Appellate briefs addressing trustee’s duty of good faith in foreclosing, UDAP claims, U.S. Bank NA v Lyons Washington Supreme Court, Main Brief Oct. 2013; Amicus Brief of Northwest Consumer Law Center & Northwest Justice Project filed April 25, 2014.
Second Amended Class Action Complaint to enforce loan modification agreements, raising contract, good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel and UDAP claims. Bosque v Wells Fargo D. Mass. Aug. 17, 2010
Similar claims:
Bosque v Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 762 F Supp 2d 342 [D Mass 2011] breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, UDAP Class action, extensive Westlaw pleadings and memos.
Class action complaint raising HAMP TPP claims under state UDAP and FDCPA laws, contract, good faith and fair dealing, and promissory estoppel. Lucia v. Wells Fargo Oct. 2010 (joined with Corvello in 9th Circuit appeal with favorable decision) LUCIA and Lucia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Does 1 through 10, Defendants., 2010 WL 4271748 (N.D.Cal.) 9th Cir various HAMP claims, class action.
Class action complaint involving successor in interest issues, claims of promissory estoppel, negligence, UDAP.
McGarvey v JP Morgan filed Cal. Super. Court April 2013 later removed, complaint as exhibit in removal motion, needs deletion of exhibits or obtain from firm. MCGARVEY, An individual, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; and Does 1 through 100 inclusive, Defendants., 2013 WL 2479615 (E.D.Cal.) complaint not on Westlaw, good negligence and UDAP (Letcher, Mercer).
Complaint alleging failure to implement loan modification, raising breach of contract, negligence, promissory estoppel, and UDAP against both servicer and loan owner. D. Mass. Jan. 2014. Joseph HANNIGAN and Linda Hannigan, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Certificate holders of Banc of America Mortgage Securities, Inc., Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-7, Defendant., 2014 WL 8388851 (D.Mass.) detailed facts, perm mod, 93A and negligence, contract.
Class action compliant enforcement of conversions to permanent modifications, breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and UDAP claims Cave v. Saxon Mortgage Services E.D. Pa. Sept. 2012 CAVE, and Smith, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. SAXON MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC. and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, Defendant., 2012 WL 4718976 (E.D.Pa.) good decision, class action HAMP background breach of contract, UDAP, FDCPA
Subpoena for records from DocuSign regarding an electronically executed contract for solar panels.
Complaint alleging that an algorithm-based tenant screening system had a disparate impact in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, and Massachusetts General Laws
Statement of Interest of the United States in matter alleging that an algorithm-based tenant screening system had a disparate impact in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, and Massachusetts General Laws.
This is a sample of a letter typically sent at the beginning of litigation, or pre-litigation, advising the Defendant to preserve all relevant documents and electronic records. This ESI preservation letter is related to Notices of Error sent to the servicer. Letter drafted by Thomas Cox.
Sample discovery requests in a case involving failure to respond to a QWR asking for the identity of the loan holder. Case litigated by Sarah Mancini, Atlanta Legal Aid.
Sample discovery requests in a case involving failure to respond to a QWR asking for the identity of the loan holder. Case litigated by Sarah Mancini, Atlanta Legal Aid.
Sample discovery requests in a case involving failure to respond to a QWR asking for the identity of the loan holder. Case litigated by Sarah Mancini, Atlanta Legal Aid.
Sample discovery requests from a case involving failure to properly apply payments and failure to provide a timely and accurate payoff quote. Case litigated by Rachel Scott, Atlanta Legal Aid.
Plaintiff alleges that it did not agree to Security Procedures of bank sufficient to shift liability for unauthorized wire transfers.
Consumer liability for unauthorized transfers under California UCC Article 4A. Consumer alleges that bank failed to establish and/or follow a commercially reasonable security procedure.
Consumer liability for unauthorized transfers under Virginia UCC Article 4A. Consumer alleges that it did not agree to any security procedure sufficient to shift liability to consumer.
