State of New York Supreme Court: County of Warren ---------------------------------------------------------X HSBC Mortgage Services Inc Plaintiff, vs.

James T. Mullen Defendant ---------------------------------------------------------X Index No: 54546

I have been trying to work with HSBC Mortgage Services since they have been billing me for a Mortgage Agreement from another company. I have never been furnished with proper documentation as requested and an audit of my note as requested has not been preformed. I have tried to make many arrangements with customer service agents of HSBC Mortgage Services only to have other departments change said agreements. Their refusal to work with me in good faith forced me to file for bankruptcy. My payments have changed many times after said bankruptcy when I was assured at the time of closing that my payments could not change for the life of the agreement. My reason and decision for filing bankruptcy was due to the unwillingness of HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. to help lower my payments. In point of fact, after the bankruptcy filing, my monthly payments increased by $500.00 per month. HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. then agreed to several loans modifications. The issue with these modifications was that those payments were higher than the original payment I could not afford before the bankruptcy! I tried on numerous occasions to explain this to customer service agents at HSBC Mortgage Services, but to no avail. I feel that HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. portrayed that they were trying to work with me, when in reality, they knew I could not afford the payments they were giving me, so I was destined to fail. There were many Government Programs and low-rate refinance options available to homeowners in trouble, but when I would asked HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. about them, they would always respond that they were not participating in these programs at that particular time. I currently have a 90 day notice from HSBC stating I have until 10/17/10 to cure the default (attached hereto as schedule A). How then is it that this action is already filed? When I called the office of Steven J. Baum P.C. to ask for an extension to file an answer and to ask about the 90 day notice, they were not aware of the 90 day notice and granted my extension to include September 7, 2010, with the stipulation (attached hereto as schedule A-1) that I waive any defense regarding

service process and jurisdiction, with prejudice. I do not waive any right or defense and question both the service process and jurisdiction. As stated and now reaffirmed, I believe I am victim to so called predatory lending practices from the beginning. I believe the plaintiff is not the holder in due course and has no right to bring forth this action and as such is committing a felony. The Law firm of Steven J. Baum should also have confirmed the debt before bringing this action and as such also is in violations