264 Ga. 285, 285-286 (1) (443 SE2d 837) (1994). BANA and Fannie Mae continue to assert on appeal that James alleged only that she failed to receive notice of the foreclosure. But this argument is belied by the record. In the complaint, James specifically pled that BANA foreclosed on the Property “without having sent proper notice to [her] as required by OCGA § 44-14-162.2 or indeed any notice at all.” Further, James repeats in numerous places throughout the complaint that BANA failed to “send” or to “provide” her with the requisite notice of the foreclosure proceedings. These allegations are sufficient to set forth a claim for wrongful foreclosure, and the trial court erred in dismissing that claim. See Babalola v. HSBC Bank, USA, 324 Ga. App. 750, 753 (2) (a) (751 SE2d 545) (2013) (<HOLDING>); see also Roylston v. Bank of America, 290 Ga.
holding that debtors allegation that mortgage holder failed to provide him with the statutorily required notice of foreclosure was sufficient to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage holding that despite foreclosure judgment providing that the holder of a junior mortgage had no interest in or lien on or claim to said premises the lack of foreclosure sale meant that the junior mortgage was not extinguished holding that a failure to comply with the foreclosure statutes invalidates a foreclosure sale holding that rookerfeldman barred a debtors action to rescind a mortgage because it was inextricably intertwined with a state courts foreclosure judgment which was premised on the existence of a valid mortgage