PRINT, PDF, EMAIL

Plaintiff lender brought a deficiency judgment action against defendant borrowers in the 189th District Court, Harris County, Texas. After a bench trial, the trial court found that the fair market value of the property was $ 2.4 million as of the date of the foreclosure sale and that the borrowers owed the lender a deficiency of $ 129,172 and attorney’s fees. The borrowers appealed. After attempting a workout of a $ 2.4 million loan, the lender foreclosed on the property, which was raw land intended for an apartment complex. The lender bought the property at the foreclosure sale for $ 1.2 million. An officer of the lender testified that the fair market value at the time of the foreclosure sale was $ 1 million. The borrowers’ expert testified that the value was between $ 2.7 and $ 2.8 million. The court agreed with the borrowers that the lender’s officer was not qualified to testify as to the value of the property because he was not an expert, and he did not qualify under the Property Owner Rule because his opinion was based on sources of information other than his own personal knowledge and familiarity, which were required under Tex. R. Evid. 701. The borrowers rebutted the presumption created by the rule that the officer was personally familiar with the property’s fair market value. Accordingly, his testimony did not constitute evidence of market value. The purchase price at the foreclosure sale and the sale price of $ 980,000 a year after the foreclosure sale also were not competent evidence of fair market value. The court reversed the trial court’s deficiency judgment and rendered a take-nothing judgment against the lender.