United States District Court

Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)

RE: CYNTHIA ZOCCALI

Intervenor / Pro Se

Robert Shapley
Plaintiff

V. CASE NO: 2:20-cv-00864-CFK

Trans Union LLC
Experian Information Solutions, Inc
Equifax Information Services LLC
OCWEN / PHH Mortgage Services
Defendant

MOTION TO INTERVENE

COMES NOW Intervenor Cynthia Zoccali (daughter of Plaintiff Robert Shapley) intervenes to protect
her interest in real property 118 Meredith Drive, Spring City, PA 19475. and for the unnecessary emotional
distress in this case through Retaliation and Retribution by OCWEN/PHH et al and their attorneys, involved in
this case.

The Intervenor will show opposing attorneys with their clients OCWEN/PHH et al and/or with the collusion of
NewRez took information from this case, switched attorneys from DuaneMorris, Brett L. Messenger, Esq., to
attorneys of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young LLP involved in this case. That Intervenor contacted
OCWEN/PHH et al because her father was not on the loan, and his signature had been forged. That Plaintiff,
Mr.Shapley, is the father of Intervenor Cynthia Zoccali. The following is the retaliation and retribution by
lawyers and OCWEN/PHH.

JURISDICTION AND RULES

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Intervene.

That Intervenor under Rule 24 Intervention has an absolute right by law to intervene as Intervenor has a
claim on property that is at this moment threatened by an illegally, fraudulently foreclosure in Retaliation and
Retribution of this suit.

Cynthia Zoccali, Intervenor, also OWNS STOCK IN OCWEN/PHH, New Residential Investment Corp aka
NewRez, HSBC, Mr. Cooper and Brookfield Asset Management.

INTRODUCTION
That Attorneys of STRADLEY RONON STEVENS & YOUNG LLP ie: Thomas Francis Lucchesi, Len Fisher,
Joe Nguyen et al have created a FRAUD ON THE COURT with the attorney’s duty to the court against
Concealment, Nondisclosure and Suppression of Information. To the extent to which it is regarded as
counsel’s duty to advise the court as to matters relevant to the proper decision of the case of which opposing
1
counsel is ignorant or which he has overlooked turns on the degree to which the old idea that litigation is a
game between the attorneys. This Intervene will show questions as to the standing of OCWEN/PHH/NewRez,
and the question to - does this loan exist? That Intervenor and Father had reached out to OCWEN et al due to
the forgery of his name and the wrongly reporting of the loan on his credit report. Intervenor was contacted by
DuaneMorris in Philadelphia, PA to resolve the matter. Stradley attorneys took over this in or around April/May
of 2020 and OCWEN/PHH/NewRez et al stopped taking Intervenor’s payments even though she was not
behind in her payments. Retaliation and Retribution by the lawyers and/or OCWEN/PHH/NewRez.
PARTIES
Plaintiff / Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs
of this Complaint.

CYNTHIA ZOCCALI - Intervenor/Pro Se (Daughter to Robert Shapley) Owner of home, Intervenor/Pro Se

Robert Shapley - Plaintiff (Father to Cynthia Zoccali) Intervenor

Trans Union LLC - Defendant Terminated 05-21-2020

Experian Information Solutions, Inc - Defendant Terminated 05/28/2020

Equifax Information Services LLC - Defendant Terminated 04/10/2020

OCWEN/PHH Mortgage Services - Defendant who is in business/coludes with NewRez, who attorneys
STRADLEY RONON STEVENS & YOUNG LLP ie: Thomas Francis Lucchesi, Len Fisher, Joe Nguyen have
colluded using the information in this case to deny payments sent to OCWEN/PHH/NewRez and to respond
with questions requested about the loan to Intervenor Cynthia Zoccali.

OCWEN/PHH Mortgage Services et al SCHEME / CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE

Plaintiff / Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs
of this Complaint.

That Intervenor believes the following laws and or rules have been violated by OCWEN/PHH/NewRez
where a complaint has been filed with the CFPB / SEC and other complaints to follow:

Violations of the following Rules and Laws:

 
18 USC § 371 Conspiracy 15 U.S. Code Subchapter V - DEBT COLLECTION
18 USC § 1341 Frauds and Swindles PRACTICES § 1692d - Harassment or abuse §
18 USC § 1343 Fraud by Wire, 1692e -False or misleading representations § 1692f
18 USC §1344 Bank Fraud - Unfair practices § 1692g - Validation of debt §
18 USC §1346 Honest Services 1692j - Furnishing certain deceptive forms Fair
18 USC § 1348 Securities and commodities fraud Debt. Collection Act (FDCPA), §1639 (g) Requests
18 USC §1349 Attempt and Conspiracy Sarbanes – for payoff amounts of home loan § 806
Oxley Act Harassment, § 807 False and misleading, § 808
18 U.S. Code § 666 - Theft or bribery concerning Unfair practices, § 809 Validation of debts, § 812
programs receiving Federal funds Furnishing deceptive forms, et al

2
26 U.S.C. § Section 61 A (1) DOJ and 48 states including Virginia. CFPB has
26 U.S.C. § Section 108 (i) filed new suit USDC Southern District of Florida
26 U.S.C. § Section 451 West Palm Beach Div Case No. 9:17 – cv-80495
26 U.S.C. § Section 1033 Regs. Sec. 1.707-3(b)(2) Disguised sales of
U.S.C Section 1.751, CFR 1.752 property to partnership;
SEC Rule 1122 AB
31 U.S.C. § 3729 Federal False Claims Act Theft by deceptive taking
Violation of the Consent Order in 2014 with the Illegal Conversion of Real Estate

That when OCWEN issued the 1099’s it did not use a company it would have and did use a name that could
be a “Payer Agent” ? ALL FDCPA “debt collections”.

This is the ENRON game with a twist:

1. Take Bad Assets written down to 10% of the original appraised value
2. Recap them by pulling them into CMBS
3. Originate loans to anyone by taking the title up front - under the IRS Rules for installment sale
4. Now the pool of crap is properly capitalized
5. Now amortize the bad Bank OREO by 10% annually to keep within range of a qualified investment
6. Assign the amortized amount annually to Consumers as pass-through investors
7. and then issue a 1099 A to close out these like-kind exchanges in the year of disposition
8. Where the title held by a BANK TRUSTEE A is released to the payees agent OCWEN
9. For the LLC to recast Itself by paying your withholding taxes on the Phantom earnings

The IRS calls these tax promoters and liquidation schemes “genius” intended to beat the best intent of
Congress who is the authoritative guidance under Title 26. These are passed through Investments. Cynthia
Zoccali and/or her Father never did not agree to a pass through Investment.

That Plaintiff and Intervenor claims against OCWEN/PHH/NewRez et al for ABUSE AND FRAUDULENT
PROCESS by Officers of the Court acting to wrongly take real estate of the Intervenor located at: 118 Meredith
Drive, Spring City, PA 19475 under color of law with a fraudulent trustee process, to intimidate and cause a
wrongful auction.

THEFT BY DECEPTIVE TAKING: the attorney and trustee acts, under color of law, are intentionally designed
to harass and intimidate plaintiff to wrongfully deprive her of her lawful rights of ownership, by
OCWEN/PHH/NewRez with Stradley Ronon et al.

THAT the Defendant OCWEN/PHH et al, individually and jointly are acting and acted in bad faith, for their own
financial interests (and not that of any client) to perpetuate a financial law-scam for their own advantage
against the Plaintiff under color of law, including breach of fiduciary duty to this plaintiff/homeowner indicating a
LACK OF DUTY OF CARE, FAIR DEALING AND GOOD FAITH that is A PATTERN AND PRACTICE OF
DEFENDANTS.

