Norwest Mortgage, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 487·72 Cal. App. 4th 214·85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 18·99 Daily Journal DAR 4696·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3706
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 28, 1999D032050California5,735 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDonald, J.

Real parties in interest Bruce H. and Kathleen Conley and Kenneth and Dorine Younger (collectively plaintiffs) sued Norwest Mortgage, Inc. (Norwest Mortgage), alleging that Norwest Mortgage’s “Forced Placement Insurance” (FPI) program was an unfair business practice under California’s unfair competition law (UCL). (Bus. & Prof. Code , § 17200 et seq.) Plaintiffs allege that on lapse or cancellation of the insurance they were required to maintain as borrowers from Norwest Mortgage, Norwest Mortgage provided replacement insurance under the FPI program and charged the cost to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege the FPI cost charged to plaintiffs was unnecessarily expensive because it included an amount sufficient to cover rebates provided by the insurer to Norwest Mortgage.

The complaint, styled as a class action lawsuit, asserts it is brought on behalf of all borrowers throughout the United States for whom Norwest Mortgage purchased FPI during the four years prior to the lawsuit. Although the complaint originally pleaded numerous claims, plaintiffs dismissed all but the UCL claim. Plaintiffs sought nationwide class certification. Norwest Mortgage opposed nationwide class…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.