Adversarial Complaint 3,5,2019) freeman vs orlans

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND In re William Freeman : BK No. 18-11609DF : Ch 13 William Freeman Plaintiff v. JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association FDIC Fidelity National Financial Fannie Nae Chase Home Finance Orlans, Plc Harmon Law, Morgan Lewis Bockius John Does Affiliates of any other above companies listed DEBTTOR’S Adversarial Action Complaint against THE DEFENDANTs JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, The FDIC, and Fidelity National Financial (subrogator), et al 1. William Freeman who is the alleged debtor in the above captioned case and who is a resident of 39 Side Road in Little Compton, Rhode Island. The debtor holds title and is the secured owner of the note and mortgage for both properties listed in the reports submitted to the RI US Bankruptcy Court. 2. However, Title is imperfected. This is caused by JP Morgan Chase Banks unsecured claim of ownership, therefore. clouded title caused by JP Morgan Chase Bank and Co, disallowing Mr Freeman or any secured party to act on the title of the real estate located at 39 Side Road Little Compton, Rhode Island.

3. One Defendant is JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association. The Defendant has claimed that it is the owner of the properly located at 39 Side Road Little Compton, Rhode Island and 135 Randolph Avenue, Tiverton, by virtue of highly disputed documents. For example, an unrecorded foreclosure deed submitted to the US Bankruptcy Court, showing August 6, 2018 as the date. This document infers that the alleged foreclosure was effective. a) This is an incorrect document and should be stricken immediately. The recordation of the foreclosure deed took place on January 2nd, 2019, during the automatic Stay period. The document has many defects, including vague references to JP Morgan Chase Bank as holder, filed by a debt collector who has No Agency or Power of Attorney. b) The Plaintiff brings this complaint pursuant to Rule 7001(2) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure to determine the validity of JP Morgan Chase National Association’ procedures and actions required by Law, as they claim an interest in 39 Side Road, Little Compton, Rhode Island, but have not issued proper legal documents. We request validation of debt and a comprehensive audit of accounting, as forensic analysis show gross miscalculations and the use of non-standard accounting methods. c) Under (or as per) this Adversarial Complaint filed in RI US District Federal Bankruptcy Court, the following complaints and relevant legal questions need responses to for the Court to be able to fully understand clarify the extent that JPMC went to commit fraud for profit against William Freeman, Debtor and Plaintiff 3. Summary of Adversarial Complaints By way of introduction, Mr Freeman has new evidence of bizarre accounting anomalies adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to claimed balances by JPMC. The notes are subrogated to Fidelity National Financial, and false documents have been submitted to the US Bankruptcy Court by the opposition,

escrow, taxes are wildly misapplied, and finally, Mr. Freeman’s many filed Disputes of Debt and violations of other Federal Dodd- Frank Laws including TILA, RESPA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act that have never been responded to, require and adjucation of the failure as per the pains and penalties described in Dodd Frank, UCC Statutes and RI Criminal Law a) The Debt, if it exists, is subrogated, as per the application I signed in 2004 and because of payment made to Fidelity National Financial, purchasing an indemnification of loss if Freeman ever defaults. 1) There has been no proof offered by any legal entity questioned, including JPMC, Orlans Plc, Harmon Law, Morgan Lewis Bockius, Lender Live, The FDIC, Fannie Mae , the Washington Mural Inc Liquidation Trust, or any signers of the (infamous) Purchase and Assumption Agreement( with no schedule of assets received or sold by the FDIC in its receivership of Washington Mutual Bam , Fa. No other Legal entities in the WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK empire are mentioned, The Parent Company , Washington Mutual Inc, filed for Bankruptcy on September 29, 2008, it being mostly finalized by the Honorable Judge Collier, last modified ( with more changes expected ) in late 2013 .( therefore bringing rise to prior claims submitted by Mr. Freeman , by virtue of the unfinished Agreement, subject to recourse, recoupment and Federal charges of Violations of Dodd Frank, RI Foreclosure Laws, UCC Statutes 3, 6, 8, and 9) 2) Orlans, Harmon, and others, have NEVER Answered Mr Freeman’s Qualified Written Requests or Dispute of Debt requests, going back to 2010 b) These filings made by parties unable to legally commit to the affidavits and other non-proven claims and inferences made in the now submitted documents. The documents submitted are defective and, we request that they be stricken (SEE list in appendix) c) Most lately, Orlans Plc, Brock and Scott, Carrington Inc, the Christiana Trust and MERS have made false claims against Mr. Freeman. The documents submitted by Carrington and all affiliates are hereby denied in their entirety and MR. Freeman kindly asks the court to address the specific issues that are further detailed in the remainder of this document.

I, William Freeman, certify that the disputes sent to alleged secured parties are strictly meant to dispute any claimed debt, and challenge the claimant ‘s status as “Holder in Due Course “. d) Violation of UCC 9 - Failure to pat consideration from notes, voiding claims of ownership e) Violation of UCC 3- Non-Negotiable Note- Freeman’s note is non -negotiable by UCC 3 definition, not subject to sale, and with a clouded title. f) Accounting Fraud- See enclosed analysis proving Overcharges of over $200,000 discovered to date g) Violation of Dodd Frank - P Morgan Chase Bank was not in possession of the Deed or Notes at the time of the pre- foreclosure, illegal Auction, which could change the status of the title and deed. (see Mgt 24 recording/transcript stating Chase did not have possession of the note, that William Freeman is the owner) h) False Claims Act Violation i) Chase Attorneys have not provided proof of Agency, Power of Attorney, or affirmations of Truth and sworn, executive sign-off from Chase, as required by Dodd Frank and RI State Law j) Violation of RESPA 12 U.S.C. QWR, and § 12 CFR § 1024.36 – Requests for information and. Truth in Lending Act (TILA) Regulation Z (12 CFR Part 226)- We are requesting an instant action for imposition of fines, penalties and attorney's fees demanded. Total Cost to Chase will exceed $12,000 for these two violations only, but the court has authority to expand fines given Chase has three strikes or more k) Violation of Stay in Bankruptcy, - Orlans Plc, who claim to represent Chase , but there are no POA’s, agency agreements, and have committed Fraud Upon the Court for misrepresenting they had foreclosed on Side Road , LC, in April of 2018, but did not foreclosure until Jan2, 2018, They submitted defective documents to the Court, the illegal foreclosure deed during the “ Stay period “in an effort to attempt to perfect title. Orlans recorded a foreclosure deed on Jan 2, 2019, which we protest and require validation of the alleged transaction, where they sold it to themselves. l) Mr Freeman was not allowed to bid on the off-site auction, nor was he properly notified. Title cannot be perfected because of defects in assignments, lack of consideration paid, lack of standing and many other reasons. This deception to the Court should be fully explored and all documents, the original note included, which will knock out Creditors’ claims, we believe. Violation of revealing subjugation of the mortgages and failure to record a security interest in until 2013, an assignment that is under protest ***, JPMC could have done a foreclosure at any time, after 2012 when Freeman first filed complaints, given he was told, in an unsigned letter from JPMC Executive Office, that accounting could not be figured out due to systems issues, and if I did not like the “New Loan “( which I had already rescinded ) , I should hire a lawyer because JP Morgan Chase Bank was done dealing with me ( opinion: Chase did not foreclose, given their lack of proof of standing, and because filing a complaint would have created a judicial foreclosure situation, to which they could not bear the scrutiny of.)

JPMC is past the statute of limitations on debt collection, and subrogation and payments made to WAMU or Chase as per the default Insurance Freeman purchased for them in 2005 require JPMC and Co, books and records, as well as Fidelity National Financial, the FDIC and a reveal of all assignments between the mute-party chain of participants in a securitization trust p) subpoena to JP Morgan Chase and Co, 1Fidelity National Financial and the FDIC and to Fannie Mae, the Christiana Trust, Wells Fargo and Nations Bank is required to review all best evidence ,given Chase will not reveal any “ behind the curtain transactions” , no books or records, ledgers, etc and will not provide employee validation ( signature not made by Chase employees are rampant in the documents provided by Chase because legal documents were signed by non-chase employs, as the Evidence shows . The title is clouded, therefore not subject to creditors’ claims 2) Damages demanded: Count I - Void deed for failure to record, requires a monetary penalty 1 RIGL 34-27-6 provides that foreclosure deed and pay the conveyance tax and the Little Compton preservation Tax is required to be made with 45-days of the foreclosure sale. 2 The foreclosure deed by which the Defendant claims the Freeman title in this instant case. has not been timely recorded, assignments are not legally valid based on what they say, and Orlans of Chase did no title search. 3. Conveyance tax has not been paid to the RI Division of Taxation when Chase claims they purchased Freeman notes from the FDIC, as receiver for unspecified assets and liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank, Fa 2.Damages demanded- Foreclosure-improper- Location of alleged auction sale and Improper Notice 4. RIGL § 34-27-4 sets forth the required notice to be sent to the Mortgagor before a foreclosure sale can take place. That statute provides in pertinent part as follows, given the Newport Daily news cannot produce a printed newspaper containing the alleged advertisement of auction. The tear sheet provided by Orlans, does not contain legally required information, such as the alleged creditor, amount owed, and precise description of property location. 1 Including Chase Home Finance JPMC asset Mgt, and

a. Whenever any real estate shall be sold under any power of sale mortgage, and the mortgage shall provide for the giving of notice of the sale by publication in some public newspaper at least once a week for three (3) successive weeks before the sale, the first publication of the notice shall be at least twenty-one (21) days before the day of sale,(b) Provided, however, that no notice shall be valid or effective unless the mortgagor has been mailed written notice of the time and place of sale by certified mail return receipt requested at the address of the real estate and, if different, at the mortgagor's address listed with the tax assessor's office of the city or town where the real estate is located or any other address mortgagor designates by written notice to mortgagee at his, her, or its last known address, at least twenty (20) days for mortgagors other than individual consumer mortgagors, and at least thirty (30) days for individual consumer mortgagors, days prior to the first publication, including the day of mailing in the computation. The mortgagee shall include in the foreclosure deed an affidavit of compliance with this provision. (not done) 5. Prior to proceeding with the public auction on the Plaintiff’s property a notice was published in the Newport Daily News and entitled “Mortgagee’s Notice of Sale of Real Estate 39 Side Road, Little Compton, RI” indicated that the “premises described in the mortgage will be sold subject to all encumbrances and prior liens on April 27, 2018 at 9:00 am on the premises. . . .” This notice lacks legal requirements: the creditor must be identified, the amount due is to be published and, the description of the property by plats, metes and bounds, were not included 6. The auction was not open to the public, Mr Freeman was not allowed to attend, for example. The public auction did not occur “on the premises” but rather occurred down the street from the 39 Side Road, the subject premises. Consequently, the Foreclosure notice served upon the Debtor and claimed to be advertised in the Newport Daily News, although the evidence has not been provided nor can the advertisements be found (plus they lack legally required disclosures) indicating that the public auction would occur on the premises was inaccurate and failed to comply with RIGL 34-27-4. (we cannot find the publications by searching on-line, sql queries, and by speaking directly to the paper itself. Therefore, we demand that Orlans to provide all the correspondence between them and the newspaper, show us the actual hardcopy newspaper with notices, they claim notices for all three

dated, and a signed receipt from the Newport Daily News regarding the veracity, that Orlans PLC padre and placed the alleged notices in the paper. 7. Damages Demanded, Additionally, the Defendant Chase Bank failed to provide the Plaintiff written notice of the time and place of sale by certified mail return receipt requested as required by RIGL 34-27- 4. Consequently, the foreclosure auction that occurred on April 27, 2018 and subsequent deed dated August 6, 2018 is void. The alleged foreclosure took place on January 2, 2019, when the rebuttable foreclosure deed was filed in Little Compton. There is no record showing any money changed hands, Chase having sold it to themselves, which is impossible to achieve if they already owned it. 8. The Defendant Chase Bank has failed to otherwise comply with the Notice requirements provided in the mortgage and consequently the foreclosure is subject to an adversarial complaint * see Martins v. Fed House Finance agency, 214 F Sup 3rd 163. i) Further damages - The mortgage that the Plaintiff signed, and which is at issue in this case provides a paragraph 22 provides that “if the Lender invokes the Statutory Power of Sale, Lender shall mail a copy of a notice of sale to Borrower as provided in section 15 [of the security agreement]. ii) . Section 15 of the security agreement provides that “All notice by the borrower or the lender in connection with this security agreement must be in writing. Any notice to Borrower in connection with this security agreement shall be deemed to have been given the Borrower when mailed by first class mail to the Borrower or when delivered to the borrower’s notice address if sent by other means. iii) The Defendant failed to send via first class mail or to deliver to the Plaintiff’s address a notice of the Foreclosure sale as required by paragraph 22 and 15 of the Security agreements. iv) . The Defendant through its alleged agent, and there is still no POA, agency agreement, proof of representation when this foreclosure mill (Orlans Plc) agent attempted to deliver a notice of foreclosure

sale by certified mail to the Plaintiff at 39 Side Road but failed to effectuate delivery on the Plaintiff. ( see USPS record, no return receipt purchased, Orlans choose electronic review of any delivery the abuse of electronic media ( Zillow, Realtor.com….., caused harm, disturbed the peace , invaded Freeman’s privacy in an method showing the vindictive effort to have the auction advertisement be ‘viral” in nature ., received back the envelope and whatever was int, therefore having knowledge of Mr Freeman’s not being aware . The subsequent abuse of Mr. Freeman when the agent entered his house, involved the attendees swearing and defaming Mr. Freeman, plus other laws were broken, Privacy, trespassing2 and violation of electronic distribution laws are contained in the POLICE report submitted by Mr. Free nab3 v) Since the Defendant failed to mail via first class mail a copy of the notice of foreclosure sale, or to effectuate a delivery of the notice of the foreclosure sale by other means upon the Plaintiff, the Notice of Foreclosure sale did not comply with paragraphs 15 and 22 of the mortgage’s agreements. 8.It is very possible an intentional deception was calculated to claim Freeman Equity without enough foundation4. Orlans represents many companies, many of which have had a hand in Freeman securitized notes, and some who may have claimed false ownership or servicing rights. New evidence makes it clear the notes were securitized. Please provide ledgers, transfers, and other document, wire transfers and agency agreements regarding the securitization. These documents would determine damages due Mr Freeman 2 3 nee Police report, both regarding the events of April 27, and RI state Police report submitted by Freeman, under formal investigation by the white-collar crime unit if the RISP) 4 for Standing for Standing See Orlans Michigan Investigation

