Frank Kosir, Jr., Esquire fk@muslaw.com |
Bebee v. Pennsylvania
Human Relations Commission, 2012 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 316 (2012)
This
matter addressed the issue of whether the Pennsylvania Human Relations
Commission had the authority to dismiss a complaint alleging predatory and
discriminatory lending practices as untimely filed, where the party against
whom the allegations were made failed to file a timely response. In 2007, Phyllis Bebee (“Bebee”) refinanced a
residential mortgage (the “Mortgage”) with First Franklin Financial Corporation
(“First Franklin”). The Mortgage was
subsequently assigned on several occasions, and was held at different times by
Merrill Lynch First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust, LaSalle Bank National
Association, Bank of America, and U.S. Bank, N.A. On April 21, 2009, U.S. Bank, N.A. commenced
a foreclosure action against Bebee in the Montgomery County Court of Common
Pleas due to her default under the Mortgage.
Following
the filing of the foreclosure complaint, Bebee filed a complaint before the
Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (the “Commission”) against Bank of
America, alleging that she had been the victim of mortgage fraud. Specifically, Bebee contended that at the
time of refinance, her monthly income had been overstated by approximately two
hundred percent, and that she had not been advised of the amount her monthly
mortgage payment would increase. Bebee also alleged racial and age
discrimination. Bank of America failed
to file a timely response, and a judgment was entered against it as to
liability. After a subsequent hearing was
held to determine damages, the Commission hearing officer dismissed Bebee’s
complaint concluding, inter alia, that it was untimely filed, and that
since Bank of America was nothing more than an assignee under the Mortgage,
Bebee could not assert claims against it for actions that were allegedly
undertaken by the original mortgagee.
On
appeal, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed. In issuing its ruling, the court noted that
43 P.S. § 959 permits the Commission to dismiss any action brought before it at
any point prior to the entry of final judgment, if it concludes that the action
was untimely filed. Therefore, as 43 P.S.
§ 959(j) requires a complaint alleging unlawful discrimination to be filed
within one hundred and eighty (180) days of the alleged discriminatory act–and
Bebee did not assert her cause of action for more than two years after the
alleged predatory and discriminatory conduct had occurred–the Commission was
within its rights to dismiss her complaint, despite the fact that Bank of
America had failed to file a timely response.
No comments:
Post a Comment