Attorney Malik reviews basic wrongful complaint.
How to Write a Sample Complaint for Wrongful Foreclosure
[No legal advice intended. It is purely an academic exercise because of greater interest in such issues. Absolutely no legal relationship is created and no follow up questions entertained other than general issues.]
IN THE CLARK COUNTY
OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
MILLSFARGO MUTUAL BANK, FA dba MILLSFARGO MUTUAL MORTGAGE
dba MILLSFARGO MUTUAL; PROFESSIONAL FORECLOSURE SERVICES
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Come now the plaintiffs, Frank Sinatara, by and through their attorneys of record, and for their First Amended Complaint against the defendants hereby complain and allege as follows:
1.1 Frank Sinatara are residents of Clark County, Nevada.
1.2 MillsFargo Mutual Bank, FA (hereafter “WMU”) does business in the state of Nevada and at relevant times serviced a loan acquired by MillsFargo Mutual and ultimately by the Federal National Mortgage Association.
1.3 Professional Foreclosure Services is believed to be a Nevadan corporation operated from California and is in the business of conducting non-judicial foreclosures in Clark County, Nevada.
II. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AND FIRST CLAIM: BREACH OF CONTRACT
2.1 On or about January 2005 the plaintiffs purchased a condominium and obtained a mortgage loan from the Johny Walker National Mortgage Company, Pahrump, Nevadain the approximate amount $265,000.00. This mortgage loan was eventually transferred for servicing to Milikan Mortgage Company (hereafter “Milikan”). On or about June, 2006, WMU acquired Milikan and began servicing plaintiffs’ mortgage loan. The exact monthly payment varied according to property taxes and other fees paid but a typical monthly payment was $1496.36 including reserves for the payment of taxes and insurance.
2.2 Beginning in February 2007 and continuing until July of 2001 the plaintiffs made timely payments to Lee National Mortgage until such time as the loan was assigned to Milikan Mortgage and, thereafter, payments were made to Milikan Mortgage.
2.3 Around June of 2001 the plaintiffs were notified that MillsFargo Mutual had acquired Milikan Mortgage and payments were to be made to MillsFargo Mutual prospectively.
2.4 On or about August 1, 2001 the plaintiffs, through their personal bank, MacMacMacPacific Bank, initiated an automatic bill payment service to automatically pay the MillsFargo Mutual home loan payment, which commenced on August 14, 2001. Initially, the payments were scheduled to be sent on or about the 14th day of each month in accordance with the loan agreement. Between August 14, 2001, and April 10, 2002 MacMacPacific Bank sent automatic payments to MillsFargo Mutual for the amount of the full payment each and every month in a timely fashion.
2.5 The automatic payments were received by MillsFargo Mutual within a few days of the transmission by MacMacPacific Bank, but not credited to their account.
2.6 Around October of 2007 the monthly statements from MillsFargo Mutual reflected that payments were not being credited. The Consumers promptly checked with MacMacMacPacific Bank to ensure that the payments had been sent and then supplied the requested information about the transmission and receipt of the payments to MillsFargo Mutual. The Consumers had MacMacPacific Bank produce canceled checks from these payments which were transmitted to MillsFargo Mutual whenever requested. In November, MillsFargo Mutual, without explanation, sent back the September payment to MacMacPacific Bank which credited it to the Consumers’ MacMacPacific Bank account.
2.7 On December 12, 2001 MillsFargo Mutual wrote to the Consumers indicating no payments had been received since October 1. MillsFargo Mutual assessed escrow expenses and delinquency charges and threatened to foreclose on the property.
2.8 The Consumers immediately responded to this, again supplying canceled checks and proof that MillsFargo Mutual had in fact received their payments.
2.9 In early 2002, despite repeated communication from the Consumers and repeated proof of payments made, MillsFargo Mutual hired Professional Foreclosure Services to commence foreclosure. On March 6, 2002, a Notice of Default was issued by Professional Foreclosure Services and approximately 30 days later a Notice of Trustee Sale scheduling a non-judicial foreclosure for July 19, 2002, was transmitted to the Consumers.
3.0 The Consumers continued to send letters and make phone calls to MillsFargo Mutual to no avail. As a result, in April 2002 adverse credit consequences occurred to the Consumers including a cancellation of a MacMacPacific Bank credit line and reduction of an American Express credit line.
3.1 MillsFargo Mutual and/or Professional Foreclosure Services has transmitted to various credit reporting agencies, including Equifax, false adverse information about the Consumers, causing their credit to be impaired.
3.2 In April of 2002 MillsFargo Mutual returned some of the payments and refused to take further payments made by the Consumers.
3.3 Beginning May 2002, the Consumers have made payments directly to MillsFargo Mutual payable to a bank account in a MillsFargo Mutual bank to show their good faith and intent to comply with their loan obligations.
3.4 The Consumers have contacted Professional Foreclosure Services to dispute the debt and request verification of the debt and have received no information whatsoever in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Alaskan Collection Agency Act, as well as in breach of the duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing implicit in contracts.
III. SECOND CLAIM: WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE
3.1 As a proximate result of the negligent or reckless conduct of MillsFargo Mutual and Professional Foreclosure Services the Consumers’ credit has been impaired and they are threatened with the eminent loss of their property despite the fact that they have made all payments in accordance with the loan agreement.
3.2 Unless enjoined, the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm and will not have an adequate remedy at law.
3.3 As a proximate result of the negligent actions of both defendants, the Consumers have suffered consequential damage and will continue to suffer additional damage in an amount to be fully proved at the time of trial.
IV. THIRD CLAIM: SLANDER OF TITLE
4.1 The defendants have caused to be recorded various documents including a Notice of Trustee Sale which has impaired the Consumers’ title which constitutes slander of title and the Consumers should be awarded resulting damages to be fully proved at the time of trial.
V. FOURTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
5.1 The defendants have engaged in a pattern of unfair practices in violation of the Nevada Revised Statutes XXXXXX Consumer Protection Act, XXXX et seq. entitling the Consumers to damages, treble damages and reasonable attorney fees and costs pursuant to the statute.
VI. FIFTH CLAIM: SLANDER OF CREDIT
6.1 The Consumers allege that the actions and inactions of the defendants have impaired their credit causing them to lose the ability to have good credit entitling them to damages, including statutory punitive damages pursuant to state and federal law, all to be proved at the time of trial.
VII. INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
7.1 The defendants have intentionally or negligently taken actions which have caused the plaintiffs severe emotional distress.
Wherefore, having set forth various causes of action against the defendants, the plaintiffs pray for the following relief:
1.That this Court enjoin the foreclosure presently scheduled for July 19, 2005, conditioned upon the Consumers making payments as the have in the past in a timely fashion;
2. That the actions of both defendants be determined to be unfair and deceptive business practices in violation of UDAP Nevada;
3. That the Consumers be awarded punitive damages provided for in UDAP XXXX including costs and attorney fees;
4. That the Consumers be awarded consequential damages to be fully proved at the time of trial;
5. That the Consumers be awarded their fees and costs pursuant to the written loan agreements which bind the defendants; and
6. That the Court grant any other relief that may be just or equitable.
Attorney for XXXXXXX