FILED FOR RECORD 

9/5/2023 12:29 PM 

BETTY HERRIAGE 

DISTRICT CLERK 

CaNmenSDelgacJo TM

CV23-0430-3 

CAUSE NO. 

STEPHANIE A. JOHNSON n/Icia § IN THE DISTRICT COURT 

STEPHANIE A. RANGE, § 

§ - 

Plaintiff,, § 

§ - . 

v. § 

§ JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING, and § 

LOANCARE, LLC, its/their successors § 

and/or assigns, § 

§ ' 

Defendants. § OF HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR 

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

NOW COMES Stephanie A. Johnson n/Ic/a Stephanie A. Range, hereinal3er called 

Plaintifff, complaining of and about Lakeview Loan Servicing and Loancare, LLC. its/their 

successors and/or assigns, as Defendants, and for her clairns and causes of action set forth herein 

below, and respectfully shows unto the Court the following: 

I. 

DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN LEVEL 

1. Plaintiff intends that the discovery be conducted under Discovery Leveel 2. 

II. 

PARTIES AND SERVICE 

2. Plaintiff, Stephanie A. Johnson n/k/a Stephanie A. Range ("Plaintiff"), is an 

individual whose present address is 21581 Waterwood Drive, Chandler, Texas 75758. The Iast 

three digits of Plaintiffs driver's license number are XXX, and the iast three digits of their social 

security humbers are XXX. 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VER[FIED PETITION, etc. —Stephanie Range Page 1 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 46
a 

.t 

3. Defendant Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC ("Lakeview') is a foreign limited 

liability company doing business in the State of Texas and purports to be the current mortgagee 

and owner and holder of PlaintifFs mortga& laan made the subject of this suit, and may be 

served with process by serving its registered agent, Corporation Service Company, 211 East 7th 

Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701. Service of `process- upon said Defendant as described 

above can be effectuated by personal delivery to its registered agent identified herein. 

4. Defendant LoanCare, LLC ("LoanCare") is a foreign limited liability company 

doing business in the State of Texas and purports to be the current mortgage loan servicer of 

Plaintiff s mortgage loan made the subject of this suit, and may be served with process by 

serving its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 

75201. Service of process upon said Defendant as described above can be effectuated by 

personal delivery to its registered agent identified herein. 

III. 

JURISDICTIDN AND VENU]E ~ 

5. The subject matter in controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of this court. 

6. Plaintiff seeks: 

a. monetary relief of more than $100,000, including damages of any kind, 

including penalties, costs, expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attonney's fees; and, 

b. injunctive relief in the forrn of a temporary restraining order and 

temporary injunction; and, 

7. This court has personal jurisdiction herein because the Defendants routinely 

engage in or transact business with sufficient minimum contacts in the State of Texas. 

PLAINTIFF'S OR,tGiNAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stepltanie Range Page 2 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 47
8. Venue is proper in Henderson County, Texas in this cause pursuant to TEX. CIV. 

PRAC. & REIVI. CODE §15.011 et seq., and because this action involves real property that 

is situated entirely in Henderson County, Texas. 

IV. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

5 

9. On October 12, 2012,'Plaintiff purchased the real property and improvements 

commonly known as 21581 Waterwood Drive, Chandler, Texas 75758, and legally described, to 

, 

wit: 

ALL THAT CERTAIN LOT, TRRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN 

THE HILLHOUSE SURVEY, A-283, AND BEING KNOWPT AS LOTS 118 & 119, 

OF SECTION D IN WESTWOOD BEACH SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN IN PLAT 

RECORDED IN VOLUME 9, PAGE 17 AND CABINET C, SLIDE 251 OF THE 

PLAT RECORDS OF HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS (uProperty"); 

which is the PlaintifPs homestead. At all relevant and material times hereto, Plaintiff was and is 

the fee simple owner of the subject Property. A true and cortect copy of the General Warranty 

Deed With Third Party Vendor's Lien dated October 12, 2012, and recorded as instrument no. 

