Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 14
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113 (2026)

Mortgage servicer duty of good faith

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  Definitions.  As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, the following terms have the following meanings.  
A. "Good faith" means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.   [PL 2019, c. 363, §1 (NEW).]
B. [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (RP).]
B-1. Except as provided in subsection 5, "mortgage servicer" means a person responsible for servicing an obligation, including a person that holds or owns an obligation or originates a mortgage loan if the person also services the obligation.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (NEW).]
C. "Obligation" means a debt or other duty or liability of an obligor secured by a mortgage of the type described in section 6111, subsection 1 and includes a mortgage deed even if the debt secured by the mortgage deed has been discharged in bankruptcy.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
D. "Obligor" means a person that:  
(1) Owes payment or performance of an obligation;  
(2) Has provided property other than the mortgaged property to secure payment of the obligation;  
(3) Has granted a mortgage interest with respect to the mortgaged property; or  
(4) Is otherwise accountable in whole or in part for payment of the obligation.   [PL 2019, c. 363, §1 (NEW).]
E. [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (RP).]
F. "Servicing" means any one or more of the following:  
(1) Receiving a periodic payment from an obligor under the terms of an obligation, including an amount received for an escrow account;  
(2) Making or advancing payments to the owner of an obligation on account of an amount due from the obligor under a mortgage servicing loan document or a servicing contract;  
(3) Making a payment to the obligor under a home equity conversion mortgage or reverse mortgage;  
(4) Evaluating the obligor for loss mitigation or communicating with the obligor with respect to loss mitigation;  
(5) Collecting funds from a homeowner for deposit into an escrow account and making payments out of an escrow account; and  
(6) Taking any other action with respect to an obligation that affects the obligor's payment or performance of the obligation or that relates to the enforcement of the rights of the loan owner arising under the obligation.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
[PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
2.  Duty of good faith.  A mortgage servicer shall act in good faith toward an obligor in the servicing of an obligation secured by a mortgage and in any foreclosure action relating to such an obligation.  
[PL 2019, c. 363, §1 (NEW).]
3.  Effect of violation during foreclosure.  If during a foreclosure action a mortgage servicer controlling or managing the action on its own behalf or on behalf of the owner of the obligation subject to foreclosure is shown to have committed a violation of its duty of good faith under subsection 2, the court may dismiss the action, stay the action on appropriate terms and conditions or impose other appropriate sanctions until the violation is cured.  
[PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
4.  Remedies for violation.  The following are remedies for a violation of the duty of good faith under subsection 2.  
A. A homeowner or obligor injured by a violation of the duty of good faith may bring an action against the mortgage servicer for all actual damages sustained by the homeowner or obligor.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
B. In addition to the damages recoverable under this subsection, the court may award a homeowner or obligor statutory damages not exceeding $15,000 for a pattern or practice of the mortgage servicer's violating the duty of good faith. In determining whether to award statutory damages and the amount of statutory damages, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:  
(1) The frequency and persistence of violations by the mortgage servicer;  
(2) The nature of the violations;  
(3) The extent to which the violations were intentional; and  
(4) The extent to which the actions that constitute violations are prohibited by state or federal laws, rules or regulations, and the extent to which such actions constitute violations by the mortgage servicer of any consent judgments to which it is a party.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
C. If the court determines during a foreclosure action or an independent action for damages that there has been a violation of the duty of good faith:  
(1) The mortgage servicer may not charge the loan owner for, or add to the amount of the obligation, any attorney's fees or costs incurred as a result of the violation or any other attorney's fees or costs incurred before the mortgage servicer cures the violation; and  
(2) The court shall order the mortgage servicer to pay to the obligor the obligor's costs incurred in the action and reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.   [PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
[PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
5.  Exclusion.  The term "mortgage servicer" defined in subsection 1 does not include a supervised financial organization as defined in Title 9‑A, section 1‑301, subsection 38‑A; a financial institution holding company as defined in Title 9‑B, section 1011, subsection 1; a mutual holding company as defined in Title 9‑B, section 1052, subsection 2; a credit union service organization as defined in 12 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 712.1; a subsidiary of a supervised financial organization, financial institution holding company, mutual holding company or credit union service organization; or the Maine State Housing Authority.  
[PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 2019, c. 363, §1 (NEW). PL 2021, c. 203, §1 (AMD).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 2021–2026 · leading case: Charles D. Finch v. U.S. Banik, N.A., 2024 ME 2 (Me. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Charles D. Finch v. U.S. Banik, N.A., 2024 ME 2 (Me. 2024). · cites it 4× “19, 2019) (codified as subsequently amended at 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (2023)). We should not assume the courts will not use their authority to deal with abusive foreclosure practices.”
Ross v. New Residential Mortg. LLC (D. Me. 2024). · cites it 8× “In Count I, Ross argues that Defendants violated Maine’s mortgage servicer duty of good faith, codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6113. Ross argues that Defendants did not act in good faith in offering a modification because the initial offer required him to discharge the second mortgage,…”
Kamin (D. Me. 2026). · cites it 7× “§ 6113,” the provision at issue is “14 M.R.S. § 6113.” See 14 M.R.S. § 6113. In September 2025, SN Servicing timely removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction, contending complete diversity of citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in…”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2024). · cites it 5× “Maine’s Mortgage Servicer Good Faith Statute Finally, Howe moves for summary judgment on her counterclaim against Fay under 14 M.R.S. § 6113, Maine’s statute titled “mortgage servicer duty of good faith.”
Shelton (D. Me. 2026). · cites it 5× “Fourth, he asserts violations of the mortgage servicer’s duty of good faith under 14 M.R.S. § 6113 when RTR, among other things, falsely claimed to be the holder of the Mortgage, recorded insufficient documents with the Registry of Deeds, and opposed Plaintiff’s bankruptcy claim…”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2022). · cites it 4× “, and that Fay violated a Maine law, 14 M.R.S. § 6113, that requires mortgage servicers to act in good faith in servicing a mortgage-secured debt.”
Morneault v. Longoria (D. Me. 2025). · cites it 3× “§§ 1692 -1692p, and other provisions of Maine law regulating mortgages and foreclosure actions, see 14 M.R.S. § 6113: 1 DLJ then reassigned it to 1900 Capital Trust II, by U.”
Us Bank Trust Na as Tr. for Lsf11 Master Participation Trust v. Vincent (D. Me. 2021). · cites it 2× “§ 1692e(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and 14 M.R.S. § 6113. The attorneys move to dismiss the counterclaims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).”
Mckay v. Fay Servicing LLC (D. Me. 2024). · cites it 2× “§§ 1692–1692p (Count I); (2) breach of the Maine mortgage servicer duty of good faith, 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (Count II); (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count III); and (4) fraudulent misrepresentation (Count IV).”
Beer v. Toyota Motor Corp. (D. Me. 2024). · cites it 2× “§§ 1692–1692p (Count I); (2) breach of the Maine mortgage servicer duty of good faith, 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (Count II); (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count III); and (4) fraudulent misrepresentation (Count IV).”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2022). “, and that Fay violated a Maine law, 14 M.R.S. § 6113, that requires mortgage servicers to act in good faith in servicing a mortgage-secured debt.”
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. as Tr. for LSF11 Master v. Vincent (Bankr. D. Me. 2021). “§ 1692e(8) (the “FDCPA Claims”) and 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (the “State Law Claims”), the District Court referred to this Court the question of whether the claims fall within the limited scope of bankruptcy jurisdiction.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(1) — 2 cases
Ross v. New Residential Mortg. LLC (D. Me. 2024). “In Count I, Ross argues that Defendants violated Maine’s mortgage servicer duty of good faith, codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6113. Ross argues that Defendants did not act in good faith in offering a modification because the initial offer required him to discharge the second mortgage,…”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2024). “Maine’s Mortgage Servicer Good Faith Statute Finally, Howe moves for summary judgment on her counterclaim against Fay under 14 M.R.S. § 6113, Maine’s statute titled “mortgage servicer duty of good faith.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(1)(A) — 1 case
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2024). “Maine’s Mortgage Servicer Good Faith Statute Finally, Howe moves for summary judgment on her counterclaim against Fay under 14 M.R.S. § 6113, Maine’s statute titled “mortgage servicer duty of good faith.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(2) — 3 cases
Us Bank Trust Na as Tr. for Lsf11 Master Participation Trust v. Vincent (D. Me. 2021). “§ 1692e(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and 14 M.R.S. § 6113. The attorneys move to dismiss the counterclaims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2024). “Maine’s Mortgage Servicer Good Faith Statute Finally, Howe moves for summary judgment on her counterclaim against Fay under 14 M.R.S. § 6113, Maine’s statute titled “mortgage servicer duty of good faith.”
Carrington Mortg. Servs., LLC v. Brisley (Me. Super. Ct 2023).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(3) — 1 case
Charles D. Finch v. U.S. Banik, N.A., 2024 ME 2 (Me. 2024). “19, 2019) (codified as subsequently amended at 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (2023)). We should not assume the courts will not use their authority to deal with abusive foreclosure practices.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(4) — 1 case
Ross v. New Residential Mortg. LLC (D. Me. 2024). “In Count I, Ross argues that Defendants violated Maine’s mortgage servicer duty of good faith, codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6113. Ross argues that Defendants did not act in good faith in offering a modification because the initial offer required him to discharge the second mortgage,…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(4)(A) — 4 cases
Shelton (D. Me. 2026). “Fourth, he asserts violations of the mortgage servicer’s duty of good faith under 14 M.R.S. § 6113 when RTR, among other things, falsely claimed to be the holder of the Mortgage, recorded insufficient documents with the Registry of Deeds, and opposed Plaintiff’s bankruptcy claim…”
Ross v. New Residential Mortg. LLC (D. Me. 2024). “In Count I, Ross argues that Defendants violated Maine’s mortgage servicer duty of good faith, codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6113. Ross argues that Defendants did not act in good faith in offering a modification because the initial offer required him to discharge the second mortgage,…”
Wilmington Trust Nat'l Ass'n Not in Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Tr. for Mfra Trust 2015-1 v. Howe (D. Me. 2024). “Maine’s Mortgage Servicer Good Faith Statute Finally, Howe moves for summary judgment on her counterclaim against Fay under 14 M.R.S. § 6113, Maine’s statute titled “mortgage servicer duty of good faith.”
Kamin (D. Me. 2026). “§ 6113,” the provision at issue is “14 M.R.S. § 6113.” See 14 M.R.S. § 6113. In September 2025, SN Servicing timely removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction, contending complete diversity of citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(4)(B) — 4 cases
Mckay v. Fay Servicing LLC (D. Me. 2024). “§§ 1692–1692p (Count I); (2) breach of the Maine mortgage servicer duty of good faith, 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (Count II); (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count III); and (4) fraudulent misrepresentation (Count IV).”
Beer v. Toyota Motor Corp. (D. Me. 2024). “§§ 1692–1692p (Count I); (2) breach of the Maine mortgage servicer duty of good faith, 14 M.R.S. § 6113 (Count II); (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count III); and (4) fraudulent misrepresentation (Count IV).”
Kamin (D. Me. 2026). “§ 6113,” the provision at issue is “14 M.R.S. § 6113.” See 14 M.R.S. § 6113. In September 2025, SN Servicing timely removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction, contending complete diversity of citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in…”
Shelton (D. Me. 2026). “Fourth, he asserts violations of the mortgage servicer’s duty of good faith under 14 M.R.S. § 6113 when RTR, among other things, falsely claimed to be the holder of the Mortgage, recorded insufficient documents with the Registry of Deeds, and opposed Plaintiff’s bankruptcy claim…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(4)(C) — 1 case
Kamin (D. Me. 2026). “§ 6113,” the provision at issue is “14 M.R.S. § 6113.” See 14 M.R.S. § 6113. In September 2025, SN Servicing timely removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction, contending complete diversity of citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 6113(F)(4) — 1 case
Ross v. New Residential Mortg. LLC (D. Me. 2024). “In Count I, Ross argues that Defendants violated Maine’s mortgage servicer duty of good faith, codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6113. Ross argues that Defendants did not act in good faith in offering a modification because the initial offer required him to discharge the second mortgage,…”
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.