Fox

Pacific Plan v. Fox

Good Law
148 Cal. Rptr. 510·84 Cal. App. 3d 215
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 1978Civ. No. 42738California1,328 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Taylor, J.

*217 Opinion

Pacific Plan of California (Pacific Plan) appeals from a judgment denying its petition for a writ of mandamus to set aside an order of the State Real Estate Commissioner directing Pacific Plan to refrain from charging or collecting escrow fees without taking into account the costs and expenses paid, incurred or reasonably earned for each individual loan transaction. Pacific Plan argues that: 1) the court erred in concluding that Business and Professions Code section 10242, subdivision (a), requires individualized cost accounting for each escrow operation; and 2) the trial court erred in finding that the commissioner had established that fees earned by Pacific Plan were not reasonably earned. For the reasons set forth below, we have concluded that the court below properly determined that Pacific Plan’s method of calculating escrow fees violated the statute.

The facts 1 are not in dispute. Pacific Plan is a licensed mortgage loan broker, subject to the provisions of Business and Professions Code section 10131. Pacific Plan’s activities as a mortgage loan broker are regulated and controlled by Business and Professions Code section 10240 et seq. 2 In the course of its…

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.