2012-00016976 in the official real property -records of the Henderson County Clerk's oflice to 

evidence Plaintiff's tee simple title and ownership of the subject Property is attached hereto 

marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

10. At that same time, October 12, 2012, Plaintitf applied for and obtained a 

mortgage loan from Georgetown Mortgage LLC ("Original Lender") evidenced by a promissory 

note in the original principal amount of $80,612.00 ('Note") and secured by a Deed of Trust of 

even date to Calvin C: Mann, Jr., Trustee {"Deed of Trust"). A true and correct copy of the Deed 

of Trust recorded as instrumcnt no. 2012-000'i69r7 in the official real property records of the 

PLAINTIFF'S OR[GINAL VERIFIED PETITiON, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 3 

~ 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 48
lienderson County Clerk's offiee is attached hereto marlCed Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein 

by reference for a11 purposes. 

11. Plaintiff made all required monthly loan payments due under the iVote and Deed 

of Trust. 

12. On or about April 2020, Plaintiff was dramatically and negativeiy affected by' 

COVID-19, and she contacted Defendant LoanCare to seek a COVID forbearance, which was 

approved.

. :;~:,•. 

, 

i3. On or about August 2021, Plaintiff: received a letter from Defendi~7t -LoanCare 

stating the forbearance would end on September. 21, 2021. Plaintiff reached; o Defendant 

~ 

LoanCare to see if she +could apply for a loan modiflcation and the Defendant supplied Plaintiff 

with the Loan Modification Application to complete. 

14. On March 3, 2022, Plaintiff applied for and, obtained a Loan' Modification 

Agreement from Defendants Lakeview and Loancare ("Loan 'ModifEcation"). Under the Loan ' 

Modification Agreement, Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendants monthly payments of $660.72 

beginning on December 1, 2012. A true and correct copy of the Loan Modification Agreement , 

;. 

recorded as instrument no. 2022-00003767 in the official real property ceeords of the Henderson 

County Clerk's office is attaehed hereto marked Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by 

reference for all purposes.

•'•;`.4. 

15. Plaintiff, made the required Enonthly payments pursuant to the te 

.~ 

of the Loan 

. . . . .. .. 

..,. 

~. 

Modification Agreement starting in Apri12022.

, . . . . ° ±}. 

,: , 

• 

. ...:: 

16. On or about April 12, 2022, Plaintiff made a payment to Defendant .Lakeview 

. .: . ..a. 

from her personal bank aecount in the amount of $700.00. A true and correct copy ;of Plaintiff s 

PLAINT[FF'S ORIGINAi;, VERIFIED P.ET1Ti0N,,.etc-.- Stephanie Range Rage 4 

. . . . 

• 

,

'i S 

. 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 4 of 20 PageID #: 49
, a 

. .. 

f r',•°IC 

.•. 

r ! 

bank statement to reflect the payment made to Defendant Lakeview is attachedi6oreto marked 

Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference for al) purposes. 

17. On or about April 27, 2022, Plaintiff made another payment::to Defendant 

Lakeview of $700 from PlaintifPs bank account, which payment represented the. May 2022 

instatlment paymerit. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs bank statement to reflect the payment 

made to Defendant Lakeview is attached hereto marked Exhibit "E" and incorporated herein by 

reference for all purposes. ' 

18. On or about June 6, 2022, Plainti€f made another payment to Defendant Lakeview 

from her bank account in the arnount of $653. A true and correct copy of Plaintifrs bank 

statement to reflect the payment made to Defendant Lakeview is attached hereto marked Exhibit 

"F" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

19. On or about July 7, 2022, Plaintiff made another monthly payment to Defendant 

Lakeview in the amount of $640.2. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff s bank statement to 

reflect the payment made to Defendant Lakeview is attached hereto marked Exhibit "G" and 

incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

20. On or about August 3, 2022, Plaintiff made another rnonthly ioan payment to 

Defendant Lakeview through her bank account in the amount of $700. A true and correct copy of 

PlaintifPs bank statement to reflect the payment made to Defendant Lakeview is attached hereto 

marked Exhibit "H" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

21. On or about early September 2022, Plaintiff received a letter f.rom Defendant 

y

' 

LoanCare dated August 29, 2022,-stating that her mortgage payment is thirty (30)`or more days 

past due, which made no sense whatsoever since Plaintiff had already paid all of,the required 

monthly mortgage payments under the Loan Modification Agreement. A true and correct copy of 

; . 

PLAINTIFF'S OR[GINAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stephanie Range .Page 5 

; 

~ 

' ,. a;t~• .. 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 5 of 20 PageID #: 50
the August 29, 2022 letter from Defendant LoanCare to Plaintiff is attached hereto marked 

Exhibit "I" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

22. On September 6, 2022, Plaintiff made another monthly payment through her bank 

account to Defendant Lakeview of $704.00. A true and correct copy of Plaintif#'s bank statement 

to reftect the payment made to Defendant Lakeview is attached hereto marked Exhibit "J" and 

incorporated herein by reference for al l purposes. 

23. On or about mid-September 2022, Plaintiff received another letter from 

Defendant LoanCare dated September 9, 2022, which stated that, K...We wanted to let you 

know that we are returaina or your paymen t to the originating online bill e'aver because 

your loan is epaid 'en full". (emphasis added). A true and correct copy of the letter dated 

September 9, 2022 is attached hereto marked Exhibit `'K" and incorporated herein by reference 

for all purposes. 

24. On or about mid-October 2022, Plaintiff received another letter from Defendant 

LoanCare dated October 7, 2022, with the Subject: "Ptease Contact Us about Your Recentiv 

Missed Morteape Pavment". (emphasis added). Once again Plaintiff was extremely confused 

as she kept receiving conllicting letters from Defendant LoanCare and she had been d'aligently 

and timely paying her monthly mortgage payments under the Loan Wlodification Agreement. A 

true and correct copy of the letter dated October 7, 2022 from Defendant LoanCare is attached 

hereto madced Exhibit "L" and incorporated herein by reference for atl purposes: 

25. On or about October 24, 2022, Defendant LoanCare mailed' Plaintiff a letter 

stating, "You received the enclosed letter fratn us that stated we returned aavnaent to the 

orisinating online bill .paver service because the loan is paid in full. After a review of the 

accouint information, we have determined that aavment should have been returned but the 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL vEttIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 6 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 6 of 20 PageID #: 51
loan is not naid in full..." (emphasis added). Plaintiff was becoming extremely frustrated as she 

continuously received conflicting information from the Defendants, and she had been timely 

tendering the monthly payments and there . A true and correct copy of the letter dated October 

24, 2022 is attached hereto marked Exhibit "M" and incorporated herein by reference for all 

purposes. 

26. On or about November 8, 2022, an Appointrnent of Substitute Trustee was 

recorded into the real property records of Henderson County, Texas. A true and correct copy of 

the Appointment of Substitute Trustee recorded as instrument no. 2022-00020956 in the offecial 

real property records of the Henderson County Clerk's office is attached hereto marked Exhibit 

"N" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

27. On January 3, 2023, Defendant LoanCare sent Plaintiff a letter confinning receipt 

of a Notice of Servicing Errors that Plaintiff had provided to the Defendants in response to the 

various conflicting and confusing letters and correspondence that she had been receiving. The 

January 3, 2023 letter stated, "Please accgt this as written confirmation tbat LoanCare. 

LLC received your notice of error reeardina the loan referenced above...in comaliance 

with apnlicable Federal law, a detailed written resaonse will be sent to eou no later than 30 

dpl fezcludina weekends and leaal Public holidays) from the date LoanCare received vour 

notice of error." (emphasis added). 

28. On January 13, 2023, Defendant LoanCare sent Plaintiff another letter stating that 

due to the nature of Plaintiff s request they need additional time to respond and that Plaintiff 

should expect to receive a response within 15 business days. 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGiNAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 7 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 52
29. On January 27, 2023, Defendant LoanCare sent Plaintiff yet another letter that 

said the exact same thing as the January 13, 2023 letter, i.e., "we need additional time to fully 

address vour concerns. You can exnett to receiive a resaonse from us within fifteen [15) 

business days:' (emphasis added). True and correct copies of the January 3, 2023, January 13, 

2023 and January 27, 2023 (etters received by Plaintiff from Defendant LoanCare are each 

attached hereto marked Exhibit "O" and incorporated herein by reference for ali purposes. 

