In Kreuter v. Tsucalas (287 AD2d 50, 734 NYS2d 185 [2001]), the Appellate Division, Second Department, found that the Real Property Law did not bar plaintiff's recovery of a fee for negotiating a lower payoff amount for an existing mortgage because plaintiff was not negotiating a loan upon, or the sale or transfer of, real property. Plaintiff communicated financial information related to the deal among the parties. (Id. at 56.) His services in negotiating a lower payoff figure enabled the property owner to satisfy the existing mortgage, so that he would not be forced to sell it or lose it through foreclosure. (Id.) The goals sought to be achieved by article 12-A would not be promoted by extending its reach to encompass the Kreuter plaintiff's activities, which enabled defendant to satisfy the existing mortgage on his properties for a greatly reduced sum. (Id.)