We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
Case Conclusion Date: 05.12.2011
Practice Area: Chapter 13 bankruptcy
Outcome: Motion Granted in Part
Description: Holdings: The Bankruptcy Court, James P. Smith, J., held that: 1 federal law preempted debtors' claims under GAFLA; 2 agreement reducing debtors' mortgage payments for trial period, pursuant to Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), was not enforceable contract under Georgia law; 3 alleged promise to provide permanent loan modification was too vague to support promissory estoppel claim; 4 debtors lacked standing to sue, under Georgia law, as third-party beneficiaries of service participation agreement (SPA) between government and mortgagee; 5 no private right of action exists for violations of provision of RESPA governing uniform settlement statements; 6 whether mortgagee violated RESPA in responding to debtors' written request for information regarding servicing of loan could not be decided on motion for judgment on the pleadings; and 7 FBPA does not apply to residential mortgage transactions.