Defendant conspiracy to enrich themselves: SERVICER OCWEN et al AND FORECLOSURE LAWYER

Stradley Ronon et al (AND OTHERS) APPEAR to have designed a fraudulent ‘foreclosure’ scam that takes
personal financial ADVANTAGE of homeowners by FRAUD under color of law, without a bonafide client (in this
case, HSBC Bank USA) THE Defendant’s acts seek to BENEFIT themselves, as officers of the court, by
3
manipulating the “trustee” system, to illegally move homeowner property into foreclosure auction, where the
officers of the court are the sole-beneficiaries. This FRAUDULENT SCHEME, uses illegal intimidation and
improper auction process (of Pennsylvania real estate) TO generate excessive profits for their own
law-corporate/trustee POCKETS:

● OCWEN/PHH et al failed to provide any accounting or proof of to Intervenor prior payments had
been properly credited. The payments history sent was incorrect, and refused to accept
Intervenors’ payments or otherwise communicate with Intervenor.
● OCWEN/PHH et al caused damages including the imposition of late charges for Intervenor
purported nonpayment, tried to charge for "forced insurance on the property," and interest and
costs related to untimely property tax payments and property inspections.
● OCWEN employees have stated the following of OCWEN’s acts and actions in collusion with
lawyers to harass and further mentally abuse homeowners: “Do not answer phones, Turn off
Fax machines, etc. That the lawyers did not respond to the OCWEN employees
questions and requests.”
● OCWEN past employees state clearly: “after the purchase of PHH that OCWEN was
going to be going into Bankruptcy and or Closing its doors.”
● The appearance is that OCWEN/PHH (OCN) is moving its assets into NewRez (NRZ), a
subsidiary of New Residential Investment Corp. - you then have Mr. Cooper (COOP) on the
Stock Market, and Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) on the stock market. After PHH took
over it moved the Meredith Dr Property as an alleged loan to NewRez. This loan should not
exist, as HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as Trustee for Deutsche Alt-B Securities
Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2006-AB2 according to the Settlement in or around 2012 does not
exist.

That the appearance of the facts that insiders have shared with another victim and with the acts and
actions of OCWEN / PHH is moving its assets to NewRez that was once owned by PHH. That further shows
that investors, shareholders of owner New Residential Investment Corp may not know loans that do not exist
and/or should not exist are being moved and/or counted as assets on OCWEN/PHH as well as New Rez and
the question becomes:

How many do non existing assets accounted for - for which companies etc.?

Defendant lack of standing. That in or around late 2014 - 2015, Defendant OCWEN (only has Servicing
Rights not the Right to assign) became aware of its lack of standing to pursue any type of foreclosure action on
Intervenor’s home, but they nevertheless, for their own financial profit and gain, pursued illegal collection
remedies on a loan that does NOT exist that have wrongfully harmed this Plaintiff and now the Intervenor.

That in or around 2014, OCWEN to avoid any criminal charges – no different then in the past with HSBC, Wells
Fargo Bank and Bank of America et al, did a consent ORDER to cease and desist the criminal activity. That
OCWEN has violated the Consent ORDER.

OCWEN et al is involved in a suit known as the CFPB new Complaint against OCWEN on or around April 20,
2017: in the USDC of the Southern District of Florida West Palm Beach Division Case No. 9:17 –cv- 80495 -
CFPB v. OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION a Florida Corporation , OCWEN MORTGAGE SERVING, INC,
a US Virgin Islands corporation AND OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC a Delaware Corporation Page 2
Paragraph 2 States: The bureau brings this action against the Defendants under: (1)Sections 1031 and 1036
of the CFPA , 12 USC §§ 5531, 5536; (2) Sections 807 (2)(a), 807(10), and 808 of the Fair Debt Collection
4
Practices Act, 15 USC §§ 1692e(2)(a), 1692e(10), and 1692f (the “FDCPA”); (3) Section 6 and 19 of the Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), 12 USC §§ 2605, 2617, and the regulations, promulgated
thereunder at Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. part 1024 (“Regulation X”); (4) Section 105(a) of the Truth and Lending
Act (“TILA”), 15 USC § 1604(a), and the regulations promulgated thereunder act Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. part
1026 (“Regulation Z”): and (5) Section 3(b) of Homeowners Protection Act of 1998, 12 USC § 4902(b)(the
“HPA”). Intervenor INCORPORATES the UNCLEAN HANDS OF OCWEN AND DEFENDANTS TO COVER
UP criminal activity. These allegations represent the allegations that Intervenor has reported to the
CFPB.

This Government and this Court is aware of the UNCLEAN hands and have supported the Banks accusations
on served complaints and Servicers criminal activity ignoring the American Citizen for by all appearance
personal gain. With the admission of the forgery of Plaintiff Robert Shapley.

The scheme and artifice between the Defendants who intentionally and willfully scheme to defraud Intervenor,
was for the purpose of using color of law and misuse of the Trustee function, to obtain money, attorney fees,
and Intervenor’s and/or Plaintiff’s property for their own benefit by materially false and fraudulent pretense,
representations and promises, by intentionally defrauding both the Intervenor and Plaintiff, HSBC by collecting
on a non-existent loan, which they knew was not collectible, was written off by the bank, and which they
interfered with refinancing to cause harm to Plaintiff/Intervenor and opportunity for themselves.

Manner and means. During the relevant period, Defendants are scheming to create a foreclosure on Meredith
Dr with knowledge aforethought and despite questions raised in court that there is no valid loan documentation
in existence as required for foreclosure under law.

The knowing acts and omissions of attorneys et al show a pattern and practice of law firms enabling and
covering up for each other for their own self-profit. The Defendants represent Foreclosure Mills across America
– when law firms and trustees operate fraudulently to cause and create unnecessary foreclosures cases, solely
for their own financial gain.

The knowledgeable acts and actions described herein violate Rules of Court, Federal Law, and the United
States Constitution, by denying Intervenor’s fundamental right to Due Process and ownership of property.
Under a pattern of ‘legal mortgage fraud’ in administration/collection..

Here, so-called lawyer “Trustees” are attorneys who operate as joint lawyers in the same shared office space,
who double dip by churning illegitimate collection, sale, attorney, and trustee fees in violation of Rules of Ethics
and self-dealing, by churning closed and settled collection accounts into their own profit.

Here, the involved lawyers failed to disclose they operate both as collection lawyers, trustee, and foreclosure
lawyers, without disclosure and in violation of fiduciary and ethical duties.

The “ Servicer”, the lawyer and the trustee all worked in collusion to provide false and misleading information to
defraud the Intervenor.

Wire Fraud. The scheme was transmitted by interstate wire communications in writings, emails, telephone
calls, facsimiles all in violation of Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

This action’s for appropriate for relief pursuant to the common law, statute and/or Constitution of the United
States of America, for impermissible restraints upon the Intervenor’s constitutionally protected property, in
5
Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) (15 U.S.C 1692, ET SEQ.), also for Breach of
Contract, Honest Service under 18 U.S.C. § 1346 for the Breach of Fiduciary duty to defraud a homebuyer/
owner and deprive her of the right to honest services without fraud.

Pursuant to the Federal Civil False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq.(to preserve the right of the
Government to become a party to the suit as a Relator in the protection of many others) That the Defendants
pursued and continue to pursue the appearance of a soon to foreclosure actions using false and fabricated
documents, particularly mortgage assignments to conceal that they are missing critical documents, namely, the
mortgage assignments. Without lawfully executed mortgage assignments, the value of the mortgages and
notes held by the trusts is impaired because effective assignments are necessary for the trust to foreclose on
its assets in the event of mortgage defaults. When the trustee banks discovered that the mortgage
assignments were missing, the trustee banks, together with an associated servicing company, default
Management Company and/or mortgage loan documentation company (OCWEN), devised and operated a
scheme and artifice to replace the missing assignments with fraudulent, fabricated assignments. The
purpose of this scheme is to meet the evidentiary requirements imposed by courts in the foreclosure cases and
to conceal from trust shareholders the true, impaired value of the assets of each of the alleged trusts, crippled
by the missing assignments and related documents, creating illegal foreclosure.

HSBC presently claim they have no loan, Defendants and their representatives either generated or rely on
loan documents that are forged, robo-signed, or reversed-engineered., and in a manner that is arbitrary and
capricious in dealing with Cynthia Zoccali.

The Fraud carried out by the Defendants in this case includes, inter alia:

● Mortgage assignments with forged signatures of the individuals signing on behalf of the grantors, and
forged signatures of the witnesses and the notaries by all appearance;
● Mortgage assignments with signatures of individuals signing as corporate officers for banks and
mortgage companies that never employed them by all appearance;
● Mortgage assignments prepared on behalf of grantors who had never themselves acquired ownership
of the mortgage and notes by a valid transfer, including assignments where the grantor was identified
as “Bogus Assignee for Intervening Assignments” and
● Mortgage assignments notarized by notaries who never witnessed the signatures that they notarized.

That the appearance and the FACTS are the CFPB did nothing to help Intervenor and many across the USA.

There is nowhere for a homeowner to go for help and must stand up for themself. For this
reason Cynthia Zoccali should be allowed to intervene .

That after 1 ½ years to move a loan in my name from OCWEN/PHH to NewRez. Which Interevenor has
learned is a pattern and practice these lawyers share: Zimmerman Reed Lawyers
https://www.zimmreed.com/case/ocwen-mortgage-errors-illegal-foreclosures/
States:

OCWEN MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES & PAYMENT PROBLEMS

6
RealServicing is a proprietary loan servicing platform Ocwen used to process and apply payments and
communicate information to borrowers – and it’s alleged they loaded inaccurate information into the system
resulting in the platform generating scores of errors. Using this inaccurate information, Ocwen did not
accurately account for homeowners payments or the amounts due under the home loans they serviced, failed
to correctly process and provide for required foreclosure mitigation protection to homeowners, failed to timely
and properly respond to homeowners’ requests for information in regards to their loans, and in many instances
wrongfully and improperly instituted foreclosure proceedings against them.

The following include common complaints from homeowners:

● Disputes concerning the amounts due and owing on the loan after a transfer to Ocwen
● Account disputes and inaccuracies provided by Ocwen through its customer website
● Payment application issues
● Escrow accounting issues
● Loan modification process issues, including, issues related to Ocwen’s failure to properly document
loan modification terms
● Wrongful foreclosure (e.g., authority to foreclose, amounts alleged to be due and owing)
● Failure by Ocwen to adequately respond to customer inquiries
● Backdating of homeowner correspondence

MAHANY LAW https://www.mahanyertl.com/2019/ocwen-fraud-investigations/

States:

MahanyLaw is investigating Ocwen and hopes to file one or more national class action complaints against the
company within coming weeks.

Specifically, we are investigating the following allegations of wrongdoing:

1. Use of a proprietary software known to trigger unsupported fees and speed foreclosures (REAL
Servicing);
2. Knowing use of infirm loan data,
3. Illegal foreclosures,
4. Failure to credit borrowers’ payments,
5. Mismanagement of escrow accounts,
6. Manufactured force-placed insurance,
7. Delayed termination of private mortgage insurance,
8. Charges for additional products without consent,
9. Mishandling accounts for deceased borrowers, and
10. Failure to correct errors identified by the borrower.

We agree. In our opinion, Ocwen has taken fraud and abuse to a new level.

We hoped that Ocwen had finally met its demise in 2015. That year investors sold off their stock in the
company causing the company’s value to plummet. Over one hundred trusts holding $82 billion of mortgages
gave Ocwen the boot. Their reasons?

7
 ● Using trust funds to pay off Ocwen’s obligations owed under a regulatory settlement. Instead of
paying what they owe, the trusts say that Ocwen pushed the payments onto them;
● Gross conflicts of interests. Ocwen used corporate affiliates such as Altisource and Home Loan
Servicing Corporation to further enrich itself and hurt borrowers and the trusts;
● Failing to comply with foreclosure and consumer protection laws;
● Engaging in illegal and improper loan modification and advance recovery practices;
● Improper records practices;
● Failing to properly communicate with borrowers; and
● Failing to properly pay the trusts.

In other words, it isn’t just homeowners who claimed they were the victims of Ocwen fraud. It is the investors
who own the loans too.

STATEMENT OF FACTS OF ALLEGED LOAN ON: 118 Meredith Drive, Spring City, PA 19475

Plaintiff / Intervenor incorporates herein by reference the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

On February 19, 2019 Intervenor received an incorrect statement dated 2/11/19 from Ocwen Loan Servicing.
(Exhibit 1)

Intervenor emailed bankruptcy attorney, Dan Mudrick, Esq., and he followed up and indicated she was
up-to-date and to send Feb. 2019 payment (Exhibit 2)

In March of 2019 Intervenor was informed by Ocwen that it would change to PHH in April 2019. (Exhibit 3)

Intervenor continued to submit monthly payments. Several of these payments have never been found or
cashed, and statements from PHH were sporadically mailed and were not consistent. (Exhibit 4)

Intervenor received incorrect monthly statements beginning in March 2020 that were sent to the incorrect
address. There were four (4) incorrect statements for the month of April 2020 - All statements from March
2020 to October 2020 are attached as (Exhibit 5)

Intervenor continued to receive incorrect statements and foreclosure threats. Continued to send proof of
payments. As well as correspondence to the “representative” handling my account.
1. Correspondence to Sirsak Chettri - Relationship manager dated 12/21/10 (Exhibit 6)
2. Correspondence to Sirsak Chettri - Relationship manager dated 1/3/20 (Exhibit 7)

As a result of continued harassment the credit of Intervenor’s father was ruined, and he retained Vullings Law
Group in January 2020.

Intervenor received correspondence from attorneys Duane Morris (Brett Messinger) in Philadelphia, PA
responding to her letters. Duane Morris letters dated:

1. January 15, 2020 Brett Messinger (Exhibit 8)

2. February 27, 2020 Brett Messinger (Exhibit 8)

8
The attorneys were switched after they knew of Intervenor’s and Plaintiff’s issues to Stradley Ronon / Len
Fisher et al as a retaliation to after Intervenor as a result of Robert Shapley retaining Vullings Law Group to
recover his credit and address the alleged forgery on the Loan Modification.

Federal Case filed February 14, 2020 Case No. 2:20-cv-864 - the attorneys were Len Fisher, Joe Nguyen and
Thomas Lucchesi of Stradley Ronon.

It is apparent that Stradley Ronon / Len Fisher, Joe Nguyen and Thomas Lucchesi used this information
without the Vullings Law group, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor realizing it. This me and or my daughter
realizing it. I believe that to be negotiating in bad faith - and possibly a Bar Complaint should be filed against
all attorneys involved.

In March of 2020 Intervenor received the first letter from Stradley Ronon.

April / May 2020 discovery is done by Plaintiff and his attorney Brent Vulings with the help of his daughter,
Intervenor. All documents were provided, and it was unknown at the time that Intervenor and Plaintiff were
being retaliated against.·

June 2020 PHH stopped cashing Intervenor’s payments. Intervenor continues to send payments. They are
returned.

