## Facts

- Plaintiffs Thomas Lane and Carleen Lane obtained a home mortgage loan serviced by defendant Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.
- The Lanes applied to Ocwen for a loan modification.
- During the modification-review process, Ocwen allegedly told the Lanes not to make their regular loan payments while the application was under review.
- Ocwen later granted the loan modification.
- After granting the modification, Ocwen allegedly failed to tell the Lanes the amount of their new modified monthly payment, even after the Lanes made multiple requests for that information.
- Ocwen later told the Lanes they were past due because they had not made payments, but allegedly did not tell them the amount of the past-due payments.
- The deed of trust allowed foreclosure if the Lanes failed to make payments required under the loan documents.
- Ocwen initiated foreclosure proceedings on the property.
- The Lanes filed this federal action against Ocwen and sought emergency injunctive relief, including a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop the foreclosure sale.

## Issues

1. Whether the Lanes were entitled to a temporary restraining order enjoining Ocwen’s foreclosure sale based on the allegations about Ocwen’s loan-modification communications and payment-disclosure failures.
2. Whether the alleged failure to provide clear information about the modified payment amount and the amount past due stated a viable federal consumer-credit claim (including under the Truth in Lending Act) sufficient to support emergency injunctive relief.

## Decision

- The court addressed the Lanes’ request for temporary restraining relief aimed at preventing a foreclosure sale while the dispute over the loan modification and payment information was litigated.
- Publicly available summaries of this case do not provide the court’s specific ultimate disposition on the TRO request or the final merits outcome of the Lanes’ statutory claims.

## Legal Principles

- A plaintiff seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction generally must satisfy the federal equitable factors applied to emergency injunctive relief, including showing a likelihood of success on the merits and a likelihood of irreparable harm absent relief, along with consideration of the balance of equities and the public interest.
- The Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., provides for civil liability (including damages in appropriate circumstances) for certain violations of its disclosure and related consumer-credit requirements. See 15 U.S.C. § 1640.
- In mortgage-servicing disputes involving imminent foreclosure, courts evaluating emergency relief commonly focus on whether the borrower’s pleadings and evidence show a legally cognizable claim tied to the alleged disclosure/servicing misconduct and whether foreclosure would cause harm that cannot be adequately remedied by money damages alone.

## Conclusion

In *Lane v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC*, No. 3:17-cv-00008 (W.D. Va. 2017), Thomas and Carleen Lane challenged Ocwen’s handling of a loan modification—alleging Ocwen told them not to make payments during review, granted a modification, then failed to provide clear information about the new payment amount and later claimed they were past due—after which Ocwen moved toward foreclosure; the case includes the Lanes’ request for a TRO to stop a foreclosure sale, but open summaries do not report the court’s specific TRO ruling or ultimate merits disposition.


Lane v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, Case No. 3:17-cv-00008 (2017)