Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of defendants sued herein asDOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by such fictitiousnames and all persons unknown claiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien,or interest in the property described in the complaint adverse to plaintiff’s title, or anycloud on Plaintiff’s title thereto. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to allege their truenames and capacities when ascertained.6.Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, at all times hereinmentioned each of the defendants sued herein was the agent and employee of each of the remaining defendants. Plaintiff alleges that each and every defendant alleged hereinratified the conduct of each and every other defendant. Plaintiff further alleges that atall times said defendants were was acting within the purpose and scope of such agencyand employment.
Plaintiff purchased the foregoing Real Property and on or about April 18, 2006 andfinanced his purchase through AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT by virtue of aTrust Deed and Notes securing the Loans. (See Exhibit “A”)
Plaintiffs further allege that on or about March 4, 2009, Defendants allege thatPlaintiffs became in default of their loan. (See Exhibit “B”) However the Declarationof Due Diligence that is required to be attached to the Notice of Default is missing pursuant to
California Civil Code
§2923.5, therefore making the Notice of Defaultvoid.
Plaintiffs further allege on information and belief that none of these alleged beneficiaries or representatives on the Notice of Default and/or Notice of Trustee’sSale can prove that they have the authority to conduct the foreclosure. Furthermore,