Superior Court Judge Denies Bank’s Motion to Dismiss HAMP Claims
The complaint states that Bank of America illegally foreclosed on the homeowners. The homeowners had applied for a loan modification under the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), and were promised by Bank of America that they would not lose their home during the evaluation process. This promise proved false when the foreclosure was conducted anyway. Copies of all the letters from Bank of America were attached to the complaint, showing that it had made explicit assurances that it would not foreclose. In a showing of the level of incompetence alleged in the case, even after the sale was conducted Bank of America sent another letter promising that the foreclosure would not occur.
After the homeowners filed suit, the bank’s first response was to ask the judge to dismiss it. The bank treated all the allegations as true, but argued that none of what was alleged was bad enough to give the homeowners grounds to file a lawsuit.
Agreeing with Culik Law’s argument, the court wrote that the homeowners are intended to benefit from Bank of America’s multi-billion dollar contract with the US Government, and that Bank of America fraudulently promised to not foreclose and then foreclosed anyway.
A copy of the decision is available here: Barbas v. Bank of America