    
Christine
Board Administrator
Username: Christine
Post Number: 2158
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 11, 2005 - 11:27 pm: | 
|
AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY
106. Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs.
107. On April 20, 2004, AMERIQUEST contacted plaintiff after she had submitted an online mortgage application in response to electronic bulk email (“spam”).
108. Upon information and belief, the FCC cited AMERIQUEST on 6/18/02 for the transmission of unsolicited advertisements.
109. Upon information and belief, AMERIQUEST knew or should have known that the leads purchased from Defendant PANDA MANAGEMENT were procured through unlawful unsolicited advertisements and AMERIQUEST is a “sender” as defined by the Arizona Commercial Electronic Mail Statue and a “person” as defined by the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act.
110. Plaintiff explained to AMERIQUEST loan officer Beatrice during the 4/20/04 telephone call that she was looking for prequalification to purchase investment property and that she was self-employed. Plaintiff also specifically explained that EQUIFAX and Trans Union were blocking her from obtaining her FICO scores and Beatrice promised to mail the credit reports with the FICO scores to plaintiff within a couple of days.
111. Plaintiff then provided Beatrice with her social security number and other identifying information so that she could order the credit reports.
112. On April 28, 2004, plaintiff received a call from Jonathan with Great Southwest Mortgage, stating that his friend Beatrice provided him with plaintiff’s information and that he was offering a free consultation regarding plaintiff’s purchase of a home.
113. AMERIQUEST provided plaintiff’s personal contact and financial information to Jonathan with Great Southwest Mortgage in violation of the GLBA.
114. On May 4, 2004, plaintiff sent an e-mail to Beatrice, inquiring about this strange call and why she received some disclosures, but no credit reports.
115. On May 7, 2004, Beatrice returned plaintiff’s call and she left a long VM explaining that she had not been at work due to her father’s heart attack and that she could not “put together the best purchase program” and therefore provided plaintiff’s phone number to Jonathan.
116. Upon information and belief, AMERIQUEST denied plaintiff’s mortgage application no later than 5/7/04, as per Beatrice’s voice message, although the actual date of decline was apparently no later than 4/28/04, when plaintiff’s application data had already been provided to Great Southwest Mortgage.
117. Upon information and belief, the 4/21/04 credit reports were the only new information AMERIQUEST had received since plaintiff’s 4/20/04 telephone application and plaintiff’s credit caused Beatrice to decline the application.
118. AMERIQUEST failed to provide plaintiff with the true reason for the decline within 30 days from the decline as required by the ECOA and FCRA.
119. On May 8, 2004, plaintiff wrote to Beatrice:
Hi Beatrice,
I received your 5/7/04 voice mail and I'm sorry your Dad had a heart attack, I hope he is well now.
I am concerned because you said that you would reply to the e-mail below, but I haven't received anything from you.
Where are my credit reports with the FICO scores? What are the problems with my loan?
I'll greatly appreciate a response,
Christine
120. On May 12, 2004, AMERIQUEST sent a “Notification of Incompleteness” to plaintiff. It advised that the loan application was on hold pending the receipt of the following items: “Current Paystubs, Borrower W-2, Proof of Hazard/Flood Insurance.”
121. Plaintiff had informed Beatrice prior to applying that she was self-employed and looking for prequalification and it is impossible to provide hazard/flood insurance prior to having a purchase agreement for the subject property.
122. Plaintiff’s September 10, 2004 press release “Consumer Sues Ameriquest Mortgage Company for Spamming, False Promises, Misrepresentation and Incompetence” was republished at many financial websites and accessed over 52,000 times at http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/9/prweb156653.htm. [Exhibit E]
123. Despite plaintiff’s notice to AMERIQUEST attorney Jeffrey Messing and PR representative Joan Gladstone prior to the release, plaintiff has not received any comments or objections from AMERIQUEST or its representatives.
124. Plaintiff therefore concluded that all her allegations are true.
125. To date, plaintiff has not received any communications from Beatrice, she has not received the promised credit reports nor has AMERIQUEST explained what caused its inability to “put together the best purchase program.”
126. Plaintiff alleges that AMERIQUEST attempted to cover up its false promises, misrepresentations, extraordinary incompetence and gross negligence by submitting entirely false and misleading statements to the Court.
127. AMERIQUEST violated AZ Consumer Fraud and Mortgage Brokers Statutes repeatedly and deliberately, as it enticed plaintiff to apply with false promises of credit reports, competent consultation and availability of loan programs for self-employed persons.
CAUSES OF ACTION
148. AMERIQUEST demonstrated gross negligence and incompetence and misrepresented its ability to assist plaintiff in violation of A.R.S. § 44-1522 and A.R.S. § 6-947.
149. AMERIQUEST or its agents are liable for the transmission of at least one false and deceptive bulk email advertisement to plaintiff in violation of A.R.S. § 44-1522 and A.R.S. § 44-1372.
150. AMERIQUEST failed to provide the adverse action letter in violation of FCRA § 1681m and ECOA § 1691(d).
160. Plaintiff seeks judgment in plaintiff’s favor and damages against the Defendants, based on the following requested relief:
....
h) An order directing AMERIQUEST to provide plaintiff with the promised credit reports and the adverse action letter containing the true reason for the decline. |
