In a case against Fidelity National Financial Inc., two homeowners, Melissa Henson and Keith Turner, alleged that the company violated RESPA by receiving fees from delivery companies in exchange for referring overnight delivery business to the carriers using its escrow subsidiaries. The company argued that it performed actual services in exchange for the marketing fees, and asked the court to dismiss the case. The court denied the motion, finding that the phrase “for services actually performed” contained in Section 8(c)(2) refers specifically to “settlement services.”
Fidelity previously filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the class action complaint. The court granted the motion in part, by removing Henson from the action and eliminating Turner’s claim under RESPA Section 8(b). The court did not, however, dismiss Turner’s Section 8(a) claim.
Fidelity then filed a motion on the pleadings, asking the court to dismiss Turner’s Section 8(a) claim. The company argued that it provided actual services in exchange for marketing fees, which is allowed under RESPA.
TO READ THE FULL STORY
Cover Story: