("Opp'n') 13, ECF No. 1024.41(f), (g). Thorn v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Delaware Attorney General Kathleen Jennings said the settlements, Several states also fined Nationstar in 2018, Kwame Raoul, attorney general of Illinois, latest research from the Mortgage Bankers Association. R. Civ. While Mr. Robinson sought to reduce his monthly mortgage payment in applying for a loan modification, his deposition testimony reflects that he understands that the present lawsuit contends that Nationstar did not process the Robinsons' loan modification application correctly. Petitioner: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC: Respondent: TAMARA ROBINSON and DEMETRIUS ROBINSON: Case Number: 19-379: Filed: September 24, 2019: Court: U.S. Court of Appeals . As for the claims of errors in Oliver's analysis, although this criticism is couched as his "misunderstanding the nature of Nationstar's various databases," Nationstar largely challenges Oliver's failure to use particular data fields, some which were never made available to him. Since neither party contends that Oliver's testimony and report are not "critical," the Court must address the Daubert challenge before reaching the question of class certification. 2017) (holding that "incidental costs related to the sending of correspondence" to the servicer, including "postage and travel," are not actual damages under RESPA because such a rule "would transform virtually all unsatisfactory borrower inquiries into RESPA lawsuits"). 2605(f), is common question of law and fact that Mr. Robinson and the class members would all be required prove in their individual cases in order to qualify for statutory damages. It will be otherwise denied. P. 23(b)(3). Because such information is stored electronically and based on objective criteria, the members of the class will be ascertainable without significant administrative burden. Ask to speak in court about the fairness of the Settlement. During discovery, Oliver revealed that his fee arrangement with the Robinsons includes a flat fee for his expert services, but that a portion of the fee is contingent on the certification of a class in this case. Law 13-316(c) are triggered upon the submission of a loss mitigation application, while 12 C.F.R. The Magistrate Judge ordered Nationstar to run those scripts and return the electronic data to the Robinsons. or misleading oral or written statement . A servicer that fails to comply with Regulation X is liable for actual damages and, upon a finding of a "pattern or practice" of non-compliance by the servicer, up to $2,000 in statutory damages. In February 2014, after their income had further decreased, the Robinsons ceased making payments on the mortgage loan. Campbell v. Nationstar Mortg., 611 F. App'x 288, 297-98 (6th Cir. 1024.41(c)(1)(ii), which requires a servicer to respond to a completed loan modification application; or Md. Law 13-316(c), the Court will grant class certification as to those class members and claims. . Compl. But see Ayres v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 129 F. Supp. TDC-14-3667, 2019 WL 4261696 (D. Md. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Multiple States Enter into 12 U.S.C. 2013); Poindexter v. Teubert, 462 F.2d 1096, 1097 (4th Cir. For the following reasons, the Motion for Summary Judgment will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; the Motion to Strike will be DENIED; and the Motion for Class Certification will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Nationstar Mortgage Unwanted Phone Calls Class Action Lawsuit is Wright, et al. Robinson, 2015 WL 4994491, at *4 (citing Marchese v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 917 F. Supp. 12 U.S.C. A code is also added to LSAMS to put a hold on foreclosure proceedings. 3d at 1014. Id. The denial letters stated that the loan's principal balance exceeded the limit under HAMP. If the initial application is not complete, a different Remedy Star substatus notation and LSAMS code are entered, and a letter is created and sent to the borrower asking for the required documents. According to Oliver, to determine that certain disclosures or specific information were conveyed to borrowers, the "objectid" field used in FileNet can be used to identify the type of letter sent. But, Nationstar is correct that Owens-Benniefield may In their memorandum in opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment ("Opposition"), the Robinsons admit that they "do not have evidence that Nationstar dual tracked them" or began foreclosure proceedings while a loan modification application was pending. Florida Appeals Court Reverses Mortgage Foreclosure - Pike & Lustig, LLP 1024.41(b)(1), which requires reasonable diligence in obtaining documents and information to complete a loss mitigation application; and Md. Certification will also be denied as to the claim under 12 C.F.R. 2005))). Finally, the Court finds that Mr. Robinson will adequately represent the absent class members. Robinson v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC | 2015 WL 4994491 | D. Md. | Judgment The MCPA prohibits the use of an "unfair or deceptive trade practice" in the "[t]he extension of consumer credit" or "[t]he collection of consumer debts" and provides for a private right of action. For the claims that rely on the timing of a response, Oliver and the Robinsons propose using changes in the Remedy Star substatus or LSAMS codes and documents stored in FileNet to identify the date a loan modification application was received or marked as complete, to identify the date a response was sent, and to count the number of days between events. 1024.41. Furthermore, Oliver states that since Nationstar employees used templates to communicate with borrowers, he could determine whether there were violations of certain RESPA provisions based on entries showing that Nationstar employees used templates that did not comply with RESPA. The servicer "is liable for any economic damages caused by the violation." For a class action brought for violations of Regulation X, a servicer is liable for "actual damages to each of the borrowers in the class" and, upon a finding of a "pattern or practice" of noncompliance, statutory damages amounting to a maximum of $2,000 per class member up to a total of the lesser of $1 million or one percent of the servicer's net worth. See Fed. The Court will therefore deny the Motion for Summary Judgment as to this argument. Actual damages may also include "non-pecuniary damages, such as emotional distress and pain and suffering." . She alleges Nationstar was sent multiple disputes by both Experian and Equifax with documentation showing the debt was forgiven, yet Nationstar persisted in reporting the debt as valid. Plaintiffs Demetrius and Tamara Robinson (the "Robinsons") have resided in a home in Damascus, Maryland that has been subject to a mortgage loan. 120. 2012). Nationstar also asserts that the Robinsons have not identified evidence sufficient to support their MCPA claims. Code Ann., Com. The proposed settlement with the CFPB requires Nationstar to pay $73 million in restitution to affected borrowers, as well as a $1.5 million civil penalty to the agency. Therefore, Nationstar was required to comply with section 1024.41 in processing it. 1988) (distinguishing between a rule of professional conduct and admissibility of evidence); cf. Sept. 29, 2017); Billings v. Seterus, Inc., 170 F. Supp. The Federal Rules of Evidence do not prohibit these kinds of arrangements. Nationstar Mortgage agreed to settle an action commenced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for $91 million to resolve allegations surrounding mortgage servicing misconduct and deceptive practices that resulted in financial harm to borrowers. If the loan servicer denies a loan modification application where the complete application was received more than 90 days before a foreclosure sale, the servicer must allow the borrower to appeal and must respond to the appeal within 30 days of receiving it by stating in writing whether the appeal was granted and a loan modification will be offered. v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC. McAdams v. Nationstar Mortg. In their Motion for Class Certification, the Robinsons seek certification of two classes. Where the Robinsons, after discovery, cannot point to evidence that Nationstar did not even consider or evaluate the Robinsons for loss mitigation options, they have not established the existence of a genuine issue of material fact on the issue of false or misleading statements. See Stillmock v. Weis Markets, Inc., 385 F. App'x 267, 275 (4th Cir. The Motions are fully briefed, and no hearing is necessary to resolve the issues. . In contrast, the Court finds that there is a genuine issue of material fact whether the administrative costs and fees incurred by the Robinsons resulted from Nationstar's RESPA violations. Before the error was discovered, Mr. Robinson appealed this offer as insufficient on April 10, 2014. Nationstar asserts that Oliver's testimony should be stricken because this fee arrangement includes an unethical contingency fee. Nationstar argues that it should be granted summary judgment on all of the RESPA claims because Nationstar was required to comply with Regulation X only as to a borrower's first loss mitigation application, and the Robinsons' March 7, 2014 application was not their first loan modification application. 