Thrifts and Mortgage Finance
Company Overview of ReconTrust Company, N.A.
ReconTrust Company, N.A. provides financial services for mortgage industry in the United States. It offers default services, including foreclosure, bankruptcy, eviction, loss mitigation, and REO, as well as document custody and lien release services to loan originators, servicers, and mortgage companies. The company is based in Simi Valley, California. ReconTrust Company, N.A. operates as a subsidiary of Bank of America, National Association.
1800 Tapo Canyon Road
Simi Valley, CA 93063
Key Executives for ReconTrust Company, N.A.
ReconTrust Company, N.A. does not have any Key Executives recorded.
ReconTrust Company, N.A. Key Developments
U.S. District Court Denies the Plaintiffs' Motion and Dismisses the Case against ReconTrust and Other Defendants
May 27 14
The U.S. District Court for the District of Utah determined that it had jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) over a lawsuit concerning allegedly unlawful foreclosure sales. The plaintiffs did not meet their burden of showing that jurisdictional exceptions applied. Several Utah residents whose homes were subject to foreclosure sales sued ReconTrust Co. N.A. and other defendants involved in the sales. The defendants removed the case to federal court and then moved to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims. The plaintiffs filed a motion to remand. The district court denied the plaintiffs' motion and dismissed the case, concluding the National Banking Act preempted the Utah foreclosure statute upon which the plaintiffs' claims were based. The plaintiffs appealed. The Tenth Circuit, following briefing by the parties on whether the federal court had jurisdiction to hear the plaintiff's claims, ruled that diversity jurisdiction was not established. The Tenth Circuit remanded for the district court to determine whether the requirements of CAFA were met. The plaintiffs argued on remand that CAFA's local controversy and home state exceptions applied. Evidence does not support remand. Both CAFA exceptions required the plaintiffs to show that more than two-thirds of the proposed class members were citizens of Utah at the time of removal. The plaintiffs did not make the showing. They merely alleged, upon information and belief, that more than 75% of the proposed class members were citizens of Utah but provided no supporting evidence. The district court observed that a person can own property in a state without being a citizen of it. The plaintiffs did not demonstrate the alleged conduct of local defendants Stuart T. Matheson and Matheson, Mortenson, Olsen & Jepson P.C. (collectively, the Matheson defendants) formed a significant basis for the proposed class' claims for the local controversy exception to apply. The majority of the complaint's allegations centered on actions taken by ReconTrust and Bank of America. Also, the plaintiffs' pleadings characterized the lawsuit as a dispute concerning ReconTrust's qualifications to act as a foreclosure trustee. The home state exception required that all primary defendants in the case be citizens of Utah. ReconTrust and Bank of America were primary defendants but they were not citizens of Utah. The plaintiffs failed to establish CAFA's home state exception or local controversy exception deprived the district court of jurisdiction. The case did not have a truly local focus.
Bank of America Corporation Settles Lawsuit by Utah Homeowners
Dec 20 12
Bank of America Corporation has agreed to a substantial settlement in a lawsuit by Utah homeowners in which an earlier ruling had raised serious questions about whether a unit of the bank had legally foreclosed on homes in Utah. U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins still has to approve the settlement before it becomes final. Under Utah law, only local attorneys or title companies are allowed to foreclose on property in the state. ReconTrust, however, used neither in the Bells' case or hundreds of other foreclosures in the aftermath of the real estate market's free fall that began in late 2007. The company argued in court that it is governed by Texas law given that it carries out the foreclosure operations from its headquarters there. That ruling was at odds with those of two other federal judges in Utah on questions that probably will be settled by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Utah Attorney General's Office did not respond to an email seeking comment on the settlement in the Bell case. Another case with some of the same issues is set for oral arguments before the 10th Circuit on January 14, 2012. The state of Utah has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in that case but has been denied permission to participate in the oral arguments before a panel of judges.
Similar Private Companies By Industry
Recent Private Companies Transactions
|No transactions available in the past 12 months.|
Most Searched Private Companies
Sponsored Financial Commentaries