| 03/30/2016 |
Yes |
- Mortgage
- Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
|
- Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
|
|
Web |
|
|
I, XXXX XXXX make the following dispute against a law firm that avoided legal precedent pertaining to a lawsuit I filed in federal court XXXX 2015. Even though this firm was successful obtaining an order of foreclosure on my home, the guidelines have been established for decades of federal over state law intervention. I hereby attach copies of various letters to this law firm, as well as my claim that the XXXX defaulted in the legal process answering the initial legal claim. Even though my federal claim takes precedent, this law firm continued its foreclosure action avoiding my rights under several statutes including my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I request a full investigation on this illegal action against my home located in XXXX, New York. I request the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to use my case as part of its ongoing process to protect consumers against abusive collection and/or foreclosure processes. My federal claim is still in process in the Northern District of New York, XXXX As Trustee, et al. Even though I still hold possession of my property, this very same law firm has extended its fraudulent practices by submitting an order of eviction with the county sheriff 's department to force egress into my home, evict current tenants and cause other financial hardships that are not legal. My complaint to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and XXXX are hereby attached for review.
Even XXXX eventually submitted a law firm on record to defend their position giving the case validity. XXXX defaulted on answering the complaint by three months from the legal guidelines. It is the taxpayers of the United States that are eventually paying these extraordinary legal fees to defend fraud being procured against private citizens. The federal case I filed in XXXX of 2015 is still a valid claim, and all aspects of this claim and declaratory judgment must be addressed before any future foreclosure actions can persist. For that matter, the initial foreclosure actions violated my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and an additional lawsuit will be filed against the firm in this matter, Stein, Weiner & Roth, LLP. This abusive process, whereas law firms turn a blind eye on the rule of law can not exist in a society built on rules of law.
|
| 01/06/2017 |
Yes |
|
- Settlement process and costs
|
|
Web |
|
|
THIS OFFICE REPRESENTED XXXX XXXX AGAINST ME AND MY HOME
|
| 06/10/2018 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- Mortgage debt
|
- Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
- Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 03/08/2017 |
Yes |
|
- Settlement process and costs
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 07/07/2016 |
No |
- Debt collection
- Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.)
|
- Disclosure verification of debt
- Not given enough info to verify debt
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 07/06/2016 |
No |
- Debt collection
- Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.)
|
- Disclosure verification of debt
- Not given enough info to verify debt
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 07/26/2013 |
Yes |
|
- Disclosure verification of debt
- Not given enough info to verify debt
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|