BREACH OF CONTRACT(AGAINST THE FORECLOSING DEFENDANTS)

00. Plaintiff re-alleges and reincorporates each and every allegation contained in

the General Allegations and all previous paragraphs of all previous sections and

Causes of Action in this Complaint, inclusive, made in paragraphs 0 through 00,

inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

00. Plaintiffs’ original loan agreement set forth dates by which monthly principal

and interest payments were due, and when late fees and other charges could be

assessed.

00. Alternatively, if the original note and deed of trust were properly assigned to

Defendants, Defendants breached the note and deed of trust that Plaintiffs signed in

July 2007. The terms of the note required payments made by Plaintiffs to be

applied properly to the note.

00. The Foreclosing Defendants breached the note and deed of trust by failing to

apply the payments made by Plaintiffs in August and September 2008 to Plaintiffs’

loan, the result of which led to the Foreclosing Defendants eventually foreclosing

on the Subject Property.

00. As a proximate result of Defendants' breaches, Plaintiffs have suffered

compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

00. Defendant’s also failed to accurately report Plaintiff’s payment history, did not

notify the Plaintiff that it had submitted inaccurate and false information to the

CRAs and refused to correct or retract its credit reporting errors.

00. This failure was a dereliction of it duty to service, or, insure that it agent

properly serviced Plaintiffs loan. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants breach of the

mortgage contract caused Plaintiff irreparable harm for which they should be

compensated and for which the Defendants should be punished. Defendant’s

breach of the terms of the original mortgage agreement was the direct and

approximate cause of harm to Plaintiff.