Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pace v. Federal National Mortgage Assoc.

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

March 26, 2018

ANTHONY PACE, Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC., Defendant,

          OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant's motion to dismiss, [Doc. No. 9]. Plaintiff has responded to the motion, to which Defendant has responded. The matter is fully briefed. For the following reasons, the Court will grant Defendant motion.

         Facts and Background

         Plaintiff's Petition alleges the following:

         On or about September 27, 2010, a foreclosure sale was conducted on Plaintiff's property.

         Defendant purchased the property.

         At the time, Plaintiff was unaware that for the years preceding the foreclosure, Defendant had for all intents and purposes actually owned the loan, and was using Wells Fargo as a glorified servicer under its guidelines.

         Defendant put into place multiple safeguards to ensure that although it was not listed on the note and deed of trust that it would have all say as to how the mortgage would be handled, and would be the beneficiary if the property went into foreclosure.

         To that extent, even though it was never mentioned in the note and deed of trust, Defendant purchased the property at the foreclosure sale, and did so with a credit bid, a luxury no third-party bidder would have been given.

         Defendant, because of the arrangement made with Wells Fargo before entering into the loan agreement with Plaintiff, was the true owner of the loan at all times it was being serviced by Wells Fargo.

         During this time, Defendant forced Wells Fargo to enter into a sham modification and other agreements with Plaintiff, during which it told Plaintiff not to make his payments, that he would be modified, and to disregard the written communication he received indicating his default.

         Employees of Wells Fargo, acting as agents for Defendant, told Plaintiff repeatedly that he was eligible for loan modification, and that he must be behind in his payments to receive such modification.

         Plaintiff relied on the representations of the agents of Defendant, and was thereby harmed when Defendant ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.