Articles Tagged with debt defense

There are many arguments for why one should never represent themselves in court – even if he or she is a licensed attorney. It’s referred to as “pro se” litigation, and it’s a legal term that means “on one’s behalf.” It’s generally not required for civil litigants (or even criminal defendants) to hire an attorney to represent them. That’s because most people don’t have the knowledge it takes to adequately represent themselves, and even if they do, they lack the experience. Beyond that, most people are too close to their own case to be objective. foreclosure attorney

When you’re dealing with something as serious as the foreclosure of your home or debt defense against a large credit card company, it’s generally unwise to go it alone. That said, it is your right. But understand that you will likely face a legal system that will be harsh and unforgiving – and maybe even unfair – to pro se litigants.

Take, for instance, the recent resignation of long-time federal judge Richard Posner. Posner was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit by President Ronald Reagan, and has served in that capacity ever since. He abruptly resigned in September, and when asked why, he told The New York Times he, “Awoke from a slumber of 35 years” in which he came to the realization that people without attorneys are mistreated by the legal system. He wanted to act on it. However, the 11 other judges in the circuit refused his idea for how to address it.  Continue reading

Spotting a single cockroach scurrying across the kitchen floor when you flip the light on is disconcerting enough. What’s even worse is the knowledge there are almost certainly more you can’t see, lurking in dark crevices, part of a systemic problem (of your own creation or otherwise). The same is true of the consumer rights violations uncovered at Wells Fargo. consumer rights

As billionaire investor Warren Buffet recently commented to CNBC, Wells Fargo’s recent woes are indicative not just of issues within that institution, but are likely reflective of more widespread problems within then banking industry as a whole. When this issues are spotlighted – as is currently being done with a third-party review of the bank’s most recent sales scandal – we’re likely to be seeing more of the same. Even the bank’s CEO in an internal message warned workers to brace for the potential onslaught of negative headlines as the independent review nears a close.

Buffet commented that anytime an organization with thousands of employees is heavily scrutinized, issues will be uncovered. This is especially true when there have already been notable systemic problems. Such issues highlight the culture of a place, which can set the tone for other shady practices.  Continue reading

An eight-year dispute over allegations of debt harassment, illegal foreclosure and a resulting bankruptcy has been resolved, with Bank of America agreeing to pay $6 million to the couple affected. foreclosure defense lawyer

The proposed settlement has reportedly affected every aspect of the family’s life. While $6 million may sound like a lot, it’s far less than the $46 million originally ordered by a federal judge in March. At the time, the judge opined the mortgage modification process of the bank and the mistaken foreclosure on their home (in California) left them not only homeless, but bankrupt and battle-weary and demoralized.

It all started back in the spring of 2009. At the time, the bank issued statements indicating it wouldn’t consider loan modifications for its customers who were current on their payments. Based on this, the couple stopped making their mortgage payments, as they were underwater on their home and needed a loan modification. After they stopped payment, they made an estimated 20 requests for loan modification. However, the bank always declared the requests were insufficient, incomplete, stale, needed to be resubmitted, denied without reasonable explanation or lost.  Continue reading

Wells Fargo has repeatedly found itself answering to government regulators for violating consumer rights – most recently for overcharging military veterans on home finance loans.foreclosure attorney

Just one week before announcing the $108 million settlement it had reached with the federal government for this wrongdoing, the bank revealed it was paying out $80 million in compensation for wrongfully force-placing car insurance on some 570,000 consumers. A significant number of those customers their vehicles wrongly repossessed when they couldn’t keep pace with the artificially high payments – which impacted their credit scores too. And just before that, the bank was answering to allegations that more than 5,000 former employees opened 2 million unauthorized accounts in order to rake in sales and bonuses. The bank paid an $185 fine, plus another $142 million settlement following a class action in that case.

In the case of military veterans, it all stems from a 2006 lawsuit claiming the Interest Reduction Refinance Loans through the Department of Veteran Affairs – issued by Wells Fargo – should not have been eligible for guarantees through the VA because the bank was reportedly charging loan fees that weren’t authorized. The VA then paid claims after a number of those loans defaulted, and the government then sought redress from Wells Fargo. Continue reading

The establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau came in 2012, following the fallout of the economic crisis set off by the collapse of the housing market and a massive wave of foreclosures. debt defense

As our Miami debt defense lawyers know well, the birth of the agency was an unprecedented effort to address and prevent the kinds of abuses by banks and other large financial institutions that led to the financial crisis. It also helps to keep fraud and debt collection abuses at bay.

But now, there are those who seek to severely undercut it with the introduction of the Financial CHOICE Act, which purportedly aims to curb excess regulation and enforcement (a non-existent issue in our opinion). The truth of the matter is those behind this measure are eager to scrap consumer protections because they are viewed as bad for business – even if the business itself is bad.  Continue reading

Illegal debt sales and debt collection practices have landed Citibank in hot water with federal regulators. In two separate actions, regulators ordered the bank to fork over $16 million in consumer relief, pay $3 million to the government in penalties and forego $34 million in collections from approximately 7,000 customers.business man

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized two actions against Citibank – one involving sales of credit card debt with inflated interest rates and not timely forwarding consumer payments to debt buyers. The second involved both the bank and two of the debt collection law firms that together reportedly falsified court records in debt collection lawsuits. For the first action, the bank is ordered to pay $5 million in consumer relief, as well as a $3 million federal penalty. For the latter, it is ordered to refund $11 million to customers and stop its pending debt collection actions against involved consumers.

CFPB’s director said the bank gave its consumers bad information when it sold their credit card debt, and then relied on shady law firms to change up court records to appear in the bank’s favor.  Continue reading