The U.S. District Court issued an opinion in another “the bank was bad when it foreclosed on me when I wasn’t, you know, paying my mortgage” case.
Plaintiffs, Pasadena, Maryland residents, sued Bank of America alleging that the bank’s failure to process a mortgage modification, after the servicer informed them it would help them change their mortgage terms, was actionable. The big crime? Bank of America was only willing to lower the payment a bit.
Judge Catherine C. Blake dismissed the case, finding that:
- Plaintiffs cannot show they reasonably and detrimentally relied on any of the bank’s statements;
- A bank being hard to deal with is annoying but not actionable (I’m paraphrasing!)
- The absence of “a clear and definite promise” make promissory estoppel inapplicable;
- A letter that lacks bargained-for consideration and a definite manifestation of mutual assent cannot alone be a contract;
- There are no tort claims in this case that would make claims for negligence or negligent misrepresentation under Maryland law.”
You can find the court’s opinion in Goss v. Bank of America here.