9. Orlans represents the following companies on a contractual, ongoing basis Fannie Mae MERS FDIC Chase Wells Fargo vi) The pre- acceleration notice sent to the debtor by the Defendant dated November 2, 2016 asserted that the Plaintiff owed the Defendant the sum of $116,867.94 in past due payments and demanded said sum to cure the default on the mortgage. This dollar amount has not been validated as per the many requests sent by Mr. Freeman, which is a violation of UCC Law and Dodd Frank Law. Mr Freeman sent request prior to, during the foreclosure period and after Chapter 13 was filed, with no response, Fines and damages are required thefore and we ask the court to determine any amounts due Mr Freeman 10. Legal documents and assignments are not signed by anyone with the authority to represent Chase. The fact pattern around signatures is disturbing. Mr. Freeman has 6 documents, not including Orlans sent documents, that are claimed to sign by Chase, but an investigation shows these people are not Chase employees vii) The Defendant failed to account for all payments made by the Plaintiff on the underlying note. 11.There are many more examples of failed accounting, including the detailed descriptions in Mr. Freeman’s letters sent to Chase. (approx. 30 letters over 7 years) to provide notice of error and ask for correction and resolution. (see attached) 12.These Specific items that Freeman questioned have been forensically validated by MBA accountant Paul Rodrigues, who studied the transaction histories and did a forensic analysis of the various transaction histories. (Since Mr Rodrigues performed his analysis, additional and other wild errors

have been identified in addition, the analysis shows the application of payments is not done according the ‘alleged ‘note, and not recognizable as GAAP, or FASB methods of Accounting. The method used by EAMU and Chase precludes Mr Freeman from paying the note in a fixed period5 3) Mr. Freeman is seeking a refund of these and all other moneys ever paid to WAMU or Chase 4) there are the following accounting anomalies regarding the history of the loan: Jan19, 2012 - $7510.80 Payment --- This payment was not made by Mr. Freeman Jan 19,2012 - Jan19, 2012 - $2384.55 Payment applied and retracted Jan 19, 2012 - Jan 18, 2012 - $ 22,638.56 Added to Freeman balance Jan 17,2012 - Feb,2012 - $ 20,830.08 added as principal adjustment March,2012 - Dec,2011 - $121,500.00 added as adjustment $ 3598.85 reversed from Freeman account $ 2032.00 Payment credited, never made $ 2032.00 payment credited, never made6 $13,749.32 added to balance 5) Total = $186,317.81 Added to Freeman balance * 6) 21. The Plaintiff has demanded from the Defendant a complete and accurate accounting of all payments, credits and charges on the loan that is secured by the mortgage at issue and has to date received several different versions of the accounting., none accurate, and none responded to as per UCC and Dodd Frank requirements 5 . The note then is non-negotiable per UCC 3 and Mr. Freeman requests to invalidate the note and have it signed as satisfied and returned to him 6 Freeman has specifically requested cancelled checks, wires or any proof that Freeman made these payments. It was in Chase Banks interest, as our stripping equity from Freeman, had an incentive to claim these payments

7) As a result, the Plaintiff has not been able to identify or cure any claimed default asserted by the Defendant. Additionally, the note is nonnegotiable per UCC 3, given it has no fixed payment, or fixed dollar amount and requires Mr. Freeman special tasks in getting principal applied correctly. The practice of accounting applied interest, escrow, the principal which violates Federal Law 8) . The $$ dollar amount of the sale stated in the Orlans affidavit, is not the amount that taxes were paid in in Little Compton. The Little Compton Conservancy tax paid indicates a lower alleged sales price, if one can sell a property to themselves, no money was exchanged. 9) JPMC Bank, Orlans Plc, Brocton Scott, Morgan Lewis Bockius, Washington Mutual, the FDIC and Fannie Mae and Fidelity Nation all papers with ‘unclean hands” The current class action against Orlans in Michigan, is for violations of notice exactly as per Freeman alleged notice (See Garland Case). Chase has paid $30 Billion in fines for illegal foreclosures, was made to stop foreclosures for over a year for fabricating documents and other reasons, The FDIC has been sued and lost many times for not providing a list of assets allegedly sold to JPMC from the WAMU receivership. This is ONLY receivership in which the FDIC did not have an inventory. 10. Orlans put into evidence a false Purchase and assumption agreement and failed to discuss the Bankruptcy of Washington Mutual Parent Washington Mutual Inc, and Washington Mutual Securities Corp. The PAA and receivership were not settled until 2013, far different than what Orlans, Harmon and Brock and Scott have represented to the Court.11. We request s date and request the QWR be answered and expect the original documents will be remanded to the court as per the Fed rules of best evidence. The documents sent are not valid copies

Signed by secured owner, William Freeman __________________________ CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I the undersigned certify that on this 6th_ day of January 2019 I served a copy of the within objection on the following in person to the US Bankruptcy Court, Rhode Island and will be sending copies to all listed participants /s/ William Freeman, ProSe_________________________________ 10) Reference Data 11) Garland case is very similar to a complaint Freeman will be bringing: 12) Class Action currently under investigation for Orlans sending the same letters they sent me a violation of FDCPA and ethical violations as per the LAW Firm Unlike most law firms, Orlans PC’s website does not list its attorneys. 13) Please read excerpts from the case below

14) In 2012, The Managing Partner Forum, working with ALM Legal Intelligence and 15) The National Law Journal conducted a comprehensive survey of mid-size US law firms. (ALM 16) Survey.) Some 196 firms, with nearly 10,000 lawyers, participated. 17) 2:18-cv-11561-VAR-RSW Doc # 1 Filed 05/17/18 Pg. 7 of 30 Pg. ID 7 18) The ALM Survey found that in 2012 law firms averaged 83 support staff per 100 lawyers (ratio of 0.83 staff to one lawyer). If Orlans PC has a total of 30 lawyers and had an average ratio of support staff to lawyers, it would have approximately 25 support staff for a total of 55 employees (rather than 500 or more). 19) Alternatively, if Orlans PC has 500 employees and had an average ratio of support staff to attorneys among mid-sized American law firms, it would employ approximately 273 attorneys rather than less than 50. 20) Plaintiff was confused by the Garland Foreclosure Letter in that it appeared to be from an attorney, but was not signed by one, and did not identify the full name of an attorney. 2:18-cv-11561-VAR-RSW Doc # 1 Filed 05/17/18 Pg. 9 of 30 Pg. ID 9 21) Plaintiff was not certain whether the Garland Foreclosure Letter was from an attorney. 22) The suggestion in the Garland Foreclosure Letter that it was from an attorney raised plaintiff’s anxiety. 23) The appearance that the Garland Foreclosure Letter may have been from an attorney suggested to plaintiff that an attorney may have conducted an independent investigation and substantive legal review of the circumstances of his account, such that his prospects for avoiding foreclosure were diminished. 24) The Garland Foreclosure Letter was an attempt to collect a debt allegedly owed by plaintiff on a note secured by a mortgage on his home.

25) The Garland Foreclosure Letter is a form letter, in that it was generated based on a standard form of letter used by Orlans PC to initiate correspondence with homeowners whose mortgages Orlans PC had been retained to foreclose. This form letter (as distinct from Exhibits A and B, which comprise an instance of it) is referred to herein as the “Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter”. 26) Using the Garland Foreclosure Letter as an example, on information and belief account-specific information such as the addressee, the “Regarding:” line, the Orlans PC file number, and information contained in the Notice of Debt on page 2 (including “the amount of the debt”) was “merged” or “cut and pasted” into the Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter to generate such letters to Michigan residents and residents of other states. 27) On information and belief, the Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter has remained substantively consistent throughout the Class Period, with minor changes that do not materially affect the claims presented in this Complaint. 28) On information and belief, the Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter has remained substantively consistent throughout the Class Period, with minor changes that do not materially affect the claims presented in this Complaint. 29) On information and belief, the Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter, since at least 2011: 2:18-cv-11561-VAR- RSW Doc # 1 Filed 05/17/18 Pg. 10 of 30 Pg. ID 10 a) Has been printed on Orlans PC letterhead; b) Has displayed Linda Orlans’ and Alison Orlans’ surname; c) Has recited that Orlans PC is “[a] law firm”; d) Has recited the name of Orlans PC’s “client”; e) Has contained another boilerplate text specified by the client; f) Has included a closing substantially like “Sincerely, Orlans PC,” g) Has not disclaimed that it was from an attorney;

h) Has not been signed by an individual attorney at Orlans PC. 30) The Misleading Character of the Orlans PC Foreclosure Letter 31) On information and belief Exhibit A was not specifically authored by an attorney. 32) In other words, an attorney did not write the Garland Foreclosure Letter. 33) On information and belief, the Garland file was not meaningfully reviewed by an attorney at Orlans PC in connection with the Garland Foreclosure Letter being generated and sent by or on behalf of Orlans PC to plaintiff. 34) On information and belief any review of Orlans PC Foreclosure Letters by an 35) Orlans PC attorney before they are sent out is clerical, ministerial, or administrative in nature. 36) On information and belief, Orlans PC Foreclosure Letters are almost never signed, and in the rare instances when they are signed this fact is discernable from Orlans PC’s records and files. 37) On information and belief, the Garland Foreclosure Letter, and other Orlans PC Foreclosure Letters, were processed by non-attorney “processors” using the firm’s proprietary advantage software and/or services supplied by non-attorneys at the Orlans PC affiliate, eVantage 38) Services, Inc., based on data supplied by the client. 39) On February 26, 2008, more than ten years prior to the filing of the original 40) Complaint in this matter, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a published opinion in Amanda Kistner v. The Law Offices of Michael P. Margelefsky, LLC and 41) Michael P. Margelefsky, 518 F.3d 433 (6th Cir. 2008). In the Kistner decision, the court states: 42) “This court has not previously had occasion to decide an “attorney letterhead” case under the FDCPA.” Id. at 438. 43) The Sixth Circuit in Kistner held that a form debt collection letter on law firm letterhead sent to “thousands” of debtors that was block signed “ACCOUNT

44) REPRESENTATIVE” which did not disclaim that it was from an attorney suggested to the least sophisticated consumer that it was sent by an attorney, and therefor was potentially misleading where no attorney specifically reviewed or authored the letter. 45) Alternatively, the Kistner court held that a debt collection letter sent to a consumer on law firm letterhead that was not individually signed by an attorney could reasonably be construed either to have been sent or, conversely, not to have been sent by an attorney and was therefore was potentially misleading to the least sophisticated consumer 46) The inclusion of the aforesaid notice reflects defendants’ recognition that Orlans PC’s communications providing notice to the homeowner of the initiation of non-judicial foreclosures in Michigan and elsewhere are subject to the FDCPA as communications relating to attempts to collect debts by a debt collector. 47) On information belief, Orlans PC, Linda Orlans, Alison Orlans, Jane Doe, and 48) John Doe—at least since the United States Supreme Court decided in Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 U.S. 49) 291 (1995), that the FDCPA applies to lawyers who regularly engage in debt collection—have 2:18-cv- 11561-VAR-RSW Doc # 1 Filed 05/17/18 pg. 14 of 30 Pg. ID 14 50) monitored published and unpublished FDCPA, MOC, RCPA and other consumer rights case law issued by the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Michigan, and other courts on a periodic basis. 51) Other violations against William Freeman

52) § 34-27-2. Right of mortgagee/ mortgagor to bid at sale. 53) At any sale by public auction made under and according to the provisions of any mortgage of real estate, or of any power of sale contained therein or annexed thereto, the mortgagee in the deed of mortgage or other conveyance, or pledgee, his, her, or their assigns, or his, her, or their heirs, executors or administrators, or any person for him, her, or them, may fairly and in good faith bid for and purchase the estate or property so put up for sale, or any part thereof, in the same manner as it may be bid for and purchased by any other person. 54) § 34-27-3.2. Mediation conference. (required by Law) 55) highlight >(m) No deed offered by a mortgagee as a result of a mortgage foreclosure action under power of sale shall be submitted to a city or town recorder of deeds for recording in the land evidence records of the city or town until and unless the requirements of this section are met. 56) Highlight 2: (a) If the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by this subsection to the mortgagor within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date of default, it shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand(1) If the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by this subsection to the mortgagor within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date of default, it shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand ($1,000) per month for each month or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the one hundred twenty-first (121st) day after the date of default and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. 57) ($1,000) per month for each month or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the one hundred twenty-first (121st) day after the date of default and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. 58) Below is the entire law (1) Statement of policy. It is hereby declared that residential mortgage foreclosure actions, caused in part by unemployment and underemployment, have negatively impacted a substantial number of homes 59) § 34-27-3.2. Mediation conference.

(1) Statement of policy. It is hereby declared that residential mortgage foreclosure actions, caused in part by unemployment and underemployment, have negatively impacted a substantial number of homeowners throughout the state, creating a situation that endangers the economic stability of many of the citizens of this state as the increasing numbers of foreclosures lead to increases in unoccupied and unattended buildings and the unwanted displacement of homeowners and tenants who desire to live and work within the state. (2) Purpose. The statutory framework for foreclosure proceedings is prescribed under the provisions of chapter 27 of this title. As the need for a mortgage mediation process has evolved, it is important for the state to develop a standardized, statewide process for foreclosure mediation rather than a process based on local ordinances that may vary from municipality to municipality. By providing a uniform standard for an early HUD-approved, independent counseling process in owner-occupied principal residence mortgage foreclosure cases, the chances of achieving a positive outcome for homeowners and lenders will be enhanced. (3) Definitions. The following definitions apply in the interpretations of the provisions of this section unless the context requires another meaning: (a) \"Default\" means the failure of the mortgagor to make a timely payment of an amount due under the terms of the mortgage contract, which failure has not been subsequently cured. (b) \"Department\" means the department of business regulation. (c) \"Good faith\" means that the mortgagor and mortgagee deal honestly and fairly with the mediation coordinator with an intent to determine whether an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible for the mortgagor and mortgagee, as evidenced by some or all the following factors: (i) Mortgagee provided notice as required by this section; 60) (ii) Mortgagee designated an agent to participate in the mediation conference on its behalf and with the authority to agree to a work-out agreement on its behalf; 61) (iii) Mortgagee made reasonable efforts to respond in a timely manner to requests for information from the mediation coordinator, mortgagor, or counselor assisting the mortgagor; 62) (iv) Mortgagee declined to accept the mortgagor's work-out proposal, if any, and the mortgagee provided a detailed statement, in writing, of its reasons for rejecting the proposal; 63) (v) Where a mortgagee declined to accept the mortgagor's work-out proposal, the mortgagee offered, in writing, to enter an alternative work-out/disposition resolution proposal that would result in net financial benefit to the mortgagor as compared to the terms of the mortgage. 64) (4) \"HUD\" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and any successor to such department.

