Ocwen Technology Xchange Whistleblower Suit West Palm Beach Florida *UPDATE Ex-Employee responds ..The ticketing system's data wasn't totally lost..

Richard ***************, Delray Beach, FL 33483,Plaintiff,vs.Ocwen Technology Xchange1665 Palm Beach Lakes BlvdWest Palm Beach FL Defendant )Case No.: Violation Whistblower Act, Invasion of Privacy, Violation of Computer Privacy Act, MaliceDated this 27 day of October, 2004Let it be known that Ocwen Technology Xchange is a Florida Corporation located at 1665 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd, West Palm Beach FL, 33401. If the defendant is know under any other names or companies and states this suit will be amended to reflect those changes.Let it be known that Richard the Plaintiff resides at 215 *********** Delray Beach, FL 33483.In November of 2003 Richard did accept a Sarbanes Oxley contract with Ocwen to review their network infrastructure. In accordance with this agreement Richard was to be paid weekly. Further the contract stated Richard was to have complete access to all relevant data without interference from or by the direction of Ocwen.During the month of January Richard began a review of all uptime for critical financial applications that Ocwen monitored for a period from Jan 2003 to Jan 2004. This data was kept in an application called Whats Up Gold. Upon completing his analysis of this data Richard provided a report to Dale Pickford, the CIO of Ocwen and Richard direct report.This report showed a serious material weakness in the overall stability and reliability of the applications know as REAL Servicing, Real Mortgage, Real Trans and Real Loan. The data showed over 14,300 trouble tickets submitted on these application in a 1 year period, further the data showed that these applications were down (not working) as much as 34% of the time. This made it impossible for Ocwen to correctly report loan information to its customers during normal business hours.Richard met with Dale Pickford the CIO to discuss this report. Richard was told to cease all investigation into the uptime of these critical applications and to review other areas inside the IT organization. Richard was told to confine his review to only areas outlined by Dale Pickford.During this meeting Richard informed Dale Pickford that the data that was reviewed clearly showed a material weakness and in accordance with 404 had to be acknowledged or disclosed publicly.Richard discovered after this meeting all data that had been examined had been deleted from the Ocwen Network.Numerous inquiries were sent to Dale Pickford and Bill Ownby asking for an explanation of the missing data. None were ever received.Richard did inform Kevin Wilcox VP of HR that based on his understanding of Sarbanes 404 rules, a serious and perhaps criminal incident had taken place. And unless a reasonable explanation was provided in writing detailing the reason for the deleted data Richard would report the incident to the SEC.Richard notified Kevin Wilcox that this information also supported claims in another lawsuit file against Ocwen Federal District Court in Connecticut Docket #3:02CV960. A $1.5 billion class action suit claiming Reckless Misconduct, Civil Conspiracy, Fraud Claims, Illegal Accounting Practices as a partial in the suit.Kevin Wilcox acknowledged the receipt of the information and agreed to investigate. At that time Kevin Wilcox did inform Richard that if he notified any agency Ocwen would take legal action. After a reasonable period Richard did contact Kevin Wilcox again for status of the issue he had reported. Kevin Wilcox failed to respond.Richard did contact the SEC and provide a full account of the issue he had observed. Ocwen Technology Xchange filed and Injunctive Claim for damage against Richard asking for $15,000 claiming he had violated his employment contract by reporting this information to the SEC. After notifying Ocwen legal council that a Congressional investigation has been initiated into Ocwen activities and contact with a local news station about Ocwen action a third party hired by Ocwen did attempt to hack into Richard home computer. The log files of this intrusion were kept.IF IT PLEASE THE COURTOcwen Technology Xchange has clearly violated The Whistle Blower Act known as FS, §112.3187 (4) ACTIONS PROHIBITED (b) An agency or independent contractor shall not take any adverse action that affects the rights or interests of a person in retaliation for the person's disclosure of information under this section.Richard Block followed the procedure established in FS, §112.3187 5) NATURE OF INFORMATION DISCLOSED--The information disclosed under this section must include: (b) Any act or suspected act of gross mismanagement, malfeasance, misfeasance, gross waste of public funds, or gross neglect of duty committed by an employee or agent of an agency or independent contractor. And reported this information in accordance with FS §112.3187 6) TO WHOM INFORMATION DISCLOSED--The information disclosed under this section must be disclosed to any agency or federal government entity having the authority to investigate, police, manage, or otherwise remedy the violation. The SEC is the agency identified in Sarbanes Oxley 404 as this body.TO AWARD DAMAGES IN THE FOLLOWINGThis suit is being filed Pro Se and in accordance with the appropriate US Supreme Court rules ask the court indulgence in addressing specific legal issues and further ask the courts protection from predatory legal practices by opposing council. Ocwen Technology Xchange has damaged the professional reputation of Richard and has hampered his ability to develop business due to Ocwen frivolous and irresponsible actions.In accordance with FS, §112.3187 (9) RELIEF--In any action brought under this section, the relief must include the following:(a) Reinstatement of the employee to the same position held before the adverse action was commenced, or to an equivalent position or reasonable front pay as alternative relief. (c) Compensation, if appropriate, for lost wages, benefits, or other lost remuneration caused by the adverse action. (d) Payment of reasonable costs, including attorney's fees, to a substantially prevailing employee, or to the prevailing employer it the employee filed a frivolous action in bad faith. (e) Issuance of an injunction, if appropriate, by a court of competent jurisdiction.(f) Monetary consideration for the extreme mental hardship and anguished willfully inflicted by Ocwen Technology Xchange.(g) Any other funds the court deems appropriate.(h) Compensation for the damage to Richard Block career by filing a frivolous suit against a professional consultant which directly impacts his ability to find gainful employment.(I) Compensation for the invasion of privacy into Richard Block home computer network and violating the Federal Computer Privacy Act.This information is true and correct as attested to me this _______________________RichardDelray Beach, FloridaU.S.A.