Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published by “Patrick Kane”

Calif. App. Court (2nd Dist) Holds No Duty of Care Owed in Loan Mod Negotiations

Disagreeing with contrary rulings from the First and Sixth Districts, the California Court of Appeal for the Second District recently affirmed a trial court’s ruling that no duty of care is owed to a borrower during contract negotiations for a mortgage loan modification. A copy of the opinion in Sheen v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 1998, the plaintiff borrower obtained a $500,000 loan secured by a deed of trust (the “first loan”).  The first loan is not at issue.  In 2005, the borrower obtained two junior loans from the defendant bank in the amounts $167,820 (the…

8th Cir. Affirms Cancellation of Lis Pendens Due to Imprecise Property Description and Prayer for Relief

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s order canceling a lis pendens, finding that the description of the property at issue in the lis pendens was imprecise and did not connect to any particular request for equitable relief as required under Missouri law. A copy of the opinion in Enterprise Financial Group, Inc. v. Podhorn is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff lender extended a $1.9 million loan to an entity that then made alleged fraudulent transfers of the loan proceeds to the defendant company. The defendant used the fraudulently transferred loan proceeds to purchase…

6th Cir. Reverses Dismissal in Short-Term Cash Advance Class Action Involving Two Definitions of ‘APR’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a breach of contract claim in a putative class action involving short-term cash advance loans, finding that the contract at issue was ambiguous because it provided two inconsistent definitions of “annual percentage rate” that could not be reconciled. A copy of the opinion in Laskaris, et al. v. Fifth Third Bank is available at:  Link to Opinion. The defendant bank created a short-term cash advance program for eligible customers who held checking accounts with the bank.  Specifically, the bank would deposit loans up to $1,000 directly…

9th Cir. Adopts Broad Definition of ATDS Under TCPA, Reverses Trial Court’s Ruling

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the term automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”), as defined by the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, includes devices that store telephone numbers to be called, “whether or not those numbers have been generated by a random or sequential number generator.” Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit vacated the trial court’s order dismissing the plaintiff’s putative class action asserting violations of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. A copy of the opinion in Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 2012, the plaintiff signed up…

9th Cir. Rejects Attempt to Hold Lenders Liable for Promoter’s Alleged TCPA Violations

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s judgment in favor of several lender defendants in a putative TCPA class action, ruling that the defendants could not be vicariously liable under the TCPA for a promoter’s text messages because the promoter was either not the defendants’ agent or the defendants did not have knowledge concerning material facts about the agent’s unlawful activities. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that mere knowledge that an agent is engaged in an otherwise commonplace marketing activity, such as text message marketing, would not lead a reasonable person…

Calif. App. Court Rejects Borrower’s HBOR ‘Dual Tracking,’ SPOC Allegations

The Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, recently held that a borrower failed to state a cause of action for alleged violations of the “dual tracking” and “single point of contact” provisions of California’s Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR), Calif. Civ. Code, §§ 2923.6, 2923.7, because: (1) the borrower did not allege acceptance of a loan modification agreement within 14 days after receiving it; and (2) the borrower’s allegations demonstrated that the servicer assigned a customer service representative to process the loan modification application. The Court also dismissed the borrower’s allegations of lack of standing to foreclose, illegal…

9th Cir. Holds Company Willfully Violated FCRA by Including Liability Waiver in Disclosure Document

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a prospective employer violated the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act by including a liability waiver in the same document as the statutorily required disclosure notice for obtaining a job applicant’s consumer report. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that the company’s conduct was “willful” as a matter of law, because the language of the statute clearly contradicted the company’s interpretation, and whether or not the company “actually believed that its interpretation was correct is immaterial.” A copy of the opinion in…

1st Cir. Rejects Bankruptcy Trustee’s Effort to Avoid Mortgage Due to Allegedly Defective Acknowledgment

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit recently rejected a bankruptcy trustee’s effort to avoid a mortgage on the basis that the acknowledgment signed by the borrowers’ attorney-in-fact was defective under Massachusetts law, holding that the acknowledgment was not materially defective because as a matter of agency law the attorney-in-fact’s signature was the borrowers’ “free act and deed.” A copy of the opinion in HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Lassman is available at:  Link to Opinion. The borrowers purchased a parcel of “registered land” in 1994 in North Attleboro, Mass. (the “subject property”). “Registered land” is real property…

9th Cir. Holds Discovery Rule Applies in All Types of FDCPA Cases

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the discovery rule applies equally regardless of the nature of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) violation alleged by a plaintiff. Therefore, according to the Ninth Circuit, the FDCPA statute of limitations begins to run in all cases when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action. A copy of the opinion in Lyons v. Michael & Associates is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff consumer filed a lawsuit against the defendant debt collector alleging it…

9th Cir. Affirms Denial of Class Certification in HAMP Loan Modification MDL

In a consolidated multi-district litigation putative class action involving allegations of improper handling of HAMP loan modifications by a large mortgage servicer, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the district court’s order denying the putative class plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, holding that the district court correctly determined that individual issues predominated over common issues. The opinion was not published, and is non-precedential.  A copy of the opinion in Hanna Bernard v. CitiMortgage Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. Among other things, the putative class plaintiffs alleged that the defendant servicer supposedly improperly denied permanent…

Illinois Court Holds 9% Statutory Interest Rate Applies to Amounts Due in Foreclosure Judgments

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, recently affirmed a trial court’s final order in a foreclosure, refusing to vacate summary judgment in favor of the mortgagee, even though the notice of the relevant motions was mailed directly to the borrowers and not their attorney of record, and was originally missing the time of the hearing and the date it was mailed, and even though the borrowers argued that the trial court used the wrong interest rate to calculate the amounts due at sale. In so ruling, the Appellate Court held that the Illinois statutory rate of 9% interest is to…

CFPB to Issue Proposed Amendment Delaying TRID Effective Date to Oct. 1, 2015

The federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a brief press release yesterday, confirming reports that it would be issuing a proposed amendment to delay the effective date for the “Know Before You Owe” TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID) rule until Oct. 1, 2015. A copy of the press release is available at:  Press Release. The press release simply states: “The CFPB will be issuing a proposed amendment to delay the effective date of the Know Before You Owe rule until October 1, 2015. We made this decision to correct an administrative error that we just discovered in meeting the requirements under federal law,…