Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
Santos v. U.S. Bank National Association
United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
September 7, 2017
BRIAN H. SANTOS, Plaintiff,
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's second
Motion for Stay of Proceedings pursuant to the Servicemembers
Civil Relief Act (“SCRA”). Dkt. #32. The Court
has reviewed the motion, the opposition thereto, the reply in
support thereof, and the attendant Declarations and Exhibits.
For the reasons set forth herein, the Court now GRANTS IN
PART Plaintiff's motion.
Brian Santos, initially filed his Complaint for Damages in
King County Superior Court. Dkt. #4. Defendants removed the
action to this Court on March 25, 2016. Dkt. #1. Plaintiff
3.2 At all times material and relevant hereto [he] was an
active duty member of the United States Air Force.
3.3 At all times material and relevant hereto, [his]
then-wife was also an active duty member of the United States
3.4 Defendant U.S. BANCORP, doing business as U.S. Bank and
U.S. Bank Home Mortgage, holds the mortgage to [his] home
located at 19007 SE 260th Street in Covington, King County,
3.5 On or about September 1, 2012, [he] spoke with Jordan
Clark of Defendant U.S. BANCORP, d/b/a U.S. Bank, regarding
his active duty status to ensure his home would be protected
while he was deployed.
3.6 On said occasion, Jordan Clark assured [him] that he was
protected under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA)
and no negative action would be taken against him by the bank
for any missed mortgage payments.
3.7 On or about September 11, 2012, Jill Payne, E-mail
Representative of the Special Loans Department of Defendant
U.S. BANCORP emailed [him] and advised him that the SCRA did
apply to his mortgage on the subject property and should he
become delinquent on his mortgage payments, the bank could
not take action against him.
3.8 On or about September 16, 2012, [he] responded to Jill
Payne's email seeking further confirmation that he was
fully enrolled in the program ensuring his protection under
the SCRA and advised Ms. Payne that Jordan Clark had
previously assured him that U.S. BANCORP, d/b/a U.S. Bank,
would fully exonerate him for any missed mortgage payments
and asked Ms. Payne for confirmation this statement by Jordan
Clark was indeed true.
3.9 On or about September 17, 2012, Jill Payne responded to
[his] email and confirmed his accounts with U.S. Bank were
“set up in accordance with the Servicemembers Civil
Relief Act through [his] September 1, 2014, payment.”
She went on to state, “. . . you will not accrue any
late charges through this date and we will not report you to
the credit bureaus through November 28, 2013.” Ms.
Payne further confirmed that “[d]uring [his] period of
active duty and for nine months thereafter, [he would] not be
in danger of foreclosure...” and advised him that
“[a]s of today, neither loan is being reviewed for
foreclosure, so ... [he was] not going to lose [his]
home.” 3.10 On or about November 27, 2012, Defendant
U.S. BANCORP, by and through Jessica Brazier, Special Loans
Specials with U.S. Bank's Special Loans Department, sent
[him] a letter again confirming his protection under the SCRA
based upon his active duty status in the U.S. military.
3.11 Defendant U.S. BANCORP employed Defendant SAFEGUARD
PROPERTIES to winterize Plaintiff's Covington home and,
upon information and belief, hired Defendant SAFEGUARD
PROPERTIES to perform this work less than one month after
Plaintiff had received the written confirmation of November
27, 2012, that he was subject to SCRA protections.
3.12 Upon information and belief, when Defendant U.S. BANCORP
hired Defendant SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES to winterize
Plaintiff's home, Defendant U.S. BANCORP, by and through
its duly authorized agents or employees, informed Defendant
SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES that Plaintiff's mortgage was in
default and that the subject residence was an asset of the
bank and therefore needed winterization to preserve said
3.13 Defendant SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES then hired Defendant
QUEST PRESERVATION to perform ...
Buy This Entire Record For