30. On March 10, 2023, Defendant LoanCare sent Plaintiff another letter responding 

to a complaint that Plaintiff had f led with . Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Defendant 

Loancare stated in this letter, "The amoant reanired to brinQ the loan current fnr naements due 

Aa-aust. 2022 throu-eh March, 2023 is $5.699.7S": Plaintiff was once again shocked to her 

conscious and very confused as Defendant Loanlcare had accepted her August 2022 payment 

and only retumed the September 2022 payment after Defendant LoanCare sent numerous letters 

stating Plaintiff s loan was paid in full and then stated Plaintiff s payments were late, which was 

completely false and untrue as evidenced by the attached payment records. A true and correct 

copy of the letter dated March I0, 2023 from Defendant LoanCare is attached hereto titarked 

Exhibit "P" and incorporated herein by reference for al1 purposes. 

31. On April 21, 2023, Plaintiff spoke with a manager at LoanCare and she asked 

Plaintiff if Plaintiff could pay the past due balance. Plaintiff informed Defendant LoanCare that 

she could and would pay off the past due baiance. Defendant LoanCare's manager told Plaintiff 

that she would call Plaintifff back within a couple of days, but never did. 

32. On May 10, 2023, Defendants LoanCare and Lakeview, through its/their local 

foreclosure counsel, Barrett Daffn Frappier Turner & Engel, LLP, sent Plaintiff a Notice of 

Acceleration advising that her mortgage loan had been fully accelerated, which included a Notice 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 8 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 8 of 20 PageID #: 53
of [Substitute] Trustee's Sale advising that a foreclosure sale was scheduled for July 5, 2023. 

Upon receipt, Plaintiff immediately called Defendant LoanCare and advised that she would pay 

the past due amount. Defendant LoanCare told Plaintifff that someone would call her back with 

the reinstatement amount to pay, but once again no one ever did. A true and correct copy of the 

May 10, 2023 Notice of Acceleration and the Notice of [Substitute] Trustee's Sale included 

therewith are each attached hereto marked Exhibit "Q" and incorporated herein by reference for 

all purposes. 

33. On May 16, 2023, Defendant LoanCare sent another letter to Piaintiff stating that 

Plaintif'f has been approved for a USDA Cap and Extended Loan Modification. This letter stated 

that, "Within the inext 15 days. we will calculate the terms of vour mortaaae assistance offer 

and send vou a oacksae that outlines the reonired nlan. To acceot this offer, alease be sure 

to make all three reauired trial aavments within the months thev 'are due." (emphasis 

added). Plaintiff was very excited and relived to finally receive written confrmation that a 

modification offer had been made. A true and cotrect copy of the letter dated May 16, 2023 is 

attaehed hereto marked Exhibit "R" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

34. On June 27, 2023, Defendant LoanCare then sent Plaintiff another form letter 

confirming receipt of the Notice of Errors and advising that a detailed response would be sent 

within 30 days. A true and correct copy of the letter dated June 27, 2023 is attached hercto 

marked Exhibit "S" and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. 

35. Plaintitf then contacted Defendant LoanCare and was verbally told that the 

foreclosure sale scheduled forJuly 5, 2023 was eanceled due to fact that a loan rnodification was 

"under review" which was obviously contrary to the May 16, 2023 letter which confrmed that a 

modification had already been offered and was being sent to Plaintiff: To date, no actual 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. —5tephanie Range Page 9 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 9 of 20 PageID #: 54
written loan nnodifcation.offer has ever been arovid~.~al to PlaintofT, nor have the Defendants - 

ever urovided anv written resnonse to the_Notice of Errors as nromised_in their numerous 

letters. Plaintiff has lost all faith and patience with the Defendants as the Defendahts continue to .~ , 

provide conflicting statements and information, and Plaintiff still has never been,pcovided with 

any reinstatement quote or other infotmation to cure the default. (emphasis added): 

36. Ivforeovc:r, at no point have the Defendants ever provided Plaintiff with any notice 

of default and opportunity to cure notice, nor the 30-day period in which to cure the default as 

expressly required under paragraph 22 of the Deed of Trust (Exltibit "`B") and:.TEX. 

PROP. 

CODE 51.002(d), bpt yet they have purported to accelerate the loan and post her homestead 

property for foreclosure sale. 

V. 

FiItST ACTiON ~ 

' APtU 1~;1Vil"VKAI(Y=11VJUltll:1'1VP1 

37. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set frorth in Section IV above as if fully set forth herein. 

38. Pursuant to Rule 680, of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff hereby sceks 

immediate relief in the form of a Temporary Restraining Order wherein this Court otders, 

restrains and prohibits the Defendants, and/or any of its/their agents, , employees, attorneys, 

trustees, successor trustees, successorg and/or assigns from foreclosing upon Plaintiff s 

homestead property for a period of at least fourteen (14) days until a temporary. injunction 

r

hearing is held .by.this Court'conczrning whether f'laintiff has a probable right of recovery for her 

various clainis and causes.9f action pleaded herein. There presently exists an imminent threat of 

irreparable har.m to Plaintiff in the form mf thd~ Defendants, and/or its/their agents, employees. 

PLAINTIFF'S OiLIGINAL- VERIFiED PETITION,''etc. ~ Stephanie Range 

. Page 20 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 55
attorneys, trustees, successor trustees, successors and/or assigns stated threat and intent to 

complete a foreclosure sale and divest Plaintitff of her fee simple title, ownership interests, and 

possession of her homestead property, unless this Court immediately restrains such acts or 

conductas requested' herein. 

39. Moreover, after issuance of a temporary restraining order, and upon notice and a 

hearing as required by law, Plaintiff further seeks entry of a Temporary Injunction.,to maintain 

the status quo and prohibit the Defendants, andlor any of itsltheir agents, employees, attorneys. 

trustees, successor trustees, successors and/or assigns from foreclosing or attempting to foreclose 

upon PlaintifPs homestead property unti) the merits of Plaintiff:s various claims and causes of 

action as pleaded herein can be fairly and fully adjudicated. 

VI. 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION — 

BItEACH OF CONTRACT AND FAILURE OF CONDITION PI2ECEDENT 

40. Plaintiffhereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set forth in Section IV and V above as if fully set forth herein. 

41. The acts, conduct, or omissions of Defendants as described herein, supra, also 

constitute a material breach of the Deed of Trust and a failure of condition precedent as to 

its/their acceleration of; the Plaintiffs Loan and posting of` Plaintiffs homestead property ifor 

foreclosure sale, and which material breach is the proximate cause of the actual damageS 

sustained and incurred by Plaintiff in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

42. Specifically, the Defendants have breached paragraph 22 of the Deed of Trust for 

failure to provide Plaintiff with the required notices, which provides in pertinent part as follows: 

"22. Acceleration; ltemedies. Lender shall eive notice to Borrower nrior to 

acceleration followine Borrower's breach of any covenant or aereement in this Securitv 

Aereement tbut not nrior to acceleration under 5ection 18 unless Analicable Law arovides 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. —Stephanie Range Page 11 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 56
otherwise). The notice shall soecifv: (a) the default; (b) the action repuired to cure the 

defaulh (c) a date& not less than 30 days from the date the notice is Eiven to Borrower. Isy 

which the default must be cured: and (d) that failure to cure the default on or before the 

right to reinstate after acceleration and the rieht to hrina-a court action to assert the notrexistence of a default or anv other defense of Borrower to acceleration and sale..."

(ernphasis added). 

43. As a result of the foregoing breach of the Deed of Trust contract by the 

Defendants, Plaintift has sustained and incurred actual damages in excess of the minimum 

jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

THIR1) CAUSE OF ACTION — 

CQMMON LAW FRAUD 

44. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set forth in Section iV, V, and VI above as if fully set forth herein. 

45. The acts, conduct, or omissions of the Defendants as described herein, supra, 

also constitute common law fraud and are a producing cause of the actual damages sustained and 

incurred by Plaintiff in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

46. SpeciFcally, Defendant LoanCare made numerous material misrepresentations of 

fact that Plaintiff relied upon to her detriment. namely Defendant LoanCare misinfotmed 

Plaintiff by stating that her loan was paid in ful) and within the same month sent Plaintiff another 

conflicting letter claiming that her payment for August 2022 was thirty days late --- this aRer 

Plaintiff had timely paid all of the monthly payments due under the prior loan modification. 

Plaintiff then offered to pay the full reinstatement amount but the Defendants refused to provide 

any details of what was clairtted due and owing, and certainly never provided any notice of 

default and opportunity to cure notice. Further, Defendant l.oanCare specifically told Plaintiff, in 

PETITiON, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 12 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 57
,•,4 ' Ir. . . 

