This case arises out of a foreclosure and sheriff’s sale involving plaintiff’s home. The Mortgage and accompanying loan were revived pursuant to a loan modification agreement, and the sheriff’s sale was set aside. The affidavit to set aside the sheriff’s sale and revive the mortgage was recorded on June 15, 2015.
Under the terms of the 2015 modification agreement between plaintiff and Bank, plaintiff’s total monthly payment was $592.24. The agreement specifically provided that the monthly escrow payment may adjust periodically. Consequently, the agreement also specifically provided that the total monthly payment may adjust periodically. Plaintiff specifically agreed in the modification agreement that he will be in default if he does not comply with the terms of the Loan Documents, as modified by the Agreement.
Pursuant to the agreement, the modifications took effect on June 1, 2015, and plaintiff’s first modified payment was due on July 1, 2015. The modification agreement was recorded on August 25, 2015.
On October 1, 2015, according to the affidavit of Bank loan administration analyst, an annual escrow disclosure statement was mailed via first class United States mail to plaintiff at his home on the Property. The escrow disclosure statement showed that plaintiff’s new monthly payment would be $857.76 and that this new payment amount would take effect on November 1, 2015.
In a letter dated February 23, 2016, addressed to plaintiff from Bank, plaintiff was informed that his loan was past due, and Bank offered plaintiff the opportunity to schedule a face-to-face interview to discuss his financial circumstances and options to make his loan current. This letter was mailed to plaintiff at the Property via first class United States mail. In a letter dated February 25, 2016, addressed to plaintiff from Bank, plaintiff was informed that his failure to make timely payments on the mortgage note had caused a default in the Mortgage.
The letter further indicated that plaintiff could cure the default by submitting all payments due since January 1, 2016, which amounted to $1,818.02. The letter also stated: This default must be cured by paying the above amount. You have thirty (30) days from the date this letter is mailed to make your overdue payment. If you fail to cure this default, your indebtedness may be accelerated, the entire amount due and payable immediately, and it may result in the sale of the property. This letter was mailed to plaintiff at the Property via first class United States mail.
On August 6, 2016, notice that the Mortgage on the subject property was in default and would be foreclosed by sale was posted in a conspicuous place and attached in a secure manner to the Property. Additionally, notice that the Mortgage on the Property was in default and would be foreclosed by sale was published in the Oakland County Legal News. The sheriff’s deed was recorded on October 25, 2016.
On May 5, 2017, plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against defendants.
In lieu of an answer, defendants filed a motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(8) and (C)(10), arguing essentially that plaintiff lacked standing to bring claims related to the Property because plaintiff’s legal interest in the Property was extinguished through properly conducted foreclosure proceedings and the redemption period had expired and that none of plaintiff’s claims had legal merit.
The trial court granted Bank’s motion for summary disposition.