A major mortgage lending company was allegedly a little too Quicken to assume that a customer wanted to opt out of legal representation.
Tyrone Mosley has sued Quicken Loans Inc. in U.S. District Court in Aiken for giving him a pre-populated loan form that he says automatically prevented him from having a lawyer at his side during the transaction.
Mosley asserts in his complaint that “I/We will not use the services of legal counsel” was already printed on the form. He also alleges that he was not given an option to fill in his own selection.
Quicken contended that the pre-printed language on the form complied with a law that requires lenders to disclose enough information to borrowers to determine whether they want lawyers.
But U.S. District Judge J. Michelle Childs of Columbia wasn’t buying what Quicken was selling.
“If the facts alleged by Plaintiff are true, it is hard to imagine how Defendant could have ascertained Plaintiff’s preference for an attorney if Defendant essentially told Plaintiff what his preference was by providing him with an already completed form,” Childs wrote in a June 30 order.
She found that Mosley could move forward with his claim that Quicken prevented him from opting for legal counsel.
But she dismissed Mosley’s separate claim for unconscionable inducement, finding that he had failed to allege that he applied for the loan based on whether Quicken would let him choose an attorney.
If this case goes to trial, Quicken might want to go ahead and provide the jury with a pre-printed verdict form – just to be certain.