. . . 

writing, that she had beea approved. for a lo,an modification and that the written offer would be 

fotthcoming in fifteen days, but then never sent her any offer and instead purported to accelerate 

the loan and post her property for foreclosure sale, and Plaintiff relied upon all of'these material 

misrepresentations of fact to her detriment, which are the proximate cause of the actual damages 

Plaintiffhas sustained and incurred in excess o€the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

47. As each of the acts, conducts, or omissions of the Defendants as described herein, 

supra, that constitute common law fraud and were committed intentionally, knowingly and/or 

with malice, or a conscious in.difference as to the rights of Plaintiff, Plaintiff is entitled to and 

hereby seeks an award of exemplary damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of 

this Court. 

VIII. 

. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION - 

VIOLATIONS OF THE TEXAS DEBT COL.LECTIION ACT 

48. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set focth in Sections IV, V, VI, and VII above as if fully set forth herein. 

49. Further, the acts, conduct, or omissions of Defendant LoanCare, which at all times 

was acting in its capacity as mortgage servicer and third' party debt coliector on behalf of 

Defendant Lakeview, of wholly failing or refusing to ever provide Plaintiff with any Notice of 

Default and Opportunity to Cure notice °nor any amount to fully reinstate the loan or any true 

amount that was actually due and owing, also eonstitute the intentional and/or knowing 

misrepresentation of the character amount or extent of the debt to be collected, which false 

representations of material fact Plaintiff relied upon to her detriment and whieh are a producing 

cause of the actual damages sustained and incutred by Plaintiff in excess of the minimum 

jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PET[TION, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 13 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 13 of 20 PageID #: 58
50. Specifically, Defendant LoanCare and/or hislits various officers, directors, agents. 

attomeys, or employees as described herein, supra; constitute violations of the following 

provisions of the TDCA: §392.301(a)(7)-threatening that nonpayment of a consumer debt will 

result in the seizure, repossession, or sale of the person :c p-operty ivithottt proper co2rrt 

proceedings; and §392.30 1 (a)(8)-threatening to iake ari action prohibited by law; and 

§392.304(a)(8) — misrepresenting the character, exterrt, or amount of a consumer debt, or• 

misrepresenting the consumer's debt status in a judicial or guvernmental proceedi,tg; and 

§392.304(a)(19) — using any other false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt or 

obtain information corrcerning a consumer and which violations are a producing cause of the 

actual damages sustained and incuffed by Plaintiff in excess of the minimum jurisdictional Ifmits 

of this Court. 

51: . As each of the acts, conduct and/or omissions of Defendant LoanCare that 

constitute violations of Texas Debt Collection Act and were committed intentionally, knowingly 

and/or with malice, or a conscious indifference as to the rights of l'laintiff, Plaintiff is entitled to 

and hereby seeks an award of exempiary damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits 

of this Court. 

IX. 

FIFTII CAUSE OFAC'1'ION — 

NEGLIGENT NIISREPRESENTATION 

52. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set forth in Sections IV, V, V[, VII, and VI;I1 above as if fully set forth herein. 

53. The various acts, conduct, and/or omissions of the Defendants and/or its/their 

various employees, agents or attornfrys as described herein, supra, also constitute negligent 

PLAINTiFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PETITION..etc. — Stephanie Range . Page 14 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 14 of 20 PageID #: 59
misrepcesentation and are a producing cause of the actual damages sustained and incurred by 

Plaintiff in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

54. Specifically, Defendant LoanCare andlor its agents, employees, and/or attorneys. 

in the course of conducting the Defendant's business in a transaction in which the Defendant has 

a pecuniary interest, was negligent in responding to Plaintiff and in sending Plaintiffconflicting 

written infotmation concerning the status of the Loan and her pending request for loss mitigation 

and a loan modiflcation, as well as its repeated.failure to ever provide Plaintiffwith the amount 

claimed due and owing to cure the default, and instead purported to accelerrate the Loan and post 

her homesYead property for foreclosure sale, which constitutes negligent misrepresentation to the 

detriment of the Plaintiff who was wholly unaware and did not have an equxl opportunity to 

discover these materia) facts, and suffered injury and actuai damages in excess bf the minimum 

jurisdictional limits ofthis Court. 

Ki 

SIXTH CAUSE OF AC'I'ION — 

VIOLATIONS OF RESPA AND REGULATION X 

OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS 

55. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and realleges all material allegations of 

fact set forth in Sections IV, V, VI, V1I, VIII, and IX above as if ful[y set forth herein. 

