Hanrahran v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
54 F. Supp. 3d 149
D. Mass.2014Background
- Hanrahran obtained a $100,800 mortgage from Countrywide in 2006 secured by a Brockton home; SLS became servicer in 2012 and sent a foreclosure notice in 2012.
- Hanrahran requested HAMP mortgage assistance in Oct 2012 and again in Feb 2014, alleging eligibility and a need for modification.
- SLS urged she not need additional documents in Nov 2012 but failed to provide timely status on her HAMP application from Nov 2012 to Apr 2013.
- SLS denied her 2014 HAMP request in June 2014 on allegedly missing documents, which Hanrahran contends were not missing and not properly communicated.
- Plaintiff asserts Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A claims for unfair/deceptive practices and seeks damages, injunctions, and costs; SLS moves to dismiss, which the court denies.
- The court analyzes 93A standards, applying the HAMP-specific context and evaluating whether the conduct constitutes an unfair or deceptive practice and whether there is cognizable economic injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether SLS engaged in unfair or deceptive practices under 93A | Hanrahran alleges pattern of delay, misrepresentation, and evasion in processing HAMP | SLS contends no deceptive/unfair practice shown beyond technical violations | SLS's conduct plausibly constitutes unfair/deceptive practice under 93A |
| Whether Hanrahran adequately pleads economic injury | Economic harms include higher payments, increased interest, damaged credit, and fees | Alleged harms insufficiently linked to 93A violation or are too general | Economic injury adequately pleaded; harms are separate, identifiable consequences of the conduct |
| Whether the amended complaint shows a sufficient 93A claim given pattern/delay is the basis | Pattern of delay and misrepresentation supports 93A claim in HAMP context | Pattern must show unfair or deceptive act beyond mere delay | Amended complaint plausibly alleges an unfair/deceptive pattern under 93A |
| Whether the conduct, viewed holistically, supports liability for 93A claim | Totality of SLS's actions harmed Hanrahran and undermined modification efforts | Individual missteps not enough without a broader unlawful pattern | Holistic conduct supports 93A liability |
| Whether SLS’s actions were within the scope of HAMP-related protections | SLS misled and delayed in processing HAMP applications | HAMP framework does not automatically create 93A liability | Court finds enough to proceed under 93A in light of HAMP context |
Key Cases Cited
- Mass. Eye & Ear Infirmary v. QLT Phototherapeutics, Inc., 552 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2009) (unfair/deceptive conduct and injury considerations under Chapter 93A)
- Young v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 717 F.3d 224 (1st Cir. 2013) (handling of forbearance and modification can support 93A claim; injury analysis)
- Dill v. Am. Home Mortg. Servicing, Inc., 935 F.Supp.2d 299 (D. Mass. 2013) (unfair/deceptive conduct in processing HAMP can support 93A claim)
- Kozaryn v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 784 F.Supp.2d 100 (D. Mass. 2011) (HAMP violation that is unfair or deceptive can support 93A claim)
- Morris v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 775 F.Supp.2d 255 (D. Mass. 2011) (not every technical HAMP violation exposes 93A liability; pattern may)
- Hannigan v. Bank of America, N.A., 48 F.Supp.3d 135 (D. Mass. 2014) (pattern of misrepresentation and delay can survive motion to dismiss)