Nationstar's claim that the above-described coding is not dispositive, because an underwriter could subsequently determine that more information was needed after all, is not persuasive. Because such information is stored electronically and based on objective criteria, the members of the class will be ascertainable without significant administrative burden. 2605(f), caused by the violation, which likely consist of administrative fees and costs, the individual recovery available for each class member would likely be low, far below the cost of litigating the claims themselves.
Nationstar's Motion to Strike will be DENIED. Id. 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. Although similar to Rule 23(a)'s commonality requirement, the test for predominance under Rule 23(b)(3) is "far more demanding" and "tests whether proposed classes are sufficiently cohesive to warrant adjudication by representation." Therefore, the Court will grant in part and deny in part the Motion for Class Certification. Actual damages may also include "non-pecuniary damages, such as emotional distress and pain and suffering." The Robinsons do not address this argument in their Opposition. Mr. Robinson's counsel is experienced in complex civil litigation and class action litigation. While it is not necessary to identify every class member at the time of certification for a class to be "ascertainable," a class cannot be certified if its membership must be determined through "individualized fact-finding or mini-trials." Because of the manner in which class discovery was conducted, see supra part II.A, Oliver did not have access to all of Nationstar's data fields for the representative sample of loans. While Demetrius Robinson did appeal Nationstar's March 15, 2014 offer of an in-house modification, the requirements of subsection (h) were not triggered because the offer was not a denial of a loan modification application. Code Ann., Com. 1024.41(c)(1)(i)-(ii), (g). He asserted that the amount of fees was calculated based on Nationstar's statements, but he could not specify the nature of the fees. Law 13-303(4)-(5), 13-408. 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. 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"). Md. 1024.41(d). TDC-14-3667 (D. Md. Oliver is the Chief Executive Officer of Hilltop Advisors LLC, a financial services consulting, compliance audit, and accounting advisory firm, and has extensive experience conducting compliance reviews for mortgage servicers, including for compliance with loss mitigation procedures. DEMETRIUS ROBINSON, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, Defendant. Once an underwriter is assigned, that employee double-checks whether the application contains all required documentation and is complete. 1024.41, a regulation of RESPA that outlines loss mitigation procedures. Id. 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. See Lierboe v. State Farm Mut. The cases cited by the Robinsons do not alter the Court's conclusion. Under Count I, the Robinsons allege a violation of 12 C.F.R. Because Nationstar employees used standard templates to communicate with borrowers, Oliver concluded that Regulation X violations can be identified through the existence of noncompliant templates and the dates that those templates were in use. 1024.41(f), (g), and (h) and Md. They have claimed $141,000 in interest; $6,147.12 in fees assessed by Nationstar; $2,275 in consulting fees; $50.58 in administrative costs; and lost time and labor of approximately 120 hours; as well as punitive and statutory damages. See Farber, 2017 WL 4347826 at 15; Billings, 170 F. Supp. Sept. 2, 2015). Fed.
Robinson v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC - Casetext The Deed specifies that a person who signs it but "does not execute the note" is a co-signer of the Deed in order to mortgage and convey that person's interest in the Property under the terms of the Deed, but "is not personally obligated to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument," and her consent is not required to alter the terms of the Deed or the Note. 15-05811, 2016 WL 3055901 (N.D. Cal. Since the MCPA and Regulation X allow recovery only of "economic damages," Md. The fact that Oliver's methodology has not been subjected to peer review and that he has not published any articles about it does not invalidate it.
CFPB Takes Action Against Nationstar Mortgage for Flawed Mortgage Loan In response, on May 30, 2014, Mr. Robinson sent Nationstar the exact same application that he had submitted on March 7, 2014. But see Ayres v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 129 F. Supp. 1024.41(f), (g), and (h), and Md. These claims do not have to be factually or legally identical, but the class claims should be fairly encompassed by those of the named plaintiffs. 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. Nationstar also argues that Oliver's report should be stricken as unreliable under the Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert. 1990) (citing Universal Athletic favorably for this proposition). Under subsections (f) and (g), a loan servicer is not permitted to begin foreclosure proceedings or move for foreclosure judgment if "a borrower submits a complete loss mitigation application" except in certain circumstances. R. Civ. An "unfair or deceptive" trade practice includes a "false . They have a home in Damascus, Maryland purchased by Demetrius Robinson ("Mr. Robinson"). cause[d] damages retroactively" and "transmogrifie[d]" the costs that predate the RESPA violation into damages. The Court may rely only on facts supported in the record, not simply assertions in the pleadings. A Scheduling Order was first entered on November 24, 2015, and the period for discovery was extended four times between November 2015 and January 2017. Thus, Mrs. Robinson is not "obligated" to pay the amount due on the Note and therefore is not a "borrower" for purposes of RESPA. On March 8, 2014, Nationstar sent to Mr. Robinson a letter stating that he was ineligible for a HAMP modification, but on March 15, 2014, it sent a different letter offering a loan modification under which Mr. Robinson would receive a reduced interest rate for two years. Nationstar Mortgage LLC Filing 18 Robinson et al v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, No. Compl. If the named plaintiff satisfies each of these requirements under Rule 23(a), the Court must still find that the proposed class action fits into one of the categories of class action under Rule 23(b) in order to certify the class. The Robinsons have not made any mortgage payments since January 2014 and have not been assessed any late fees since February 2014. May 31, 2016), the plaintiff had signed the deed of trust but not the promissory note but was nevertheless deemed to have standing because she had owned the home with a right of survivorship with her deceased husband, who had signed the note.
