Consumer Finance Litigation

In Wassef v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. CV-12-02480-PHX-DGC, 2013 WL 1123678 (D. Ariz. Mar. 18, 2013), the United States District Court for the District of Arizona granted a motion to dismiss where the claims were premised on an alleged repayment agreement. There, the plaintiffs had taken out a loan from Chase Bank, N.A. to refinance their home. The loan was secured with a deed of trust on the property. The plaintiffs later entered into a HAMP modification agreement with Chase, but they were unable to make their payments under the modification. The plaintiffs alleged that Chase subsequently agreed to a repayment plan, under which the plaintiffs would make lower payments and Chase would agree to reinstate the modification. The plaintiffs claimed that they made the required payments under the repayment agreement, but the payments were rejected, and later refunded by Chase, and the property was scheduled for foreclosure sale. In the Amended Complaint, the plaintiffs purported to assert a number of claims, including breach of contract and unjust enrichment. The court dismissed these claims because the plaintiffs were already obligated to make these (and greater) payments. Thus, the breach of contract claim failed for lack of consideration, and the unjust enrichment claim failed because Chase was not unjustly enriched or the plaintiffs unjustly impoverished. The court also found that these claims, as well as the plaintiffs' claims for consumer fraud and promissory estoppel, failed because the plaintiffs could not claim damages for paying what they already owed. For more information on consumer finance litigation topics, please contact one of the Burr & Forman team members for assistance. We are happy to answer any questions or concerns you may have.