Woods v. Flagstar Lender, Lakeview Loan Maintenance, LLC

In addition, brand new undersigned unearthed that Plaintiff’s allegation regarding the recording out-of a few lien launches failed to give rise to people possible claim as the latest releases, even when connected with the property involved, alarmed a new loan unrelated to that particular match

That it Report and you https://servicecashadvance.com/title-loans-la/ferriday/ will Testimonial concerns next around three moves: (1) Plaintiff’s Affidavit of Things in support of Defendant’s Ginnie Mae Default Wisdom [#17], that the Courtroom construes just like the Plaintiff’s Actions to own Standard View up against Offender Ginnie Mae; (2) Plaintiff’s Affidavit regarding Products to get Defendant’s Hughes, Watters & Amp Askanase Lawyer Standard Judgment [#18], which the Judge construes because Plaintiff’s Action for Standard View against Defendant Hughes, Watters & Askanase; and (3) Accused Hughes Watters & Askanase, LLP’s Signal 12(b)(6) Action to help you Discount with Bias [#21]. Pursuing the Area Court implemented new undersigned’s prior report and you will testimonial, the brand new Judge re-known this situation to the undersigned for feeling of all of the remaining pretrial issues [#28]. This new undersigned have power to go into it recommendation pursuant in order to twenty eight You.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Toward reasons set forth lower than, we recommend that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Wisdom against Accused Ginnie Mae [#17] end up being Refuted; Plaintiff’s Actions for Default Judgment facing Offender Hughes, Watters & Askanase [#18] end up being Ignored Once the MOOT; and you can Offender Hughes Watters Askanase, LLP’s Code a dozen(b)(6) Activity in order to Dismiss that have Bias [#21] getting Provided. The latest undersigned subsequent advises that Area Court discount without prejudice Plaintiff’s leftover states facing Ginnie Mae sua sponte.

Plaintiff Sammy Lee Trees, Jr., continuing expert se, submitted their Ailment into the [#3] against Defendants Flagstar Bank, Lakeview Mortgage Servicing, LLC, Loancare, LLC, Ginnie Mae, and you can Hughes, Watters & Askanase. Plaintiff’s says matter assets located at 7727 Windview Ways, San Antonio, Texas 78244 and a supposedly illegal take to from the foreclosures. (Compl. [#3] from the 2, 33.) Plaintiff’s Criticism, even though lengthy, contains very few informative accusations as well as lacks a conclusion regarding the brand new events to be able to distinguish new so-called misconduct of various Defendants. (Id. on 2.) The causes of step asserted inside the Plaintiff’s Ailment are unclear, but Plaintiff seems to be asserting says out-of wrongful property foreclosure, infraction from package, fraud, and you may denial of due processes, together with violations of the Tx Company and you may Trade Code §step three.603, the truth During the Lending Act (“TILA”), the true Estate Settlement Steps Operate (“RESPA”), the new Racketeer Swayed and Corrupt Organizations Operate (“RICO”), and the Consistent Commercial Password (“UCC”). (Id. in the 3-28.) Connected to Plaintiff’s Ailment are specific data files one to presumably service his states. (Id. on 33-60.)

However, construing Plaintiff’s Issue and other pleadings liberally, it would appear that he or she is alleging he renegotiated his mortgage with a new promissory notice with the , and this note efficiently repaid the mortgage in a manner that people try in the foreclosures are illegal

Defendants Flagstar Bank, Lakeview Loan Repair, and you will Loancare gone to live in disregard Plaintiff’s states pursuant in order to Federal Code out-of Civil Techniques a dozen(b)(6), plus the undersigned issued a report and you can recommendation recommending the activity feel supplied with the [#19]. From the report, the fresh new undersigned figured Plaintiff’s allegation he came across extent due towards their mortgage from the submission a special note so you can Flagstar Financial did not produce any facially possible claim, just like the note connected to Plaintiff’s Problem looked like unilaterally written and you will carried out by Plaintiff inside you will need to customize the loan’s terms. In the long run, brand new undersigned discovered that Plaintiff’s claims lower than RILA, Control Z, and you can RESPA had been prohibited of the ruling law of constraints and you will Plaintiff’s UCC and you can Texas Business and you can Business Code claims unsuccessful since the a matter of rules because these regulations don’t control liens for the real-estate.