on Barrie for the proposition that Countrywide owed a duty to plaintiff to properly determine his flood zone coverage. In Barrie, the court held that a termite inspector hired by a home seller owed a duty to provide correct information to the home buyer because the inspector knew that the information would be used by the buyer. On its facts, Barrie is inapposite to this case. Barrie and its progeny hold that for a negligent misrepresentation claim to stand, there must be. a legal duty to provide correct information to the plaintiff. No such duty exists here. Both Louisiana courts and federal courts agree that a flood zone determination is undertaken for the benefit of the lender and not for the benefit of the borrower. See Oliver v. Cent. Bank, 658 So.2d 1316, 1322 (La.App. 2 Cir.1995)(<HOLDING>); Wentwood Woodside I, LP v. GMAC Commercial
holding that insurer could not tortiously interfere with its own insurance plan holding that it is improper to exercise general jurisdiction when defendants purchases combined with its sales in the forum yielded 129 of its total income holding that a lender purchases flood insurance for its own purposes and not for its borrower holding that a lending institution does not violate a separate duty of good faith by adhering to its agreements with a borrower or enforcing its contractual rights as a creditor holding that as a general rule the prosecution is entitled to prove its case by evidence of its own choice