Press "Enter" to skip to content

Ohio Supreme Court Rules Defectively Executed Mortgage Still Provides Constructive Notice

The Supreme Court of Ohio recently held that a mortgage defectively executed but properly recorded still provides constructive notice of its contents. A copy of the opinion in In re Messer is available at:  Link to Opinion. The borrowers executed a promissory note and a mortgage.  The notary acknowledgment on the mortgage was left blank.  The mortgage was recorded with the notary section incomplete. The mortgage was later assigned. The borrowers later initiated a Chapter 13 bankruptcy asking to avoid the mortgage as defectively executed under Ohio Rev. Code § 5301.01.  The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio…

8th Cir. BAP Holds Lien Against Only One Tenant by Entirety Avoidable in Bankruptcy

The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed an order of the bankruptcy court granting a debtor’s motion to avoid a judgment creditor’s lien on the debtor’s residence held in tenancy by the entirety with his non-debtor spouse, holding because the lien “fixed” under the Bankruptcy Code and thus impaired the debtor’s claimed exemption, it was avoidable. A copy of the opinion in In re: Casey Drew O’Sullivan is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debtor and his wife purchased their home in Missouri in 1995, taking title by the entireties. A creditor of the husband obtained a…

11th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of FDCPA, FCCPA Complaint for Failure to State Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld the district court’s dismissal of a borrower’s amended complaint against a loan servicer alleging claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)  and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) for leaving a letter in the borrower’s mailbox, posting a letter to his front door, and sending a letter via registered mail offering the borrower various sums of financial assistance if he vacated the property. The Court held that the servicer’s actions did not constitute a demand for payment under the FDCPA and FCCPA and upheld the district…

11th Cir. Refuses to Hold Assignee Liable Under TILA for Failing to Provide Payoff Statement

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld the dismissal of federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) allegations that sought to hold the assignee of a mortgage loan liable for the mortgage loan servicer’s supposed failure to comply with the borrower’s written request for a payoff statement. In so ruling, the Court held that TILA creates a cause of action against an assignee where violation is “apparent on the face of the disclosure statement provided in connection with [a mortgage loan] transaction pursuant to this subchapter,” and that an alleged failure to provide a payoff statement is…

Arizona Fed. Court Holds No FDCPA Violation for Collecting on Ex-Spouse’s Discharged Debt

The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona recently held that a debt collector did not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by attempting to collect on a debt because a debtor’s spouse’s bankruptcy proceedings did not discharge the debt to the extent that the debtor himself may be liable for it. A copy of the opinion in Parker v. First Step Group of Minnesota LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debt at issue arose prior to June 2010, and both the debtor and his wife were liable on the debt.  In June 2010, the…

Florida Court Reverses Dismissal of Foreclosure, Confirms Prior Servicer Records Rulings

The District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, Fifth District, recently reversed an involuntary dismissal of a mortgage foreclosure action, holding that the trial court erroneously ruled that the mortgagee failed to comply with the mortgage’s pre-foreclosure notice requirements, and erroneously excluded from evidence the prior loan servicer’s business records. A copy of the opinion in The Bank of New York v. Johnson is available at: Link to Opinion. A borrower defaulted on her mortgage and the mortgagee sued to foreclose. The foreclosure action proceeded to a non-jury trial, at which an employee of the mortgage servicer testified about the process…

9th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of False Claims Act Allegations Involving Loans Sold to GSEs

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a federal False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. §§3729-3733, lawsuit brought by private citizen plaintiffs against various mortgage lenders and servicers for supposedly making false certifications regarding loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In so ruling, the Court held that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FCA, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(2)(A)(i). A copy of the opinion in U.S. ex rel. Adams et al. v. Aurora Loan Services Inc. et al. is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff…

3rd Cir. Rejects Borrowers’ Equitable Tolling Arguments in RESPA Captive Reinsurance Class Action

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed summary judgment against a putative class of borrowers who were allegedly victims of a captive reinsurance scheme by a lender and its affiliated reinsurance company. In so ruling, the Court held that the plaintiff borrowers’ claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and the doctrine of equitable tolling did not apply because the plaintiff borrowers had not exercised reasonable diligence in investigating their potential claims. A copy of the opinion in Judith Cunningham v. M&T Bank Corp. is available at: Link to Opinion. The plaintiff borrowers financed the purchase…

Calif. S.C.: Borrower in Non-Judicial Foreclosure May Challenge Allegedly Void Assignment of DOT

In a case limited to nonjudicial foreclosures, the Supreme Court of California recently held that a borrower may maintain an action for wrongful foreclosure based on an allegedly void assignment. More specifically, the Court held that, “because in a nonjudicial foreclosure only the original beneficiary of a deed of trust or its assignee or agent may direct the trustee to sell the property, an allegation that the assignment was void, and not merely voidable at the behest of the parties to the assignment, will support an action for wrongful foreclosure.” The Court clarified that:  “[w]e hold only that a borrower…

Tennessee Supreme Court Refuses to Set Aside Tax Sale Despite No Notice to MERS

The Supreme Court of Tennessee recently affirmed judgment on the pleadings in favor of a tax sale purchaser, holding that although a party challenging the validity of a tax sale for lack of notice does not have to tender the amount owed before filing suit under the Tennessee tax sale statute, MERS had no protected interest in the property arising from the deed of trust’s designation of MERS as beneficiary and nominee for the lender or it being the alleged holder of bare legal title for the purpose of enforcing the lender’s rights. The Court held that, because MERS was…

CFPB Issues Final ‘No Action Letter’ Policy Without Substantial Change

The federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently issued its final policy regarding “no action letters.” A copy of the final policy is available at: Link to Policy. The final policy establishes a process to apply for non-binding statements from the CFPB as to whether it has any “present intention to recommend initiation of an enforcement or supervisory action against the requester with respect to a specified matter” involving “innovative financial products or services that promise substantial consumer benefit where there is substantial uncertainty whether or how specific provisions of statutes implemented or regulations issued by the [CFPB] would be…

EDNY Holds Providing Callback Information to Third Party Violated FDCPA

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York recently granted summary judgment in favor of a debtor in his claim that a debt collector violated the FDCPA when the debt collector, in attempting to reach the debtor by telephone, left a message with a third party providing the debt collector’s callback information. The Court held that because the undisclosed nature of the call may induce the debtor to contact a debt collector when he does not wish to do so, the debt collector must refrain from leaving callback information and attempt the call at a later time…