California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 2924.18 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)(1)If a borrower submits a complete application for a first lien loan modification offered by, or through, the borrower’s mortgage servicer at least five business days before a scheduled foreclosure sale, a mortgage servicer, trustee, mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record a notice of default, notice of sale, or conduct a trustee’s sale while the complete first lien loan modification application is pending, and until the borrower has been provided with a written determination by the mortgage servicer regarding that borrower’s eligibility for the requested loan modification.

(2)If a foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved in writing prior to the recordation of a notice of default, a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record a notice of default under either of the following circumstances:

(A)The borrower is in compliance with the terms of a written trial or permanent loan modification, forbearance, or repayment plan.

(B)A foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved in writing by all parties, including, for example, the first lien investor, junior lienholder, and mortgage insurer, as applicable, and proof of funds or financing has been provided to the servicer.

(3)If a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved in writing after the recordation of a notice of default, a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record a notice of sale or conduct a trustee’s sale under either of the following circumstances:

(A)The borrower is in compliance with the terms of a written trial or permanent loan modification, forbearance, or repayment plan.

(b)This section shall apply to both of the following:

(1)A depository institution chartered under state or federal law, a person licensed pursuant to Division 9 (commencing with Section 22000) or Division 20 (commencing with Section 50000) of the Financial Code, or a person licensed pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 10000) of Division 4 of the Business and Professions Code, that, during its immediately preceding annual reporting period, as established with its primary regulator, foreclosed on 175 or fewer residential real properties, containing no more than four dwelling units, that are located in California.

(2)A person or entity that services seven or fewer loans encumbering residential real property located in California in a calendar year.

(c)Within three months after the close of any calendar year or annual reporting period as established with its primary regulator during which an entity or person described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) exceeds the threshold of 175 specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), that entity shall notify its primary regulator, in a manner acceptable to its primary regulator, and any mortgagor or trustor who is delinquent on a residential mortgage loan serviced by that entity of the date on which that entity will be subject to Sections 2923.55, 2923.6, 2923.7, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.11, and 2924.12, which date shall be the first day of the first month that is six months after the close of the calendar year or annual reporting period during which that entity exceeded the threshold.

(d)For purposes of this section, an application shall be deemed “complete” when a borrower has supplied the mortgage servicer with all documents required by the mortgage servicer within the reasonable timeframes specified by the mortgage servicer.

(e)If a borrower has been approved in writing for a first lien loan modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, and the servicing of the borrower’s loan is transferred or sold to another mortgage servicer, the subsequent mortgage servicer shall continue to honor any previously approved first lien loan modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, in accordance with the provisions of the act that added this section.

(f)This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust described in Section 2924.15.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases, 2013–2020 · leading case: Rockridge Trust v. Wells Fargo, N.A., 985 F. Supp. 2d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rockridge Trust v. Wells Fargo, N.A., 985 F. Supp. 2d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2013). · cites it 2× “To that end, California Civil Code § 2924.18 27 provides, in relevant part, as follows: (a)(1) If a borrower submits a complete application for a first lien loan modification offered by, or through, the borrower’s moi'tgage servicer, a mortgage servicer, trustee, mortgagee,…”

George Gehron v. Christiana Trust, 696 F. App'x 268 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “The district court properly granted summary judgment on the Gehrons’ claim that defendants violated California’s Homeowner Bill of Rights (“HBOR”) because the Gehrons failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants failed to comply with Cal. Civ. Code…”

Campbell v. Bank of Am. CA2/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “CONTENTIONS The Campbells contend: the trial court abused its discretion in sustaining the demurrer to each cause of action without leave to amend; the judgment should be reversed to allow them to maintain the claims falling within the provisions of the recently enacted…”

In re: Richard John Mullin & Gayle Anne Harsma (9th Cir. BAP 2014). · cites it 2× “The Ninth Circuit made it clear that involvements of MERS do not 20 21 3 The HBOR, and specifically Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.18 (a)(2), prohibits the practice of “dual tracking” by mortgage servicers 22 if the borrower is working on securing a loan modification.”

(PS) Benoit v. PNC Bank (E.D. Cal. 2020). “16 Plaintiff is also advised that California Civil Code § 2924.18 provides, in relevant part: 17 (a)(1) If a borrower submits a complete application for a first lien loan modification offered by, or through, the borrower’s mortgage 18 servicer, a mortgage servicer, trustee,…”

Alvarez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (E.D. Cal. 2020). “) 24 /// 25 3 California Civil Code § 2924.18 is nearly identical to § 2923.”

Chu v. Fay Servicing, LLC (N.D. Cal. 2020). “18 (“dual-tracking” prohibition on servicer proceeding 27 with trustee’s sale ends when borrower has been provided with a written determination of loan 28 modification application and applies only where property is “owner-occupied,” i.”

Santana v. BSI Fin. Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2020). “See Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.18 (c). In this case, Plaintiffs rely on the language in section 2923.”

Valencia v. Wells Fargo Bank CA2/2 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “) As noted, Civil Code section 2924.18 does not apply to the Bank, as a large-volume servicer.”

Rodriguez v. Bank of Am. CA4/1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “” (Civ. Code, § 2924.18, subd. (a)(1).) “However, Civil Code section 2923.”

— Cal. Civil Code § 2924.18(a)(2) — 2 cases

In re: Richard John Mullin & Gayle Anne Harsma (9th Cir. BAP 2014). “The Ninth Circuit made it clear that involvements of MERS do not 20 21 3 The HBOR, and specifically Cal. Civ. Code § 2924.18 (a)(2), prohibits the practice of “dual tracking” by mortgage servicers 22 if the borrower is working on securing a loan modification.”

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.