Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

California Court Holds That Borrowers May Enjoin A Foreclosure If A Lender Fails To Meet Servicing Guidelines

By Alejandro Moreno & Shannon Petersen on February 4, 2013
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In Pfeiffer v. Countrywide Home Loans, — Cal.Rptr.3d —-, 2012 WL 6216039 (Dec. 13, 2012), mortgage borrowers filed a damages claim against a trustee for violating the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and an injunction claim against a lender to halt a foreclosure they claimed was wrongful. The trial court sustained the defendants’ demurrer to both claims without leave to amend. The California Court of Appeal affirmed as to the first claim, but reversed as to the second.

As to the first claim, the California Court joined others in holding that foreclosure activities are not “debt collection” within the meaning of the FCDPA. In particular, the issuance of foreclosure sales notices in compliance with California non-judicial closure law did not constitute debt collection. Thus, the borrowers could not state an FDCPA claim even if the foreclosure was otherwise allegedly wrongful.

As to the second claim, the Court held that the lender could be enjoined from foreclosing. The loan here was insured by the Federal Housing Administration. Thus, the foreclosure was subject to servicing regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). These regulations required the lender to conduct a face-to-face interview prior to initiating foreclosure. The borrowers alleged this never happened. The Court held that even though the HUD regulations did not create a private right of action, failure to follow the regulations could nevertheless support an injunction based on a common law claim of wrongful foreclosure. Because the borrowers were seeking to halt the foreclosure before it concluded, rather than unwind or set aside a foreclosure that had already occurred, the Court held that the borrowers need not tender the loan proceeds to obtain the injunction.

Of course, nothing would prevent the lender from conducting the face-to-face interview and then starting the foreclosure process all over again.

Authored by:

Alejandro E. Moreno
(619) 338-6664
amoreno@sheppardmullin.com

Shannon Z. Petersen
(619) 338-6656
spetersen@sheppardmullin.com

Photo of Alejandro Moreno Alejandro Moreno

Alejandro (“Alex”) Moreno is a partner in the Business Trial Practice Group and the Office Managing Partner of the Firm’s San Diego office. He is the firm’s 2021 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Fellow.

Read more about Alejandro MorenoEmail
Photo of Shannon Petersen Shannon Petersen

Dr. Shannon Petersen is a business litigator in the San Diego (Del Mar) office. He leads the firm’s TCPA Defense Team.

Read more about Shannon PetersenEmail
  • Posted in:
    Real Estate & Construction
  • Blog:
    Financial Institutions Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo