under the TDCA and DTPA are different, individuals who are consumers under one may not be under the other. Compare Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.45(4) (“ ‘Consumer’ means an individual ... who seeks or acquires by purchase or lease, any goods or services .... ”), with Tex. Fin.Code § 392.001(1), (2) (“ ‘Consumer’ means an individual who has ... an obligation, or an alleged obligation, primarily for personal, family, or household purposes and arising from a transaction or alleged transaction.”). In this case, there are no allegations or evidence that the plaintiffs sought to acquire or acquired, by lease or purchase, goods or services that form the basis of their DTPA claim. The Brushes sought a loan modification from the defendants. Their DTPA cla 8, at *4 (S.D.Tex. Dec. 29, 2010) (<HOLDING>). Summary judgment is granted as to the
holding that a mortgage transfer does not take effect until the mortgagee gives value in exchange for the mortgage holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage holding court could consider a mortgage agreement not attached to the complaint in ruling on motion to dismiss because the complaint refers to the mortgage numerous times the mortgage is attached to this motion and is central to plaintiffs claims holding that a mortgage or modification of a mortgage is not a good or a service under the dtpa holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity