The borrowers in Glarum v. LaSalle Bank Nat. Ass’n, 4D10-1372 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Sept. 7, 2011) admitted in their answer to a foreclosure action that they had not made payments according to the terms of the note. However, they denied the mortgagee’s allegations regarding the amount of the default.…
Read More »In Beneficial Maine Inc. v. Carter, 2011 ME 77, __A.3d__ (July 7, 2011) the borrower’s challenged the foundation presented by the plaintiff mortgagee to support the admissibility of its mortgage records pursuant to the business records exception to the hearsay rule. The plaintiff relied on the affidavit of an employee…
Read More »As part of the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), the defendant servicer in Stagikas v. Saxon Mortg. Services, Inc., CIV.A. 10-40164-FDS (D. Mass. July 5, 2011) entered into a Trial Period Plan agreement (TPP) with the plaintiff who later sued when the servicer did not permanently modify the mortgage. The…
Read More »The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California granted a debtor’s motion seeking to enjoin a creditor’s foreclosure sale, ruling that the creditor was bound by the terms of the debtor’s confirmed Chapter 13 plan even though the debtor’s automatic stay had been lifted.. The primary issue in…
Read More »In Grden v. Leikin Ingber & Winters PC, 643 F.3d 169 (June 27, 2011, 6th Cir. 2011) the debtor plaintiff sued his creditor’s law firm under the FDCPA on two theories. First, in a state-court debt-collection action against the debtor, the defendant served him with a motion for default judgment,…
Read More »In Morales v. Chase Home Finance LLC, (C 10-02068, N.D. Cal. April 11, 2011), two borrowers filed a putative class action on behalf of California homeowners who complied with HAMP Trial Period Plan (TPP) contract, but who had not received a permanent HAMP modification. The borrowers’ alleged that they executed…
Read More »Residential Funding Co. v. Saurman (No. 290248 and No. 291443, Ct. of Appeals MI April 21, 2011.) In this consolidation of two appeals, each of the defendants obtained a mortgage loan with MERS named as the mortgagee under the mortgage. Both defendants defaulted and MERS began non-judicial foreclosure by advertisement…
Read More »In re David A. Simpson, P.C., (NC Ct. of Appeals, COA10-361, May 3, 2011), a foreclosure action, the trial court found that the petitioner was the owner and holder of the mortgage after it produced the original note and allonge for the trial court’s inspection, as well as affidavits attesting…
Read More »In _Tinsley v. Integrity Financial Partners, Inc._, No. 10-2045 (7th Cir., Feb 11, 2011), the Seventh Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of a debt collector finding that a lawyer is not the consumer for the purpose of 15 U.S.C. § 1692c of the FDCPA. In _Tinsley_,…
Read More »In _Ogbin v. Fein, Such, Kahn & Shepard, P.C._, No. 09-2829, (3rd Cir. Feb. 22, 2011 unpublished), the Third Circuit vacated in part and remanded a District Courts’ dismissal of a class action complaint asserting a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692(f)(1) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).…
Read More »