Statutes Do Not Create a Special Relationship Under the Economic Loss Rule
For the purpose of the application of the Economic Loss Rule, statutes generally do not create a special relationship. Statutory products liability law generally do not create an independent duty of care. See Simantob v. Mullican Flooring, L.P., 527 Fed. Appx. 799 (10th Cir. 2013). A violation of (i) the Truth in Lending Act; (ii) the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act; (iii) the Homeowners Equity Protection Act; or (iv) the Utah High Cost Home Loan Act, do not create a special relationship which would avoid the application of the economic loss rule. Moliere v. Option One Mortgage Corp., 2011 WL 5403475 (D. Utah, Nov 4, 2011).
The Fair Credit Reporting Act does not impose an independent statutory duty sufficient to overcome the economic loss doctrine. Aclys International, LLC v. Equifax, Inc., No. 2:08–cv–00954, 2010 WL 1816248 *3 (D. Utah, May 5, 2010). The Uniform Commercial Code § 4–103 does not create an independent duty sufficient to overcome the economic loss doctrine. Andersen v. Homecomings Financial, LLC, No. 2:11–CV–332–TS; 2011 WL 3626828 (D. Utah 2011).