(a)A declaration recorded pursuant to Section 2923.5 or pursuant to Section 2923.55, a notice of default, notice of sale, assignment of a deed of trust, or substitution of trustee recorded by or on behalf of a mortgage servicer in connection with a foreclosure subject to the requirements of Section 2924, or a declaration or affidavit filed in any court relative to a foreclosure proceeding shall be accurate and complete and supported by competent and reliable evidence.
(b)Before recording or filing any of the documents described in subdivision (a), a mortgage servicer shall ensure that it has reviewed competent and reliable evidence to substantiate the borrower’s default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower’s loan status and loan information.
(c)Any mortgage servicer that engages in multiple and repeated uncorrected violations of subdivision (b) in recording documents or filing documents in any court relative to a foreclosure proceeding shall be liable for a civil penalty of up to seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per mortgage or deed of trust in an action brought by a government entity identified in Section 17204 of the Business and Professions Code, or in an administrative proceeding brought by the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation or the Department of Real Estate against a respective licensee, in addition to any other remedies available to these entities.
Notes of Decisions
Ghalehtak v. Fay Servicing, LLC, 304 F. Supp. 3d 877 (N.D. Cal. 2018).
· cites it 5× “State-Law Claims Plaintiffs bring seven state-law causes of action under Cal. Civ. Code sections 2924.17, 2923.5, 3 2924(a)(6), *886 2934a(a)(1)(A)(C), under the common law for cancellation of a written instrument, negligent misrepresentation, and under California's Unfair…”
Green v. Cent. Mortg. Co., 148 F. Supp. 3d 852 (N.D. Cal. 2015).
· cites it 3× “7 ; (4) violation of HBOR, Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.17 ; (5) violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”), 12 U.”
Rockridge Trust v. Wells Fargo, N.A., 985 F. Supp. 2d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2013).
“Cal. Civ.Code § 2924.17. In addition, the notice requirements for filing a NOD are set forth in California Civil Code § 2923.”
Rees v. PNC Bank, N.A., 308 F.R.D. 266 (N.D. Cal. 2015).
“The Complaint alleged three causes of action, for violation of: (1) California Civil Code § 2923.6; (2) California Civil Code § 2924.”
Tuan Anh Le v. Bank of New York Mellon, 152 F. Supp. 3d 1200 (N.D. Cal. 2015).
· cites it 5× “Homeowner Bill of Rights Claims Plaintiff alleges four HBOR causes of action for violations of California Civil Code §§ 2924.17, 2923.55, 2923.”
Johnson v. PNC Mortg., 80 F. Supp. 3d 980 (N.D. Cal. 2015).
“) The Johnsons also allege that the assignment was “robosigned without reliance on competent or reliable evidence to substantiate the right to foreclose,” in violation of California Civil Code § 2924.17(b). (Id. at 17, ¶ 61.”
Tjaden v. HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n, 681 F. App'x 641 (9th Cir. 2017).
“Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.17 provides in relevant part that the mortgage servicer must submit a declaration of the kind described in § 2923.”
Richard Dahnken v. Wells Fargo Bank, 705 F. App'x 508 (9th Cir. 2017).
“Dahnken’s claims against defendants are, therefore, inapplicable, since the notice was issued by the trustee, not by defendants.”
Gray v. Ocwen Loan Servicing CA4/1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 4× “Based on these allegations, Gray asserted the following nine causes of action against Defendants: (1) invalidity of contracts; (2) cancellation of instruments; (3) slander of title;2 (4) violation of California Civil Code section 2924.17; (5) intentional misrepresentation; (6)…”
Clark v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (N.D. Cal. 2023).
· cites it 4× “17 , for failure to 7 provide “the requested payment history;” (4) recording a notice of default without substantiating 8 it, in violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.17 ; (5) a violation of California’s Unfair Competition 9 Law, Cal.”
— Cal. Civil Code § 2924.17(a) — 2 cases
— Cal. Civil Code § 2924.17(b) — 3 cases
Johnson v. PNC Mortg., 80 F. Supp. 3d 980 (N.D. Cal. 2015).
“) The Johnsons also allege that the assignment was “robosigned without reliance on competent or reliable evidence to substantiate the right to foreclose,” in violation of California Civil Code § 2924.17(b). (Id. at 17, ¶ 61.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.