Page 1
C.A. Declines to Rely on Alleged Signature by 92-Year-Old
Opinion Expresses Doubt as to Whether Elderly Man With Dementia Executed Loan Documents
Which Were Signed Within 23 Seconds After Being Sent to His Daughter’s Email Address
By Kimber Cooley, associate editor
A factual dispute exists as to the authenticity of an electronic signature on arbitration provisions in a home improvement loan purportedly signed by a 92-year-old man suffering from dementia where the documents were sent to his daughter’s email, opened on a mobile phone, and completed with the required signatures at seven places within seconds, Div. Eight of this district’s Court of Appeal held yesterday.
In addition to declining to compel arbitration based on the signature, the court also found that the man’s subsequent affirmative responses during a follow-up phone call by the lender did not sufficiently establish that he ratified the agreement where he was confused and coached by a female voice in the background.
Appealing the order denying a motion to compel arbitration was Solar Mosaic LLC, an online consumer lending platform providing home improvement financing by contracting with solar installers who offer point-of-sale loans through the company as part of their offering of services. Since its founding in 2011, Mosaic has exceeded $9 billion in funded loans.
The dispute arose after Ilai Mitmiger, a sales representative with Elite Home Remodeling Inc., visited Harold West’s Los Angeles County home in July 2022 and offered financing services to perform renovations. West was 92 years old at the time of the visit and his daughter Deon West was with him when Mitmiger arrived.
According to Deon West, Mitmiger never mentioned an association with Mosaic and claimed to work with a government program that helped senior citizens fix up their homes. The sales representative offered to renovate the Wests’ bathroom for $25,000 and to throw in the installation of solar panels at no extra charge, promising lower electric bills and tax incentives.
Loan Documents
Believing that the renovations would be paid for, at least in part, by the government program purportedly mentioned by Mitmiger, Deon West agreed to provide her email address for the purpose of obtaining a quote. Mosaic then sent loan documents that utilized DocuSign, an electronic signature provider.
The loan documents were sent to Deon West at 6:29:20 p.m. on the day of Mitmiger’s visit. They were signed electronically in Harold West’s name in seven places in the 33-page attachment by 6:29:33.
After the signing was complete, a Mosaic representative asked to speak with Harold West and the ensuing recorded conversation included unintelligible responses and confusion by the homeowner.
Deon West asserts that she unsuccessfully tried to cancel the loan agreement after discovering the contract in August 2022, causing work to cease on the bathroom and leaving her father and 89-year-old mother to bathe in their kitchen sink. Harold West and his wife, Lucy West, filed a complaint against Elite and Mosaic in February 2023, asserting fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, and other causes of action.
Mosaic moved to compel arbitration. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elaine Lu denied the motion, finding that the company had not proven that Harold West had completed the loan documents containing the arbitration provision.
Presiding Justice Maria E. Stratton authored the opinion affirming the denial. Justices Elizabeth A. Grimes and John Shepard Wiley Jr. joined in the opinion.
Agreement to Arbitrate
Stratton noted that an arbitration agreement will not be enforced if the party opposing the motion to compel offers admissible evidence creating a factual dispute as to the authenticity of a signature and the opposing side is unable to prove that the plaintiff signed the document.
Unpersuaded by Mosaic’s assertion that Harold West did not meet his burden as to a factual dispute because he failed to submit an affidavit averring that he never signed the loan agreement, the jurist said:
“Mosaic is incorrect. The loan documents were sent to Deon’s e-mail address, Deon told the Mosaic representative she would go check her e-mail, the documents were opened on a mobile phone 10 seconds after being sent, they were completed with seven electronic signatures within the space of 13 seconds, and Deon confirmed the documents’ completion. Harold was in his 90’s, suffered from dementia, did not use a computer, mobile phone, or e-mail, and was unable to answer simple questions such as his birthdate and telephone number without assistance and significant delay.”
Under these circumstances, she opined:
“The evidence strongly suggests Harold lacked the technical facility to open his daughter’s e-mail on what was presumably her mobile phone, create a digital signature, electronically click through and execute the loan agreement in seven locations, and submit those signatures, all in the space of 23 seconds, and it unquestionably demonstrates the existence of a factual dispute as to whether Harold actually executed the electronic signatures on the loan documents.” The presiding justice noted that Mosaic argues that Harold West ratified the agreement to arbitrate in the follow-up phone call, saying:
“Mosaic argues that the recorded telephone call does in fact demonstrate Harold’s ratification of the loan agreement. Mosaic points out that its representative repeatedly referred to a loan during the conversation, Harold responded in the affirmative to the representative’s questions whether he understood, and Harold neither objected to a loan nor disputed the stated repayment obligations. It argues Harold was made aware of the transaction during the call and had a reasonable duty to inquire of the representative regarding the circumstances of the loan. Mosaic concludes that because Harold did not object to the loan transaction during the telephone call, he ratified his daughter’s conduct and is thus bound by the arbitration provision in the loan agreement.”
Stratton said:
“It took less time for the Mosaic representative to give Harold all the information about the loan and secure his one word responses than it had taken to elicit from him his birthdate, the last 4 digits of his Social Security number, and the e-mail address and phone number associated with the account.”
She reasoned that “[g]iven the content and brevity of the call and the lack of comprehension demonstrated by Harold during the conversation, we cannot say the recorded telephone call is of such a character and weight as to leave no room for a judicial determination that it was insufficient to support a finding of ratification.”
The case is West v. Solar Mosaic LLC, 2024 S.O.S. 3522.
Copyright 2024, Metropolitan News Company