12 U.S.C. § 4907

Civil liability

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In generalAny servicer, mortgagee, or mortgage insurer that violates a provision of this chapter shall be liable to each mortgagor to whom the violation relates for—(1) in the case of an action by an individual, or a class action in which the liable party is not subject to section 4909 of this title, any actual damages sustained by the mortgagor as a result of the violation, including interest (at a rate determined by the court) on the amount of actual damages, accruing from the date on which the violation commences;(2) in the case of—(A) an action by an individual, such statutory damages as the court may allow, not to exceed $2,000; and(B) in the case of a class action—(i) in which the liable party is subject to section 4909 of this title, such amount as the court may allow, except that the total recovery under this subparagraph in any class action or series of class actions arising out of the same violation by the same liable party shall not exceed the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the net worth of the liable party, as determined by the court; and(ii) in which the liable party is not subject to section 4909 of this title, such amount as the court may allow, not to exceed $1,000 as to each member of the class, except that the total recovery under this subparagraph in any class action or series of class actions arising out of the same violation by the same liable party shall not exceed the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the gross revenues of the liable party, as determined by the court;(3) costs of the action; and(4) reasonable attorney fees, as determined by the court.(b) Timing of actions

No action may be brought by a mortgagor under subsection (a) later than 2 years after the date of the discovery of the violation that is the subject of the action.

With respect to a residential mortgage transaction, the failure of a servicer to comply with the requirements of this chapter due to the failure of a mortgage insurer or a mortgagee to comply with the requirements of this chapter, shall not be construed to be a violation of this chapter by the servicer.

(2) Rule of construction

Nothing in paragraph (1) shall be construed to impose any additional requirement or liability on a mortgage insurer, a mortgagee, or a holder of a residential mortgage.

(Pub. L. 105–216, § 8, July 29, 1998, 112 Stat. 905.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 1 year after July 29, 1998, see section 13 of Pub. L. 105–216, set out as a note under section 4901 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Ginnine Fried v. JP Morgan Chase & Co, 850 F.3d 590 (3rd Cir. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ginnine Fried v. JP Morgan Chase & Co, 850 F.3d 590 (3rd Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “” 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (b). Chase contends that Fried discovered its alleged violation of the Protection Act more than two years before she filed her complaint and that it therefore must be dismissed.”

Nancy R. Murray, Plaintiff-Petitioner v. Gmac Mortg. Corp., Doing Bus. as ditech.com, Defendant-Respondent, 434 F.3d 948 (7th Cir. 2006). “The Truth in Lending Act has an identical cap. 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (a)(2)(B) (substituting “creditor” for “debt collector”).”

Fellows v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 710 F. Supp. 2d 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). “Like ERISA, the HPA provides for a private cause of action for violations of requirements imposed by the HPA, see 12 U.S.C. § 4907 , and might therefore be interpreted to displace certain common law contract claims.”

Augustson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 864 F. Supp. 2d 422 (E.D.N.C. 2012). “In the HPA, Congress provided for the recovery of actual damages and statutory damages, see 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (a), and included an express preemption clause.”

Ciolino v. Seterus, Inc., 202 F. Supp. 3d 841 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “See 12 U.S.C. § 4907 . Thus to the extent Congress’ purpose in enacting the HPA was “to remove from the states’ purview the regulation of requirements concerning PMI cancellation and disclosure,” Fellows, 710 F.”

Steve Kovachevich v. Nat'l Mortg. Ins. Corp., 140 F.4th 548 (4th Cir. 2025). “2; 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (a). 10 USCA4 Appeal: 23-2071 Doc: 35 Filed: 06/16/2025 Pg: 11 of 16 the homebuyer.”

Sanders, Michelle v. Jackson, John L., 209 F.3d 998 (7th Cir. 2000). “§ 4310 (a)(2)(B)(ii); Homeowners Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (a)(2)(B)(i); Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.”

Abruscato v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortg. (N.D. Ill. 2022). “” 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (a). Defendants argue that the Court should dismiss the Complaint for at least two reasons.”

Bryant v. Washington Fed. Bank, Inc (D.N.M. 2020). “” 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (b). Plaintiff has not stated when she discovered the alleged violations.”

Ahmed v. Wells Fargo Bank, Na (E.D. Pa. 2020). “” 12 U.S.C. § 4907 (b). Thus, Wells Fargo contends that Ahmed needed to bring this claim by September of 2014.”

Murray, Nancy R. v. GMAC Mortg. Corp (7th Cir. 2006). “§4010 (a)(2)(B), and 12 U.S.C. §4907 (a)(2)(B). Other laws, however, lack such upper bounds.”

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.