Once again, our Courts have ruled in favor of a bank. In 2005, Mr. and Mrs. Diaz (Diaz) executed a note for a home equity line of credit secured by a deed of trust on their home.  The deed of trust was for the benefit BBVA bank. 

In 2012 Diaz stopped payments.  At the same time, the couple filed for bankruptcy.  In bankruptcy court the Diaz’ obligation to repay the loan was discharged.

Nine years after their obligation was discharged, the couple filed a quiet title lawsuit. Diaz argued that the six-year statute of limitations for the bank to foreclose on their home began when they missed their first payment. The BBVA filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the statute of limitations begin to run on the date the deed matured or when it sought to enforce its remedies.  The trial court agreed with the BBVA and granted the motion to dismiss. 

The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed.  The court rejected Diaz’ argument that the statute of limitations began to run when they missed their first payment.  Based on the Court of Appeals’ decision in Webster Bank N.A. v. Mutka, 250 Ariz. 498 the statute of limitations for a bank to seek its remedies only begins to run on future, unmatured installments when the bank seeks to accelerate the debt.  The position asserted by the couple, on the other hand, only applied to unsecured debt, such as credit card debt. See case link below.

We also handle, Breach of contract, Non-compete agreements, Non-disclosure agreements, Employee theft and embezzlement, Insurance purchases and enforcement of policy coverage, Negotiation and/or enforcement of commercial leases, Negligence and gross negligence resulting in losses, Intentional acts causing a company to suffer damages, Tortious interference with contractual relationships, Unjust enrichment, Real Estate fraud, Consumer fraud, Conversion/Theft, Intentional and/or negligent misrepresentation, Business torts and Real estate title and escrow. Bill Miller 602-319-6899

Diaz v. BBVA USA 

Comments are closed.