Plaintiff filed an oversized memorandum of points and authorities. Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113 limits the length of this Opposition to fifteen pages. If Plaintiff exceeds that page length in the future, the court may decide to ignore Plaintiff’s Opposition.

The Requests for Judicial Notice are GRANTED. Leave to amend shall be for fifteen (15) days.

The Demurrer to the First Cause of Action for Declaratory Relief is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

“As an unrelated third party to the alleged securitization, and any other subsequent transfers of the beneficial interest under the promissory note, Jenkins lacks standing to enforce any agreements, including the investment trust’s pooling and servicing agreement, relating to such transactions.” Jenkins v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 497, 513.

Jenkins has been followed in Siliga v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 75, 82.

“California courts have refused to allow trustors to delay the nonjudicial foreclosure process by pursuing preemptive judicial actions challenging the authority of a foreclosing ‘beneficiary’ or beneficiary’s ‘agent.’” This is the majority view. Plaintiff failed to show that he experienced any prejudice. Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,(2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 256, 272.

The Demurrer to the Second Cause of Action for Deceit is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

Plaintiff failed to allege the elements of fraud with specificity. “In California, fraud must be pled specifically; general and conclusory allegations do not suffice. . . .A plaintiff’s burden in asserting a fraud claim against a corporate employer is even greater. In such a case, the plaintiff must “allege the names of the persons who made the allegedly fraudulent representations, their authority to speak, to whom they spoke, what they said or wrote, and when it was said or written.” Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 645.

The Demurrer to the Third Cause of Action for Constructive Fraud is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

Constructive fraud is based upon a fiduciary or confidential relationship. Salahutdin v. Valley of California, Inc. (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 555, 562. Plainiff failed to alleged a fiduciary relationship with the Defendants.

The Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action for Tortious Interference is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

In order to prove intentional or negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, plaintiffs must show defendants engaged in conduct that was wrongful by some legal measure other than the fact of the interference itself.” Contemporary Services Corp. v. Staff Pro Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1043, 1060. Plaintiff has failed to show that Defendants engaged in wrongful conduct to interfere with the contract.

The Demurrer to the Fifth Cause of Action for Slander of Title is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

Civil Code “section 2924 deems the statutorily required mailing, publication, and delivery of notices in nonjudicial foreclosure, and the performance of statutory nonjudicial foreclosure procedures, to be privileged communications under the qualified common-interest privilege of section 47, subdivision (c)(1).” Kachlon v. Markowitz (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 316, 333-334. Plaintiff must allege that Defendants acted maliciously in order to overcome the qualified privilege.

The Demurrer to the Sixth Cause of Action for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.

“[A]s a general rule, a financial institution owes no duty of care to a borrower when the institution’s involvement in the loan transaction does not exceed the scope of its conventional role as a mere lender of money.” Nymark v. Heart Fed. Savings & Loan Assn. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1089, 1096. Plaintiff cannot establish the duty of care for negligence.

The Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Violation of Rosenthal Act is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.

In order to establish a claim under the FDCPA against Recon, the facts as alleged must show that Recon was a “debt collector” as defined by the Act, that Recon’s challenged conduct constituted ‘debt collection,’ and that the debt collection actions violated a provision of the Act.” Pfeifer v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1250, 1262. “[G]iving notice of a foreclosure sale to a consumer as required by the Civil Code does not constitute debt collection activity under the FDCPA.” 211 Cal.App.4th at 1264 (Footnote omitted).

The Demurrer to the Eighth Cause of Action for Violation of Business & Professions Code 17200 is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

Plaintiff failed to allege this cause of action with specificity. “A plaintiff alleging unfair business practices under these statutes must state with reasonable particularity the facts supporting the statutory elements of the violation.” Khoury v. Maly’s of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 619.

The Demurrer to the Ninth Cause of Action for Quasi-Contract is OVERRULED.

“’[T]he elements for a claim of unjust enrichment [are] receipt of a benefit and unjust retention of the benefit at the expense of another.” Elder v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 841, 857.

The Demurrer to the Tenth Cause of Action for Accounting is OVERRULED.

“A cause of action for an accounting requires a showing that a relationship exists between the plaintiff and defendant that requires an accounting, and that some balance is due the plaintiff that can only be ascertained by an accounting.” Teselle v. McLoughlin (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 156, 179. It is not required that the “relationship” be fiduciary. Plaintiff alleged that a balance is owed to him.