West v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
214 Cal. App. 4th 780
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- West defaulted on a $645,000 adjustable-rate mortgage and entered a Trial Plan Agreement (TPP) under HAMP after Chase Bank acquired her loan.
- Chase Bank denied West a permanent loan modification after the TPP despite her compliance with the plan.
- West’s home was sold at trustee’s sale on May 26, 2010, two days after Chase Bank indicated no foreclosure sale was scheduled.
- West filed suit alleging fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of written contract, promissory estoppel, unfair competition, conversion, slander of title, and quiet title.
- The trial court sustained Chase Bank’s demurrer without leave to amend; the appellate court reversed as to several claims and affirmed only as to conversion, set aside/void trustee sale, slander of title, and quiet title.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether West stated fraud/negligent misrepresentation claims. | West alleges Chase Bank made specific misrepresentations during the TPP and re-evaluation process. | Chase Bank contends the allegations lack specificity, justifiable reliance, and causation. | Fraud/negligent misrepresentation claims stated with specificity and justifiable reliance; remanded for merits. |
| Whether West stated a breach of written contract claim. | Trial Plan Agreement, read with HAMP directives, required a permanent modification upon compliance. | Chase Bank argues it reevaluated and denied modification; no breach. | Yes, breach of written contract stated; trial plan interpreted to require good-faith modification offer under HAMP. |
| Whether the fourth cause of action to set aside the trustee sale survives. | Defendant’s foreclosure procedures violated statutory requirements. | Pleading insufficient; tender/defect arguments apply. | set aside/vacate trustee sale claim dismissed without leave to amend. |
| Whether West’s quiet title claim is viable. | West sought title relief against entities involved in foreclosure. | Defendants did not have adverse claims to title; trustee’s deed recitals foreclose. | Quiet title claim held deficient as pleaded; potential for amendment but not here. |
| Whether West stated a promissory estoppel claim. | Chase Bank promised reevaluation and non-foreclosure during the TPP. | Promises were not clearly defined or relied upon. | Promissory estoppel adequately alleged; sufficient to state a claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 673 F.3d 547 (7th Cir. 2012) (HAMP does not preempt state-law claims; TPP constitutes enforceable contract and must lead to a permanent modification if conditions are met)
- Lona v. Citibank, N.A., 202 Cal.App.4th 89 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (Foreclosure-settlement pleading requirements and tender rules for setting aside sale)
- Lazar v. Superior Court, 12 Cal.4th 631 (Cal. 1996) (Fraud elements and pleading standards in California)
- Bosque v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 762 F.Supp.2d 342 (D. Mass. 2011) (HAMP-related claims and TPP expectations in Massachusetts federal matter)
- Daugherty v. American Honda Motor Co., 144 Cal.App.4th 824 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (Unfair competition and tort distinctions under UCL framework)