65) (5) \"Mediation conference\" means a conference involving the mortgagee and mortgagor, coordinated and facilitated by a mediation coordinator whose purpose is to determine whether an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible to both the mortgagee and the mortgagor, and if it is determined that an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible, to facilitate a loan workout or other solution in an effort to avoid foreclosure. 66) (6) \"Mediation coordinator\" means a person employed by a Rhode Island-based, HUD-approved counseling agency designated to serve as the unbiased, impartial, and independent coordinator and facilitator of the mediation conference, with no authority to impose a solution or otherwise act as a consumer advocate, provided that such person possesses the experience and qualifications established by the department. 67) (7) \"Mortgage\" means an individual consumer first-lien mortgage on any owner-occupied, one (1)- to four (4)- unit residential property that serves as the mortgagor's primary residence. 68) (8) \"Mortgagee\" means the holder of a mortgage, or its agent or employee, including a mortgage servicer acting on behalf of a mortgagee. 69) (9) \"Mortgagor\" means the person who has signed a mortgage in order to secure a debt or other duty, or the heir or devisee of such person provided that: (i) The heir or devisee occupies the property as his or her primary residence; and 70) (ii) The heir or devisee has record title to the property, or a representative of the estate of the mortgagor has been appointed with authority to participate in a mediation conference. 71) (d) The mortgagee shall, prior to initiation of foreclosure of real estate pursuant to § 34-27-4(b), provide to the mortgagor written notice at the address of the real estate and, if different, at the address designated by the mortgagor by written notice to the mortgagee as the mortgagor's address for receipt of notices, that the mortgagee may not foreclose on the mortgaged property without first participating in a mediation conference. Notice addressed and delivered as provided in this section shall be effective with respect to the mortgagor and any heir or devisee of the mortgagor. (a) If the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by this subsection to the mortgagor within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date of default, it shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand ($1,000) per month for each month or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the one hundred twenty-first (121st) day after the date of default and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. 72) Notwithstanding the foregoing, any penalties assessed under this subsection for any failure of any mortgagee to provide notice as provided herein during the period from September 13, 2013, through

the effective date of this section shall not exceed the total amount of one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) for such mortgagee. 73) (2) Penalties accruing pursuant to subsection (d)(1) shall be paid to the mediation coordinator prior to the completion of the mediation process. All penalties accrued under this section shall be transferred to the state within one month of receipt by the mediation coordinator and deposited to the restricted- receipt account within the general fund established by § 42-128-2(3) and used for the purposes set forth therein. 74) (3) Issuance by the mediation coordinator of a certificate authorizing the mortgagee to proceed to foreclosure, or otherwise certifying the mortgagee's good-faith effort to comply with the provisions of this section, shall constitute conclusive evidence that, to the extent that any penalty may have accrued pursuant to subsection (d)(1), the penalty has been paid in full by the mortgagee. 75) (4) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this subsection, a mortgagee shall not accrue any penalty if the notice required by this subsection is mailed to the borrower: (i) Within sixty (60) days after the date upon which the loan is released from the protection of the automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding, or any similar injunctive order issued by a state or federal court, or within sixty (60) days after a loan is no longer afforded protection under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq.) or the provisions of § 34-27-4(d), or within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date on which the mortgagor initially failed to comply with the terms of an eligible workout agreement, as hereinafter defined; and 76) (ii) The mortgagee otherwise complies with the requirements of subsection (d); provided, however, that if the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by subsection (d) to the mortgagor within the time frame set forth in subsection (d)(4)(I), the mortgagee shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per month for each month, or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the thirty-first (31st) day after the date upon which the loan is released from the protection of the automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding or any similar injunctive order issued by a state or federal court and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any penalties assessed under this subsection for any failure of any mortgagee to provide notice as provided herein during the period from September 13, 2013, through the effective date of this section shall not exceed the total amount of one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) for such mortgagee. 77) (5) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, a mortgagee may initiate a judicial foreclosure in accordance with § 34-27-1. 78) (e) A form of written notice meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. The written notice required by this section shall be in English, Portuguese, and Spanish and may be combined with any other notice required under this chapter or pursuant to state or federal law.

79) (f) The mediation conference shall take place in person, or over the phone, at a time and place deemed mutually convenient for the parties by an individual employed by a HUD-approved, independent counseling agency selected by the mortgagee to serve as a mediation coordinator, but not later than sixty (60) days following the mailing of the notice. The mortgagor shall cooperate in all respects with the mediation coordinator including, but not limited to, providing all necessary financial and employment information and completing any and all loan resolution proposals and applications deemed appropriate by the mediation coordinator. A mediation conference between the mortgagor and mortgagee conducted by a mediation coordinator shall be provided at no cost to the mortgagor. The HUD-approved counseling agency shall be compensated by the mortgagee for mediation conferences that take place at a rate not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per mediation. The HUD-approved agency shall be entitled to a filing fee not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per mediation engagement. 80) (g) If, after two (2) attempts by the mediation coordinator to contact the mortgagor, the mortgagor fails to respond to the mediation coordinator's request to appear at a mediation conference, or the mortgagor fails to cooperate in any respect with the requirements of this section, the requirements of the section shall be deemed satisfied upon verification by the mediation coordinator that the required notice was sent and any penalties accrued pursuant to subsection (d)(1) and any payments owed pursuant to subsection (f) have been paid. Upon verification, a certificate will be issued immediately by the mediation coordinator authorizing the mortgagee to proceed with the foreclosure action, including recording the deed. Such certificate shall be valid until the earlier of: (a) The curing of the default condition; or (b) The foreclosure of the mortgagor's right of redemption. 81) The certificate shall be recorded along with the foreclosure deed. A form of certificate meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. 82) (h) If the mediation coordinator determines that after a good-faith effort made by the mortgagee at the mediation conference, the parties cannot come to an agreement to renegotiate the terms of the loan to avoid foreclosure, such good-faith effort by the mortgagee shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of this section. A certificate certifying such good-faith effort will be promptly issued by the mediation coordinator authorizing the mortgagee to proceed with the foreclosure action and recording of the foreclosure deed; provided, however, that the mediation coordinator shall not be required to issue such a certificate until any penalties accrued pursuant to subsections (d)(1) and (d)(4)(ii), and any payments owed pursuant to subsection (f), have been paid. Such certification shall be valid until the earlier of: (a) The curing of the default condition; or (b) The foreclosure of the mortgagor's equity of redemption.

83) The certificate shall be recorded along with the foreclosure deed. A form of certificate meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. (i) If the mortgagee and mortgagor can reach agreement to renegotiate the terms of the loan to avoid foreclosure, the agreement shall be reduced to writing and executed by the mortgagor and mortgagee. If the mortgagee and mortgagor reach agreement after the notice of mediation conference is sent to the mortgagor, but without the assistance of the mediation coordinator, the mortgagee shall provide a copy of the written agreement to the mediation coordinator. Upon receipt of a written agreement between the mortgagee and mortgagor, the mediation coordinator shall issue a certificate of eligible workout agreement if the workout agreement would result in a net financial benefit to the mortgagor as compared to the terms of the mortgage (\"Certificate of Eligible Workout Agreement\"). For purposes of this subsection, evidence of an agreement shall include, but not be limited to, evidence of agreement by both mortgagee and mortgagor to the terms of a short sale or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, regardless of whether said short sale or deed in lieu of foreclosure is subsequently completed. (j) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, where a mortgagor and mortgagee have entered into a written agreement and the mediation coordinator has issued a certificate of eligible workout agreement as provided in subsection (I), if the mortgagor fails to fulfill his or her obligations under the eligible workout agreement, the provisions of this section shall not apply to any foreclosure initiated under this chapter within twelve (12) months following the date of the eligible workout agreement. In such case, the mortgagee shall include in the foreclosure deed an affidavit establishing its right to proceed under this section. (k) This section shall apply only to foreclosure of mortgages on owner-occupied, residential real property with no more than four (4) dwelling units that is the primary dwelling of the mortgagor and not to mortgages secured by other real property. (l) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, any locally based mortgagees shall be deemed to follow the requirements of this section if: (a) The mortgagee is headquartered in Rhode Island; or (b) The mortgagee maintains a physical office, or offices, exclusively in Rhode Island from which office, or offices, it carries out full-service mortgage operations, including the acceptance and processing of mortgage payments and the provision of local customer service and loss mitigation and where Rhode Island staff have the authority to approve loan restructuring and other loss mitigation strategies; and (c) The deed offered by a mortgagee to be filed with the city or town recorder of deeds as a result of a mortgage foreclosure action under power of sale contained a certification that the provisions of this section have been satisfied. (m) No deed offered by a mortgagee as a result of a mortgage foreclosure action under power of sale shall be submitted to a city or town recorder of deeds for recording in the land evidence records of the city

or town until and unless the requirements of this section are met. Failure of the mortgagee to comply Commented [BF1]: I cannot find any notice of default with the requirements of this section shall render the foreclosure voidable, without limitation of the right of the mortgagee thereafter to re-exercise its power of sale or other means of foreclosure upon I have received letters like “ intent to foreclose “ but all compliance with this section. The rights of the mortgagor to any redress afforded under the law are not unsigned and never acted on. abridged by this section. (n) Any existing municipal ordinance or future ordinance that requires a conciliation or mediation process as a precondition to the recordation of a foreclosure deed shall comply with the provisions set forth herein and any provisions of said ordinances that do not comply with the provisions set forth herein shall be determined to be unenforceable. (o) The provisions of this section shall not apply if: (1) The mortgage is a reverse mortgage as described in chapter 25.1 of this title; or (2) The date of default under the mortgage is on or before May 16, 2013. (p) Limitations on actions. Any person who claims that a foreclosure is not valid due to the mortgagee's failure to comply with the terms of this section shall have one year from the date that the first notice of foreclosure was published to file a complaint in the superior court for the county in which the property is located and shall also file in the records of land evidence in the city or town where the land subject to the mortgage is located a notice of lis pendens, the complaint to be filed on the same day as the notice of lis pendens or within seven (7) days thereafter. Failure to file a complaint, record the notice of lis pendens, and serve the mortgagee within the one-year period shall preclude said mortgagor, or any other person claiming an interest through a mortgagor, from subsequently challenging the validity of the foreclosure. Issuance by the mediation coordinator of a certificate authorizing the mortgagee to proceed to foreclosure, or otherwise certifying the mortgagee's good-faith effort to comply with the provisions of this section, shall constitute a rebuttable presumption that the notice requirements of subsection (d) have been met in all respects. owners throughout the state, creating a situation that endangers the economic stability of many of the citizens of this state as the increasing numbers of foreclosures lead to increases in unoccupied and unattended buildings and the unwanted displacement of homeowners and tenants who desire to live and work within the state. (2) Purpose. The statutory framework for foreclosure proceedings is prescribed under the provisions of chapter 27 of this title. As the need for a mortgage mediation process has evolved, it is important for the state to develop a standardized, statewide process for foreclosure mediation rather than a process based on local ordinances that may vary from municipality to municipality. By providing a uniform standard for an early HUD-approved, independent counseling process in owner-occupied principal residence mortgage foreclosure cases, the chances of achieving a positive outcome for homeowners and lenders will be enhanced. (3) Definitions. The following definitions apply in the interpretations of the provisions of this section unless the context requires another meaning:

(a) \"Default\" means the failure of the mortgagor to make a timely payment of an amount due under the terms of the mortgage contract, which failure has not been subsequently cured. (b) \"Department\" means the department of business regulation. (c) \"Good faith\" means that the mortgagor and mortgagee deal honestly and fairly with the mediation coordinator with an intent to determine whether an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible for the mortgagor and mortgagee, as evidenced by some or all the following factors: (i) Mortgagee provided notice as required by this section; (ii) Mortgagee designated an agent to participate in the mediation conference on its behalf and with the authority to agree to a work-out agreement on its behalf; (iii) Mortgagee made reasonable efforts to respond in a timely manner to requests for information from the mediation coordinator, mortgagor, or counselor assisting the mortgagor; (iv) Mortgagee declined to accept the mortgagor's work-out proposal, if any, and the mortgagee provided a detailed statement, in writing, of its reasons for rejecting the proposal; (v) Where a mortgagee declined to accept the mortgagor's work-out proposal, the mortgagee offered, in writing, to enter an alternative work-out/disposition resolution proposal that would result in net financial benefit to the mortgagor as compared to the terms of the mortgage. \"HUD\" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and any successor to such department. (5) \"Mediation conference\" means a conference involving the mortgagee and mortgagor, coordinated and facilitated by a mediation coordinator whose purpose is to determine whether an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible to both the mortgagee and the mortgagor, and if it is determined that an alternative to foreclosure is economically feasible, to facilitate a loan workout or other solution in an effort to avoid foreclosure. (6) \"Mediation coordinator\" means a person employed by a Rhode Island-based, HUD-approved counseling agency designated to serve as the unbiased, impartial, and independent coordinator and facilitator of the mediation conference, with no authority to impose a solution or otherwise act as a consumer advocate, provided that such person possesses the experience and qualifications established by the department. (7) \"Mortgage\" means an individual consumer first-lien mortgage on any owner-occupied, one (1)- to four (4)- unit residential property that serves as the mortgagor's primary residence. (8) \"Mortgagee\" means the holder of a mortgage, or its agent or employee, including a mortgage servicer acting on behalf of a mortgagee.

