Moore v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-bank’s motion for summary judgment in action under Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), where plaintiff-mortgagee alleged that defendant failed to respond adequately to written request regarding status of his loan. Record showed that plaintiff made RESPA request at time when he had already lost state-court mortgage foreclosure action, and as such, plaintiff could not recover damages under 12 USC section 2605(f) where mortgage had already been foreclosed on. Moreover, RESPA was not intended to provide borrowers with federal discovery tool to litigate state-court foreclosure action. Also, record showed that defendant had served timely response that adequately addressed certain questions posed by plaintiff. Moreover, although defendant gave only incomplete responses to certain questions, plaintiff was unable to show existence of any compensable injuries arising out of said incomplete responses, where: (1) plaintiff’s $900 out-of-pocket expense to pay attorney to review defendant’s responses is not appropriate RESPA injury; (2) simply having to file instant lawsuit did not suffice as actionable harm; and (3) plaintiff’s fear of losing home did not qualify as emotional harm linked to any alleged RESPA violation, where said fear was related to fact that plaintiff could not make timely payments towards his mortgage.