Heier v. Wells Fargo Bank CA1/3

Filed 12/31/15 Heier v. Wells Fargo Bank CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

CYNTHIA HEIER as Trustee, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, A140847 v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. MSC-13-01070) Defendant and Respondent.

Cynthia Heier, as Trustee for the Cynthia S. Heier Living Trust (Heier in her individual capacity and as trustee of the trust is hereafter referred to collectively and severally as Heier), filed a first amended complaint (FAC) with seven causes of action against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. for damages arising from an alleged wrongful foreclosure. Wells Fargo’s demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, and Heier appealed from the judgment of dismissal. The appeal challenges the sustaining of the demurrer as to three of the seven causes of action: wrongful foreclosure, violation of Civil Code section 2924.11, and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200. The arguments as to these causes of action lack merit and we affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND In August 2003, Heier’s father, Bernard Heier, borrowed $444,000 from World Savings Bank, which changed its name to Wachovia Bank and eventually merged with Wells Fargo. The loan was secured by a deed of trust on the property at 61 Paradise Lane

1

in Pleasant Hill. In March 2004, Bernard transferred title to the property to Heier, and in March 2012, Heier transferred title to the Cynthia S. Heier Living Trust. In September 2008, Heier stopped making payments on the loan. The complaint alleges that Wells Fargo denied Heier a loan modification in March 2012 because the owner of the property was “ ‘not an actual living person.’ ” It also alleges that Wells Fargo denied Heier’s request for additional documentation supporting the denial. In August 2012, Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation (CWRC), as agent for Wells Fargo, recorded a notice of default against the property stating that the unpaid balance of the loan was $150,336.58 . In November 2012, CWRC recorded a notice of trustee’s sale of the property for December. Attached to the FAC is an April 15, 2013 letter Heier’s counsel wrote Wells Fargo to “formally appeal the loan modification decision.” The letter stated that Heier had received several letters denying the modification, each of which gave different reasons for the denial. A March 21, 2013 letter stated that the modification was denied because “ ‘the borrower on the loan or owner of the property is a legal business entity, not an actual living person.’ ” A March 22 letter stated that the modification was denied because Heier had “ ‘excessive financial obligations.’ ” A March 25 letter stated that “ ‘after careful consideration of your situation, we are unable to proceed with the modification request at this time.’ ” On April 29,Wells Fargo responded in a letter addressed to “Bernard Heier Deceased.” This letter, also attached to the FAC, stated: “After carefully reviewing your documentation supporting your appeal request, we have determined that you still do not meet the requirements of a loan modification.” Heier filed this lawsuit the next month. II. DISCUSSION A. Scope of Review We review an order sustaining a demurrer de novo to determine whether the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Bower v. AT & T Mobility, LLC (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 1545, 1552; Stanton Road Associates v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co. (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 333, 341 (Stanton Road).) We construe the