A Washington homeowner has filed a lawsuit against Nationstar Mortgage, alleging wrongful foreclosure and the destruction of her belongings valued at over $200,000.
A homeowner in Washington has taken legal action against Nationstar Mortgage LLC, operating as Rushmore Servicing, after claiming they improperly foreclosed on her home while it was deemed vacant. The lawsuit, filed on August 6 in federal court in Washington, D.C., also names property-preservation vendor Cyprexx Services and UMB Bank, which acted as the loan's trustee. The plaintiff alleges that these entities failed to provide due notification, leading to the loss of her home along with more than $200,000 worth of personal belongings.
The case outlines a troubling narrative rooted in missed communications. The homeowner acquired the property in 2006 with a $260,000 mortgage, and for over a decade, she maintained timely payments. However, in 2018, a severe storm caused significant damage to her roof, which her insurance would not fully cover. Following this, she temporarily vacated the property to oversee repairs, leaving her possessions in the home while she regularly checked mail and monitored the situation.
Following a period of unemployment and a health crisis, she fell behind on mortgage payments. In March 2020, Rushmore assumed servicing responsibilities as her loan was already in default. The homeowner asserts she communicated consistently with Rushmore and provided an active mailing address for important correspondence, which is central to her claims.
By 2022, Cyprexx, at Rushmore’s instruction, changed the locks on the property. The homeowner contends she was not informed about how to regain access, which contributed to Rushmore's designation of the house as vacant. This decision was critical, as it set the stage for the subsequent foreclosure.
The foreclosure proceedings commenced in July 2024. According to the homeowner, Rushmore and UMB Bank filed a lawsuit and sent a process server to what they had labeled as a vacant residence. The server's report indicated they attempted to deliver legal papers to a supposed occupant, but the homeowner maintains there was no one living there, and she was never officially served. Consequently, by failing to appear in court, the court ruled against her by default.
From this point, the homeowner claims a series of procedural missteps occurred. Notices regarding the foreclosure were still sent to the vacant house despite having a P.O. box and email contact provided previously. Alarmingly, the U.S. Postal Service returned a sale notice as undeliverable just days before the auction, yet the sale went forward regardless. On June 13, 2025, the residence was sold for $444,417.57, which fell short of the nearly $471,000 owed, resulting in a deficiency of over $25,000.
Only after the sale did the homeowner discover the status of her property when a family member noticed it listed as sold on Zillow. Her return to the home revealed that while her belongings remained, they had vanished weeks later. The lawsuit claims Cyprexx cleared out and disposed of everything, including furniture, appliances, and even personal items like her father’s ashes and valuable law practice tools, totaling an estimated value of $212,893.04. Critically, the homeowner asserts no eviction proceedings were initiated, nor was she given any guidance on retrieving her possessions.
The allegations presented in this case highlight systemic failures within mortgage servicing, particularly concerning communication practices, service of process, and the management of personal property following foreclosure. The homeowner's claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act assert that the actions of Rushmore constituted an attempt to collect a debt improperly. Additional claims include conversion, trespass to chattels, and wrongful eviction, emphasizing that property was seized without a lawful eviction.
The homeowner seeks not only damages but also punitive measures against the defendants, alongside costs and attorney's fees, and she has requested a jury trial to address these issues. It's significant to note that these claims have yet to be validated in court, and all allegations remain unproven pending judicial review.
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion.