On 06/15/2017, Schneider filed a Declaration in the Matter of Mortgage Resolution v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N/A. [D.E. 191] as part of a Motion for Restraining Order and/or injunction in the matter of MRS v JPMC 15-00293 (S.D.N.Y.). Exhibit 4 to the Schneider Declaration was the Jessie Holmes Case Study [101] Ex. 4
16. A further example is Mary Schmidt. Ms. Schmidt intended to sell her home in March 2016, and learned there was a lien on the property relating to a line of credit she had opened with Chase. Chase would not release the lien because they claimed they did not own the loan, but they had not provided the Schneider Entities with any of the loan documentation either, including the Assignment of the Mortgage. During the efforts between the Schneider Entities and Chase to resolve this matter, Chase initially sent the Schneider Entities a purported assignment of mortgage from Chase to MRS, which appeared to be "robo-signed." The Schneider Entities refused to accept this fraudulent document, and insisted upon the preparation and delivery of a valid Assignment of Mortgage, which was eventually provided just as the borrower was interested in closing on the sale of her home. Again, unnecessary delays and expenses were visited upon the Schneider Entities and the borrowers because of Chase's failure to tum over loan files and execute documents when the loan sales were executed. A true and correct copy of the communications described herein is attached hereto as Composite Exhibit 5 .
Original Title
[D.E. 191] Ex. 5 Mary Schmidt Case Study Mortgage Resolution v JPMorgan Chase 15-00293 (S.D.N.Y.)
On 06/15/2017, Schneider filed a Declaration in the Matter of Mortgage Resolution v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N/A. [D.E. 191] as part of a Motion for Restraining Order and/or injunction in the matter of MRS v JPMC 15-00293 (S.D.N.Y.). Exhibit 4 to the Schneider Declaration was the Jessie Holmes Case Study [101] Ex. 4
16. A further example is Mary Schmidt. Ms. Schmidt intended to sell her home in March 2016, and learned there was a lien on the property relating to a line of credit she had opened with Chase. Chase would not release the lien because they claimed they did not own the loan, but they had not provided the Schneider Entities with any of the loan documentation either, including the Assignment of the Mortgage. During the efforts between the Schneider Entities and Chase to resolve this matter, Chase initially sent the Schneider Entities a purported assignment of mortgage from Chase to MRS, which appeared to be "robo-signed." The Schneider Entities refused to accept this fraudulent document, and insisted upon the preparation and delivery of a valid Assignment of Mortgage, which was eventually provided just as the borrower was interested in closing on the sale of her home. Again, unnecessary delays and expenses were visited upon the Schneider Entities and the borrowers because of Chase's failure to tum over loan files and execute documents when the loan sales were executed. A true and correct copy of the communications described herein is attached hereto as Composite Exhibit 5 .
On 06/15/2017, Schneider filed a Declaration in the Matter of Mortgage Resolution v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N/A. [D.E. 191] as part of a Motion for Restraining Order and/or injunction in the matter of MRS v JPMC 15-00293 (S.D.N.Y.). Exhibit 4 to the Schneider Declaration was the Jessie Holmes Case Study [101] Ex. 4
16. A further example is Mary Schmidt. Ms. Schmidt intended to sell her home in March 2016, and learned there was a lien on the property relating to a line of credit she had opened with Chase. Chase would not release the lien because they claimed they did not own the loan, but they had not provided the Schneider Entities with any of the loan documentation either, including the Assignment of the Mortgage. During the efforts between the Schneider Entities and Chase to resolve this matter, Chase initially sent the Schneider Entities a purported assignment of mortgage from Chase to MRS, which appeared to be "robo-signed." The Schneider Entities refused to accept this fraudulent document, and insisted upon the preparation and delivery of a valid Assignment of Mortgage, which was eventually provided just as the borrower was interested in closing on the sale of her home. Again, unnecessary delays and expenses were visited upon the Schneider Entities and the borrowers because of Chase's failure to tum over loan files and execute documents when the loan sales were executed. A true and correct copy of the communications described herein is attached hereto as Composite Exhibit 5 .
Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 1 of 34
Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 2 of 34
Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 3 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 4 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 5 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 6 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 7 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 8 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 9 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 10 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 11 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 12 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 13 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 14 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 15 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 16 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 17 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 18 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 19 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 20 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 21 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 22 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 23 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 24 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 25 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 26 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 27 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 28 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 29 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 30 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 31 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 32 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 33 of 34 Case 1:15-cv-00293-LTS-JCF Document 191-5 Filed 06/15/17 Page 34 of 34