The Court will not revisit this determination. But where the broad methodology is sound, the lack of consideration of unproduced data cannot provide a basis to strike the expert witness's testimony. Similarly, though the precise nature of the fees imposed was not specified, it is reasonable to infer that some were attributable to delays linked to RESPA violations. 1976). 13-316(e)(1).
ROBINSON v. NATIONSTAR MO | Civil Action No. TDC - Leagle Johnson, 374 F. App'x at 873; Keen v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, No. Law 13-316(e)(1), and "actual damages," 12 U.S.C. is generally unproblematic as the non-injured parties can just be sorted out at the remedies phase of the suit."). In Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, No. Specifically, the loan servicer failed to honor borrowers' loan modification agreements. 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. 1024.41(c)(1)(i). The Fourth Circuit has stated that 74 members is "well within the range appropriate for class certification," Brady v. Thurston Motor Lines, 726 F.2d 136, 145 (4th Cir. . 2013); Poindexter v. Teubert, 462 F.2d 1096, 1097 (4th Cir. Joint Record ("MCC JR") 0907. The Court agrees that costs, including administrative costs, "incurred whether or not the servicer complied with its obligations" are not actual damages "caused by, or 'a result of,'" the RESPA violation, whether or not they occurred before or after the violation. On August 20, 2014, when Mrs. Robinson called to check on the status of the application, a Nationstar representative told her that the paperwork had gone to the wrong loss mitigation division and that the Robinsons needed to submit their application again. Fed. That provision provides, in parallel, that a loan servicer which does not comply with Regulation X is liable "to the borrower." loan" did not have standing to bring a RESPA claim); Nelson v. Nationstar Mortg. 218. Messner v. Northshore Univ. 2601-2617 (2012), specifically RESPA's implementing regulations known as "Regulation X," 12 C.F.R. The Robinsons' expert had written the scripts using data dictionaries and without accessing the databases. Nationstar employees use four software applications and databases to store and track electronic information relating to loans: (1) Loan Services and Accounting Management System ("LSAMS"), Nationstar's primary loan servicing software, which contains data for loans, including the permanent records of the accounting history, communication logs, and letters documented with codes that were sent to the borrower; (2) Remedy Star, Nationstar's proprietary loss mitigation and loan modification management system, which, among other tasks, tracks the status and timeline of a loan modification and links to documents stored in FileNet; (3) LPS Desktop ("LPS"), an application which Nationstar uses to track and manage foreclosure processes and communicate with outside attorneys; and (4) FileNet, a platform that houses PDF images of documents, including letters sent to borrowers by Nationstar. Thumbnails Document Outline Attachments Layers. When those scripts did not produce data that allowed the Robinsons to conduct the sampling, the Magistrate Judge ordered Nationstar on April 3, 2018 to run certain "structural scripts" on two of its four databases. that it is improper to pay an expert witness a contingent fee." Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC 1:2021cv00452 | US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio | Justia Log In Sign Up Find a Lawyer Ask a Lawyer Research the Law Law Schools Laws & Regs Newsletters Marketing Solutions Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Northern District Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC Robinson v. The company has already paid about $57.5 million in restitution to affected consumers, according to the CFPB. application to Nationstar after January 10, 2014, and through the date of the Court's . ORDER Scheduling Settlement Conference for Wednesday, October 26, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. To calculate damages, Oliver stated that he would look to data from the LSAMS application, including data tables that contain fee information, to identify fees that would not have been charged but for Nationstar's various RESPA violations, but that he was not able to evaluate this data in his report because it had not been provided to him. Id. The comments to that rule state that the "common law rule in most jurisdictions is . 12 U.S.C. Id. "[A]n evaluation of the merits to determine the strength of plaintiffs' case is not part of a Rule 23 analysis." Since the Court has already concluded that Nationstar is entitled to summary judgment on the Robinsons' claims under 12 C.F.R. 12 U.S.C. Feb. 14, 2017) (holding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded damages under the MCPA where she alleged that the defendant's failures to respond "resulted in the continual assessment of accruing interest, fees and costs on the mortgage account," as well as "stress, physical sickness, headaches, sleep deprivation, worry, and pecuniary expenses"). In Pennsylvania, the settlement affected 2,234 loans for a total of $2.75 million in restitution for these borrowers. Wesleyan Coll. Id. Mortgage Servicing Rules Under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("Regulation X"), 78 Fed. Ins.
