CAPON v. MONOPOLY GAME LLC









Filed 3/4/11





CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

DANIEL J. CAPON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MONOPOLY GAME LLC et al., Defendants and Appellants.

A124964 (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. CIV451348)

The Home Equity Sales Contract Act (HESCA or the Act) (Civ. Code, § 1695 et seq.),[1] enacted in 1979, is designed to protect homeowners in default against unfair purchases of their home equity. The Act regulates transactions between an equity purchaser and an equity seller resulting in the sale of residential real property in foreclosure. Central to the legislative scheme is the requirement that the agreement between the buyer and seller be in writing and contain specific terms aimed at protecting the homeowner (§§ 1695.2, 1695.3, 1695.5). (Segura v. McBride (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1028, 1034-1036 (Segura).)
This case arises from a home equity purchase transaction involving plaintiff Daniel J. Capon (plaintiff) and defendants Sidney Gladney (Gladney), Monopoly Game LLC (Monopoly Game), Charles Prael (Prael), and Los Trancos Systems, L.L.C. (Los Trancos) (collectively, defendants). Following a bench trial, the trial court awarded plaintiff a total of $660,625.48 to compensate him for the home equity he lost in the transaction and for the conversion of his personal property. On appeal, defendants challenge the trial court's findings that the deed recorded on their behalf is void and that they are liable for conversion. Plaintiff cross-appeals, contending the trial court erred in concluding that the underlying sale transaction did not violate HESCA and in failing to hold defendants Prael and Los Trancos jointly and severally liable for a portion of the amount awarded to plaintiff for loss of his home equity.
In the published portion of this opinion we interpret section 1695.1, subdivision (a)(1),[2] which exempts from the definition of â€