Henok v. Chase Home Finance, LLC
947 F. Supp. 2d 6
D.D.C.2013Background
- Henok, a pro se plaintiff, sues Chase and Fannie Mae over foreclosure of a rental property in Washington, D.C.
- Henok alleges RESPA violations for Chase’s failure to respond to cure-amount requests.
- The loan originally funded by JP Morgan Chase Bank; Chase later foreclosed and Fannie Mae bought the property in 2009.
- Henok filed suit in Feb. 2012; case was removed to federal court, with responses by defendants.
- Henok does not occupy the property; the dispute centers on whether RESPA applies to a non-owner-occupied rental loan and whether the deed of trust incorporates RESPA requirements.
- The court analyzes whether the deed of trust definitions and RESPA provisions create liability for the alleged cure-amount responses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does RESPA apply to Henok’s loan? | Henok relies on deed of trust language invoking RESPA. | Chase argues the loan is business-purpose/non-owner-occupied; RESPA exempt. | No; RESPA does not apply to the loan. |
| Does the deed of trust incorporate RESPA requirements? | DEED defines RESPA applicability for a federally related mortgage loan. | Deed language does not unambiguously adopt RESPA’s 2605(e) duties. | Deed does not incorporate RESPA’s notification requirements. |
| Are damages or relief based on RESPA claims proper? | Henok seeks cure-amount remedies under RESPA. | RES-PA not applicable; no liability for RESPA. | Cross-motion granted; RESPA claim dismissed. |
| Is reconsideration of prior RESPA ruling warranted? | Reasserts RESPA applicability via deed language. | No new facts or controlling law; arguments previously rejected. | Reconsideration denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., Inc., 635 F.3d 401 (9th Cir. 2011) (non-owner-occupied rental property deemed business purpose; RESPA exemption)
- Joyner v. Estate of Johnson, 36 A.3d 851 (D.C.2012) (objective contract law governs deeds; interpretation of RESPA in deed context)
- Found., for the Pres. of Historic Georgetown v. Arnold, 651 A.2d 794 (D.C. 1994) (interpret contract language; words control absent ambiguity)