In its March 2022 updates to a staff manual for its examiners, the CFPB noted that discrimination can satisfy the statutory requirements for unfairness under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. The Bureau did not determine that any particular discriminatory practice was unfair.
DentalPlans made many thousands of telemarketing robocalls to the cell phones of Plaintiff and tens of thousands of other similarly situated Americans. On June 6, 2024, this Court denied defendant DentalPlans’ summary judgment motion on the issue of whether it had consent to make the calls, and granted Plaintiff’s motion for class certification.
The summary judgment ruling was based upon the Court’s finding that DentalPlans was required to have obtained “prior express written consent” for its robocalls, because that is the standard the FCC set for telemarketing robocalls.
These are jury instructions in a 2015 federal case in the Southern District of Florida concerning violations of the federal CROA statute, the Florida credit services organization act, and where the consumer also sought to pierce a corporate veil.
IT IS ORDERED that Appellant’s Opposed Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal of the borrower-defense and closed-school provisions of a “Rule” governing student loan discharges, 87 Fed. Reg. 65904 (Nov. 1, 2022), is GRANTED.
Maine Attorney Thomas Cox representing the homeowner in a foreclosure case sent discovery to Deutsche Bank National Trust Co, as trustees for a trust holding the consumer's mortgage. The response from the trustee's attorney objected to much of the discovery.
This is a 2021 state court complaint alleging that, in a rent-a-bank situation, the credit agreements with an out-of-state bank did not comply with Wisconsin's non-interest rate regulation of consumer credit. Although not stated in the complaint, the bank could not rely on Riegle-Neal preemption as to Wisconsin non-interest rate regulation because TAB Bank had no branches in Wisconsin. As a result, it had to comply with Wisconsin non-interest rate regulation and not that of its home state regulation. The case was removed to federal court and the federal case resulted
This is an action under the Administrative Procedure Act for declaratory relief from Gainful Employment (“GE”) regulations of the U.S. Department of Education, 34 C.F.R. Part 668 Subpart Q, as applied to member schools of the American Association of Cosmetology Schools. The GE regulation assesses the outcomes of educational programs based on the ratio of graduates’ educational debt to earnings. Although the Department acknowledges that some graduates of cosmetology programs underreport their incomes, the Department has made no provision for such underreporting in its regulations.
Does the preemption of state usury laws enjoyed by national banks under the National Bank Act extend to non-bank debt buyers where, as here, the national bank retains no interest in or control over the subject accounts, and the national bank and the debt buyer are operationally and legally unrelated entities?
As demonstrated in the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, and the Administrative Record (“AR”), the FDIC’s rule on the Federal Interest Rate Authority, 85 Fed. Reg. 44,146 (July 22, 2020) (“Final Rule”) represents a reasonable interpretation of 12 U.S.C. § 1831d, and should be upheld under Chevron’s familiar two-step framework. The Final Rule is neither arbitrary or capricious, nor contrary to law, is consistent with the FDIC’s authority, and in compliance with applicable procedural requirements.
States have long used interest-rate caps to prevent predatory lending. In light of the comprehensive federal regulatory regime to which national banks are subject, Congress exempted them from compliance with state rate caps in the National Bank Act (“NBA”). 12 U.S.C. § 85 (allowing national banks to “take, receive, reserve, and charge” interest in excess of state law); see also 12 U.S.C. § 1463(g)(1) (same for federal savings associations).
This is a case about federal overreach. States have long used interest-rate caps to protect consumers, business owners, and scrupulous creditors from the harms of predatory lending. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”) exempts federally insured, state-chartered banks and insured branches of foreign banks (“FDIC Banks”) from these caps.
This is a class action complaint against a debt settlement organization that used the attorney model. It alleges common law fraud, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, unjust enrichment, violation of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (for attorneys), and the Illinois Debt Settlement Consumer Protection Act. The facts of the complaint provide an extensive description of how debt settlement operators attempt to evade laws regulating debt relief services by attempting to use attorneys as a front for their operations.
Defendants’ Consolidated Opposition to Motions for Intervention
This class action lawsuit presents a dispute between student loan borrowers and the U.S. Department of Education (“Department”) regarding the Department’s process for reviewing and adjudicating borrowers’ applications for the Department to relieve them of their loan repayment obligations based on the alleged misconduct of the schools they attended.
This is a class action against the City of Cleveland for various discriminatory and abusive practices concerning water pricing, termination of service, and turning water delinquencies into tax liens and tax takings, including claims under the FHA, due process, and state law.
This is an answer and affirmative defenses in an foreclosure on a reverse mortgage after the death of one spouse, where the remaining spouse demands proof that the plaintiff is the holder of the reverse mortgage, and alleging that the HECM mortgage was consummated without the required HECM counseling, that the foreclosure was initiated with improper loss mitigation or servicing, and that the plaintiff had unclean hands and initiated foreclosure without complying with a condition precedent.
This is a proposed order of dismissal of a lender foreclosure action on a HECM reverse mortgage relating to non-payment of property charges, where the applied for, and was granted, an “AT RISK” extension of the foreclosure deadlines. The order sets out that the effect of the AT RISK extension is that the lender will not proceed on the foreclosure for one year and the extension continues thereafter so long as, prior to the expiration of the one-year extension, the homeowner certifies that she continues to meet the criteria for the extension.
This is an action in Pennsylvania state court seeking the court clerk to put a residential foreclosure case into deferred status due to the homeowner’s status as an “At Risk” mortgagor under HECM regulations.
This is a 2018 New Jersey state court summary judgment motion seeking to dismiss a judicial foreclosure action concerning a reverse mortgage because HUD had granted an at risk foreclosure extension. The motion was filed by Legal Services of New Jersey.
This is motion to set aside a default judgment on a Florida foreclosure action and sale concerning unpaid property taxes and insurance on a reverse mortgage. The excusable neglect is based on the homeowner’s age and cognitive difficulties. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is a brief in opposition to a lender’s attempt to strike the homeowner’s defenses and dismiss the homeowner’s UDAP and ECOA counterclaims in a Florida action involving the foreclosure of a reverse mortgage for alleged failure to pay property taxes or insurance. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is an answer and defenses to a Connecticut action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage for failure to pay property taxes and insurance where the lender breached the payment plan that had been agreed upon. The Connecticut Fair Housing Center drafted the pleadings.
This is a homeowner’s first request for documents from a reverse mortgage lender in a Florida action to foreclose on the home for non-payment of taxes or insurance. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is a Florida homeowner’s first request for documents from a reverse mortgage lender in a Florida action to foreclose on the home for non-payment of taxes or insurance. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is an answer and defenses to a Florida action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage for failure to pay property taxes and insurance where the defenses are based on the lender’s failure to comply with servicing requirements and failure to show it has standing to foreclose. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is an answer and defenses to a Florida action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage for failure to pay property taxes and insurance where the defenses are based on the lender’s failure to comply with servicing requirements and failure to show it has standing to foreclose. Counterclaims include UDAP and ECOA age discrimination and adverse action notice violations. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
This is an amended answer, defenses and counterclaims to a Florida action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage where there was confusion as to the amount owed on a separate line of credit that was used to pay insurance. The defenses are based on estoppel, the lender’s failure to comply with HECM servicing requirements, substantial performance, and unclean hands. Counterclaims include violation the state debt collection, ECOA violations for age discrimination and failure to properly send adverse action notices, malicious prosecution, and slander of title.
This is an amended counterclaims to a Florida action to foreclose on a reverse mortgage for failure to pay property taxes and insurance. Counterclaims include UDAP and FDCPA claims against the servicer. Lynn Drysdale of Jacksonville Legal Aid drafted the pleadings.
