Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Homeowners allege repeated servicing errors, court questions 'pattern or practice' proof
Summary
In Medocious v. Mr. Cooper, homeowners told the court the servicer repeatedly sent notices to counsel or provided inconsistent reasons for denying loan modifications and failed to disclose a claimed three-application limit until late; the panel pressed whether those ministerial lapses constitute a statutory 'pattern or practice.'
Attorney Todd Dion told the panel that homeowners Armani and Kimberly Medocious faced a sequence of servicing errors by the loan servicer, including modification-denial communications sent to a bankruptcy attorney rather than to the borrowers, inconsistent reasons provided by phone versus in writing, and a failure to disclose an internal 'three-modification' limit until the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
