    Subd. 3. Penalties. A person who violates subdivision 2 may be sentenced as follows:

    1. if the offense involves a single direct victim and the total, combined loss to the direct victim and any indirect victims is $250 or less, the person may be sentenced as provided in section 609.52, subdivision 3, clause (5);
    2. if the offense involves a single direct victim and the total, combined loss to the direct victim and any indirect victims is more than $250 but not more than $500, the person may be sentenced as provided in section 609.52, subdivision 3, clause (4);
    3. if the offense involves two or three direct victims or the total, combined loss to the direct and indirect victims is more than $500 but not more than $2,500, the person may be sentenced as provided in section 609.52, subdivision 3, clause (3);
    4. if the offense involves more than three but not more than seven direct victims, or if the total combined loss to the direct and indirect victims is more than $2,500, the person may be sentenced as provided in section 609.52, subdivision 3, clause (2); and
    5. if the offense involves eight or more direct victims, or if the total, combined loss to the direct and indirect victims is more than $35,000, the person may be sentenced as provided in section 609.52, subdivision 3, clause (1).

    Subd. 4. Restitution. A direct or indirect victim of an identity theft crime shall be considered a victim for all purposes, including any rights that accrue under chapter 611A and rights to court-ordered restitution.

    Subd. 5. Reporting.

    1. A person who has learned or reasonably suspects that a person is a direct victim of a crime under subdivision 2 may initiate a law enforcement investigation by contacting the local law enforcement agency that has jurisdiction where the person resides, regardless of where the crime may have occurred. The agency must prepare a police report of the matter, provide the complainant with a copy of that report, and may begin an investigation of the facts, or, if the suspected crime was committed in a different jurisdiction, refer the matter to the law enforcement agency where the suspected crime was committed for an investigation of the facts.
    2. If a law enforcement agency refers a report to the law enforcement agency where the crime was committed, it need not include the report as a crime committed in its jurisdiction for purposes of information that the agency is required to provide to the commissioner of public safety pursuant to section 299C.06.

    Subd. 6. Venue. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in section 627.01, an offense committed under subdivision 2 may be prosecuted in:

    1. the county where the offense occurred; or
    2. the county of residence or place of business of the direct victim or indirect victim.

    Subd. 7. Aggregation. In any prosecution under subdivision 2, the value of the money or property or services the defendant receives or the number of direct or indirect victims within any six-month period may be aggregated and the defendant charged accordingly in applying the provisions of subdivision 3; provided that when two or more offenses are committed by the same person in two or more counties, the accused may be prosecuted in any county in which one of the offenses was committed for all of the offenses aggregated under this subdivision.”
    Transfer/Assignment. Have you ever heard of Statute of Frauds. If someone has an interest in your property, a UCC fixture filing or a Deed of Trust or a Mortgage has to be in the public.

    If Bank A sold the mortgage to Bank B, Bank B must file and Assignment or Transfer. It’s written in my Deed.
    BTW, Bank B did not take over until Nov. 2009, and they sent me an accounting with their name on it starting from Feb, 2009.

  4. same thing happened here disputed credit report claiming identity theft CRA said the debt was verified. filed a complaint with the FTC, they’re worthless there for looks false security and only go after those who pose as a threat to the federal/criminal enterprise. oh yeah do yourself a favor if you move somewhere new DON”T LET the DEBT COLLECTORS KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE, they sell that info to marketing scam affiliates.

  5. You’re claiming “ID theft” because Bank #1 sold your mortgage to Bank #2? Good luck with that. This has “very bad ending” written all over it.

  6. im loving it….letter on its way to atty general

  7. CASE NO.: 2:10-CV-00257-JAM-KJM

    Sean Patrick; Solomon
    Karen J.Solomon Plaintiff
    E-Loan Inc.;
    Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. Lenders First Choice TRUSTEE1 ;
    Wells Fargo Bank N.A )
    Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, )
    Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation, )
    LSI Title Company,
    Marco Marquez, )
    John Kennerty, )
    DOES I-XX, Inclusive. Et al

    . FRAUD
    2. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
    3. BREACH OF CONTRACT
    4. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANTOF GOOD FAITH AND FAIRDEALING
    5. NEGLIGENCE
    6. VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §17200 et seq.
    7. QUIET TITLE (AS TO ALL Defendants)
    8. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Conspiracy/Rico)
    9. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1572

  8. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/04/24/number-of-the-week-103-months-to-clear-housing-inventory/tab/article/

    103: The number of months it would take to sell off all the foreclosed homes in banks’ possession, plus all the homes likely to end up there over the next couple years, at the current rate of sales.

    How much should we worry about a new leg down in the housing market? If the number of foreclosed homes piling up at banks is any indication, there’s ample reason for concern.

    As of March, banks had an inventory of about 1.1 million foreclosed homes, up 20% from a year earlier, according to estimates from LPS Applied Analytics. Another 4.8 million mortgage holders were at least 60 days behind on their payments or in the foreclosure process, meaning their homes were well on their way to the inventory pile. That “shadow inventory” was up 30% from a year earlier.

    Based on the rate at which banks have been selling those foreclosed homes over the past few months, all that inventory, real and shadow, would take 103 months to unload. That’s nearly nine years. Of course, banks could pick up the pace of sales, but the added supply of distressed homes would weigh heavily on prices — and thus boost their losses.

    The government is understandably worried about the situation, and its Home Affordable Modification Program has made an impact by helping people stay in their homes and avoid foreclosure. As people who enter the program catch up on their payments, the number of homeowners 60 or more days delinquent has fallen 9% over the past two months.

    Now, though, the effect of modifications could be on the wane. According to Goldman Sachs, HAMP started less than 80,000 trial modifications in March, less than half the number in the peak month of October 2009. At the same time, a growing number of modifications are being canceled as borrowers prove unable to pay. By Goldman’s count, about 68,000 were canceled in March.

    All this means that little can stop banks’ inventory of distressed homes from growing. Too many people owe too much more on their homes than they can afford. For the housing market, that could mean a long-lasting hangover.

  9. Are you reading my mind?

    I have to send this now, before I am able to read the whole article. I hit send to opposing party (defendant in my Civil Suit) I sent her a letter, my third attempt, requesting her client Chicago Title Ins. to consider allowing us to open this “original ” she claims of the documents that I have to exhaustion requested from June 2007. They have always been “missing”. The Mortgage company was asked by Judge to provide this for me. I received a letter from their Paralegal saying they sold the loan and X company owned it now. Two days later I received a letter from Chicago Title saying Varde owned it, they are an investment brokerage. She won’t answer my questions just says it will be at a handwriting analysis an hour or so drive. She will not be permitted to allow me to have the file to examine with an expert. The Attorney for Varde said they cannot let more than her have it. This same ‘company demanded I sign the “HUD 1” they created after the closing that I did not sign, but that also showed up with a signature, along with about 6 or so other versions. She said they had “removed ” the signature from the document to be signed by me in ink 20 copies of the set, for an example of what it would look like if I had signed it.

    It is terribly distressing, not because I am afraid of what they will find, but what they will report to us.

    Thanks, now I have to go out but look forward to reading both the article and the response.

    Neil you have been amazing!
    Thanks Juli

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: