Thompson v. Bank of America: Sixth Circuit Rejects Claims Challenging Loan Securitization And Denial Of HAMP Loan Modification

On Friday, December 5, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently issued its decision inThompson v. Bank of America, et al., — F.3d —, No. 14-5561, 2014 WL 6844931, a case involving various statutory, tort, and contractual challenges to the securitization of a mortgage loan and the denial of a loan modification under the Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”). In an opinion designated for publication, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the lawsuit, holding that the borrower did not state any claim for relief.

The Sixth Circuit used its comprehensive opinion in Thompson to address and reject so-called “securitization” and HAMP claims that borrowers have increasingly asserted in the past few years. The Sixth Circuit addressed the theories “in detail” to “assist the district courts in addressing this wave of creative litigation.”

Here are a few key aspects of the Court’s ruling:

First , the Sixth Circuit rejected the borrower’s “argument that the securitization of her mortgage note altered her obligations under the note.” The court emphasized that “Federal law provides for the creation of mortgage-related securities” and “[t]he pooling of mortgages into investment trusts is not some sort of illicit scheme that taints the underlying debt.” It also unequivocally held that the “[s]ecuritization of a note does not alter the borrower’s obligation to repay the loan” because “[s]ecuritization is a separate contract, distinct from the borrower’s debt obligations under note.” The court further reaffirmed the propriety of using Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) in the transfer of mortgage notes.

Read on.

One response to “Thompson v. Bank of America: Sixth Circuit Rejects Claims Challenging Loan Securitization And Denial Of HAMP Loan Modification

  1. Sixth
    That’s all you need to know about how certain courts and judges reach decisions like this, just in time for the holidays, another Christmas sell-out. Maybe Santa will deliver a sense of justice and shame to the court for Christmas….Yeah, right…HO!HO!HO!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s