Action to quiet title; Failure to allege fraud & related deficiencies in the foreclosure process & sale; Standing; Expiration of the statutory six-month redemption period; Bryan v JPMorgan Chase Bank

The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs’ claims in this quiet title action because they did not allege fraud and related deficiencies in the foreclosure process and sale with sufficient particularity. Further, as a result of that failure, they did not have standing to challenge the mortgage foreclosure after the expiration of the redemption period. Thus, it affirmed summary disposition for defendant. The case arose from the foreclosure of the mortgage on plaintiffs’ home. The trial court determined that their first amended complaint (the FAC) failed to describe their allegations of fraud as to “the execution of the loan modification documents with sufficient particularity.” It also concluded that the FAC “did not specifically address the allegations of deficiencies in the foreclosure process and sale.” On appeal, reviewing the FAC “and accepting all factual allegations as true,” the court found that “the nature of plaintiffs’ claims are not entirely clear and are difficult to discern. For example, aside from numerous general allegations fraught with conjecture and speculation, [they] were unable to state with clarity how the loan modification procedure was procured by fraud or deception. Plaintiffs also accused defendant of engaging in fraudulent transactions and unsavory business tactics.” The court agreed with the trial court that the FAC “did not contain the requisite level of detail to support their allegations of fraudulent behavior on the part of defendant both during the loan modification process and during the 2019 foreclosure by advertisement. While acknowledging that plaintiffs were representing themselves in the trial court and were not attorneys, the record reflects that the [trial] court gave [them] the opportunity to amend their complaint in order to more definitively state their allegations against defendant. [They] were provided ample time and opportunity to clarify the nature of their allegations of fraud, as well as their claims that the 2019 foreclosure process was legally deficient, but plaintiffs did not take advantage of the opportunity to amend their initial complaint to articulate their allegations more precisely.”