1024.41(b)(2)(B), which requires that an acknowledgment letter be sent within five days of receipt of a loan modification application; or 12 C.F.R. Where the PaCE consulting fee was a one-time fee to advise the Robinsons in their interactions with Nationstar paid in August 2013, several months before they first submitted the March 2014 loan modification application, this cost was incurred "whether or not [Nationstar] complied with its obligations." at 151. Nationstar to Pay $110 Million to Settle Borrower Claims See Farmer v. Ramsay, 159 F. Supp. See 12 C.F.R. Thus, the nature of the proof of whether there has been a pattern or practice of RESPA violations provides substantial support for a finding of predominance. 1024.41(a). Fed. at 983. 2011) ("[T]he possibility that a well-defined class will nonetheless encompass some class members who have suffered no injury . 2013). 2003). The first of these prerequisites is that the class must exist and be "readily identifiable" or "ascertainable" by the court through "objective criteria." 2601-2617 (2012), specifically RESPA's implementing regulations known as "Regulation X," 12 C.F.R. 1024.41(i). Code Ann., Com. On June 16, 2017, the Magistrate Judge bifurcated discovery to focus initially on the merits of the Robinsons' individual claim and the question of class certification, ordered Nationstar to disclose electronic records so that the Robinsons could sample Nationstar's data for purposes of a motion for class certification, and limited the discovery of such records to a sample of 400 loans from the period from January 10, 2014 to June 30, 2014 and "to areas which inform" the Court's decision on class certification, namely whether Nationstar was in compliance with Regulation X. Mot. See id. The Class is represented by Rafey S. Balabanian of Edelson PC. 1024.41(b)(2)(i)(B) and Md. at 358. In analyzing this question, a court compares the class representative's claims and defenses to those of the absent class members, considers the facts needed to prove the class representative's claims, and assesses the extent to which those facts would also prove the claims of the absent class members. See Tagatz, 861 F.2d at 1042. Hickerson, 882 F.3d at 480 (quoting Cooper, 259 F.3d at 199). Accordingly, Nationstar's Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted as to the MCPA claims under sections 13-301 and 13-303. Nationstar filed a notice of settlement and a joint motion to proceed before a magistrate . If more documents are required, then the same Remedy Star substatus and LSAMS code that denote missing documents are entered. Code Ann., Com. Those claims arose from Nationstar's alleged application to Nationstar after January 10, 2014, and through the date of the Court's . In contrast, Nationstar maintains that there is no way to reliably identify when a loss mitigation application is submitted or complete using codes and status change entries in its existing software, and that the only way to make those determinations is through a file-by-file review. Your Email Please enter your email. Questions? The relevant rule prohibits an attorney from "offer[ing] an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law." 1984), and has upheld the certification of a class with as few as 18 members, Cypress v. Newport News Gen. & Nonsectarian Hosp. Relevant factual and procedural background is set forth in the Court's prior Memorandum Opinion granting in part and denying in part Nationstar's partial Motion to Dismiss. See Stillmock, 385 F. App'x at 274 ("[T]here is no reasoned basis to conclude that the fact that an individual plaintiff can recover attorney's fees in addition to statutory damages of up to $1,000 will result in enforcement of [the Fair Credit Reporting Act] by individual actions of a scale comparable to the potential enforcement by way of class action."). The distinction is crucial. In approving such a modification, Nationstar made a mistake: the underwriter working on the Robinsons' loan had erroneously double-counted their income. Actual damages may include late fees; denial of credit or access to the full amount of a credit line; out-of-pocket expenses incurred in dealing with a RESPA violation, such as expenses for preparing and copying correspondence; and lost time and inconvenience, including time spent away from employment while preparing correspondence "to the extent it resulted in actual pecuniary loss." Id. 1972). Id. Stewart v. Bierman, 859 F. Supp. Am. As of November 22, about 2.8 million homeowners were in a forbearance plan, according to the latest research from the Mortgage Bankers Association.