Segura

Segura v. McBride

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 550·5 Cal. App. 4th 1028·7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 436·92 Daily Journal DAR 5608·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3613
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 27, 1992A054434California4,636 words

Opinion

Opinion

Anderson, J.

This appeal raises first impression questions concerning the class of persons regulated pursuant to Civil Code section 1695 et seq. (hereafter the Home Equity Sales Contract Act, or Act), as well as the measure of damages available thereunder. We hold that except for certain persons specifically exempted from regulation, the Act applies to all persons who purchase a residence subject to an outstanding notice of default, regardless of whether the purchaser routinely engages in such transactions, and regardless of whether the distressed buyer initiates the negotiations. We further set forth the measure of damages and date of assessment for particular violations, and partially reverse for prejudicial error in assessing damages.

I. Facts

A. Background,

In April 1979 respondent Ruben Segura purchased property in Femdale from Mr. and Mrs. Dilleshaw for approximately $30,500, with a cash down payment of $8,000. The Dilleshaws took back a note and deed of trust for the remainder; eventually the Bank of Loleta assumed collection of Segura’s note payments for the Dilleshaws.

In early 1982 Segura fell behind on his house payments as well as payments to the Bank of Loleta for…

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.