KAI v. AAMES CAPITAL CORPORATION (2006)

Aames Capital Corporation filed a complaint against Emma and Luk Kai to foreclose a mortgage.   After Luk Kai passed away, Emma Kai filed a counterclaim and affirmative defenses.   Following a non-jury trial, the trial court entered a final judgment in favor of Aames on the foreclosure claim and all of the counterclaims and affirmative defenses, except for a portion of the First Affirmative Defense, under which the trial court concluded that Aames was liable for a Federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) violation and awarded Kai $1,000 in damages.   Kai timely appealed the final judgment.   Aames timely cross-appealed.

We affirm as to all three issues raised by Kai on appeal.   However, we reverse as to the issue raised by Aames on cross-appeal.   We are unpersuaded by Kai's argument, both on appeal and cross-appeal, regarding public official fees;  we find that there is no technical violation of TILA.   The public official fees were properly itemized and disclosed on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement.   See Official Staff Commentary to 12 C.F.R. § 226.18(o ).   As such, we remand for the trial court to vacate Paragraph 18 of the Final Judgment in which the trial court found Aames liable for a technical violation of TILA regarding the disclosure of public official fees and Paragraph 34 awarding Kai damages of $1,000 for this technical violation.

Affirmed In Part, Reversed In Part.

ROTHSCHILD, RONALD J., Associate Judge.

POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.