Conder

Conder v. Home Savings of America

Good Law
680 F. Supp. 2d 1168·2010 WL 308798
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2010Case CV 07-7051 AG (CTx)California2,879 words

Opinion

Opinion

Guilford, J.

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

This case, like many others before this Court, involves the sale of an option adjustable-rate mortgage loan. Plaintiff John Conder (“Plaintiff”) filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). Here, Defendants Home Savings of America (“HSA”) and Aurora Loan Services, LLC (“Aurora”) (collectively “Defendants”) each move for partial dismissal of Plaintiffs claims. After reviewing the arguments submitted by the parties, the Court GRANTS Aurora’s Motion to Dismiss, and GRANTS HSA’s Motion to Dismiss.

BACKGROUND

The following factual allegations are taken from Plaintiffs SAC, and as it must for this Motion, the Court assumes them to be true.

Plaintiff refinanced his existing home loan on October 13, 2006, by purchasing an Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage (“Option ARM”) loan from HSA. (SAC ¶ 4.) Later, Aurora became the servicer of the loan. (SAC ¶¶ 7, 79.)

According to the loan documents HSA gave Plaintiff, the loan featured a fixed 1.25% interest rate and a low payment rate for the first several years of the loan term. (SAC ¶¶ 18, 22.) The Truth in Lending Disclosure Statement that HSA gave Plaintiff included a payment schedule with…

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.