In late August, Intervenor sends QWRs requesting any and all documents pertaining to the “loan” the following:
(Exhibit 9)

1. Bruce John Williams, NewRez (Did Not Respond)

2. Michael Nierenberg, New Residential (Did Not Respond)
3. Glen Messina, Ocwen/PHH (Len Fisher responded for Glen Messina on 9/4/20 - Refused
request and refused to provide requested information (Thomas Luccesi responded on 9/24/20
for Glen Messina and Kevin Harrigan - objected to request and refused to provide information.)
4. Kevin Harrigan (Thomas Luccesi responded on 9/24/20 objected to request and refused to
provide information)
5. Michael Roberts, HSBC (Did Not Respond)
6. Baron Silverstein, NewRez (Len Fisher responded for Baron Silverstein on 9/8/20 - objected to
request and refused to provide information

March - September letters to my daughter from Mr. Fisher & Mr. Lucchesi obstructing, denying/objecting
access to documents that pertain to this alleged loan: (Exhibit 10)

1. March 20, 2020 Len Fisher

2. April 8, 2020 Len Fisher
3. July 1, 2020 Len Fisher
4. July 21, 202 Len Fisher
5. September 4, 2020 Len Fisher
6. September 8, 2020 Len Fisher
7. September 24, 2020 Thomas Lucchesi

Research shows this type of “Bad Faith” negotiating is a pattern and practice of this law firm and these
lawyers, which can be seen in the letters to Intervenor. Further, this could be construed as “Fraud on the
Court” which is created with concealment, nondisclosure and suppression of information that coextensive with
the duty not to commit fraud. And the opposing counsel was using our information given from a good place to
harm Intervenor.
9
Furthermore, Stradley Ronon attorneys and Vullings Law Group sent Plaintiff an Affidavit of Fraud to execute
stating his signature was allegedly forged. Plaintiff also had to ask for an important document that was not
provided to him. This was the “Stipulation and Order to Dismiss” with prejudice. Further indicating the fraud,
concealment and retaliation.

1. Affidavit of Fraud (Exhibit 11)

2. Stipulation and Order to Dismiss (Exhibit 11 )

CAUSES OF ACTION

Count 1

18 USC § 371 Conspiracy, Federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (a)(1)(A); 31 U. S. C. § 3729
(a)1(B); 31 U.S.C. § (a)(1)(C) 18 USC §1349 Attempt and Conspiracy forms Fair Debt. Collection Act
(FDCPA) § 806 Harassment, § 807 False and misleading, § 808 Unfair practices, § 809 Validation of
debts, § 812 Furnishing deceptive forms, et al

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

Defendants and others known and unknown did knowingly and unlawfully combine, conspire, confederate, and
agree to commit the following offenses against Intervenor to, directly and indirectly, corruptly give, offer, and
promise a thing of value, that is, among other things, cash or cash equivalents, with intent to influence illegal
acts, to commit and aid in committing, and to collude in, and allow fraud, and make opportunity for the
commission of any fraud, on the United States,

PURPOSES OF THE CONSPIRACY to ensure the foreclosure of Meredeth Dr. in Retaliation and Retribution
of getting caught in the use of information of this suit against Intervenor.

Manner and Means of the Conspiracy: Includes Elected Officials, the Government and the Judiciary to
protect one of their own.

This is a claim for treble damages and forfeitures under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq. 2

The Defendants created, sold or participated in Mortgage backed securities. The Mortgage backed Securities
were composed of mortgages bundled to create the securities in which the mortgages lacked the requisites to
create a secured, real estate debt obligation, namely:

The legally binding assignments from the originating bank to the securities trust and, and finally, to the
appearance of a foreclosure agent

Recording of Title in the Cities Clerk's office

10
Original Alleged Note and Mortgage, signed by both borrower and lender. The prospectus for each
mortgage-backed securities trust, and other public statements, falsely represented that the trust held good title
to the mortgages and notes bundled in the securities.

By Virtue of the wrongful conduct alleged here including, but not limited to, the false signatures used in
manufactured mortgage assignments, or stating the person had POWER OF ATTORNEY which does not exist
each of the mortgage-backed securities sold to the Treasury, or other entity funded by the U.S. government,
violated state and federal laws and furthered an effort to transfer impaired securities to the Treasury, or other
government funded entity. Defendants and their agents and employees falsely represented that they held good
title to Meredith Drive. Defendants received millions of dollars in U.S. government funds to provide services
involving fraudulent mortgage assignments. Accordingly, the Defendants and their agents and employees
knowingly presented or caused to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval from the
government entity purchasing the mortgage-backed securities.

Defendants and their agents and employees falsely represented that they have good title to Meredeth Dr..
When in Fact they had in their knowledgeable fraudulent actions created a cloud on the Title making the home
unsellable.

Defendants acted in concert to create fraudulent legal documentation to conceal that the trust was missing title
to the asset, thus impairing the value of the security sold to the treasury, or other government funded entity.
Each of the mortgage-backed securities sold to the Treasury, or other government funded entity, was in
violation of state and federal law.
COUNT 2
Breach of Contract – Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing –
Breach of Contractual Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Honest Services 18 U.S.C. § 1346

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

By virtue of the facts stated above, defendants have violated their contractual duty of good faith and fair
dealing. Honest Service under 18 U.S.C. § 1346 the Defendants schemed to appear to create a foreclose on
Interveners home with forged documents, with knowledgeable intent of Fraud.

The above defendants and defendant’s representatives breached their contractual duty of good faith and fair
dealing when they refused to provide the requested original Note, and other documents.

The above defendants Breach of Contract includes not limited to their involvement with breaking the chain of
title and creating a situation where Intervenor could not sell the home . The documents speak for themselves
the defendants were aware of these breaches.

Intervener through implied covenant of good faith and Fair Dealing continued to work with the different
Servicing groups even after they continued to lose paperwork, and make false claims, and create a foreclosure
on her home for a Foreclosure Sale.

The defendant’s “flagrantly violated” their Fiduciary responsibility to Intervenor to deal in Good Faith while
Intervenor continued to deal in Good Faith.
.

11
 AS Debt Collectors that they state clearly they are, they need to ensure that the debt they are collecting is a
legitimate debt and owned by OCWEN. MCW was informed that it was not a legitimate debt owned by
OCWEN.

Count 3
Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)
(15 U.S.C 1692, ET SEQ.) § 1692e - False or misleading representations § 1692f - Unfair practices §
1692g - Validation of debt § 1692j - Furnishing certain deceptive forms forms Fair Debt. Collection Act
(FDCPA) § 806 Harassment, § 807 False and misleading, § 808 Unfair practices, § 809 Validation of
debts, § 812 Furnishing deceptive forms, et al

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

Defendants used unfair/unconscionable means to try and foreclose illegally and unethically acts and actions on
Meredith Drive, while it appears Intervenor was under the production of the HAMP program.

Count 4
Wrongful Foreclosure Threat – Failure to Comply with HAMP rules
Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above a. Paragraphs of this
Complaint

HAMP PROHIBITS A PARTICIPATING server from taking several actions including the following:

Proceeding with a foreclosure sale. Any foreclosure sale must be suspended and no new foreclosure action
may be initiated during the trial period, and until the borrower has been considered and found ineligible for
other available foreclosure prevention options.

Requiring a borrower to make an initial contribution payment pending the processing of the trial period plan
before the plan starts.

Soliciting borrowers to opt out of consideration for HAMP during the temporary review period.

Reporting borrowers as delinquent to credit reporting bureaus without explanation. For borrowers who are
current when they enter a trial period, the servicer should report the borrower current but on modified payment
if the borrower makes timely payments during the trial period. For borrowers who are delinquent when they
enter the trial period, the servicer should report in such a manner that accurately reflects the borrower’s current
workout status.

Assessing prepayment penalties for full or partial prepayment as part of the modification.

The HAMP rules were expressed to Intervener several times by OCWEN - that you could not be
foreclosed on while you were being considered for the program.

It is documented that lawyers are nervous of losing the financial gain of Foreclosures stopping due to their
illegal and unethical practices. That if the homeowner gets into the HAMP program and an adjustment is made
to the loan – the lawyer loses an extra $50,000 or more. he gets from a foreclosure.

12
Stradley Ronon had no other motivation to foreclose on Intervener except for personal financial gain, greed
and the exposure of their illegal and unethical practices and for COVER UP of others criminal activity as stated
in the CFPB Complaints.

The attached emails & Letters in the Exhibits back up these intentions being malicious, violent,
oppressive, fraudulent, wanton, or grossly reckless. .

Count 5
Consumer Protection Act

Intervener incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

HSBC / OCWEN / PHH / NewRez used representatives to use unfair or deceptive acts or practices in forgery
and robo signing / FORGERIES of documents were deliberate with knowledgeable acts and actions to COVER
UP criminal behavior.

Count 6
Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Unjust Enrichment/Constructive Trust

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above a. Paragraphs of this
Complaint

Sttadley Ronon et al breached its Fiduciary Duty when it put its financial gain above the law and the rights of
Intervenor. Stradley Ronon et al breached its Fiduciary Duty when it ignored the HAMP rules for financial gain
and greed.

HSBC et al and its representatives breached its Fiduciary Duty with the Robo Signing / forgery of documents
breaking the chain of title on Meredith Drive.

HSBC et al and its Representative breached their Fiduciary Duty with the refusal of production of the original
Note or any proof of the right to stop accepting payments.

OCWEN and the above had a responsibility of good faith and fair dealings that they have ignored.

Further the double dipping and filing of fraudulent documents against Meredith Drive t with their Trustee
company

That the CFPB filed this Complaint against OCWEN on or around April 20, 2017: in the USDC of the Southern
District of Florida West Palm Beach Division Case No. 9:17 –cv- 80495 - CFPB v. OCWEN FINANCIAL
CORPORATION a Florida Corporation , OCWEN MORTGAGE SERVING, INC, a US Virgin Islands
corporation AND OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC a Delaware Corporation - Defendants Page 2 Paragraph 2
States: The bureau brings this action against the Defendants under: (1)Sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA ,
12 USC §§ 5531, 5536; (2) Sections 807 (2)(a), 807(10), and 808 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15
USC §§ 1692e(2)(a), 1692e(10), and 1692f (the “FDCPA”); (3) Section 6 and 19 of the Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act (RESPA), 12 USC §§ 2605, 2617, and the regulations, promulgated 29 thereunder at
Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. part 1024 (“Regulation X”); (4) Section 105(a) of the Truth and Lending Act (“TILA”),

13
15 USC § 1604(a), and the regulations promulgated thereunder act Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. part 1026
(“Regulation Z”): and (5) Section 3(b) of Homeowners Protection Act of 1998, 12 USC § 4902(b)(the “HPA”).

That this complaint shows that CFPB knew the acts and actions of OCWEN and that they had UNCLEAN
HANDS and yet allowed the foreclosure shows the COVER UP criminal activity.

The Government and this Court is aware of the UNCLEAN hands and have supported the Banks and Servicers
criminal activity ignoring the American Citizen.

The scheme and artifice between the Defendants who intentionally and willfully scheme to defraud Intervenor,
was for the purpose of using color of law and misuse of the Trustee function, to obtain money, attorney fees,
and plaintiffs property for their own benefit by materially false and fraudulent pretense, representations and
promises, by intentionally defrauding both Plaintiff, Intervenor and HSBC by collecting on a nonexistent loan,
which they knew was not collectible, was written off by the bank, and which they interfered with refinancing to
cause harm to Intervenor and opportunity for themselves..

Count 7
Injunctive / Declaratory Relief

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

That Intervenor now needs to pray this court grants temporary or permanent injunctive relief as
Intervenor and her family resides in the property and as Defendants are seeking, through illegal and
unlawful means and without satisfying the necessary legal standing requirements to institute a
foreclosure, take possession, custody, and control of the Property by the acts and actions of there
letters in Exhibits.

Count 8
Common Law Fraud12 U.S.C 1972

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

On several occasions Intervenor sent money to the Servicing agency of HSBC to only have funds returned.

It is very well documented that the Mortgage Servicer’s were instructed to not take any payments and to "work
with you" only after borrowers fall behind in payments. Once borrowers fall behind on purpose and at the
lender's request, foreclosure proceedings begin in earnest. The Foreclosure lawyers and their friends are the
beneficiary in the game, as is seen above with the amount of money Shapiro and Burson have reported
making from being one of Freddie Mac Servicers.

The defendants or their representatives on several occasions made false statements of material facts. ie
OCWEN – “Ignore the Foreclosure it is illegal for them to as you are in the HAMP program process”

The defendants and or their representatives making these statements knew or should have known it to be
untrue;

14
Intervenor to whom the statement was made had a right to rely on the statement; but, fortunately knew how
deceitful the defendants had been in the past.

Intervenor relied on the statement for as long as time permitted.

Intervenor believes the statement was made for the purpose of inducing the other party to be able to
Foreclose on Intervenor ’s home and gain financially.

Intervenor relied on the Banks and their representatives at OCWEN et al to not foreclose and to give
Intervenor 's legal right to the opportunity to get Funding for her company and the opportunity to keep her
home.

Count 9
Negligence – the negligent infliction of emotional distress;
the intentional infliction of emotional distress

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

The defendant’s had a legal duty to use reasonable care to protect the Chain of Title to the property. By not
doing this simple act the defendant’s malicious actions caused great emotional distress to Intervenor .

The actions of the actors to cause this emotional distress were malicious, violent, oppressive, fraudulent,
wanton, or grossly reckless.

The defendants failed in their duty and unreasonably caused emotional distress to Intervenor and her family
with intentional infliction of emotional distress. The negligence is sufficient to support this cause of action.

The defendants had a Fiduciary Duty to Intervenor and Meredith Drive.

Count 10
Constructive Fraud,,18 USC § 1341
Frauds and Swindles 18 USC § 1343 Fraud by Wire, 18 USC §1344
Bank Fraud 18 USC §1346 Honest Services 18 USC § 1348 Securities and Commodities fraud

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

The defendants were deceptive of material misrepresentations of past and existing facts and remained silent
when a duty to speak existed.

That in 2014 OCWEN in a consent ORDER was commanded to cease and desist all criminal activity and in
return would not be pressed with criminal charges. OCWEN did not follow the Consent Order and continues
illegal foreclosures.

That on or around April 20, 2017 the CFPB filed a new suit in the USDC of Southern District of Florida West
Palm Beach Division Case No. 937-cv- 80495 which claims it has not stopped their criminal activities.

15
The defendant’s actions were Arbitrary and Capricious absent a rational connection between the facts found
and the choice’s made, made choices that were not in accordance with the law.

Count 11
Civil Conspiracy, Theft by deceptive taking Illegal Conversion of Real Estate

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

Defendants Civil Conspiracy to Commit Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations abuse of process,
intentional infliction of emotional distress,

That the attempts of an illegal foreclosure now leaves a cloud on the title for life..

That the apparent Conversion would be for Personal Financial Gain of lawyers, Servicers that had no Bank
Authority to sell such property, and to COVER UP criminal activity as established in The 2013 – 2014 Consent
Order by OCWEN where it is called to Cease and Desist from criminal fraudulent violations by the CFPB.

That all knowledgeable ACTS and ACTIONS by the Defendants and others were for deceptive, malicious acts
for illegal taking of Real Estate.

Defendants were in collusion of civil conspiracy to intentionally inflict emotional distress.

Count 12
18 U.S. Code § 666 – Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds

Intervener incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

That indirectly or directly through clients have received Federal Funds by all appearances.

That payday’s to Lawyers are ensured prior to anyone else being paid in the scheme and 33 artifice of fraud
on homeowners as Lawyers and as Trustees

Count 13
Sarbanes – Oxley Act

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint

That OCWEN and their lawyers had a responsibility to act in a timely manner that information that Plaintiff has
requested Interverno has still to this date not received.

The “Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency Act: that set new United States
Federal Law that expanded requirements for all U.S. Public company boards, management and public
accounting firms. There are also a number of provisions of the act that also apply to privately held companies.

16
That Intervenor believes under this act the accounting of OCWEN, HSBC and others in this Intervene failed.

That in or around Trust Assignment Fraud Letter to SEC , Posted on July 14, 2010 Which you can see
nothing has changed since her suit was won. That the allegations in this suit and the facts are no different than
what was happening in 2010 –

1. OCWEN was Ordered to Cease and Desist in the 2014 Consent Order between OCWEN and the
CFPB and 48 other States
2. CFPB in a new Suit against OCWEN alleges the same criminal behavior of FRAUD - WHEN DO THE
JUDGES STAND UP AND SPEAK OUT FOR THE AMERICAN CITIZEN? STOPPING THE ILLEGAL
ACTS AND ACTIONS OF THE SERVICERS, THE BANKS AND THE LAWYERS
3. The Banks were given Bail outs, the Servicers the opportunity to follow the law all have instead
continued the criminal activity, Frauds through today.

LYNN E. SZYMONIAK, ESQ.

The Metropolitan, PH2-05
403 South Sapodilla Avenue
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

April 15, 2010

Mary L. Schapiro, Chairman

Robert S. Khuzami, Director, Division of Enforcement
Securities & Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20549
[email protected]

Re: Mortgage-Backed Trusts Missing Critical Documents

Dear Chairman Schapiro and Director Khuzami:

This is a report of suspected fraud involving mortgage-back securities. Certain mortgage backed trusts
have been using forged and fraudulent mortgage assignments in foreclosure actions in Florida, and throughout
the United States. These assignments are most often produced by employees of Lender Processing Services,
Inc., (“LPS”), a mortgage default management company located in Jacksonville, FL. LPS produced several
million Mortgage Assignments, using its own employees to sign as if they were officers of the original lenders
The fraud includes:

● Mortgage assignments with forged signatures of the individuals signing on behalf of the
grantors, and forged signatures of the witnesses and the notaries;
● Mortgage assignments with signatures of individuals signing as corporate officers for
corporations that never employed them in any such capacity;
● Mortgage assignments prepared and signed by individuals as corporate officers of mortgage
companies that had been dissolved by bankruptcy years prior to the Assignment;
● Mortgage assignments prepared with purported effective dates unrelated to the date of any
actual or attempted transfer (and in the case of trusts, years after the closing date of the trusts);

17
 ● Mortgage assignments prepared on behalf of grantors who had never themselves acquired
ownership of the mortgages and notes by a valid transfer, including numerous such
assignments where the grantor was identified as “Bogus Assignee for Intervening
Assignments;” and
● Mortgage assignments notarized by notaries who never witnessed the signatures that they
notarized. Trust officers used these fraudulent mortgage assignments to conceal the fact that
the trusts are missing critical documents, namely, the mortgage assignments that were
supposed to have been delivered to the trusts at the inception of the trust.

These trusts suffered the following economic harm:

The Trusts paid substantial fees to the Trustees for Document Custodial Services including fees for obtaining
and retaining a Mortgage Assignment for each of the properties in the trust. The Assignment was supposed to
have been “in recordable form” – that is, legally sufficient to allow the Trustee to foreclose in the event of
default. These services were never provided. In each trust identified herein, many if not all of the Mortgage
Assignments were never obtained, or were obtained and lost.

Because the Assignments were not obtained and/or retained, the Trusts incurred significant additional
expenses:

i) each Trust paid, and will continue to pay, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees to mortgage servicers,
document preparation companies and law firms to prepare and record “Replacement Assignments” including
Assignments that were prepared with false information regarding dates and signers;

ii) each Trust paid, and will continue to pay, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees to the default
management company and to law firms retained by the mortgage servicing companies and/or default
management company (usually, Lender Processing Services) to litigate the issue of the standing of the trust to
file the foreclosure action because the Assignment to the Trust that established standing was missing or never
obtained. 35 In many cases, because the Assignments were not obtained and/or retained, the Trust could not
successfully foreclose when loans in the Trust defaulted.

In many cases, where the Trust has successfully foreclosed, it had no legal right to do so and the Trust has
been or will be exposed to claims for wrongful foreclosure by former homeowners and claims of fraud by
subsequent purchasers. In many cases, where mortgage servicing companies or law firms representing the
Trust attempted to collect amounts due from defaulting homeowners of properties in the trust, the debt
collection activities violated the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the Trust had no right to
pursue collection or foreclosure where it lacked a valid Assignment.

In many cases, particularly where the loan originator is a mortgage company that is no longer in existence, it
may not be possible to ever obtain a valid Assignment to the Trust. Long after the Trustees and Servicers
became aware that critical documents, the Assignments, were missing, the Trustees and Servicers failed to
disclose that information to the Certificate Holders and to the SEC.

Attached hereto are examples of fraudulent Assignments. Many (over 100,000) of these are signed by
Linda Green. From an examination of the signatures, it is apparent that many different employees
signed the name Linda Green. Job Titles attributed to Green include the following:

18
• Vice President, Loan Documentation, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by merger to Wells Fargo Home
Mortgage, Inc.;
• Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage
Acceptance, Inc.;
• Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing as successor-in interest to Option One Mortgage
Corporation; • Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
Brokers Conduit;
• Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Ameriquest
Mortgage Corporation; • Vice President, Option One Mortgage Corporation;
• Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for HLB Mortgage;
• Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.;
• Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for Family Lending Services,
Inc.;
• Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage
Corporation;
• Vice President, Argent Mortgage Company, LLC by Citi Residential Lending Inc., attorney-in-fact; • Vice
President, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation;
• Vice President, Amtrust Funsing (sic) Services, Inc., by American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as
Attorney-in fact; and
• Vice President, Seattle Mortgage Company.

Other LPS employees similarly used job many different job titles and claimed to be officers of many different
mortgage companies on Mortgage Assignments. Korell Harp and Tywanna Thomas used a variety of
conflicting job titles on Assignments of Mortgages in 2008 and 2009, holding themselves out to be officers of
numerous different banks and mortgage-related entities, often using numerous conflicting titles in the same
week.

Titles attributed to Korell Harp include Vice President of American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as
successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation; Vice President of American Brokers Conduit; Vice
President of Argent Mortgage Company, LLC; and Vice President of Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc. Titles attributed to Tywanna Thomas include Assistant Vice President of Option One
Mortgage Corporation, Assistant Vice President of American Home Mortgage Servicing, Assistant Vice
President of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Assistant vice President of Argent Mortgage Company,
LLC, Assistant Vice President of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Assistant Vice President of Sand
Canyon Corporation and Assistant Vice President of American Home Mortgage Acceptance.

Regarding the Attachments - Not attached for reference only

SECTION ONE – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE AMERICAN HOME
MORTGAGE ASSETS TRUSTS Section One includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to showing mortgages transferred to American Home Mortgage Assets Trusts

SECTION TWO – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE AMERICAN HOME
MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUSTS Section Two includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS
EMPLOYEES purporting to showing mortgages transferred to American Home Mortgage Investment Trusts

19
SECTION THREE – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE HARBORVIEW
MORTGAGE LOAN TRUSTS Section Three includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to show mortgages transferred to HarborView Mortgage Loan Trusts

SECTION FOUR – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE SOUNDVIEW HOME
LOAN TRUSTS Section Four includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to
show mortgages transferred to Soundview Home Loan Trusts

SECTION FIVE – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE AMERIQUEST

MORTGAGE SECURITIES TRUSTS Section Five includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS
EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages transferred to Ameriquest Mortgage Securities Trusts

SECTION SIX – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE ARGENT SECURITIES
TRUSTS Section Six includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to Argent Securities Trusts

SECTION SEVEN – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE GSAA HOME EQUITY
TRUSTS Section Seven includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to GSAA Home Equity Loan Trusts

SECTION EIGHT – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE HS1 ASSET
SECURITIZATION TRUSTS Section Eight includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to show mortgages transferred to HS1 Asset Securitization Trusts

SECTION NINE – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE IXIS REAL ESTATE
TRUSTS Section Nine includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to Ixis Real Estate Trusts

SECTION 10 – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE LONG BEACH MORTGAGE
TRUSTS Section Ten includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to Ameriquest Long Beach Mortgage Trusts

SECTION 11 – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE MORGAN STANLEY ABS
CAPITAL 1 TRUSTS Section Eleven includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to show mortgages transferred to Morgan Stanley ABS Capital 1 Trusts

SECTION 12 – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE NOVASTAR MORTGAGE

FUNDING TRUSTS Section Twelve includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to show mortgages transferred to Novastar Mortgage Funding Trusts

SECTION 13 – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST CO. AS TRUSTEE SAXON ASSETS SECURITIES
TRUSTS Section Thirteen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to Saxon Assets Securities Trusts

SECTION 14 – DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST CO. AS TRUSTEE OTHER TRUSTS WITH MISSING
ASSIGNMENTS Section Fourteen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting
to show mortgages transferred to WAMU 2005-AR2, QUEST 2005-X1

20
SECTION 15 – DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO. AMERICAS AS TRUSTEE MISCELLANEOUS TRUSTS
Section Fifteen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages
transferred to: MSIX 2006-1, MORGAN STANLEY, MSAC, 2007-NC3, MSHEL 2007-1, MSHEL 2007-2,
2007-3, MERITAGE 2005-2, JP MORGAN ACQUISITION TRUST, IMAC SECURED ASSETS CORP, GSR
MORT. LOAN TRUST, BCAP LLC TRUST, CARRINGTON, SERIES 2005 OPT2

SECTION 16 – BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST
2004-4 Section Sixteen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show
mortgages transferred to American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-4.

SECTION 17 – CITIBANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE ASSETS TRUSTS &
INVESTMENT TRUSTS Section Seventeen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES
purporting to show mortgages transferred to American Home Mortgage Assets Trusts.

SECTION 18 – CITIBANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE BEAR STEARNS ALT-A TRUSTS Section Eighteen includes
Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages transferred to Bear
Stearns ALT-A Trusts

SECTION 19 – CITIBANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE STRUCTURED ASSET MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUSTS

Section Nineteen includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages
transferred to Structured Asset Mortgage Investment Trusts

SECTION 20 – CITIBANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE WAMU TRUSTS & BNC MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST Section
Twenty includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages
transferred to WAMU Trusts and BNC Mortgage Loan Trusts

SECTION 21 – HSBC BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE DEUTSCHE ALT-A & ALT-B SECURITIES TRUSTS Section
Twenty-One includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages
transferred to Deutsche Alt-B Securities Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2006- AB3; Deutsche Alt-A Securities
Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2006-AR5

SECTION 22 – HSBC BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE ACE SECURITIES CORP. HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST;
SG MORTGAGE SECURITIES TRUST, OPTION ONE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST Section Twenty-Two
includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages transferred to
ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2006- OP1; and SG Mortgage Securities Trust Series
2006 OPT2; and Option One Mortgage Loan Trust Series 2007-HL1

SECTION 23 – JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE STRUCTURED ASSET MORTGAGE

INVESTMENTS TRUST Section Twenty-Three includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS
EMPLOYEES purporting to show mortgages transferred to Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II, Inc.,
Series 2006-AR5.

SECTION 24 – LASALLE BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE MORGAN STANLEY & BEAR STEARNS MORTGAGE
LOAN TRUSTS & OTHERS Section Twenty-Four includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS
Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to Morgan Stanley Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-6AR;
Morgan Stanley ABS Capital MSAC 2007-HE6; Bear Stearns Asset-Backed Securities 1, LLC, Series
2004-FR3; Series 2004-HE; 2005- HE9; 2006-HE2; 2006-HE7; 2007-HE1; Series 2007-HE5; Bear Stearns
Asset-Backed Securities Trust 2005-4; Securitized Asset Investment Loan Trust, Series 2004-7.
21
SECTION 25 – U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE MASTER TRUSTS Section Twenty-Five includes Mortgage
Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to MASTR Adjustable
Rate Mortgages Trust 2006-OA1; MASTR Adjustable Rate Mortgages Trust 2007-1; MASTR Asset-Backed
Securities Trust 2007-HE2

SECTION 26 – U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE STRUCTURED ASSET INVESTMENT & STRUCTURED
ASSET SECURITIES TRUSTS Section Twenty-Six includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS
Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to Structured Asset Investment & Structured Asset
Securities Trusts, including Series 2005-3, 2005-10, 2006 BNC2, 2006 BNC3 and 2006 BNC6

SECTION 27 – U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE MISC. OTHER TRUSTS Section Twenty-Seven includes
Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to American
Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-4; and 6 GSAA Home Equity Trust 2006-9.

SECTION 28 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE ABFC TRUSTS Section Twenty-Eight includes Mortgage
Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to several ABFC Trusts

SECTION 29 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE MASTR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES TRUSTS

Section Twenty-Nine includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show
mortgages transferred to MASTR Asset-Backed Securities Trust 2003-OPT2 and 2005- OPT1

SECTION 30 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE OPTION ONE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUSTS Section
Thirty includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred
to over 25 Option One Mortgage Loan Trusts

SECTION 31 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE SECURITIZED ASSET-BACK SECURITIES and/or

RECEIVABLES TRUSTS Section Thirty-One includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees
purporting to show mortgages transferred to six Securitized Asset-Backed Receivables Trusts

SECTION 32 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUSTS Section ThirtyTwo
includes Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to four
SoundView Home Loan Trusts

SECTION 33 – WELLS FARGO BANK AS TRUSTEE MISC. OTHER TRUSTS Section Thirty-Three includes
Mortgage Assignments prepared by LPS Employees purporting to show mortgages transferred to other trusts
that use U.S. Bank at Trustee.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. While I am concerned about the defrauded investors, particularly
the pension funds that have invested in these trusts, I am also concerned about the homeowners who are
losing their homes to bank/trustees who use these Assignments without disclosing the issue of the missing
Trust documents.

Yours truly,

Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq.

22
That the above letter further points out and shows that this criminal activity has been going on for a
long time. That Banks, the Servicers and the Lawyers have been given chance after chance to clean up their
act, but, find it cheaper to pay off the Government, Government agencies who by all appearance take the
money and pocket it for personal use.
Count 14
Title 26, U.S. Code. The Internal Revenue Code (IRC)  
is the body of law that codifies all federal tax laws, including income, estate, gift, excise, alcohol, 
tobacco, and employment taxes. U.S. tax laws began to be codified in 1874, but there was no 
central, comprehensive source for them at that time 

Material false claims under SEC enforced 1122 AB 

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

CAUSES:

[1] Disguised Sale Rule under the IRC title 26 used in manipulative method and means for ill gotten gains

[2] Violations of the Federal rules on partnerships and pass through taxable income in a constructive
liquidation

● where denying the pass through investor a proration distribution credited as a earn out over a
set term
● The mortgagor is a pass through for the amounts booked at settlement and not disbursement
● Resulting in the attribution of ordinary and causal to compelled abandonment under tax payer
form 1099 A

[3] Deceptive Practices that succeed by failing to properly disclose the correct character of the subject matter
transaction.

● Whereas parties are foreclosing on the good faith understanding of default by mortgagor in
default
● Wherefore the good faith understanding is lost under the doctrine of extinguishment
● Where by the instruments are cancelled for ORDINARY INCOME and title transferred under the
the instruments TRANSFER RIGHTS IN THE PROPERTY
● TRANSFER IS AFFIRMED at the origination the TRUSTEE sale whereby GRANTEE paid to
TRUSTEE CONSIDERATION
● The Consideration is for a credit back from date of the reversion [fictitious foreclosure ]
backdating ot the date of the orginal loans settlement

[4] For material violations by way of willful avoidance of a pass through right and entitlement to disclosures
mandated by assignment Pro Tanto

23
 ● Including life estate contracted by irrevocable transfers of the title for which the mortgagor is
TRANSFEROR under a QUALIFIED INVESTMENT
● Whereas the Qualified Property is by Transferors holding the reversion upon all properties
having been argued and amortized to a basis in asset of zero
● A sale for assets held in a constructive liquidation at zero is taxable to the attribution as 1099 A
recipient treated as ordinary at time of disposition .

[5] Material false claims under SEC enforced 1122 AB

● Government actor withheld as indispensable parties under the vendors understanding holding in
1122 AB
● Material false claims made under the FDCPA Federal debt collections practices act used for
assessing consumers in conventional foreclosures
● Using the state in the role of tax gather for the IRS to satisfy state budget liabilities

[6] Public sector entering the private side and violating the the taking provisions and "no capitation" guarantees
afforded on the fifth and fourteenth amendments

● DUE PROCESS denied where the trier of fact is a beneficial interest under a NOMINEE
● Whereas MERS conceals the government obligations owed to its depositors as Qualified
Investments
● Wherefore the title secured Qualified deposits levered against the benefits payable to its state
Municipal Employees Retirement System.

[7] Violations of GAAP and Non Recognition Rules for final sale accounting rule barring a subsequent
recovery on a default using the accrual method of accounting.

● Whereas the consumer is a Mortgagor for a debt converted into a reversionary interest as equity
and
● Lender , lender's successors and successor of lender are the seller for title transferred into trust
to a third party as trustee under the installment method.
● In violation of IRC Title 26 by tax matter partnerships to satisfy third party antecedent debt
assigned to mortgagors prorated shares of third party commercial obligations owed as
"receivables to offshore financial institutions.

Count 15
26 CFR § 1.707-3 - Disguised sales of property to partnership; general rules.
A disguised sale Regs. Sec. 1.707-3(b)(2)
Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

24
The partnership has incurred or is obligated to incur debt to acquire the money or other consideration
necessary to permit it to make the transfer, taking into account the likelihood that the partnership will be able to
incur the debt (considering such factors as whether any person has agreed to guarantee or otherwise assume
personal responsibility for the debt);

The partnership holds money or other liquid assets, beyond the reasonable needs of the business, which are
expected to be available to make the transfer (taking into account the income that will be earned from those
assets);

Partnership distributions, partnership allocations, or control of partnership operations is designed to effect an

exchange of the burdens and benefits of property ownership;

The transfer of money or other consideration by the partnership to the partner is disproportionately large in
relationship to the partner's general and continuing interest in partnership profits;or

The partner has no obligation to return or repay the money or other consideration to the partnership or has
such an obligation but it is likely to become due at such a distant point in the future that the present value of
that obligation is small in relation to the amount of money or other consideration transferred by the partnership
to the partner.

Caution: Note that the disguised sale regulations apply to deemed sales from the partner to the partnership,
from the partnership to a partner, and among the partners.

KNOW A MORTGAGE FROM A DISGUISED SALE

The partnership has incurred or is obligated to incur debt to acquire the money or other consideration
necessary to permit it to make the transfer, taking into account the likelihood that the partnership will be able to
incur the debt (considering such factors as whether any person has agreed to guarantee or otherwise assume
personal responsibility for the debt);

The partnership holds money or other liquid assets, beyond the reasonable needs of the business, which are
expected to be available to make the transfer (taking into account the income that will be earned from those
assets);

Partnership distributions, partnership allocations, or control of partnership operations is designed to effect an

exchange of the burdens and benefits of property ownership;

The transfer of money or other consideration by the partnership to the partner is disproportionately large in
relationship to the partner's general and continuing interest in partnership profits;or
The partner has no obligation to return or repay the money or other consideration to the partnership or has
such an obligation but it is likely to become due at such a distant point in the future that the present value of
that obligation is small in relation to the amount of money or other consideration transferred by the partnership
to the partner.

Caution: Note that the disguised sale regulations apply to deemed sales from the partner to the partnership,
from the partnership to a partner, and among the partners.

The following facts and circumstances may prove the existence of a disguised sale (Regs. Sec. 1.707-3(b)(2)):
25
 ● The timing and amount of a subsequent transfer are determinable with reasonable certainty at the time
of the earlier transfer;
● The transferor has a legally enforceable right to the subsequent transfer;
● The partner's right to receive the transfer of money or other consideration is secured in any manner
(taking into account the period during which it is secured);
● Any person has made or is legally obligated to make contributions to the partnership to permit the
partnership to make the transfer of money or other consideration;
● Any person has loaned or has agreed to loan the partnership the money or other consideration
necessary to permit it to make the transfers, taking into account whether any such lending obligation is
subject to contingencies related to the results of partnership operations;

A Pro Se Litigant

The law is very clear a pro se litigant is to be given equal treatment if not special treatment, especially in a
case where the intervening Person is a lawyer and has the financial ability to bring in as many powerful
unscrupulous lawyers to defend her criminal actions.

"Pro se plaintiffs are often unfamiliar with the formalities of pleading requirements. Recognizing this, the
Supreme Court has instructed the district courts to construe pro se complaints liberally and to apply a more
flexible standard in determining the sufficiency of a pro se complaint than they would in reviewing a pleading
submitted by counsel. See e.g., Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9-10, 101 S.Ct. 173, 175-76, 66 L.Ed.2d 163
(1980) (per curiam); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) (per
curiam); see also Elliott v. Bronson, 872 F.2d 20, 21 (2d Cir.1989) (per curiam). In order to justify the dismissal
of a pro se complaint, it must be " 'beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his
claim which would entitle him to relief.' " Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. at 521, 92 S.Ct. at 594 (quoting Conley v.
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)).
“Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has
always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. “In re Murchinson, 349 U.S. 133, 136
(1955)”
No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government from the
highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” Butz v. Economou, 98 S.Ct. 2894
(1978); United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. at 220, 1 S.Ct. at 261 (1882)” “Further it is the obligation of every Judge
to honor, abide by, and uphold not only the Constitution and laws of the State, but they are bound by the laws
and Constitution of the United States as well.” State courts, like federal courts, have a constitutional obligation
to safeguard personal liberties and to uphold federal law.” Stone v Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n 35, 96 S. Ct
3037, 49 L Ed. 2d 1067 (1976)”
It should be remembered in review of this Intervene that Intervenor could not get a lawyer and has had
no choice but to STAND UP and SPEAK OUT for herself with no help from any lawyers.

RELIEF REQUESTED

Intervenor incorporates herein by reference all of the allegations contained in the above Paragraphs of this
Complaint.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Intervenor with support of her Father Plaintiff requests that this Court:
26
Enter an Order of ENFORCEMENT of a STAY by this court on 118 Meredith Dr., Spring City, PA 19475. Till a
Judge and or Jury hear this case / new evidence.

Stay to be in effect until completion of CFPB, SEC, FTC, and or DOJ and FBI investigations of criminal acts
involving Intervenor in this matter or further order of the court.

Order judgment for Plaintiff and Intervenor and other that Defendants have no claim or right to the property in
dispute.

Enter an order declaring Defendants’ conduct negligent;

Award Intervener compensatory, punitive, exemplary damages against Defendants jointly of $5,000,000.00
Five Million to send a strong message of deterrence for this type of attorney/trustee behavior.

Award Plaintiff and Intervenor reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Grant to Intervenor and her Father Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem
just and proper under the circumstances, including but not limited to appropriate injunctive relief.

Date: November 24, 2020

Respectfully Submitted

/s/ Cynthia Zoccali

Cynthia Zoccali, Pro Se

118 Meredith Drive,
Spring City, PA 19475
(484) 336-2236
[email protected]
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on November 23, 2020 , I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court
using and, or hand delivered to the court a copy of this Intervene. I further emailed to all lawyers:

Brent F. Vullings [email protected] for Robert Shapley

Casey Green [email protected] Scott Edwin Brady [email protected] for TransUnion
LLC,
Christopher J. Pottmeyer [email protected] Mohammad S. Ghiasuddin
[email protected] for Experian Information Solutions, Inc
Jessica REilly [email protected] for Equifax Information Services, LLC
Len A. Fisher [email protected] Joe Nguyen [email protected] Thomas Francis Lucchesi
[email protected] for OCWEN/PHH

27
November 24, 2020

Cynthia Zoccali

28