Opinion ID: 3134113
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: DTAForms

Text: Brown contends the notice of default provision, RCW 61.24.030(8), supports her argument that the beneficiary for purposes of the mediation exemption provision, RCW 61.24.166, is the owner of the note. The trustee or beneficiary issues the notice of default to the borrower. RCW 61.24.030(8). The notice of default must inform the borrower, among other things, ofthe name and address of the owner of any promissory notes or other obligations secured by the deed of trust and the name, address, and telephone number of a party acting as a servicer of the obligations secured by the deed of trust. !d. at (8)(l) (emphasis added). Only after the notice of default has been issued may an attorney or housing counselor refer a borrower to FFA mediation. RCW 61.24.163(1). But, when the attorney or housing counselor does so, the Department's form asks for the contact information of the Beneficiary (Holder of Note). WASH. STATE DEP'T OF COMMERCE, Foreclosure Fairness Program, http://www.commerce.wa.gov/ Programs/housing/Foreclosure/Pages/default.aspx (last visited Oct. 19, 20 15) (click Referral to Mediation Form and Instructions to download form). According to -28- Brown v. Wash. State Dep 't of Commerce, No. 90652-1 Brown, the Department's interpretation creates an illogical system where the information [the Department] asks for on the referral form, namely the identity of the beneficiary, cannot be obtained by a referrer from the [notice of default]-the issuance of which triggers the right to ask for FFA mediation. Br. of Appellant at 25. We disagree. A borrower can identify the note holder based on the information provided in the notice of default. The notice of default informs the borrower of the identity of the servicer. RCW 61.24.030(8)(/). Servicer is not a legal term of art. Homeowners use the word to refer to the bank to which they send mortgage payments because they reasonably believe the servicer is the person entitled to enforce the note and because paying the servicer will discharge their obligation. That is true when the servicer holds the note. RCW 62A.3- 30l(i), -602(a). The inference that a servicer denotes a holder is therefore apparent and we decline to read the notice of default form as creating an absurd or illogical system for borrowers seeking FFA mediation. Brown next argues that the statute's notice of sale form appears to equate beneficiary status with ownership. It provides in part, The attached Notice of Trustee's Sale is a consequence of default(s) in the obligation to [blank space], the Beneficiary of your Deed of Trust and owner of the obligation secured thereby. RCW 61.24.040(±). This form language contemplates the traditional scenario where one party both owns and holds the note, making that party clearly the beneficiary. But the form does not require that the borrower's obligation is always owed to the -29- Brown v. Wash. State Dep 't of Commerce, No. 90652-1 owner of the note because that would make the DTA conflict with article 3 of the UCC. Article 3 provides that a borrower's obligation is owed to a person entitled to enforce the instrument[, the PETE], RCW 62A.3-412 (emphasis added), and [a] person may be a person entitled to enforce the instrument[, a PETE,] even though the person is not the owner of the instrument, RCW 62A.3-30 1 (emphasis added).