56. The acts, conduct and/or omissions of the Defendant LoanCare, which at all 

material times hereto was acting in its capacity "mortgage servicer" of PlaintifPs Loan also 

constitute violations of Regulation X of the Code of Federal Regulations established by the 

Consumer Financial Protection Ruteau, 12 C.F.R. §1024.41 et seq., which became effective as of 

January 10, 2014, because the acts, conduct or omissions of said Defendant, and/or its various 

agents, representatives or employees as described herein, supra, constitute violations this statute, 

PLAINTIFF'S ORiGINAL VERIFIED PETITION, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 15 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 15 of 20 PageID #: 60
and those statutory violations are a producing cause of the actual damages sustained and incun•ed 

by. Plaintiffs in exeess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

57. Pursuant the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), 12 U.S.C. 

§2605(f), Plaintiff has a private right of action providing for remedies for the claimed breaclies 

of Regulation X, including actual damages, costs, statutory damages and attorney's fees. 

58. . Plaintiffs' Loan is a"federally related mortgage loan" as that term is defitied by 

12 C,F.R. § 1026.4 1 (e)(4), and the Defendant is subject to these regulations. 

59. . Specifically, since Defendant. LoanCace informed Plaintiff in writing that she had 

been approved for and. offered a loan modification, and then wholly failed to ever provide the 

written loan rnori;iffication offer, and instead accelerated: the Loan and posted Plaintiffs +` 

homestead property for foreclosure sale, and never followed through with providing the actual 

written offer, constitutes a violation.

 of RESPA and Regulation of the Code of Federal 

Regulations and is a producing cause of the actual damages sustain and incurred by PlaintitT in 

excess of the minimum jurisdicti4nal limitis of this Court. 

60. Further, Defendant LoanCare never provided any written response or information 

to Plaintiff concerning her Notice of Errors, even though D►efendant LoanCare sent Piaintiff three 

(3) different written letters acknowledging receipt of her Notice of Errors, wherein they promised 

that a written response would be forthcoming and/or told Plaintiff that they needed additional 

time to review, and then never provided any type of response whatsoever, and instead 

, .. ... 

. 

.. 

. .....r~.. . . 

accelerated the l.oan and posted her homestead property for foreclosures sale, all of which acts, 

conduct, or omissions constitute a separate and distinct violation of RESPA and are a producing 

cause of the actual damages ssutained and incun•ed by Plaintiff in excess of the minimum 

. : . >, . :., . • , . 

jurisdictional limits of this Court. 

PLAINTIFF'S aRIG#NAL. VERIFIED. PETtT1ON, : etc: —,$tephanie. Range Page'16 

. : 

, 

. . . . ~. , . . . . ? : 

~ 

.?'9' . . ~ . • ... • . .. ~rq. 

. 

r, 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 16 of 20 PageID #: 61
61. As each of the acts, conduct and/or omissions of Defendant LoanCare that 

constitute violations of RESPA and Regulation X and were committed intentionally, knowingly 

and/or with malice, or a conscious indifference as to the rights of PlaintitT, Plaintiff is entitled to 

and hereby seeks an award of exemplary damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits 

of this Coutt. 

XI. . 

. 

EXEMPI,ARY DAMAGES 

62. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference and'realieges alt material allegations of 

fact set forth in Sections IV, V, Vl, Vll, Vill,1X and X above as if fully set forth herein. 

63. Plaintiff would further show that the various acts, conduct ancVor omissions of the 

Defendants complained of herein were committed knowingly, willfully, intentionally, and with 

actual awareness, and with the specific and pre-detetmined intention of ' enriching said 

Defendants at the expense of Plaintiff. ln order to punish said Defendants for such 

unconscionable overreaching and to deter such actions and/or omissions in the future, Plaintiff 

also seeks recovery from Defendants for exemplary damages as provided by Section 

41.003(a)(1) of the Texas Civi) Practice and Remedies Code. 

XII. 