(9) \"Mortgagor\" means the person who has signed a mortgage in order to secure a debt or other duty, or the heir or devisee of such person provided that: (i) The heir or devisee occupies the property as his or her primary residence; and (ii) The heir or devisee has record title to the property, or a representative of the estate of the mortgagor has been appointed with authority to participate in a mediation conference (d) The mortgagee shall, prior to initiation of foreclosure of real estate pursuant to § 34-27-4(b), provide to the mortgagor written notice at the address of the real estate and, if different, at the address designated by the mortgagor by written notice to the mortgagee as the mortgagor's address for receipt of notices, that the mortgagee may not foreclose on the mortgaged property without first participating in a mediation conference. Notice addressed and delivered as provided in this section shall be effective with respect to the mortgagor and any heir or devisee of the mortgagor. (d) If the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by this subsection to the mortgagor within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date of default, it shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand ($1,000) per month for each month or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the one hundred twenty-first (121st) day after the date of default and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. 84) Notwithstanding the foregoing, any penalties assessed under this subsection for any failure of any mortgagee to provide notice as provided herein during the period from September 13, 2013, through the effective date of this section shall not exceed the total amount of one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) for such mortgagee. 85) (2) Penalties accruing pursuant to subsection (d)(1) shall be paid to the mediation coordinator prior to the completion of the mediation process. All penalties accrued under this section shall be transferred to the state within one month of receipt by the mediation coordinator and deposited to the restricted- receipt account within the general fund established by § 42-128-2(3) and used for the purposes set forth therein. 86) (3) Issuance by the mediation coordinator of a certificate authorizing the mortgagee to proceed to foreclosure, or otherwise certifying the mortgagee's good-faith effort to comply with the provisions of this section, shall constitute conclusive evidence that, to the extent that any penalty may have accrued pursuant to subsection (d)(1), the penalty has been paid in full by the mortgagee. 87) (4) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this subsection, a mortgagee shall not accrue any penalty if the notice required by this subsection is mailed to the borrower: (i) Within sixty (60) days after the date upon which the loan is released from the protection of the automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding, or any similar injunctive order issued by a state or federal

court, or within sixty (60) days after a loan is no longer afforded protection under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq.) or the provisions of § 34-27-4(d), or within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date on which the mortgagor initially failed to comply with the terms of an eligible workout agreement, as hereinafter defined; and 88) (ii) The mortgagee otherwise complies with the requirements of subsection (d); provided, however, that if the mortgagee fails to mail the notice required by subsection (d) to the mortgagor within the time frame set forth in subsection (d)(4)(i), the mortgagee shall pay a penalty at the rate of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per month for each month, or part thereof, with the first month commencing on the thirty-first (31st) day after the date upon which the loan is released from the protection of the automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding or any similar injunctive order issued by a state or federal court and a new month commencing on the same day (or if there is no such day, then on the last day) of each succeeding calendar month until the mortgagee sends the mortgagor written notice as required by this section. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any penalties assessed under this subsection for any failure of any mortgagee to provide notice as provided herein during the period from September 13, 2013, through the effective date of this section shall not exceed the total amount of one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) for such mortgagee. 89) (5) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, a mortgagee may initiate a judicial foreclosure in accordance with § 34-27-1. 90) (e) A form of written notice meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. The written notice required by this section shall be in English, Portuguese, and Spanish and may be combined with any other notice required under this chapter or pursuant to state or federal law. 91) (f) The mediation conference shall take place in person, or over the phone, at a time and place deemed mutually convenient for the parties by an individual employed by a HUD-approved, independent counseling agency selected by the mortgagee to serve as a mediation coordinator, but not later than sixty (60) days following the mailing of the notice. The mortgagor shall cooperate in all respects with the mediation coordinator including, but not limited to, providing all necessary financial and employment information and completing any and all loan resolution proposals and applications deemed appropriate by the mediation coordinator. A mediation conference between the mortgagor and mortgagee conducted by a mediation coordinator shall be provided at no cost to the mortgagor. The HUD-approved counseling agency shall be compensated by the mortgagee for mediation conferences that take place at a rate not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per mediation. The HUD-approved agency shall be entitled to a filing fee not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per mediation engagement. 92) (g) If, after two (2) attempts by the mediation coordinator to contact the mortgagor, the mortgagor fails to respond to the mediation coordinator's request to appear at a mediation conference, or the mortgagor fails to cooperate in any respect with the requirements of this section, the requirements of the section shall be deemed satisfied upon verification by the mediation coordinator that the required notice was sent and any penalties accrued pursuant to subsection (d)(1) and any payments owed pursuant to subsection (f) have been paid. Upon verification, a certificate will be issued immediately by

the mediation coordinator authorizing the mortgagee to proceed with the foreclosure action, including recording the deed. Such certificate shall be valid until the earlier of: (a) The curing of the default condition; or (b) The foreclosure of the mortgagor's right of redemption. 93) The certificate shall be recorded along with the foreclosure deed. A form of certificate meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. 94) (h) If the mediation coordinator determines that after a good-faith effort made by the mortgagee at the mediation conference, the parties cannot come to an agreement to renegotiate the terms of the loan to avoid foreclosure, such good-faith effort by the mortgagee shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of this section. A certificate certifying such good-faith effort will be promptly issued by the mediation coordinator authorizing the mortgagee to proceed with the foreclosure action and recording of the foreclosure deed; provided, however, that the mediation coordinator shall not be required to issue such a certificate until any penalties accrued pursuant to subsections (d)(1) and (d)(4)(ii), and any payments owed pursuant to subsection (f), have been paid. Such certification shall be valid until the earlier of: (a) The curing of the default condition; or (b) The foreclosure of the mortgagor's equity of redemption. 95) The certificate shall be recorded along with the foreclosure deed. A form of certificate meeting the requirements of this section shall be promulgated by the department for use by mortgagees at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of this section. (i) If the mortgagee and mortgagor can reach agreement to renegotiate the terms of the loan to avoid foreclosure, the agreement shall be reduced to writing and executed by the mortgagor and mortgagee. If the mortgagee and mortgagor reach agreement after the notice of mediation conference is sent to the mortgagor, but without the assistance of the mediation coordinator, the mortgagee shall provide a copy of the written agreement to the mediation coordinator. Upon receipt of a written agreement between the mortgagee and mortgagor, the mediation coordinator shall issue a certificate of eligible workout agreement if the workout agreement would result in a net financial benefit to the mortgagor as compared to the terms of the mortgage (\"Certificate of Eligible Workout Agreement\"). For purposes of this subsection, evidence of an agreement shall include, but not be limited to, evidence of agreement by both mortgagee and mortgagor to the terms of a short sale or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, regardless of whether said short sale or deed in lieu of foreclosure is subsequently completed. (j) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, where a mortgagor and mortgagee have entered into a written agreement and the mediation coordinator has issued a certificate of eligible workout agreement as provided in subsection (i), if the mortgagor fails to fulfill his or her obligations under the eligible workout agreement, the provisions of this section shall not apply to any foreclosure initiated

