DeHaven

DeHaven v. JP Morgan Chase Bank CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 16, 2014C072032California6,099 words

Opinion

Opinion

facts to support their causes of action. We shall affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Predefault The DeHavens purchased their home in 2002. To take advantage of lower interest rates, they decided to refinance. In 2007 the DeHavens borrowed $900,000 from Chase. A deed of trust was recorded in March 2007, naming Chase as the lender and Financial Title Company as trustee. The deed of trust provided that the loan could be sold. In 2007 Chase pooled the loan into a securitized trust; Mellon was the trustee of the trust. Chase remained the loan servicer under the trust’s pooling and servicing agreement (PSA). The DeHavens made all their mortgage payments until early in 2009, when they began to experience financial problems. In January 2009 Bradley DeHaven called Chase to request a payment reduction; he told the Chase representative that they had never before missed a mortgage payment and wanted to work something out so they could keep their home. The Chase representative would not discuss any relief or reduction options with Bradley DeHaven at that time but told him that if the DeHavens missed three consecutive months’ payments, “only then could Chase consider or…

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.