A'I"PORNEY'S FEES 

64. Request is made for all costs and reasonable and necessary attoretey's fees 

incurred by or on behalf of Plaintiff hetein, including all fees necessary in the event of an appeal 

of this cause to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Texas, as the Court deems 

equitable and just, as provided by: a) Section 37.001 et seq. of the Texas Civil Practices and 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAF. VERIFIED PETITION, etc. —.Stephanie Range Page 17 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 17 of 20 PageID #: 62
Remedies Code; (b) the Texas Debt Collection Practices Act, TEX, FIN. CODE § 392.001 et 

. 

,. 

seq., (c) RESPA and Regulation X of the Code of Federal Regulations; and (d) common law. 

XIII. 

JURY DEMAND 

65. Plaintiff hereby requests that all issues of fact be tried before a jury. 

04W 

PMY_ER 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff, Stephanie Rangc, respectfully 

prays that Defendants Lakeview and LoanCare, and/or each of its/their various agcnts, attomeys, 

or ernployees as described herein, supra, each be cited to appear and answer herein, and that 

Plaintiff be granted immediate relief in the form of a temporary restraining order and temporary 

injunction preventing the Defendants, and/or any of its/their respective agents, employees, 

attomeys, trustees, substitute trustees, successors and/or assigns from foreclosing upon Plaintiff s 

homestead property described herein until the merits of her various claims and causes of action 

pleaded herein may be fairly adjudicated; and that upon the final trial of this cause, judgment be 

entered in favor of Plaintiff, and against the Defendants, jointly and/or severally, for Breach of 

Contract and Failure of Condition Precedent; for,~;romrnon Law Fraud; for Negligent 

Misrepresentation; for violations of the Texas Debt Collection Act; and for violations of RESPA 

and the Code of Federal Regulations; and for an award of all economic and actual damages 

requested herein in an amount in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits Court, including 

exemplary damages, together with pre-judgment and post judgment interest at the maximum rate 

allowed by law, and for an award of all attorney's fees and costs of court incurred, and for such 

other and furttter relief, at law or in equity, to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled. 

,. 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFIED PET1T10N, etc. — Stephanie Range Page 18 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 18 of 20 PageID #: 63
Respectfully submitted, 

J. GANNON HEI.STOWSICI LAW FIRNi 

~, .. .,~•. 

/s/ Jnhn Cd -Ifedstowski 

John G. Helst©wski 

Texas Bar Na. '24078653 

5209 Heritage Ave., Suite 510 

Colleyville, TX 76034 

Telephone: (817) 382-3125 

Fax. (817) 382-1799 

Email: j"g 9~fi_rm.com j

Attorney for ['laintiff Stephanie Range 

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL VERIFiED PETITION, etc. —Stephanie Range Page 19 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 19 of 20 PageID #: 64
No 

Printed Name of Notary Puhlic 

My Commission Expires on:

8/28123. 12:13 PAA imago_123927839.JPG 

I~h:RIF!(;e4"1'IL)y 

S 1'ATG Or- 'I'li\AS 

COUNTY C)F _R~,A.d e-y('- -k ~ 

§ 

§ 

5 

"My nanic is I

 Ck yLL(' I atn thc Plttinti ff naincd in the tsttachcd and 

fc+rcgoing i'L.AINT3HH'S ORIG NAL VERIFIEU hETITION. l am over the agc of 21 years and 

Itave ttever bcett cattvictcd of a fclony or otlier crinic involving moral turpitudc. I have personal 

knoK'Iedge ofal! ofthe iacts set forth in tllc PLAINTIFF' ORIGINAi. PETITION and hereby statc 

that ever), factuat statement set forth therein is truc and cotrect. 

}=URTHER AFFIA?3T SAYETH NOT." 

~ 

EXECUTED this day of &;Gt5L, 2023. 

~? 

i ar~ — 

Signaffire 

G Ct 

Print 

SUBSCRIBED A1VD SWORN BEF0RE ME on this~J' day of L, 2023, by 

Clicnt, to certify whicli witness Iny hand And official seal. 

`~1111f/~/l1

~A`♦~,~v~+ 

. - 

_ •_ 

= ~43, # : f of • t%-;: 

(S~'~~~~

hltps•l/mad.google.comlmail/u10/#inbox/QgrcJHsBpVnmGjDqQbkzBSIPVQrfXX2bwtV7projeclor-1 1!i 

Case 6:23-cv-00499-JCB Document 2 Filed 10/10/23 Page 20 of 20 PageID #: 65