under this chapter within twelve (12) months following the date of the eligible workout agreement. In Commented [BF2]: What if no proper notice was ever such case, the mortgagee shall include in the foreclosure deed an affidavit establishing its right to sent, because I don’t have one proceed under this section. (k) This section shall apply only to foreclosure of mortgages on owner-occupied, residential real property with no more than four (4) dwelling units that is the primary dwelling of the mortgagor and not to mortgages secured by other real property. (l) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, any locally based mortgagees shall be deemed to follow the requirements of this section if: (a) The mortgagee is headquartered in Rhode Island; or (b) The mortgagee maintains a physical office, or offices, exclusively in Rhode Island from which office, or offices, it carries out full-service mortgage operations, including the acceptance and processing of mortgage payments and the provision of local customer service and loss mitigation and where Rhode Island staff have the authority to approve loan restructuring and other loss mitigation strategies; and (c) The deed offered by a mortgagee to be filed with the city or town recorder of deeds as a result of a mortgage foreclosure action under power of sale contained a certification that the provisions of this section have been satisfied. (m) No deed offered by a mortgagee as a result of a mortgage foreclosure action under power of sale shall be submitted to a city or town recorder of deeds for recording in the land evidence records of the city or town until and unless the requirements of this section are met. Failure of the mortgagee to comply with the requirements of this section shall render the foreclosure voidable, without limitation of the right of the mortgagee thereafter to re-exercise its power of sale or other means of foreclosure upon compliance with this section. The rights of the mortgagor to any redress afforded under the law are not abridged by this section. (n) Any existing municipal ordinance or future ordinance that requires a conciliation or mediation process as a precondition to the recordation of a foreclosure deed shall comply with the provisions set forth herein and any provisions of said ordinances that do not comply with the provisions set forth herein shall be determined to be unenforceable. (o) The provisions of this section shall not apply if: (1) The mortgage is a reverse mortgage as described in chapter 25.1 of this title; or (2) The date of default under the mortgage is on or before May 16, 2013. (q) Limitations on actions. Any person who claims that a foreclosure is not valid due to the mortgagee's failure to comply with the terms of this section shall have one year from the date that the first notice of foreclosure was published to file a complaint in the superior court for the county in which the property

is located and shall also file in the records of land evidence in the city or town where the land subject to the mortgage is located a notice of lis pendens, the complaint to be filed on the same day as the notice of lis pendens or within seven (7) days thereafter. Failure to file a complaint, record the notice of lis pendens, and serve the mortgagee within the one-year period shall preclude said mortgagor, or any other person claiming an interest through a mortgagor, from subsequently challenging the validity of the foreclosure. Issuance by the mediation coordinator of a certificate authorizing the mortgagee to proceed to foreclosure, or otherwise certifying the mortgagee's good-faith effort to comply with the provisions of this section, shall constitute a rebuttable presumption that the notice requirements of subsection (d) have been met in all respects. Audit available thru BCPL C. By a specialized group in the UA AG’s office. How the audit is conducted Section 603(a)(1) of BPCL provides that the audits shall be performed by independent certified public accountants or independent licensed public accountants. The U.S. Trustee for each district is authorized to contract with qualified persons to perform the audits. 28 U.S.C. § 586(f)(1). BAPC§ 603(a)(1) also provides that the audits must be conducted in accordance with \"generally accepted auditing standards\" unless the Attorney General develops alternative auditing standards not later than two years after the date of enactment of the Act. Because bankruptcy documents are not prepared using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, alternative auditing standards have been developed and will be issued before the audits commence. A creditor/debtor must cooperate with the auditor, ---Several subsections of 18 U.S.C. § 152, the section of the United States Code that includes bankruptcy crimes, may be implicated by findings made by the auditors. Crimes under 18 U.S.C. § 152(1), (2), and (3) regarding concealment, false oaths, and false declarations are most likely to arise.

Request an audit done thru the AG per Although most individuals who seek bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, only a small percentage of those debtors will be audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires the Attorney General to: (B) es Although most individuals who seek bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, i. only a small percentage of those debtors will be ii. audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires iii. the Attorney General to: iv. (B) establish a method of randomly v. selecting cases to be audited, except that vi. not less than 1 out of every Although most individuals who seek vii. bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, viii. only a small percentage of those debtors will be ix. audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires x. the Attorney General to: xi. establish a method of randomly selecting cases to be audited, except that not less than 1 out of every 250 cases in each Federal judicial district shall be selected for audit; (C) require audits of schedules of income and expenses that reflect greater than average variances from the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed if those variances occur by reason of higher income o Although most individuals who seek bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, only a small percentage of those debtors will be audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires the Attorney General to: (B) establish a method of randomly selecting cases to be audited, except that not less than 1 out of every 250 cases in each Federal judicial district shall be selected for audit; (C) require audits of schedules of income and expenses that reflect greater than average variances

from the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed if those variances occur by reason of higher income or higher expenses than the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed. Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by the USTP as random audits; those under § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as targeted audits’ 96) higher expenses than the statistical norm 97) of the district in which the schedules were 98) filed. 99) Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by 100) the USTP as random audits; those under 101) § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as 102) targeted audits. 250 cases in 103) each Federal judicial district shall be 104) selected for audit; 105) (C) require audits of schedule Although most individuals who seek bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, only a small percentage of those debtors will be audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires the Attorney General to: (B) establish a method of randomly selecting cases to be audited, except that not less than 1 out of every 250 cases in each Federal judicial district shall be selected for audit; (C) require audits of schedules of income and expenses that reflect greater than average variances from the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed if those variances occur by reason of higher income or higher expenses than the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed. Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by the USTP as random audits; those under § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as targeted audits.es of income and expenses that reflect greater than 106) average variances from the statistical 107) norm of the district in which the 108) schedules were filed if those variances 109) occur by reason of high Although most individuals who seek bankruptcy protection will be subject to audit, only a small percentage of those debtors will be audited. Section 603(a)(2) of BAPCPA requires the Attorney General to: (B) establish a method of randomly selecting cases to be audited, except that not less than 1 out of every 250 cases in each Federal judicial district shall be selected for audit; (C) require audits of schedules of income and expenses that reflect greater than average variances from the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed if those variances occur by reason of higher income or higher expenses than the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed. Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by the USTP as random audits; those under § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as targeted audits.er income or 110) higher expenses than the statistical norm 111) of the district in which the schedules were 112) filed. 113) Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by 114) the USTP as random audits; those under 115) § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as 116) targeted audits and establish a method of randomly selecting cases to be audited, except that not less than 1 out of every 250 cases in each Federal judicial district shall be selected for audit; (C) require audits of schedules of income and expenses that reflect greater than average variances from the

statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed if those variances occur by reason of higher income or higher expenses than the statistical norm of the district in which the schedules were filed. Audits under § 603(a)(2)(B) are referred to by the USTP as random audits; those under § 603(a)(2)(C) are referred to by the USTP as targeted audits.