Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
·0o
Page 1 of 36
n
SCOTT A. FLAXMAN (SBN 241285)
SCOTT FLAXMAN LAW
2
200 Valley Drive, #13 Brisbane CA 94005 Telephone: (415) 571-0582 Facsimile: (650) 952-0409
[email protected]
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
S
E-filing
7
8
[N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
9
COURT
FOR THE NOF I
12
Cae FOR VIOLATION tB COMPLAINT
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
OF
2201
13
14
FEDERAL REAL ESTATE SETTTLEMENT PROCEDURES ACT AND FEDERAL RACKEETTER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT
17 18
4AROUANE OUZIZ,
Piaintift:
vs.
20 21 22 23 24 25
IAPTIAL ONE SERVICES, GREGORY
'EETER,
INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AGENT
DR CAPITOL MORTGAGE CORPORATJO1
MANDA gAWLS, iNDIVIDUALLY AND
5 AGENT FOR CAPITOL MORTGAGE
IORPORATION, KEVEN NAFAT,
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
1
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 2 of 36
1
[NUVI DUALLY AND AS AGENT FOR
2 3
:APIT0L MORTGAGE CORPORATION,
)AVUD CALDERA, INDYIDUALLY AND
A
4
\GENT FOR OREENPOINT MORTGAGE
ftINDJNG,
)oe I
5
6
through Doe 10,
7
9
Defendant5
9
13
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1.
This complaint is filed and these proceedings are instituted under the Real Estat
Settlement
actual
12
Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C.
§
2601 et
gçj. ("RESPA"), seeking to recove
13 14
damages, treble damages, and court costs, by reason of Defendants' violationr
and Regulation X, 24 C.F.R.
§
of RESPA
the
3500.1 et
çj. ("Regulation Kt) and undej
§ 1961
15
1
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C.
g.
6
(cRIcO), seeking to recover attorney fees, court costs and treble damages, by reasoi
of Defendants'
17
violation of RICO.
18
19
2.
This complaint is also brought to raise additional claims against Defendants fo
breach
actual
20
21 22
of fiduciary duty and California Statutory, 'Deceit' This complaint seek
damages and punitive damages for those claims as well.
24
JURISDICTION AN) VENUE
25
3 Personaljurisdiction over Defendants is proper before this Court.
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
2
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 3 of 36
2
4.
Counts 1 and II of this action arise under and &e brought pursuant to the Federal Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974, as amended, 12 U.S.C. §2601 et
(hereinafter 'RESPA"); thus, federal subject matter jurisdiction is properly founded
upon 28 U.S.C.
5
§
1331.
4.
B
Count ill of this action arises under and is brought pursuant to the Federal Racketeex
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (hereinafter "RICO"); thus federal subject
matter jurisdiction is properly founded upon 28 U.S.C.
10
11
§ 1331.
5.
This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the pendent state claims, set out in
Counts Ill and IV pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
12 13
1
4
6.
Venue over the Defendants is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C
§139l(b)(2) and 12 U.SC
§
15
2614.
17 18 7
STATUTORY FRAMEWORK OF RESPA
The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C.
enacted on December
§
2601
etcj.
("RESPA")
wa
20 21
22
8-
22, 1974.
Congress noted that "significant reforms in the real estate settlement process arc
needed
23
24
to insure that consumers throughout the nation are protected froni
unnecessarily high settlement charges caused by certain abusive practices that have
developed in some areas
23
of the country."
12
U.S.C.
§
2601(a).
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
3
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 4 of 36
1
2
9.
One purpose of RESPA is "to effect certain changes in the settlement process for
residential real estate that will result ... in the elimination of kickbacks or refeffal
fees.'t 12 U.S.C.
S
§
2601(b).
6
10.
RESPA applies to "federally related mortgage loans," which is defined at 12
2602(1).
u.s.c.
RESPA initially applied only to certain first liens on residential rca
On October 28, 1992, the law was amended to cover subordinate liens an
I
8
property.
loans used to prepay or pay off an existing loan secured by the same property.
u.s.c.
11
12
Ii.
§
2602(J); 24 C.F.R.
§ 3500.2+
RESPA prohibits kickbacks and rcfcrral fees: "No person shall give and no perso
shall
13
14
accept any fee, kickback, or thing of value pursuant to any ageement o
oral or otherwise, that busincss incident to or a part of a real estat
understanding,
settlement
15 15
17
18
service involving a federally related mortgage loan shall be referred to an U.S.C.
§
persot" 12
2607(a).
12.
RESPA prohibits unearned fees: "No person shall give and no person shall accep
any
real
19
portion, split, or percentage of any charge made or received for the rendering of estate settlement service in connection with a transaction involving a federall
20
21
related
mortgage loan other than for services actually performed."
12 1LS.C.
22
2607(b).
23
24 25
CONFLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
4
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 5 of 36
13
2
RESPA requires that the lender provide to the borrower a settlement statement whiek
shall "conspicuously and clearly itemize all charges imposed upon the borrower ... ir
connection with the settlement." 12
USC
§
2603(a).
14. RESPA requires that the lender and mortgage broker provide to the
6
7
faith
borrower 'a good
estimate
of the
amount or range
of charges for specific settlement services the
12
borrower is likely to incur in connection with the settlement"
24 C.F.R.
§
U.S.C.
§
2604(c)
3500.7.
9
10
15. The term "settlcmcnt services" includes "any service provided in connection with
a
real estate settlement including, but not limited to, ...the origination of a federally
12 13
related mortgage loan (including, but not limited to, the taking
loan processing, and the underwriting and funding
24
of loan applications,
12
of loans)."
U-SC
§
2602(3);
14
C.F.R.
§
3500.2.
15
15
1
1
&
The practice of lenders paying brokers yield spread premium payments to obtain
business has been successfully challenged under RICO- RESPA requires the disclosure
19
of such payments and prohibits the payment of illegal referral fees. A borrower can
successfully plead a RICO claim when the payment
cost
19 20 21 22
23
24
25
of the premium is not disclosed, th
of the premium is passed on to the borrower in the form of a higher interest rate an
the broker represented that it would provide the lowest rate available.
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
--
S
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 6 of 36
2
3
PARTIES
4
5
17
a.
Plaintiff:
6
MAROUANE OUZIZ ("Mt Ouziz"), an individual, is a 28 year old naturalizec
United States citizen. machine corporatiorn
7
Mr. Ouziz is the general manager for an automated tellei
8
9
10
18.
Defendants:
11
12 13
a.
GREENPOINT MORTGAGE ("Defendant GreenPo bit") was, at all times relevani
to this matter and upon information and belie1 a corporation, doing business as
Greenroint Funding, GreenPoint Mortgage Funding and GreenPoint, through
branch office located at 100 Wood Hollow Drive, Novato, California 94945.
a
14
15
16
b.
CAPITAL ONE SERVICES: ("Defendant Capital One") was, at all times relevant
to this matter and upon information and belief, a corporation, with a wholly-owned
17
18
subsidiary doing business as GreenPo jut Mortgage and GreenPoint Funding and
GreenPoint. Capital One Services corporate headquarters is located at: 1680 Capital
19 20
21
22
One Drivc, McLean, VA 22102.
c.
23
CAPITOL MORTGAGE CORPORATION. ("Defendant Capitol Mortgage").
was, at all times relevant to this matter and upon information and belief, a
corporation, with its main office at; 1540 Eureka Road, Suite #100, Roseville,
California 95661.
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
6
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 7 of 36
1
2
d. GEGORY TEETER ("Defendant Teeter"), an individual, was, at all times relevani
to this matter, the designated officer and broker of Defendant Capitol Mortgage.
4
e.
KEVIN NAFAI ("Defendant Nafai"), an individual, upon information
was, at all times relevant to this mattci-, either an employee
and belief
6
of or an independeni
contractor working for Defendant Capitol Mortgage.
S
1.
ANEANDA RAWTS ("Defendant Rawls"), an individual, was, upon informatior
and
10
belief, at all times relevant to this matter, either an employee of or an
11
12
independent
contractor working for Defendant Capitol Mortgage.
g.
ANDREW J. GALE ("Defendant Gale"), an individual, was, upon all time5
relevant
14
to this matter, the designated officer of Defendant GreenPoint.
Ii. 17
DOE 1 T]E]IROUGH DOE 10: Plaintiff does not know the true names of Defendants
named as Doe I through Doe 10.
19
19
FACTS
9 Mr. Ouziz is the owner
20
I
of real property Located at 95 Cleopatra Drive, Pleasant Hill,
California 945823 (the "Property") where he also resides
22
23
24
20
29
Upon information and belief, at alt times material to this action, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Gale, Defendant Capital One, Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Dcfcndan
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
7
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 8 of 36
GreenPo jut and Doe
2
I
through Doe
10
made residential loans, including "federally
related loans" as that phrase is defined by RESPA.
21. Upon information and belief, at all times material to this action, Defendant Teeter
and Defendant Capitol Mortgage conducted business as a "mortgage broker" as thai
6
phrase is defined by Regulation X at 24 C.F.R.
§ 3500.2.
As such, Defendant
Capitoi Mortgage and Defendant Teeter, provided real estate "settlement services" as that phrase is defined by RESPA at 12 U.S.C.
9
§
2602(3) and at 24 C.FJ&.
§
3500.2.
10 11
J.
22. On or about January, 2006 Mr. Ouziz discussed the possibility of refinancing the
Property
with Defendant Nafai.
2
15
23. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant hercin, Dcfcndant Nafai was acting
as an agent and/or employee of Defendant Capitol Mortgage and Defendant Teeter.
14 15
16 24.
Mr Ouziz?s only information and communication, prior to the date of Loan closing,
17 18 19
regarding the refinancing of the Property came from information supplied by Defendant
Nafai
either in person or by telephone
20 21 22 23
24
25.
Defendant Nafai agreed to serve as Mi- Ouziz's agent and to provide him with
mortgage brokerage services in connection with Mr. OUZiZ7S desire to refinance the
existing Loans on the Property. In fact, Defendant Nafai represented to Mr. Ouziz
that Defendant Nafai and Defendant Nafai's company? Defendant Capitol Mortgage
would assist Mr. Ouziz in obtaining the best possible loan with the best possible
terms
25
and lowest possible interest rate.
CONFLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
8
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 9 of 36
1
26. Mr. Ouziz was led to believe that the total fee ("Mortgage Broker Fee") Defendant
2
Nafai, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant Capitol Mortgage would
receive for the mortgage brokerage services in connection with the refinance of th
Property would be "one point" or 1% of the total value of the loans: $6,120.00 (l°/
of $612,000). Mr. Ouziz's understanding was that the Mortgage Broker Fee was
6
t
fee earned by Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter? Defendant Rawis and Defendani
Capitol Mortgage for their provision of mortgage services for Mr. Ouziz, i.e. the fee
8
was for these Dcfcndants working to get Mr. Ouziz the best possible Joan with the
best possible terms
10
27.
Mr. Ouziz was led to believe that there was to be a one-year prepayment penalty or
his new loan.
12
13
14
28-
Pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
§
2604 and 2607, Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendani
Teeter, Defendant Rawis and Defendant Nafai were obligated to disclose fhlly all
16
17
costs, expenses, and fees from others, and not to accept any kickbacks from others,
associated with the "federally related mortgage
loan" and Defendant Capitol
19
Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant Nafai's provision of mortgage brokerage services.
19
20
21
22 23
24
29. Pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
§
2603(a), Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter
Defendant Rawls and Defendant Nafal were obligated to provide a settlemen statement that "conspicuously and clearly itemizes all charges imposed upon" Mr
Ouziz.
25
COMPLAINT FOR FECEPAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
9
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 10 of 36
30. Defendant Rawis provided to Defendant Teeter, Defendant Capitol Mortgage,
2
Defendant &3reenPoint and Defendant Capital One, loan application information an paperwork necessary to secure a lederally related mortgage loan.!
4
5
31. Upon information and belief; the existing first loan on the Property was secured by a
0
Peed of Trust with (JMAC as the beneficiary. the existing second loan on the
Property was secured by a Deed of Trust with Wells Fargo as the beneficiary.
9
32. Upon
10
infoniation and belief the loans supplied for the refinance were brokered by
Defendant Capitol Mortgage and Defendant Teeter and funded by Defendant Capital
11
One and Defendant GreenPoint Funds from the refinance were paid out to GMAC
12
in satisfaction
4
of the First Trust Deed secured by the Property in the amount of
Funds were paid out to Wells Fargo in satisfaction of the Second Trust
1
S476,584M0
15
Deed secured by the Property in the amount
of $89,132MQ
16
17
33. On
or about June 20, 2006 Defendant Teeter! Defendant Rawis, Defendant Capitol
1
18 19
Mortgage: Defendant Capital One, Defendant GreenPoint and Doe
through Doe 10
conducted a loan closing to consummate the residential loans to Mr Ouziz from
20 21
22
23 24
Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One! such loans being "federally
related mortgage Loans" as defined by RESPA at 12
USC
§
2602(1) and at 24
C.F.R.
§
350tL2
34 Upon
information and belief, the loan closing was conducted on June 20th, 2006 at
23
536 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
10
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 11 of 36
35. The proceeds of the two, new loans were to refinance the two, existing deeds of trust
2
secured by the Property and for personal, family or household purposes.
3
36. On June 20, 2006, Mr. Ouziz received a "Borrower Estimated Closing Statement
("Closing Statement") A true and correct copy of the Closing Estimate is attached hereto
as Exhibit A and by this reference is incorporated herein [not reprinted herein] and
'7
states, in
relevant part.
'Lender pays YSP S 12920.00 POC to Capitol Mortgage...
Tender pays YS? $510.00 POC to Capitol Mortgage. ..
10 11
12 13
14
.' (Closing
Statement at 1).
37. On or about June 20, 2006, Defendant GreenPoint issued two, Settlement Charges
Statements ("Settlement Statement"). Settlement Statement One is attached hereto as Exhibit B and by this reference is incorporated herein [not reprtnted herein] which
states in relevant part,
16
17 18
'Yield Spread Premium.. .Lender PD.
.
.8 12,920.00'
38.
20
21
Settlement Statement Two is attached hereto as Exhibit C and by this reference is
incorporated herein [not reprinted herein] which states in rclcvant pail,
22 23
24
'Yield Spread Premium. . .Lender PD.. .8510.00'
39. Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One in fact paid these yield spread
2
payment fees as kickbacks in connection with Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
--
11
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 12 of 36
1
Defendant
Rawls and Defendant Capitol Mortgage's referral of Mr Ouziz to
2 3
4
Defendant OreenPoint and Defendant Capital One, for the purpose of making a
"federally related mortgage loan" to Mr- Ouziz.
-
40-
Defendant CireenPoint and Defendant Capital One's payment of this steering fee
increased
6
Mr. Oi&ziz's settlement costs. Defendant GreenFoint and Defendant Capital
One arranged with Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Rawls, Defendant Nafai
and Defendant Teeter to charge Mr. Ouziz a higher interest rate and to givc him
inferior loan terms, such as a three year prepayment penalty, so that Defendant
0
GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One could make more money off of Mr. Ouziz.
Defendants
Capitol
11 12 13 14
15 41.
Capital One and GreenPoint kicked back some of this profit to Defendant
Mortgage, Teeter, Nafai and Rawis in the form of the yield spread premium
payments.
This fee for steering Mr. Ouziz into the more costly and oppressive loans was paid
by Mr. Ouziz through a higher interest rate and with loan terms inferior to thosé
16
17 16
indirectly
which Mr.
Ouziz could have otherwise received.
42.
Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One paid this kickback pursuant to ar
20 21 22 23 24
23
agreement or understanding that business incident to or a part of a real estate
"eijlement
service" involving a "federally related mortgage loan' would be referred b)
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Nafai, Defendant Rawls and Defendant Teetei
to Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One.
COE1FLA1NT FOR FEDEPAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
12
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 13 of 36
1
43.
At all times relevant herein, Mr. Ouziz, had no understanding and received n
explanation
2
of the fact that Defendant GreenPoint and
Defendant
Capital One paid (hi
"yield spread premium" fee to Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafai, and Defendant Rawis as a kickback.
5
6
44.
Mr. Ouziz was led to believe that his loan would have at most a onc-ycar prepaymen
penalty. On June 20, 2006, the date of the Loan closing, GreenPoint issued for the firs
6
time a,
"Prepayment Fee Allonge Statcment" ("Allonge"), attached hereto as Exhibit
[not reprinted herein] which states in relevant part,
10
'This.
.
.Allonge is made this twentieth day of June 2006, and
is
incorporated into an
12
intended
to form a part of thc note dated the same date.. .Borrower's Right to Prepa
13
14
15
is
amended by adding the following paragraph as the last paragraph of such section:
If I
make a Prepayment within three years of the date of the Note,
.
J
will pa
16
17
8
Prepayment fee.
." (Allonge at 1).
45.
Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One paid this fee or kickback pursuant t
an
19
agreement or understanding that business incident to or a part
of a
real estat
20
21 22
"settlement
service" involving a "federally related mortgage loan" would be referred b
Defendant
ti
Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafiui and Defendant Rawl
Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One.
23
24
46.
At all times relevant herein, Mr. Oaziz, had no understanding and received nd
explanation
25
of the fact that Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One paid this
COMPLAINT POR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
13
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 14 of 36
1
'yield
spread
premium" fee to Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter:
2
Defendant Nafai and Defendant Rawls as a kickback for Defendants Capitol Mortgage,
Teeter and Rawis steering Mr- Ouziz to Defendants GreenPoint and Capital One for
a
higher-interest rate loan with a three year rather than a one-year prepayment penalty
5
47.
At all times relevant herein, Mr. Ouziz had no understanding and received
nc
explanation
of
the fact that this "yield spread premium" fee was paid indirectly by
Mr
Ouziz through
S
a
higher interest ratc and inferior loan terms.
48.
11
Neither Defendants Capitol Mortgage, Teeter, Nafai, nor Bawls disclosed to Mr
Ouziz that Defendant GreenPoint't and Defendant Capital One's payment
of this "yietc
:2
13
14
spread premium" fee to Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafai
and Defendant Rawls constituted a kickback or referral fee at or prior to the time thai
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafal end Defendant Bawls
made the referral to Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One in connection with
15
Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One making
17
a
"federally related mortgage
Joan" to Mr. Ouziz.
18
19 20
21
49 Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafal and Defendant
Rawls never told Mr. Ouziz that there would be
to the loan closing date on June 20th, 2006.
a
three year prepayment penalty prior
22 23 24 25
50.Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafai and Defendant Rawls
never disclosed to Mr. Ouziz that the prepayment penalty had been expanded to three
years in exchange for the yield spread premium kickhaclc payments from Defendant
CODCPLAINT FOR FrOERAL RESE'A VIOLATIONS
-
14
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 15 of 36
1
GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One to Defendant Capitol Mortgage7 Defendant Teeter.
Defendant Nafai and Defendant Rawis.
2
3
4
COUNTI
RESFA VIOLATIONS
(4 GAINST
B
DEFENDANT GREENPOINTAN,D DEFENDANT CAPITAL ONE)
51.
All paragraphs of this complaint are incorporated herein as
if fully restate±
10
5
12
Based on the foregoing facts7 Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital On·
violated KESPA with respect to Mr. Ouziz by:
13
14 15
53.
giving
or paying fees7 kickbacks or other things of value to Defendant Capito
Mortgage7 Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafai and Defendant Rawis pursuant to a
agreement or understanding that business incident to or a part of a real estate settlemen
1
service involving federally related mortgage loans would be referred by Defendant Capito Mortgage. Defendant Teeter, Defendant Nafai and Defendant Rawis to Defendan
18
Greenpoint and Defendant Capital One in violation of 12 U.S.C.
20
§
§
2607(a) and 24 CF.R
3500.14(b); and
21 22
54. giving or accepting a portion, split, or percentage
of charges made or received for th
23
24
rendering of a real estate settlement service in connection with a transaction involvin
a federally related mortgage loan other than for services actually performed7 i
23
violation of 12 US.C.
§
2607(b) and 24 C.F.R
§
3500.14(c); and
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
15
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 16 of 36
1
2
55 failing to
"clearly and conspicuously" itcmizc the charges on the Settlement Statement
in connection with a transaction involving a federally related mortgage loan in
violation of 12 U.S.C.
5
§
2603(a).
56.
Pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
§
2607(d), Mr. Ouziz is entitled to recover, and hereby seeks to
an amount
collect, from Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant capital One
8
equal to
three
times the amount
of any and all charges for "settlement services" paid directly or
as actual
indirectly by Mr. Ouziz as well
1
damages, court costs, and any and all other
C
amounts or damages allowed by
RESPA
11
12
COUNT H
RESPA VIOLATIONS
.
13
14
(AGAINST DEFENDANT CAPITOL MOR TGA GE, DEFENDANT TEETER,
15
DEFENDANT NA FA I AND DEFENDANT RA WLS)
16
1! 57.
All paragraphs
of this complaint are incorporated herein as if fully restated.
is
58.
Based on the foregoing facts, Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter,
20 21
22
Defendant Nafai, and Defendant Rawis violated RESPA with respect to Mr Ouziz by:
59. accepting fees, kickbacks or other things
1
of value from Defendant GreenPoint and
23
24
Defendant Capital One pursuant to an agreement or understanding that businesE incident to or a part of a real estate settlement service involving federally related
25
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
16
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 17 of 36
1
mortgage
loans would be referred to Defendant GreenPoirit and Defendant Capital
2
One in violation
of
12
U.S.C.
§
2607(1) and 24 C.F.R.
§
350014(b); and
3
60.
giving or accepting a portion, split, or percentage of charges made or received for the rendering of a real estate settlement service in connection with a transaction involving
a federally related mortgage loan other than for services actually performed, ir
violation of 12 U.S.C.
B
§
2607(b) and 24 C.F.R.
§
350014(c).
61.
failing to "clearly and conspicuously" itemize the charges on the Settlement Statemen
in
10
11
12
13
connection with a transaction involving a federally related mortgage loan
i
violation
of 12 U.S.C. § 2603(a).
62.
Pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
collect
§
2607(d), Mr. Ouziz is entitled to recover, and hereby seeks t
14
from Dcfcndant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendani Nafai, an
13 15
17 15
19
Defendant
Rawis an amount equal to three times the amount of any and all charges fo
services" paid directly or indircctly by Mr. Ouziz, as well as actua
tsettlement
damages,
court costs, and any and all other amounts or damages allowed by RESPA.
COUNT III
CIVIL RICO
(AGAINST DEFENDANT GREENFOINT, DEFENDANT CAPITAL ONE,
20 20
22
DEFENDANT TEETER, DEFENDANT NAFAIAND DEFENDANT RA WLS)
63.Defendants Capitol Mortgage, GreenPoint Funding, Capital One, Teeter,
Nafai
23
24 23
and Rawis are individuals or entities capable of holding an interest in property and as sue
are persons as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 1961(3).
COMPLAINT FQR FEDERaL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
17
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 18 of 36
1
64.Defendants Capitol Mortgage GreenPoint Funding and Capital One are enterprises
2
within the meaning of 18
4
USC §l961(4)
5
6
65Defendant Capital One, Defendant (ireenPoint engage in or conduct activities which
affect interstate commerce, including but not limited to funding loans to borrowers in different
states
S
66. Defendant Capitol Mortgage engages in or conducts activities which affect interstate
commerce, including but not limited to arranging for loans with lenders in different states.
11
67 Defendant Capital One via Defendant GreenPoint served as an umbrella for the
13
activities of the various defendants who sought to obtain profits from Mr. Ouziz and others
14
1
16
17 15
through fraud and other illegal conduct.
68. Defendant Capital One and Defendant GreenPoint Funding participated in the affairs
of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt in
violation of
18
19
U.SC. §1962(c), including, but not limited to:
20 21 22
23 24
a.
fraudulently misrepresenting the true cost of credit in connection with each loan
made to Mr Ouziz and others;
b.
25
making fraudulent advertising claims concerning the nature and terms of the loan
transactions;
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
18
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 19 of 36
1
2
c.
fraudulently misrepresenting to Mr. Ouziz and others the terms of various loan
transactions for the purpose of concealing the disadvantageous nature of the
4
transactions;
5
6
69. The Defendants have acquired funds through the aforesaid racketeering activity
7
which they have invested in the enterprise in violation of 18
8
US.C §1962(a).
9
70. The defendants have conspired to participate in the affairs
of the enterprise through a
i
12
pattern of racketeering activity and collection of unlawful debt in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§1952(d).
13
14
71. Thc dcfcndants regularly use the United States mails in furtherance
of said pattern of
15
racketeering activity and collection of unlawful debt and to otherwise defraud Mr. Ouziz and
others by: (including, but not limited to), obtaining credit information, contracts and payments by
mail, mailing collection letters, mailing checks to distribute proceeds of the transactions, and
mailing
16
17 18
various credit applications and other documents.
is
20
21
22
72.
The Defendants regularly use the interstate telephone system in furtherance of said
pattern of racketeering activity and collection of unlawfrd debt and to otherwise defraud the
Mr. Ouziz and others (including, hut not limited to), making calls soliciting business and
25
24 25
refinancing and making calls to obtain credit information and to arrange appointments to close
loans.
OOEYIFLAINT
FOR FEDERAL RESFA VIOLATIONS
-
19
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 20 of 36
1
2
73. Defendantst use
of the mail
and telephone as set forth above constitutes indictable
as
all fraud as defined by 18 U.S.C. §134 1 and indictable wire fraud
4
defined by
18
U.S.C
§1343.
3
C
-
74.
The actions of the various defendants constitute a 'pattern of racketeering activity"
as defined by 18 U.S.C. §1961(5).
9
10
Mr. Ouziz and others were damaged by said violations of law.
11
COUNTIV
BREACH OF FIb UCIARYDUTY
14
(DEFENDANT CAPITOL MORTGAGE, DEFENDANT NA FA I, DEFENDANT TEETER
AND DEFENDANTRAWLS)
16
76. All paragraphs
17
18 29
77.
of this complaint are incorporated herein as if fully restated.
20
Upon infonnation and belief, Defendant Capitol Mortgage and Defendant Teeter,
21 22
collectively
were the employer of or contracted with Defendant Nafai and had as their agent
Defendant
Mr.
Nafai who solicited and intentionally induced the trust, confidence and reliance of
23
24
25
Ouziz as home loan counsclor and guide for Mr. Ouziz.
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
20
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 21 of 36
1
78.
Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter and Defendant Capitol Mortgage's role as
for Mr. Ouziz created fiduciary duties owed by L)efendant Nafai,
2
mortgage broker
Defendant Teeter and Defendant Capitol Mortgage to Mr. Ouziz. These fiduciary
duties were breached by the conduct set forth above, that was done for the sake
S
of
self-dealing and unjustified profits taken by Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter and
S
Defendant Capitol Mortgage through the receipt of the "yield spread premium" fees
S
9
79.
11 12
Mr. Ouziz is entitled to remedies that include imposition of a constructive trust
upon the proceeds of the transaction as were paid to Defendant Capitol Mortgage,
Defendant Teeter and/or Defendant Nafai, an order requiring disgorgernent of all proceeds paid to Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter and/or Defendant Nafai, punitivc damages and to other legal and equitable remedies to be imposed
13
14
15
1
jointly and severally upon Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter and
Defendant Nafal.
17 12
19
20
21
22
23
24
COUNT V
DECEIT AS DEFINED IN CALIFORMA CIVIL CODE §17D9-171O
(AGAINST DEFeNDANT CAPITOL MORTGAGE, DEENDANT TEETER,
25
DEFENDANT RA WLS AND DEFENDANT NA FA .1)
-
CONFLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESFA VIOLATIONS
21
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 22 of 36
2
80.
All paragraphs
of this complaint are incorporated herein as if fully restated.
4
3
81.
6
Upon information and belief; Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Dcfcndant Teeter,
Defendant Rawis and Defendant Nafai made misrepresentations to Mr. Ouziz, as set forth above,
8
including but not limited to statements that Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant leeter,
9
Defendant Rawis and Defendant Nafai would act in Mr. Ouziz's best interest to obtain a loan
which would be to Mr. Ouziz's benefit and to obtain a loan with the best possible terms for Mr. Ouziz. In fact, Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defcndant Rawls and Defcndant
12 13
Nafaj did not obtain a loan which was to Mr. Ouziz's benefit and in fact induced Mr. Ou.ziz to accept a loan with a higher interest rate, and a longer prepayment penalty period than he could
have otherwise obtained so that Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant
14 15
Rawls and Defendant Nafai could receive a "yield spread premium" kickback.
16
17
18
82.
19
Mortgage
Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant Capitol
23
misrepresented the amount that Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter, Defendant
21
22 23
24
2
Rawls and Defendant Capitol Mortgage were charging Mr. Ouziz for their services.
83.
Defendant CapItol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and/or
Defendant Nafai suppressed the fact that the "yield spread premium" was a kickback payment
and that ultimately Mr. Ouziz would end up paying for the improper kick-back through higher
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESFA VIOLATIONS
-
22
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 23 of 36
interest rates, other loan fees, generally less favorable loan terms? such
2
as?
the three year pre-
payment penalty rather than a one year pre-payment penalty as Mr. Ouziz had been led to believe he was contracting for.
4
P
84.
7
Defendant Capitol Mortgage. Defendant Teeter and Defendant Nafai were boun
to disclose the nature
B
of the kickback and
the consequences to Mr. Ouziz but failed to do so.
85.
Defendant Ouziz was led to believe that the cost of the home loan brokerage
services provided by Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter? Defendant Bawls and Defendant Nafai would be "one point" or 1%
12
of the total value of the
loans: $6,120.00 (1%
of
612,000) and that the Defendant OreenPoint and Defendant Capital One would be paying this fee
to Defendant Capitol Mortgage.
1
86.
16
17
In fact, the amount
of the
fee paid to Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant
Teeter, Defendant Rawls and/or Defendant Nafai was $13,430.00 and, in fact, the fee paid to
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter and/or Defendant Nafai was indirectly paid by
19
Mr Ouziz through higher interest rates on his loans and generally worse loan terms than Mr.
19
Ouziz could have otherwise received.
20
21
22
23
24
87.
Defendant Capitol Mortgage's, Defendant Rawl's, Defendant Teeter's and
Defendant Nafai's misleading acts and statements regarding Defendant Capitol Mortgage's,
25
Defendant Rawl?s, Defendant Teeter's arid Defendant Nafai's products and services iii fact did
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS -- 23
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 24 of 36
i
mislead
Mr. Ouziz and proximately damaged Mr. Ouziz by causing him to pay more for products
2
(his home loans) and services (mortgage brokerage) than the amount originally purported to be
the price of these products and services;
4
6
88.
By giving Mr. Ouziz the false impression that he was getting the best possible
loan with the best possible terms; by fraudulently inducing Mr. Ouziz into accepting a loan that
8
he would not have accepted had he known the nature of the kickback payments;
10
11
2
89.
By damaging Mr. Ouziz by slipping in a prepayment penally 'Allonge' or
13
14
ontract addendum on the day of the loan closing after Mr. Ouziz had exerted a lot of time and
nergy in getting the new loan and had made plans, such as business arrangements in reliance on
he loans at the agreed rate and terms such that Mr. Ouziz was forced to accept the day of loan
16
losing changes made by the Defendants.
18
90.
20
California Civil Code
§
1709 provides that;
21
22
One who willfully deceives another with intent to induce him to alter his position to his injury or risk, is liable for any damages which he thereby suffers.
23
24
Deceit, within the meaning of CC
§
1709, can take any
of these forms (CCl710):
. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be
true;
23
TONIPLAINT FOR FE·DERRL RESFA VIOLATIONS
-
24
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 25 of 36
2
ii The assertion, as a fact:, for believing it to be trues
of that which
is
not true, by one who has no reasonable ground
3
of a fact, by one who is bound to disclose it, or who gives information of other facts which are likely to mislead for want of communication of that fact; or
iii. Thc supprcssion
iv. A promise, made without any intention
of performing it.
6
91.
Defendant Rawls, Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter and Defendant
Nalai knew that their assertion regarding their fee and the true cost of their fee was false and
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Bawls, Defendant Teeter and Defendant Nafai had no
10 reasonable ground for believing their assertion regarding the fee to be true
12
13
92.
14
15
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter2 Defendant Nafai and Defendant
Rawls knew that their assertion that they would procure the best loan on the best terms for Mr
16
17
Ouziz was false and they had no reasonable ground for believing this assertion to be true as they
accepted payment for the "yield spread prcmium" which was a
kick-back from the lender,
lB
Defendant OreenPoint and Defendant Capital One and in exchange for Defendant Nafai, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant Capitol Mortgage inducing Mr. Ouziz to contract to accept loans on worse ternis than he could have possibly otherwise have gotten.
lB
20
21
22
23
93
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant
24
Nafai knew that their assertion that their fee would not exceed, "one point" was false and they
had no reasonable ground for believing this assertion to be true as they accepted payment for the
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RE.SFA VIOLATIONS
25
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 26 of 36
1
"yield
spread premium" which was a kick-back from the lender to Defendant Rawls, Defendant
2
Capitol
Mortgage, Defendant Teeter and Defendant Nafai in the amount of $13,430.00 and that
this higher fee was actually going to be indirectly paid by Mr. Ouziz in the form of a higher
4
interest
5
rate and more oppressive loan terms-
6
94.
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawls and Defendant
Nafai knew that Mr. Ouziz did NOT understand the phrase, "yield spread premium" and
therefore were bound to disclose additional, explanatory information to Mr Ouziz and were
1
bound to use
terminology and language understandable to Mr. Ouziz as the "yield spread
12
premium" payment had a dramatic, material affect on the loans Mr. Ouziz received, causing him
to
13 10
'5 16
receive loans with higher interest rates and more oppressive loan terms.
95.
Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Rawls, Defendant Teeter and Defendant
17
Nafai
promised that they would procure the best loan on the best terms for Mr. Ouziz- The
18
Defendants made this promise with no intention of performing it as they knew they would
receive
19
a kick-back "yield spread premium" from the lender in exchangc for inducing Mr. Ouziz
20
21
22
I
to contract to accept loans with higher interest rates and on worse terms than Mr. Ouziz could
have possibly otherwise have gotten.
23
24
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERRL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
26
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 27 of 36
1
96.
The acts of Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendant Rawis
§§
2
and
Defendant Nafai as set forth above constitute Deceit under Cal. CC
1709-1710 thereby
cntitlirig Mr. Ouziz to his actual damages, including but not limited to: loans at actual rates and
on terms that do not include a cushion in profit for the yield spread premium payment.
5
7
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
97.
5
WHEREFORE, Mr. Ouziz requests judgment and relief as follows;
9
10
a.
under Count J against Defendant GreenPoint and Defendant Capital One for treble
damages and costs for RESPA
11
12
13
b.
violations;
under Count U against Defendant Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter, Defendani
Rawls and
14
Defendant Nafai, treble damages and costs for RESPA violations;
:3
16
c.
under Count Ill against Defendant GreenPoint, Defendant Capital One Services,
Defendant
17
Capitol Mortgage, Defendant Nafai, Defendant Rawls and Defendant
1
8
Teeter for costs, treble damages and attorney's fees.
23
d.
under Count IV against Detendant Caprtol Mortgage, Defendant Teeter,
Defendant
21
22
Rawls and Defendant Nafai, actual damages, imposition of a
constructive
trust upon the proceeds of the transaction as were paid to Defendant
23
Capitol Mortgage, Dcfcndar,t Teeter, Defendant Rawls and/or Defendant Nafai,
24
and an order
25
requiring disgorgement of all proceeds paid to Defendant Rawls,
COMPLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
27
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 28 of 36
1
Defendant CapitoL Mortgage. Defendant Teeter and/or Defendant Nafai and to
2
punitive dani*gc for breach of fiduciary duty;
3
e.
under Count IV against Defendant Capitol Mortgage! Defendant Teeter! Defendant Raw Is and Defendant Nafal, actual damages for Deceit;
3
6
ti
such other
relief to which Mr. Ouziz may be entitled, or
as
determined just and
0
appropriate by this Court.
9
DEMAND FOR JTJRY TRIAL
11
Dated: April 28th, 2008
13
By:
___
Scott A. Flaxman
17
Attorney for the Plaintiff Marouanc Ouziz
6
19 20 21
22 22 24 25
COI4PLAINT FOR FEDERAL RESPA VIOLATIONS
-
28
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 29 of 36
EXHIBIT A
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 30 of 36
®Chicago Title Company
2410
FaIr OaSt
916 421-0193 · FAX 916
SMI,, Suite
t0. S@mento, CA
4e2-sno
5S$2S
bATE June 20, 2006 ESCROW NO.: OS-6030420LMA LOCATE NO.; CACTI77O7-7734-4503-0039107161
-TIr4E
5:47 PM
ESCRQ OFFICER: Maggie Avflec
CLOSING DATE:
BORROWER STJMATEo Cwsipjç STATEMENT
LENDER:
SORROWER: PROPERn'
GreeriPoinL Mortgage Funding, Inc.
95
Marocne Owjz or; FleaiiL Hill,
Cret
CA 94523
$
DEBITS
4 CREDItS
New lIt'yrust Deed to GrçnPoin Mortgage Funding Inc. New 2nd Trust Deed to Greenpoint Mortgage
PINANaAL;
Funding, Irx.
4t000 00
TITLE CUARGEs:
06-ALTA Loan w/Forrn I - 1992 for $544,000oo Endorsement Fee(s) Recording Deed Recording Trust Deed(s)
QtTier Policy Unilted Title Policy
1,1 0_DO
1200
120,00 125.00
$68,O0o.
ESCROW CHARGE5 Escrow Fee to Chicago Title Draw Deed Outside Courier/Special Messenger AdDitional Work Charge Email 'bc
f
.
50.00 50.00
NEW LOAN CHARGrS - Greenpeint Mortgage Funding, 'Total Loan Charges; $2,297.55 Apprei5ar Fee to Penster Lender pays YSp $12920.0 POC to Capitol Mortgage Doc Prep to Green ortgage Fund ing, Inc. Ta< Service Fee to CreenPoji-it Mortgage Funding, Inc. Processing / Admin Fee to Capitol Mortgage Flood Cert to Greenpoint Mortgage FUnding, too. Underwnting Fee to GreenPoit Mortgage Funding, Inc. Intereet at $115,Si per day from 5/26/2006th 7/1/2006 to SreenPoir,t Mortgage Funding, inc.
Inc.
425,00
?// ''
A
390.00
\..
-./
//
/
11.00
25110g
/
57755-jç_
EW LOAN CflA,cjf5 - CreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.
rothi Loan Charges;
encjer Pays YSP $510.OQ POC to Capihii Mortgage Corporation unding Fee to Greenpoint Mortgng Funding,
so,oo
Inc.
150.00
AYOFFS
otal Paqoff $475,615.41 nno pal Balance to CMAC Mcrlgaçje Corporation
- GMAC
Moflgae
nterest to O6/30/ZOos orwan3ing/Demand Fee to GMAC Mortgage Cerporaijo ote Charges to GMAC Mortgage CorporatIon iipound Account to CMAC Mortgage Corpoatn ecording Fee to GM/IC Mortgage CbcporatJOn
AVOFFS - Wells Fargo Home Equity
472.1p90J)Q
1,131.7
137.66
16.00
3p'oo.oo
utal Payoff $89,754,7g
inciDal Balance to Weds Fargo Home Equity terest to 06/05/2005 'torest on Principal Science at $23.94 per day from 6/5J2lJ'JS ru 5/30/2006 to Wells Fargo Home Equity Irwartling/Demand Fee to Wells Fargo Home Equity tcorweycr- Fee to Wells Fargo Horrie Equity
mtpm)(37aJ2)
88,soo.oo 547.35
522.44
30,00
es_DO
ThihIc
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 31 of 36
EXHIBIT B
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
cNn changes to fee
--
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 32 of 36 009002fl04
SETTLEMENT CHARCES
Final settlemçrt fees muse comply with applicable federJ jnwè js,mis!adops; antI any applicable state laws or local ordinainten
ailewed Without our written approvalS
FEES
Yield Spread, Premium AprsU>inel Inspot to Ui-ulcert Doe Prep Foe To GPM Tax $erviCe Feet
&TYERFD
$0.00 $425.00 $390110
SLJLLRpD UROKERFD LENDER Pt)
S0J)0 50.oo 30.00 50.00 39-00 50.00 so.oo 50.00 50(10
$0110
FUC
50110
512,920,00
50-00
ProcesyAdmin Fee to Broktr Flood Cerlificatlosi Fec0 Underwriting Fee to GPMt SettleinentlClosing Fee Title/Escrow J)oc Prep Notary Fee title Insurance Title ilndorsemeni Recording Fees Courter Pee Co Settlwnut Agent
579.00 5505.00 511.00
30.00 50.00 50.00
50110
$000
5000 30,00
EO.00
50.00 50.00 $0.00
50110
50.00
$0110
$2o.oo
5600.00
so.oo
50.00
50.00
5(1.00
sijstoo
525110
350.00 5100,00
so.oo
$9.00 50.00 50.00
$0.00
572.00 350.04
$0.00 50.00 50.00 50,09
50-00
50,00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 30.00 50.00
$0110 $0.00
$0.00 50,00 so.oo so.oo 50.00
50-00
50.00
Lender Paid Mortgage Tssc: Total Paid From Rebarre
Ps
0.00 N/A
RESERVE&
Raxasd lnauinnce Niongage isratea Flood Ixeurwice Elts' Taxes Counft Taxes Annual Assessoteute
0
0
(I
ISUTER
nxntth @ month
SELLER
( onotli
S
0.00
0.00
/mouth
/0)015th
0.00
$
00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0A)0
too
0.00
0
0 0
I, 0
Otjserjinpcqiodl
Other Impound 2 Aggregate Adjustment F1caebe awaxe that impounds are an estlniaie.
0.00 month © 5 0.00 month 0.00 montn $ 0.00 month S 0.00 month 5 0.00
5
@
i i 5
/inonth /monrh /montk /snonth
too
0.00 0.00
month
/oaonth
0-00
0-00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PREFAID INTEREST:
ThTROM:06/11/2906
TO:07/0t/206
N/A
/ day = 004,27
SHRE/CRECK AMOIJ3T (available for wct-fijmda dares only):
LENDER CHARGES AM) PREPARATION OF HUB-i
· ·
Lender's (and ether thud-party) feLts ate indicated in the 'Senlerneji Cliargea" section of these instuctions. These charges are to be reflected precisely as labeled on the lsjate line of IfLD-L ±'OC items must be reflected as such on HTJt)4,
rir wet-
gJ
loans only, peelinloary
11151>-I
to be reviewed and approved by do5ex-/Thuder psiorto dosing.
-
You have disclosed tti us the teen settlement fees to be theecd on this loan via the Loan Settlement Fee Agreement. NO changer Is these fees are allowed without OCt vnitfrn nppnrnd. If additional fees charged without our 'prnva1, you will be teqwrei 1') retired the addlth)pgl fees to the borrower. Iii dddltiott to refunding the unappinvad lees, you will be reqsthed to pay roe any and sis damages incurred by tho Leadeç, borrower and seller as a result of your failure to follow toss' of these closing Instructions or the Loan Settlement Fee Anenieni Insthictions.
ie
-
We require a nnat HUD-l or IfUD4A PJESPA Sattrleinent Staterneni 00 au ttansecrions. We rely solely open the escrow agesit to complete and deliver the "Statement of Actnal Costs" in accordance with the Reel Estate Setsleaa Procedures Act. A cotdsiocs of our loan Is that the cscicw agent and title company accept all conditions set forth on tills docunent and ontite
other pages and addenda of these intictioris. 11w 5Staterrrnt of Acuisi GaS' must be complete and delivered in accordance with such requirements us o5er that we are not subject to ati claire for, or any damage, llsbi]lly or paushly,
·
HLThls must clearly distinguish those costs associated with any Leader-approved secondasy lb wclngfrntn those required by this Ion
AU
&5
Grce'Pajnt ax.'rtgage F*cdng, Inc.
tO-fl4W
3
5t49OS4(U et"ea (Ike.
Se/Us)
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 33 of 36
EXHIBIT C
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
*fi changes
FEES
to fees
-
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
O09005172 Page 34 of 36
SETTLEMENT CHARGES
er local crdieaoces. i-ules, and regsslatioasl and any applicable stale Laws
BUYER PD
5000
ar aVowed without our written approval. Flial
fee must comply wIth applicable federal Laws,
SELLER ED
50.00
50+00
totai
Fee
Title Irtiesitice
5450.00 550.00 5125.00
54Z0t3
BRoKERwciii}roL_.
5000 50,00
50.00
50.00
$0.00
RecordiuFees
50.00 50.00 50.00
so.oo
50.00
SILOO
sooo
59.00
S0O0
Lender Paid Mortgage Taxes: Total Fect Fairl non Rebate:
0.00 N/A
RESERVES:
Liatacil Insurance
(1
BUY)tR
month S mouth @ S month @S month fijI
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SELLER
0.1)0
(tIji
(month
0.0(1
lIMO
Mortgage Insurance flood Insurance City Taxes County Taxes Annual Asscasrllelttt
0
0 0 0 0 0
cnotd @ $ tOO
month $ 0.00 month 5 0.00 month @ $ too
Otter tmpomd 1
CI Other Impound 2 Aggregate Adjustment PIeces be aware that imnounda are an ordinate.
(mouth (month (mouth /momh (month (month
0.1)0 0+00
0.00 0.00 0.00
(bOO
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0-0O 0+00
0.00
0.00
0,00
PREFAID INTEREST:
rN/A dass FROM 06124/2006 TO 07/15/2006 WIRE/ChECK a-MOUNT (available foe wet-funds stetes only):
$ WA
N/A
Jdzy
= N/A
1-ENDER CIf.&RCJtS AND PREPARATION OF
111155.1
·
·
S
Ltnders (and other third-patly) focI are itdieated In the "Scttlemeux Charges" section Of tbese thatrectiana These thaxgn iip,iate iim fHUD-l. FOC axe to be reflected precisely as labeled on the a tntastbe reflected as such on BUD-i.
ins
For wet-funded loans only pnlixninary !1Vt1-1 to be r itwed and approved by closer/fussIer prior to closing.
You have disclosed to us the loaii settlement tees in be charFd on this loan via the Lean Settlewant Fee Ageeenaent No etiasiges to Ibtia lets are allowed without our written approval. If acIdilitonol tees axe cnargea wifteut out approval. you will be required to refunS the additional fees to the txrntswec In addition to setueding the unapproved fee; you will be required to pay for any and all datoages incurred by the Lcodiz borrower and idler as a seault of your faibue ro follow any of thate closing Instntctioos or the Loan Settlemeot Fee Agxeerrtent Tnstnnioas.
·
we require a fetal BUD 1 orl-ITJD IA RESPA S*Jeenent Stutcest on all ttaneaetioua We rely solely upon the esrow agent to cotaplete and deliver the Slatement of Astual Cost? Lu scooniaitce with the Real Estate Settlesuerot Frocednies Act.
our loan ts that the escrow agent antI title company accept all conditloos set forth on this docuniout and on the other pages and addenda of these tottnsctions The 'Stataxocot of Actual Costs" most be complete and &livered in accordance with such requirements in order that we are not subject to any claire foL or aity dasl)age, liability or penalty.
P. comttson or
4
nfl HtJDIs nest cle$y distinguish those costs associated with any Lender-approved seoondasy financing from those
required by thit loan.
Lastsfl Ctvstug Jntnicttpn cre.npani Mort5age ruaasn,
lee.
Page 3
en
C
RO3tRkv.O6(0t)
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 35 of 36
EXHIBIT D
Case 3:08-cv-02201-WHA
Document 1
Filed 04/29/2008
Page 36 of 36
PREPAYMENT FElt ALLONGE
Loan Nuxr'bet 0090025jt54
This Prepayment Fee Allonge (uMQngeIf) is made this twealja day of June, 2006, nod is incorporated into 2UJ intcrnded to form a part of the note dated the same date as this Allonge (Note) and also aniends and sup lemnuts the moflgige, deed of thasç security deed or scuilty Strurnera (the Allonge and the Note. To the extent that the provisions of this 'Sccimw 'nstrunenr) Wiled the some date as this ivroasjstgnj with the provisions of the Mouge Note nncWor the Security LLsirwin; the provisions of this Allrmge shall prtvail over arid will supercedo any inconsistent provisions of the Note andlor the Security Thstrumenc
m
The section of the Note entitled Eorrqwefl Right tc rrepay is amended by adding the tollcwitj.,g paragraph as the last paragroph of such section:
if I make a Prepayment within three yzars of the date of this Note. 1 pay a P*qnynrmt fee on the aggregate Fxq]ayaieuts made within any coasecath'e twelve month period which exceed 20% 0 C the original ncoujj. stated in the i'Jote. The Prepanuent fee I will Principal pay shall be an aniotun equal to abc (6) months advance interest on the amount of the Prepaymrjxt thai; when added to au other (12) month period irosnediately precedlug the datc of the Prepayment, exceeds amounts prepatd dunng the titelve Pnuclpel amount of this Note. I will not be obligated to pay a prepayment twenly percent (O%) of the original fee III make a Ml Prepayment at any thne after the 3rd Year anxtiversaiy of the date of this Note. In no event will such a chnrgc be matte if it violates :tate or federal law.
flI
\lTWEss ThE HAND(9
AND
SALS) OF TUB tJNDERSIGNp
(Sorrowc-)
____
forrowa
(50t0w21)
/3J Original Orr4yJ
FnpayP)ent Fee .%Ileag -
Ouqint Mnrtgae Fwrdnig. Inc
rageS ufl
Im500UCA OGOS
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms