They asked who really owned the loan. The default date then jumped eight years, they allege
Two Colorado homeowners are taking a creditor and a mortgage collector to court over a question every servicer will recognize: who actually holds the note, and can they prove it?
The couple filed suit on June 29, 2026, in Arapahoe County District Court over a home loan on their property in Aurora. According to the filing, they asked more than once for the paperwork - the promissory note, the endorsements, the assignments, and the full chain of title showing how the loan moved from the original lender to the companies now seeking payment. The suit says they sent a formal Request for Information under RESPA in October 2025, asking who owned the loan and how ownership had changed hands. The filing states the defendants did not provide the ownership documentation.
The trail, as laid out in court papers, begins with original lender GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. Servicing later passed from GMAC Mortgage to Ocwen Loan Servicing, effective February 16, 2013. A MERS Milestone Report on the loan, the lawsuit says, lists the investor only as an "Undisclosed Investor" and does not name RTR Capital II, L.P. as the owner of the note.
Timing sits at the center of the case. The suit says MERS assigned the deed of trust to Real Time Resolutions, Inc. on September 17, 2025, recorded that September 23 - by the filing's account, roughly 15 years after the alleged default. According to the suit, that assignment moved only the deed of trust, with nothing to show the underlying note had been transferred or endorsed to Real Time Resolutions.
Then the dates stop lining up. A servicing transfer notice put the default at August 2010, with a principal balance of about $74,610.88, the filing says. But later billing statements listed delinquency dates of August 2, 2018, and March 2, 2020. The homeowners allege the servicer moved the delinquency date from 2010 to 2018 "without explanation," an act they describe as "re-aging the debt by approximately eight years." Their claim is that shifting the date made a potentially time-barred debt look collectible again. Colorado allows six years to sue on a written debt obligation, the suit notes, citing C.R.S. §13-80-103.5.
The couple also says they received a Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge that eliminated any personal liability on the loan. According to the filing, the defendants acknowledged the discharge, yet continued mailing monthly collection statements.
When the homeowners pressed for ownership records, the response came through the company's corporate counsel in January 2026, the filing says. The lawsuit alleges the defendants declined to release ownership-transfer documentation, describing the information as "confidential and proprietary," while asserting that possession of a note endorsed in blank was enough to establish standing to enforce it.
A March 2026 payoff statement, according to court papers, named RTR Capital II as the "current creditor" and sought roughly $109,684.41 - a figure the suit says included attorney fees, foreclosure fees, inspection fees, broker opinion fees, and accrued interest. The filing states that same statement carried this line: "The legal time limit (statute of limitations) for suing you to collect all or a portion of this debt may have expired."
The homeowners are asking the court to quiet title, cancel the lien, and head off any foreclosure. They allege violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Colorado Consumer Protection Act.
For anyone running a servicing operation or a default-collection desk, the pressure points here are familiar - standing to enforce, a clean and documented chain of title, and consistency in delinquency reporting. This filing leans on all three.
These are allegations, and they have not been tested in court. No judge has ruled on the claims.
