Dietterle v. Vanguard Mortgage Investment Corporation
Samuel Dietterle
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

S.B. Coen

Vanguard Mortgage Investment Corporation (a.k.a. Canguard Mortgage Investment Corporation)
  • Overview: Samuel Dietterle appealed a summary judgment that rejected his claim that a mortgage from Vanguard Mortgage Investment Corporation (Canguard) was unconscionable and awarded special costs against him. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the merits but partially adjusted the costs order.

    Background:

  • Dietterle, an 85-year-old retired farmer, entered into a mortgage with Canguard to refinance an existing defaulted loan.
  • He claimed the mortgage terms were unconscionable due to his financial vulnerability and lack of understanding.
  • The mortgage broker secured a loan from Canguard that allowed Dietterle to avoid initial monthly payments by using an interest reserve.
  • Court's Analysis:

  • Unconscionability: The court found that the mortgage terms reflected market rates and were not unconscionable. Dietterle had alternatives, such as selling his property, to repay the loan. The court noted that Canguard did not exploit Dietterle’s situation beyond the typical lender-borrower dynamic.
  • Costs: While the appeal was dismissed, the court adjusted the special costs awarded against Dietterle. The court found that although Dietterle’s conduct increased litigation costs, the original special costs order was overly punitive. It reduced the award, reflecting only the unreasonable expenses caused by his conduct.
  • Outcome: The appeal on the merits was dismissed. The court varied the costs award, limiting it to specific expenses incurred due to Dietterle’s litigation conduct. The exact total amount of costs awarded is not explicitly stated in the document.

     

Court of Appeals for British Columbia
CA48563
Civil litigation
Respondent