Orcilla v. Big Sur, Inc.

244 Cal.App. 4th 982 (2016)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Virgilio (Husband) is unable to work due to a 2004 medical diagnosis. Teodora (P) contacted Quick Loan Funding, Inc. (Quick Loan), about refinancing the Property. P applied to refinance the Property for $525,000. P did not include Husband on the loan application. P told the agent she could not afford the loan modification because the monthly payments would be more than her monthly income, but she eventually accepted the agent's false representation that she could afford the loan modification. P executed an adjustable rate note to repay the loan at an initial interest rate of 8.99 percent. The interest rate would be variable after two years and would never exceed 14.99 percent. P's initial monthly payments would be in the amount of $4,220.49. P's monthly income was less than $3,000 and Husband did not work. By letter dated August 15, 2008, Countrywide Home Loans (Countrywide) advised P that her loan modification had been approved. The letter advised that P's modified principal loan balance was $570,992.60 and that, effective September 1, 2008, her monthly loan payment would be $4,627.47. The loan modification agreement provided for a five-year fixed interest rate of 8.99 percent followed by a variable interest rate. On April 23, 2010, ReconTrust sent a notice of trustee's sale. On May 24, 2010, D sold the Property to Big Sur (D) at a public auction for $495,500. Ps sued Ds on May 24, 2012. Each cause of action was based in part on the allegation that the original loan and the loan modification were unconscionable. Ds moved to dismiss the action. The motion was granted and Ps appealed. Ps allege the trustee's sale was illegal because the original loan from Quick Loan and the 2008 loan modification were unconscionable.