HousingWireHousingWire
Mutual of Omaha Mortgage has been given more time to respond to allegations against it in a case that accuses the lender of operating manipulative websites that skew reverse mortgage reviews in its favor.
The suit, brought by reverse mortgage competitor Longbridge Financial, alleges that Mutual of Omaha operates a series of websites that are both deceptive and purportedly in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) as well as guidance from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). This is according to court filings reviewed by HousingWire’s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD).
Attorneys for Mutual of Omaha told the court that they require additional time to thoroughly respond to the allegations laid out in the original complaint. The companies’ legal teams communicated with each other prior to the requested delay and Longbridge did not object, according to a court filing.
“There is good cause to grant this motion,” Mutual of Omaha’s legal team said in the initial filing. “Counsel needs additional time to investigate [Longbridge]’s allegations with [Mutual of Omaha]. [Longbridge]’s complaint — which is almost forty pages long — contains complex factual allegations and asserts claims against entities operating within a highly regulated industry.”
The case is also “in its infancy” with minimal scheduling obligations, the attorneys noted. The chief judge of the court, Dana M. Sabraw, found that good cause was shown to grant the request and extended the deadline to Dec. 17.
The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. Longbridge is seeking a jury trial and an injunction that would require Mutual of Omaha to take down the allegedly deceptive websites. It also seeks restitutionary, compensatory and punitive damages that would be determined in court.
Alongside Mutual of Omaha, Longbridge is filing suit against two other companies —California-based Review Counsel LLC and Delaware-based Advisory Institute LLC. Both entities are either owned or controlled by Mutual of Omaha, but their respective websites feature ratings of reverse mortgage lenders that Longbridge says suggests independence to readers.
But this independence is not actually present, Longbridge alleges. Instead, the websites present skewed information that favors the portrayal of Mutual of Omaha. One of the websites is also operated under the former name of its reverse lending arm, Retirement Funding Solutions (RFS).
During the reporting of the original complaint, Longbridge and Mutual of Omaha declined to comment on the matter to RMD.
