Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Welch v. Bank of America

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

February 11, 2014

GEORGE WELCH, Plaintiff,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 14)

ARTHUR J. SCHWAB, District Judge.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

On July 22, 2013, Pro Se Plaintiff filed the following Complaint against Bank of America ("BANA")[1], alleging "predatory lending, " "conspiracy, " "fraud, " and "harassment, " relating to the increase of $81.00 per month in his monthly escrow, as follows (including any misspellings, extra spacing, and typos):

In June of 2012, I purchased Insurance with USAA. Bank of America (B of A) had informed me of an increase in my monthly payments.
Bank of America stated rationale was, the amount of the monthly payments had increased because the escrow needed had increased (?), And thus, B of A was seeking an Eighty One Dollar monthly increase or as B of A stated $975.00 per annum.
Next, I began receiving a series of "helpful" directions and threats from B of A. All of these being aimed at costing Plaintiff; and all of which were camouflage (and poorly) for monthly payment increases.
Actually, this scheme to defraud the Plaintiff, started in 20110 (April) when B of A directed Plaintiff to send payments to Wilmington, Delaware. The Plaintiff did not recognize this at the time. B of A next complained that the Plaintiff was one month, behind. Then two months, behind. I called B of A in Simi Valley, California. After some discussion and time; the Supervisor, came back on the line and reported, that Delaware Office had placed the payments in a - Money Market Account" (?) or what ever! She explained, the account was up to date, and that b of A owed Plaintiff, sixty-four Dollars ($64.00) and what did I want to do with this amount? Plaintiff's response was to place that owed to me in the same account.
Plaintiff would now pay all escrow, directly. Plaintiff called B of A Office to ascertain what company held the escrow. The B of A people stated that they did not know. However, Plaintiff did find the escrow people by going through some old records. Calling the escrow company Plaintiff was informed that B of A owed the escrow company $25.75 from last year and $106.25 for this year. Plaintiff paid it all last month and borough and known School Taxes.
The payment of all escrow was the decision of the Plaintiff. With this method what and the amount will be. "a known amount and when it is due.
The mortgage-holder (B of A) planned to increase the monthly payments by some 11 or more %. B of A was summon to a hearing in Magisterial Court (28th March 2013) and failed to appear. Plaintiff appealed to Allegheny County Court (Court of Record) County Court was to have B of A and Plaintiff explain the rational of their positions (before four selected lawyers. B of A, again was a no show. Thus, Plaintiff is making appeal to the Federal Court Systems.
These circumstances and actions with lack of responsibility are the hallmark of B of A nation-wide fraud and predatorial racketeering.
Plaintiff was called by Green Tree (a serving?) Company; located in Rapid City, South Dakota. This company was demanding that I make payment to them or B of A. I patiently tried to explain to the person on the telephone that B of A was already in the Commonwealth Court System. Since, I was getting nothing over the person on the telephone. I demanded to speak with the employer.
To him, I explained that 1. I had never heard of this company. 2. I did not have contract with them. 3. I did not owe them money. 4. B of A was already in the Commonwealth Judicial System.
Plaintiff also extended an opportunity for Green Tree to become involved in this suite against B of A by another telephone call or letter to Plaintiff. This was fair warning.
Plaintiff is thus initiating suite again Bank of America and Green Tree (serving) for the following illegal actions.

Plaintiff is seeking punitive and restitutional damages in the amount of Seventy Five Thousands of Dollars, for these former and on-going illegal acts.

Doc. no. 1.

Thereafter, on August 16, 2013, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and, in the alternative, Motion for Definite Statement. Doc. no. 3.

United States Magistrate Maureen J. Kelly scheduled a Status Conference for September 3, 2013, by Text Order of August 20, 2013. Since Plaintiff failed to appear, Magistrate Judge Kelly entered the following Minute Entry:

Minute Entry for Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 9/3/2013. (Court Reporter: audio recorded). OUTCOME: Upon review of the Complaint and the Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative, Motion for a More Definite Statement, the Court scheduled a status conference and ordered Plaintiff and defense counsel to attend in person. At the date and time scheduled, Plaintiff failed to appear. The Court was not contacted by Plaintiff. A separate scheduling order will issue as well as a rule to show cause order relative to the failure of Plaintiff to appear. Defense counsel advised the Court that Plaintiff obtained a judgment against Bank of America at the district justice level in state court that may bar the claim at issue. Defense counsel was referred to Plaintiff's phone number on the docket and instructed to contact him directly. Another status conference will be scheduled. Plaintiff and defense counsel to attend in person. (dgg) Copy of this Hearing Memo mailed to Plaintiff at address of record on 9/4/2013. (Entered: 09/04/2013)

Doc. no. 6.

Magistrate Judge Kelly also entered the following two Orders on September 4, 2013, after Plaintiff failed to appear at the September 3, 2013 Status Conference:

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE issued on Plaintiff, George E. Welch, returnable 9/25/2013, to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to appear for the status conference that was scheduled for Tuesday, 9/3/2013 at 2:00 p.m. as directed in Order of Court dated 8/20/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 9/4/2013. Copy of this Order mailed to Plaintiff at address of record on 9/4/2013. (dgg) (Main Document 7 replaced on 9/6/2013) (dgg, ) (Entered: 09/04/2013)
ORDER granting 3 Motion for More Definite Statement. Plaintiff is directed to file an Amended Complaint by 10/4/2013 setting out the specific facts that support each claim against each defendant. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 9/3/2013. Copy of this order mailed to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.