Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Opinion / 2010AP1738 All Cities Privacy Class v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.

2010AP1738 All Cities Privacy Class v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.

Civil
Banking

Persons who only received solicitations, but no services, from a mortgage broker cannot recover damages from the surety posted by the broker.

“We conclude that the members of the Privacy Class are not ‘persons to whom [All Cities] provided services,’ and, therefore, Hartford is not required to pay the judgment rendered against All Cities under the plain terms of the surety bond and Wis. Stat. § 224.72(4)(d)1.  See id.  It is undisputed that the members of the Privacy Class did not solicit the mailing they received from All Cities nor did any members of the class take out a loan from All Cities based upon the mailing.  In fact, the Privacy Class admits in its brief that the mortgage offers were a ‘sham’ and that ‘All Cities could not, and did not intend to, deliver on its so-called “pre-approved” offers’ of credit. In other words, we agree with the circuit court that while the members of the Privacy Class ‘received an ad in the mail or a post card offering services’ they ‘have not actually been provided services.’”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP1738 All Cities Privacy Class v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.

Dist. I, Milwaukee County, Kahn, J., Brennan, J.

Attorneys: For Plaintiff: Robert K. O’Reily, John D. Blythin, Cudahy; For Defendant: Eric J. Meier, Milwaukee.

Full Text


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*