when a mortgage loan is discharged, satisfied; or recorded. On the other hand, the Plaintiffs contend that the Disputed Fees charged for attorney document preparation, satisfaction, recording and faxing fall squarely in the examples provided by the statute and regulation. The law regarding whether the provisions of RESPA apply beyond the inception of a mortgage is not settled in the Second Circuit. Under facts similar to this case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a complaint that alleged a RESPA violation for fees that were assessed at the time repayment of the loan was complete. Bloom v. Martin, 77 F.3d 318, 320 (9th Cir.1996); see also Greenwald v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 446 F.Supp. 620, 625 (D.Mass.1978), aff'd, 591 F.2d 417 (1st Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>). This bright-line rule, limiting the scope of
holding that a mortgage or modification of a mortgage is not a good or a service under the dtpa holding that interest payments on escrow accounts are not a settlement practice under re spa because they can continue long after the closing of the mortgage transaction and which can continue to occur during the entire life of the mortgage holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity holding that the owner of an equitable interest in property in the form of a land contract can grant a mortgage on that interest under ohio law