123 fix my loan took $4000 and did nothing

We trusted 123 Fix My Loan with 3 properties we lost all three. They charge fee of 4000 dollers total. Me and my sister have been trying to get our moneys back ever since and they tell us too bad. My banks tell us that they never even called them one single time.

We have already started a process with attourny general in NY and will bestarting one with attourny general in MA where they are. I expect to get my money back because i will never ever stop until they get in trouble for what they do to us.

Comment On This

Online exposes happen for a reason. When they're, or you're, in the spotlight they're, or you're, subject to the brightest lights. You may not like my exposes, which is your right. You may think it's NOT your or anyone else�s business, which is your right. If I find that it is MY business, I can read about it and write about it. That's my right and my freedom.

Everyday consumers of goods and services now have the Internet to describe their experiences with businesses and those businesses� employees. Government executives, administrators and all government employees, businesses, both non-profit and profit, legal and not legal, and every single one of their owners and employees, and all religious participants are ever increasingly more vulnerable to exposure, and accountability. Consumers have become bolder that their payment means total accountability for what consumers paid for. Consumers are less likely to keep to their place, do as they�re told and keep their opinions to themselves. Today�s governments, businesses or religions that dismiss or ignore consumers do so at their own risk. The Internet is free at public libraries, free at many businesses and free to anyone that wants to crawl on to it from a nearby wireless connection. Consumers of these goods and services more often than not relate bad experiences over good experiences. Exercising their freedom of speech rights where legal and illegal in other countries, they not only spell out and link the offending business� name and location, but also the offending employees and/or owner�s names and locations. They spell out in great detail, and link with supporting documentation, their complaints. I am glad to see �Gone are the days where settings from Auschwitz to Abu Ghraib contaminated in isolation both superiors and subordinates.� I am glad �the Internet is real-time exposure forcing attention, and repercussions.� I am glad �The result has been an increase in holding others accountable, just saying no and exposes.� Governments, schools, teachers, businesses, attorneys, judges, Realtors, home loan lenders, doctors, mechanics, hospitals, religions, etc. should be �relentlessly interviewed, closely monitored, increasingly resisted, and constantly scrutinized.� �Online exposes and nastiness� happen for a reason. Reasons like bad customer service or injustice. �As the realization sinks in that the Internet is also a real time conduit of ones� reputation,� customer service will be deliberately forced to get only better. I have come to the recent conclusion that the Internet has made the Better Business Bureau a dinosaur. The BBB does not publish what the complaint is, and without that, the complaint is useless. Complaints made to the BBB about businesses not providing goods and services as advertised or legally required, bar associations about lawyers lying and taking client�s money but not doing what they were paid to do, Realtor associations about Realtors clearly violating written ethics rules, ethics committees, commissions, etc. should not be private. Instead, all should be public. That�s another reason why there is an increase on the Internet of complaints and exposes. Too often, ranks have closed in around an offending member and protected them rather than hold them accountable. Or worse, the accused makes threats against the complaintant and witnesses, or bribes are offered by the accused and accepted by the investigator(s), prosecutors and/or judges, and editors. The Internet is the medium to not only expose the offending member, but also these cover ups by those paid to investigate, judge and punish offenders. Public records are public to protect the public. That�s why our publicly elected officials voting records are public. That�s why publicly elected officials can only have public meetings �putting their opinions and conclusions easily available to everyone.� That�s why all complaints, investigations and outcomes should be public. As MadMax wrote, �Remember, we have a legal system, not a justice system.� HOWEVER, "Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it." John Adams, (2nd President of the United States of America), 1776 (Thoughts on Government) FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ANONYMOUS FREE SPEECH The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads: Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society. The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States. Founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius," and "the Federal Farmer" spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment. The right to anonymous speech is also protected well beyond the printed page. Thus, in 2002, the Supreme Court struck down a law requiring proselytizers to register their true names with the Mayor's office before going door-to-door. These long-standing rights to anonymity and the protections it affords are critically important for the Internet. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the Internet offers a new and powerful democratic forum in which anyone can become a "pamphleteer" or "a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox." On December 21, 2007, Superior Court Judge Terence Flynn granted EFF's motion to quash the Township's September 26th subpoena seeking the identity of the truthsquad and denied a motion by the township to authorize future subpoenas, finding that the subpoena amounted to "an unjust infringement on the blogger's First Amendment rights" and that the blogger "has a right not to be drawn into the litigation." Judge Flynn denied the motion for a protective order, finding that it was unnecessary at this time. More from Judge Flynn's ruling from the bench: "And I [...] recognize that there are First Amendment issues with regard to disputes with the past administration. And that anyone [...] has a right to make their feelings clear. And they have a right not to be intimidated by the issuance of discovery requests in order to shut them down. For that reason, in many ways, the authority cited by the intervenor is correct and accurate. And first of all the [...] blogger, if in fact it�s an individual person, and I�m assuming absent any evidence that it is another individual person, has a right not to be drawn into the litigation and forced to reveal identity or to impede on his or her First Amendment rights simply on a suspicion, however founded or unfounded, and I don�t believe that this suspicion is sufficiently founded at this point to determine that it is Mr. Moskovitz. That person should not be drawn into the litigation and forced to abide by the rules with regard to exchange of information that the parties have, as opposed to a third party. So the Court is satisfied that there is no authority under law for this particular subpoena to obtain this private information. To allow the subpoena would be undue and unjust infringement on the blogger�s First Amendment rights. There�s no factual basis at this point, other than a mere suspicion for the justification. And ultimately that even if the information were obtained, it would be so remote to the actual elements of this litigation that it would not be admissible under any circumstances." � First Cash v. John Doe � Manalapan v. Moskovitz New Jersey Township tries to unmask anonymous online critic.

Comment On This

Countrywide now Bank of America is definitely anti-America. They�re not doing the required homeloans because of the origination fees they make off the refinance loans for the loans they should never have put us into in the first place.

Sheryl Christensen, can you spell MORTGAGE FRAUD? Sure you can. The one with the 30-year Federal felony and $1 million fine per occurrence. Remember me Sheryl? The one your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies referred to you. The one that did three purchases with you from Spring 2003 to Fall 2005 for a total of six loans. The one that you created that first rental agreement for the house I was selling through your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies. You were then with Wells Fargo on Kietzke Lane across from Lowe�s. You told me that your manager, James Elvick had told you to do that when the underwriter conditioned for either the sale of that house or a rental contract of that house. It was faster for you to create that rental contract than it was then to sell the house. I had never been a landlord nor did I have any intention of ever becoming one. Your rental contract worked. I moved into my new home. I never did rent my previous home as your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies listed it the morning after close of escrow on my new home. A bit of a financial hardship for me making both payments, but the market was starting to heat up and it sold in six months. You put me on that 100% 80 Heloc-20 Heloc that you sold me on that I �could just write a check out of as the property appreciated.� Use my home as a checking account you extolled. I�m sure now Wells Fargo was paying you a bonus to push that product. You sure quickly glossed over the details about that product. I naively made the mistake of assuming that what you told me was the same as what was in that paperwork in very small print that you mailed to me. The Sheryl mouth giveth and the small print taketh. I didn�t know until much later that your 100% 80 Heloc-20 Heloc was a bullet to my head.

Then your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies told me I �should buy another property and flip it for a quick buck.� I had zero cash but your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies told me �Sheryl�ll show you how to do it.� Sheryl certainly did. Sheryl, the Pusher, created another rental contract on my home and put on the loan I was moving into the new property. Again, I had no intention of being a landlord, and in this case, of moving. That property was flipped, but the next year during tax filing, after all the loan fees to you, the real estate commissions buying and selling, the income tax prep fees, and the capital gains taxes since the loan paperwork had it as an owner occupant which wasn�t exempt since I�d just taken the exemption on my other home, since my tax preparer wisely disclosed to me what tax fraud is, its consequences and that she wasn�t participating in it, I�d made a grand net profit of minus $9,872. At the time though, I hadn�t yet learned all that. Or that the only ones that made money off that deal was you and your fellow Pusher Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies. In fact, it turned out, you and your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies made a lot of money of that deal. In stocks, what you and your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies were doing is known as churning. The deal was done for your benefit, not mine. I still didn�t yet know that though.

So you and your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies had me do another one exactly like the previous one. But the market, unknown to me, had peaked and was collapsing. No flipping in that market. I lost that house in foreclosure soon after my tax preparer broke all the bad news to me of what you and your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies had aggressively tricked me into.

My tax preparer also broke more bad news. The IRS is one of the few hiring. The IRS is hiring

So the IRS can go back and audit loan files such as yours. The IRS is looking for declarations of rental status then matching that up to the borrower�s income tax returns. No rental income tax income declared and the IRS hauls the borrower in for an audit. In my case, there was no rental income, but my tax preparer says I won�t be believed since my loan documents, with my signature, say different. My six Deed of Trusts recorded at the Washoe County Recorder�s Office clearly has owner occupant on all those turns out were fraudulent loans you did for me. So I�ll be assessed taxes and penalties for rental income that I never received on three properties. I may even be facing criminal charges. My recourse will then be to sue you and Wells Fargo and Countrywide and your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies and Ferrari-Lund Real Estate for the MORTGAGE FRAUD I didn�t know then you and they then were doing. MORTGAGE FRAUD, you know, that creating and/or providing false information to a lender. Which I have since learned is also an NRS 645 violation for Ferrari-Lund Real Estate.

My tax preparer is convinced once the IRS gets to me I�m screwed. I�m not going down alone. I hear the FBI and Nevada AG is also hiring to go after the MORTGAGE FRAUDSTERS. If the IRS comes after me, I�m going to the FBI and Nevada AG and telling them everything. I know you�ll then say to them what you said to me, that your manager, James Elvick had told you to create a rental contract when the underwriter conditioned for either the sale of that house or a rental contract of that house. Elvick will of course deny he said that. I�ll have your loan records and Ferrari-Lund�s real estate records subpoenaed and since you and/or your Ferrari-Lund Real Estate buddies created the false rental contracts, they�re not in my handwriting.

My home? Well, I finally met an honest loan officer and she, a veteran herself, refinanced me into the loan you really didn�t want to do for me, my 30 year fixed VA loan.

Greene

http://renomortgagefraudexposes.ning.com/

Comment On This

RipoffReport.com, ComplaintsBoard.com and other consumer research sites can be very misleading to a consumer researching a company and if you are reaching a company please do not base your decision SOLELY on what you read on these sites.

Anyone, regardless of whether or not they are a consumer, can post whatever they would like about a company, positive or negative, without any repercussions. For instance, you have a disgruntled employee who decides they are going to publicize negative and inaccurate information about your company because they are mad. All they have to do is go to a site like Complaintsboard.com or RipoffReport.com and write a post. There is no legal repercussion for someone publicizing false information about a company.

RipoffReport.com and ComplaintsBoard.com rank very high in the "natural listings" search. So posting on them, generally speaking, will result in a first page listing.

There is a huge down fall to sites like this. People truly believe everything that they read and when it comes to the internet people don`t understand the internet is uncensored. That means you can write whatever you want and a large portion of our population will treat it as the truth. This cannot be father from the truth.

Please understand again anyone can post anything about a company WITHOUT repercussion on these internet sites.

If you are serious about researching a company, use reputable sites such as the State and Local Chamber of Commerce, Banking Commission and the Better Business Bureau. Also ask to speak with past clients. You will find this technique cuts through the "BS" posting that are found on these unrepeatable internet sites.

123 Fix My Loan complies with all state and local legislation. Unfortunately, being in this type of industry we can ot please all of our clients.

We Offer a 100% money back to all of our clients and if we cannot fulfill our obligation, for any reason, we will issue a full refund.

This post could not be father from the truth and we are investigating who actually posted this. Unfortunately complaints.com will not provide us the information to do so.