Class Action Seeks to Represent Loss Mitigation Applicants Charged Vacated Property Fees by Bank of America

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Bank of America, NA and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC are the defendants in a proposed class action wherein two plaintiffs claim the companies wrongfully initiated a mortgage foreclosure action after the individuals’ loan servicer, a non-party to this lawsuit, marked their account in October 2007 as unpaid even though, the case claims, the plaintiffs executed a Note payable to the non-party three months prior.

At the heart of the complaint is the transferring of the plaintiffs’ mortgage and servicing between numerous parties—first from non-parties E-Loan, Inc. to Popular Mortgage Servicing, Inc., and then to Countrywide Home Loans—before the latter became Bank of America, NA. According to the lawsuit, the plaintiffs dispute whether Countrywide and defendant Bank of America have any of the rights they claim to enforce the initial mortgage agreement. Non-party Countrywide, the lawsuit says, initiated a mortgage foreclosure action against the plaintiffs, who, in January 2017, received statements from Bank of America indicating they owed nearly $200,000, and that their homestead property in Tampa was added to the Vacant Property Registration the previous month. Subsequent communications informed the plaintiffs that almost $2,800 in fees were being added to their account, bringing their alleged total owed to $209,366, the case continues.

“Clearly both amounts due and owing are wrong,” the plaintiffs state. “In fact, [the defendants] have hired multiple inspectors to visit the property, one of which encountered the plaintiffs at the property where a verbal altercation took place.”

In addition to arguing that both the total amount and additional fees sought by the defendants are inaccurate, the plaintiffs assert the defendants’ alleged collection threats were out of line considering the individuals still occupy their property. 

“As a direct result of this instance, Defendant [Bank of America] was with actual knowledge that the property was occupied,” the complaint reads. “The continued threat of debt collection, and the mistreatment of the occupied status of the property, has the plaintiffs in fear that they may very well come home to having their locks changed.”