Nationstar Mortgage TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Settlement A letter noting receipt of the application is automatically generated and sent to the borrower, and a Nationstar employee checks the application's documentation to determine if it is complete based on a checklist. RESPA's implementing regulations, codified at 12 C.F.R. P. 23(a)(4); Ward v. Dixie Nat'l Life Ins. 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. Furthermore, the Robinsons have made a sufficient showing that a central computerized analysis of Nationstar data would substantially, if not completely, resolve questions of whether RESPA violations occurred. Nationstar, the fourth-largest mortgage servicer in the U.S., is set to pay $91 million to settle claims brought by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and state attorneys general alleging. 3d 249, 266 (D. Md. 1972). QSF Settlement Administrator. Law 13-316(e), for the reasons stated above, see supra part I.B.4, the Robinsons have provided sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact whether they have suffered economic damages, in the form of administrative costs, fees, and interest. 1024.41(i). For example, it was undisputed that on May 30, 2014, Mr. Robinson, in response to Nationstar's requests for additional information, resubmitted the same information sent with his March 2014 loan modification application. Id. Since the Rule 23(a) factors are satisfied, the Court will now consider whether the Rule 23(b)(3) predominance and superiority considerations are met. Tagatz, 861 F.2d at 1042; cf. Co v. Adair, 764 F.3d 347, 359-60 (4th Cir. Plaintiffs "must present specific evidence to establish a causal link between the [servicer's] violation and their injuries." 09-08213, 2011 WL 11651320 (C.D. R. Evid. Thus, the Court concludes that, while Nationstar may have defenses as to some borrowers, the common proof that establishes the asserted violations, as well as the common question of whether the Robinsons can prove a pattern-or-practice violation by Nationstar, will predominate over the individual issues as to these claims. Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. Am. In February 2014, after their income had further decreased, the Robinsons ceased making payments on the mortgage loan. If a borrower is experiencing issues or not getting the help needed, contact your state attorneys general. Nationstar argues that summary judgment should be entered on the Robinsons' MCPA claim under section 13-316 because the Robinsons have not shown that they submitted a complaint or inquiry that triggers a duty to respond. Courts have wide discretion to certify a class based on their familiarity with the issues and potential difficulties arising in class action litigation. See 12 C.F.R. Id. This argument runs contrary to the plain language of Nationstar's own procedures, which describe the application as "complete" based on the processor's determination, leading to the referral of the complete package to an underwriter. Nov. 12, 2011), the court held that a plaintiff who signed a deed of trust on a property and was a joint tenant with her son, but did not sign the promissory note, had constitutional standing to bring a RESPA claim because she stood to be injured if a default on her son's loan led to the loss of her equitable interest in the property. While the Nationstar employee who conducts the initial processing of an application may refer it to an underwriter based on its facial completeness, the underwriter makes the final determination of whether the application is complete and is responsible for obtaining any additional required documentation. In a victory for borrowers, the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion on Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, affirming approval of the settlement. The first of these prerequisites is that the class must exist and be "readily identifiable" or "ascertainable" by the court through "objective criteria." Contact Fraudfighters.net Current Class Settlements Search Our Successes Practice Areas Class Actions Financial Services & Economic Justice Here's what we know so far, What the end of the Covid national emergency means for student loan relief, number of unlawful practices in handling mortgages following the Great Recession. 2018). This case arises from a class action alleging that Nationstar Mortgage LLC violated federal and state consumer-protection laws in servicing the class members' mortgage loans. Stewart v. Bierman, 859 F. Supp. 702, 703. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). Casetext, Inc. and Casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC Complaint with jury demand against Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. 702. Id. Although Monday's case specifically addresses Nationstar's actions following the Great Recession, the outcome can affect today's homeowners, says Kwame Raoul, attorney general of Illinois.