Affidavit of Nick Nickerson in Support of Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

I, Nick Nickerson, states that the below is to be considered in conjunction with my supporting affidavit filed with the Montana Supreme Court on September 30, 2016, and served on this Court and should be incorporated herein. For ease of reference, a true and correct copy of my supporting affidavit has been submitted with this affidavit:

1. I am a Defendant in the above-entitled action.
2. I have personal knowledge of the facts contained in this affidavit.
3. I am competent to testify to these facts.
4. Prior to April 1, 2012, we contacted Wells Fargo to let them know we were experiencing financial difficulties and that it would only be temporary.
5. Beginning in April 2012 we initiated numerous contacts with Wells Fargo representatives via the phone and in person in order to get Wells Fargo to accept our payments and any associated fees. More than once between April 2012 and July 2012 we worked in person with Wells Fargo Personal Banker Teresa Koepke. Teresa could not get our payments including all fees to post to our account, so she spoke with several Wells Fargo employees over the phone and ultimately walked us over to Jody Lauzon. Jody was and is a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage specialist. Jody was unable to process our payments so she made some phone calls and ultimately referred us to an 800 number which Donna Nickerson called. The Wells Fargo representative on the call told us, with witnesses listening, she would fix our account so that the payments including late fees could be accepted at the local Wells Fargo branch. The representative never called us back to let us know she had fixed our account, Wells Fargo would not allow us to speak with her again and we ultimately discovered she did not fix our account.
6. Wells Fargo continued to refuse to accept our payments including fees.
7. Wells Fargo would not accept my payment and late fees without the unexplained $3,000 in blackmail fees. Even when we attempted to pay all payments, late fees and the $3,000 blackmail fee, they refused.
8. Since April 1, 2012, Wells Fargo has refused all attempts of payments in full and in part.
9. Attached to this affidavit is a true and correct copy of a note on a payment slip from Wells Fargo employee Lorrie Willey who tried to take our payments but could not. See Exhibit 1.
10. In our efforts to present our evidence to this Court, I have personally met with both Jody and Teresa. They both confirmed they remember trying to help us and thought everything had been resolved. On Friday, September 23, 2016, Teresa told us Wells Fargo’s final decision is they would not allow her to provide written testimony.
11. In response to Chris Romano’s inquiry (State of Montana Banking Commissioner’s Office), HSBC has denied having any involvement in this action.
12. I have personally requested HSBC provide proof of authority so we could require HSBC to acknowledge involvement in this action and Montana oversight agencies could gain the jurisdiction to assist us. HSBC’s alleged counsel Erika Peterman has refused to provide proof of authority that she is acting on HSBC’s behalf.
13. HSBC and Wells Fargo have refused to take responsibility for this action, refused to permit any valuable discovery to occur, and blocked our efforts to resolve this dispute.
14. By denying involvement and discovery, HSBC and Wells Fargo are committing fraud on this Court and against us.
15. Multiple agencies and legal professionals have told me, my wife, and my children, that the banks can get away with doing what they have done and are doing to us because no one will or can stand up to them. We have been told no matter what we do, the bank can take our property if they want to. It is impossible for me to wrap my mind around the possibility that in the United States of America HSBC, Wells Fargo, or any other bank, can refuse my payment and then foreclose on my home. Right is right, and this is wrong. This is what has happened to us. If it can happen to us, it can happen to you and other Montanans. Fortunately, we are not the only Montanans standing up to them. The Montana Supreme Court is standing up to them and is giving us the opportunity to defend ourselves so we can defeat HSBC and Wells Fargo’s unlawful assault against our persons, our family home, and our entire financial portfolio.
16. My research shows HSBC and Wells Fargo have violated national mortgage standards and the National Mortgage Settlement Agreement in servicing our loan and bringing this action before the Court.
17. At no time in 2012 did Wells Fargo appoint for us a Single Point of Contact (SPOC) to help facilitate a resolution as required in Wells Fargo’s settlement agreement with Montana. We requested a single point of contact.
18. At no time in 2012 with regards to our mortgage did Wells Fargo adhere to the Servicing Objectives or Servicer Discretion requirements detailed in their Servicing Agreement with HSBC that required Wells Fargo to “ vary its collection techniques to fit individual circumstances, avoiding a fixed collection pattern which may be ineffective in dealing with particular Borrowers,” and “to extend appropriate relief to Borrowers who encounter hardship and who are cooperative and demonstrate proper regard for their obligations.” We made every attempt we could to get Wells Fargo to be responsive and accept our payments including fees, but Wells Fargo’s response was consistently, no we won’t take your money, and then later it was no we have already put you into foreclosure so we can’t take your money or work with you in any way because the property is in foreclosure and the trust your note is in disqualifies you from any help whatsoever. Wells Fargo made no attempt to avoid a fixed collection pattern and made no attempt to extend any relief to us, and thus, Wells Fargo violated Montana law. MCA § 32-9-170. Mortgage Servicer Duties. “In addition to any duties imposed by federal law or regulations or the common law, a mortgage servicer shall: …(7) in the event of any delinquency or other act of default on the part of the borrower, act in good faith to inform the borrower of the facts concerning the loan and the nature and extent of the delinquency or default and, if the borrower replies, negotiate with the borrower, subject to the mortgage servicer’s duties and obligations under the mortgage servicing contract, if any, to attempt a resolution or workout pertaining to the delinquency or default.”
19. At no time has Wells Fargo acted in good faith toward us to resolve this situation.
20. Wells Fargo is 100% responsible for this entire situation due to their refusal to accept our payments back in 2012 without cause or right, their inability and refusal to appoint a single point of contact at that time to facilitate a resolution, and their unfounded and unlawful locking of our account to prevent Wells Fargo employees from accessing our account and accepting payments.
21. HSBC has never notified me that I owe them a debt.
22. I do not owe a debt to HSBC.
23. I have not defaulted on a debt to HSBC.
24. At no time prior to this action did Wells Fargo inform me that HSBC had any alleged beneficial interest in this property.
25. I dispute any admission that we executed the Mortgage and Note provided by the Plaintiff or that we would knowingly, without being subversively deceived, execute any Mortgage or Note that would grant or allow a Mortgagee to commit unconscionable acts, have the right to falsify documents, refuse payments, apply unauthorized and unexplained excessive fees that would prevent us from reinstating any alleged defaults that might arise, forge beneficial interests, pursue a wrongful foreclosure, not maintain clear chain of title in preserving interest in the real property, and disregard federal and state lending laws, rules and procedures established to protect and secure our interests in our investment and rightful ownership of our home.
26. Based on information readily available in public domain, it appears it is common practice for Wells Fargo to foreclose on properties that have over $100,000.00 dollars equity. Our property has over $100,000.00 dollars equity.
27. HSBC and Wells Fargo’s actions and inactions have prevented me from complying with the Supreme Court’s remand order within the original time allotted.
28. An extension is necessary in order for me to properly present our defense.
29. I intended to offer testimony from Wells Fargo employees and records to demonstrate Wells Fargo prevented my performance, but HSBC and Wells Fargo have blocked my access to this evidence.
30. Submitted in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct copies of the affidavits of Amanda Nickerson, Chad Nickerson, Stephanie Nickerson, Kristina Wright, Jeannie Smith and Heather Hummel.

I affirm under the penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct.