Se Habla Español | Nou Pale Kreyòl

Our family is here
to help your family

Case Results

125 results found. Viewing page 1 of 13. Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13   Next

Cramdown of Interest Rate Where Vehicle Was Purchased Less Than 90 Days Pre-Petition

In Chapter 13 bankruptcies, debtors may cram down a car loan to the present-day value of the vehicle, as long as the vehicle was purchased over 910 days before the bankruptcy was filed. This represents huge savings to many clients who get to essentially write off the rest of the loan once they finish paying through the bankruptcy plan the crammed down value, which is the fair market value of the vehicle as of the petition date. However, if a debtor purchased a vehicle within the last 910 days prior to filing for bankruptcy relief, he or she is not eligible for a cramdown.

This client had purchased her vehicle recently, within the 910 days before the bankruptcy was filed; therefore, she was not eligible for a cramdown. The interest rate on the car loan was thirty percent (30%). Many bankruptcy courts apply the “910-day rule” to the interest rate as well as the loan amount. However, we filed a motion to value and determine secured status of lien as to the interest rate arguing that the 910-day rule only applies to the loan amount, an issue which courts are split on. The court granted our motion and our client was able to reduce the interest rate on her automobile loan from a suffocating 30% to a very reasonable 5.25%.

Loan Lawyers has helped over 5,000 South Florida homeowners and consumers with their debt problems, we have saved over 1,500 homes from foreclosure, eliminated $100,000,000 in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and have collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations, negligence and fraud. Contact us for a free consultation to see how we may be able to help you.

Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result.

Contact us to see how we may be able to help you. http://www.fight13.com/Contact-Us.aspx

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Second Mortgage Lien Strip

Client came to Loan Lawyers with two mortgages, which combined total almost $800,000. Upon filing for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 13, we filed a motion to value and argued that the second mortgage lien should be stripped in its entirety as the first mortgage exceeds the value of the home. After attending a hearing, the court granted our motion and our client’s second mortgage lien was stripped and the debt was discharged. Subsequently, our client was successful in obtaining a loan modification wherein there was a significant reduction in principal. Our client has gone from being underwater and behind on payments to being current and with equity in the home.

Loan Lawyers has helped over 5,000 South Florida homeowners and consumers with their debt problems, we have saved over 1,500 homes from foreclosure, eliminated $100,000,000 in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and have collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations, negligence and fraud. Contact us for a free consultation to see how we may be able to help you.

Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result.

Contact us to see how we may be able to help you. http://www.fight13.com/Contact-Us.aspx

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Calls From Company Regarding Disputed Debt

Mary came to Loan Lawyers because she was receiving numerous auto-dialed and/or pre-recorded message phone calls on her cell phone from a loan servicer trying to collect a debt that Mary was not obligated to pay but her husband was. The phone calls were causing a major disruption in her everyday life, affecting her ability to work and make a living. The loan servicer called Mary on numerous occasions using an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message attempting to collect the debt from her and/or requesting to speak with her husband. Mary would tell the loan servicer that she did not owe the debt and to stop calling her cell phone, which the loan servicer would reply with “please send us a written letter requesting such.” After continuous calls, Mary decided to write the loan servicer a letter to stop the phone calls. Sadly, the letter did not stop the loan servicer from calling her call phone. Thankfully, Mary found the relief she was looking for from the help of the staff at Loan Lawyers. With Loan Lawyers representing her, Mary filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the loan servicer for violation of the TCPA and FCCPA. Mary alleged that the debt collector willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA by calling her cell phone with an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message without Mary’s prior consent.

Under the TCPA, a person can receive $500 in damages for each violation or $1,500 for each violation if the defendant willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA. The matter was resolved and Mary no longer receives phone calls from the loan servicer on her cell phone. Mary can now move on with her life away from the company’s disrupting phone calls that haunted her thanks to the staff and lawyers at Loan Lawyers.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you.” http://www.fight13.com/Contact-Us.aspx

*Pseudonym used.

** Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Usury Law Wins Consumer Case

Our client contacted our office because of a lawsuit they received based upon an old contract which they had allegedly signed, our client was sued for over fourteen thousand dollars. Upon carefully analyzing the lawsuit we realized that even though the rate of interested listed upon the contract was not illegal, the creditor had included other sorts of miscellaneous fees and charges and padded them onto the debt in such a way that the contract was usurious and so we filed a counterclaim. The creditor tried to get the Court to throw our counterclaim out but was unsuccessful. Ultimately the creditor agreed to pay our client for their violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, pay our office our legal fees and dismiss the case. Our client was very happy with the outcome of the case.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you. http://www.fight13.com/Contact-Us.aspx

** Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Calls From Company Regarding Disputed Debt

Henry came to Loan Lawyers because he was receiving numerous auto-dialed and/or pre-recorded message phone calls on his cell phone from a debt collector trying to collect a debt that Henry disputed he owed. The phone calls were causing a major disruption in his everyday life, affecting his ability to work and make a living. Henry had purchased some electronics from a company online but when the items arrived, they were not the items Henry had ordered. Henry informed the company of the mistake and sent the items back to the company. The company decided to charge Henry for a re-stocking fee and other charges for returning the items even though the company sent Henry the wrong items. The company called Henry on numerous occasions using an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message. A majority of the phone calls made to Henry were disconnected when he answered but on a couple occasions, he spoke to a person, informed the person of the situation regarding the returning of the items and to stop calling him on his cell phone. Henry’s attempts to have the company stop calling did not stop the company from using an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message to contact Henry on his cell phone. Thankfully, Henry found the relief he was looking for from the help of the staff at Loan Lawyers. With Loan Lawyers representing him, Henry filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the company for violation of the TCPA and FCCPA. Henry alleged that the debt collector willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA by calling his cell phone with an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message without William’s prior consent.

Under the TCPA, a person can receive $500 in damages for each violation or $1,500 for each violation if the defendant willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA. The matter was resolved and Henry no longer receives phone calls from that company on his cell phone. Henry can now move on with his life away from the company’s disrupting phone calls that haunted him thanks to the staff and lawyers at Loan Lawyers.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you.”

*Pseudonym used.

** Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

A Long-Term Reinstatement Repayment Plan

In March of 2004, our client, L.G., along with his then wife, took out a Note and Mortgage with Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation. Over time, the Note and Mortgage were sold and transferred to U.S. Bank, N.A., with Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. acting as the loan servicer for U.S. Bank, N.A. During the time period when the Note and Mortgage were transferred, our client and his wife unfortunately went through a divorce where the family law court ultimately awarded ownership of the subject property to the ex-husband, our client. During the divorce proceedings, however, our client had temporarily moved out of the subject property while his wife was still living there. Our client would send his wife a check each month for his half of the monthly mortgage payments, and the wife was then supposed to send in the full monthly mortgage payment each month directly to the mortgage lender. Unbeknownst to our client, his wife was pocketing the checks that her husband was sending her each month for his half of the monthly mortgage payments, and she was not sending in any monthly mortgage payments at all to the mortgage lender. Obviously, the mortgage loan account went into default, and the mortgage lender eventually filed a foreclosure lawsuit against our client and his now ex-wife.

Because the family law court ultimately awarded the subject property to our client, the ex-husband, the ex-wife had moved out of the property and could no longer be located. Our client wished to move back into the property after the divorce and attempt to save it from foreclosure. For case-specific reasons that will not be discussed in this article, the mortgage loan account was no longer eligible for a loan modification, but our client still wanted to try to resolve his ex-wife’s underhanded default on the mortgage loan payments and bring the account back into good standing so as to avoid a foreclosure of the property. With loan modification no longer an available option, the only remaining option to be able to keep the home was to attempt to negotiate a reinstatement with the current loan servicer, Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

In general, a reinstatement is when the homeowner pays the mortgage lender the full past-due amount necessary to bring the mortgage loan account current again and out of foreclosure proceedings. Of course, depending on how long the account has been in default, the reinstatement amount may have grown so large that the homeowner cannot afford to pay it all at once in one lump sum. Such was the situation with our client, L.G. Because his ex-wife had stopped sending in mortgage payments without his knowledge and then pocketing the money for herself, the account had been in default for a considerable amount of time to the point that our client could not afford to pay to reinstate all at once.

We therefore met with our client and reviewed his present, overall financial status to determine what amount he could afford to pay the loan servicer each month to bring the mortgage loan account out of default and avoid foreclosure. After crunching all of the numbers, we determined that our client would not be able to afford to reinstate unless the loan servicer were to agree to a reinstatement repayment plan spread out over at least 12 months. This initially caused concern, as mortgage lenders/loan servicers are not obligated to provide a reinstatement repayment plan at all, and even those that do agree to provide a reinstatement repayment plan typically do not agree to a repayment plan of any longer than 4 to 6 months.

After extensive negotiation with the loan servicer’s attorney, factoring in the unfortunate situation caused by our client’s ex-wife during the divorce, we were ultimately successful in getting the loan servicer to agree to a 12-month reinstatement repayment plan. Such a long-term reinstatement repayment plan is nearly unheard of, but through our experience and negotiation skills, thankfully we were able to negotiate an option for our client that he can afford and that will enable him to keep his home.

Loan Lawyers, LLC has saved over 1,000 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $80 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer and debt collector violations. Please do not hesitate to contact Loan Lawyers, LLC to find out how we may be able to help you:

Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result.

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Mortgage Foreclosures and Mortgage Cram-Downs in Bankruptcy

Loan Lawyers, LLC has saved over 1,000 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $80 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer and debt collector violations. Please do not hesitate to contact Loan Lawyers, LLC to find out how we may be able to help you.

Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result.

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Modification During An Appeal

Our client, T. E. took out a note and mortgage with World Savings Bank, FSB on January 30, 2007. The note had a 7.0% adjustable interest rate, which would adjust every 2 weeks, based upon the “GDW” Index. The note and mortgage were industry standard documents, however the mortgage made a specific reference to “Exhibit A” where the legal description for the property could be found. T. E. was able to make her mortgage payments until she fell on hard times in early 2015, when the Bank, Wells Fargo, sent her a demand letter.

Unable to cure the default, Wells Fargo filed a foreclosure action against our client on January 27, 2016. Attached to the complaint was a copy of the note with a blank indorsement, a copy of the mortgage and a copy of the demand letter. The mortgage again referenced Exhibit A, however attached to the mortgage was “Schedule C”. Schedule C was the legal description for some property (but not necessarily our client’s), and appeared to be taken from a title insurance policy.

The case proceeded through the normal course of litigation and was eventually set for trial on August 1, 2016. At trial, we were able to convince the Judge that the witness could not authenticate the Schedule C exhibit attached to the mortgage, and although the mortgage was entered into evidence, it was done without Schedule C. Therefore, while the mortgage was considered evidence, there was not accompanying legal description of the property to go with it. This issue was heavily debated as our motion for involuntary dismissal and again at closing. The Judge ultimately decided to grant a foreclosure judgment for Wells Fargo, despite case law suggesting that the proper remedy was for a money only judgment.

Because we disagreed with the Judge’s ruling, we decided to appeal the case to the Fourth District Court of Appeals. In response, Wells Fargo hired a more sophisticated law firm to handle defending the appeal and the attorney’s began to discuss other possible options to settle this matter. We disclosed to Wells Fargo’s new counsel that the primary issue with a foreclosure judgment entered without a legal description, which recent case law suggested was improper. The Bank, understanding that they could possibly have the judgment vacated or converted into a money only judgment, worked with our firm to try and keep the client in her home with a modification.

After several rounds of modification documents, the Bank was able to make a modification offer to our client with favorable terms. Our client was happy to finally being back in a performing loan she could afford and without having to litigate the case any further. The Appeal has been dismissed and the parties will go their separate ways. Thankfully, even after the wrong ruling at trial, we were able to work out a resolution for our client that got her exactly what she wanted – the ability to stay in her home and no longer have to worry about a pending foreclosure.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you. Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result.

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Debt Collector Violation

Andrew came to Loan Lawyers because he was receiving numerous auto-dialed and/or pre-recorded message phone calls on his cell phone from a debt collector trying to collect a debt that Andrew did not owe. The phone calls were causing a major disruption in his everyday life, affecting his ability to work and make a living. The debt collector was trying to contact someone else and not Andrew yet the debt collector kept calling Andrew’s cell phone thinking they were contacting the actual person who owed the debt. A majority of the phone calls made to Andrew were disconnected when he answered but on a couple occasions, he spoke to a person and verified he wasn’t the person they were looking for, informed them that they were contacting the wrong person and to stop calling him. Andrew’s attempts to have the debt collector stop calling did not stop the debt collector from using an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message to contact Andrew on his cell phone. Thankfully, Andrew found the relief he was looking for from the help of the staff at Loan Lawyers. With Loan Lawyers representing him, Andrew filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the debt collector for violation of the TCPA, FDCPA and FCCPA. Andrew alleged that the debt collector willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA by calling his cell phone with an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message without William’s prior consent.

Under the TCPA, a person can receive $500 in damages for each violation or $1,500 for each violation if the defendant willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA. The matter was resolved and Andrew no longer receives phone calls from that debt collector on his cell phone. Andrew can now move on with his life away from the debt collector’s disrupting phone calls that haunted him thanks to the staff and lawyers at Loan Lawyers.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you.”

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

Using TCPS to Stop Debt Collector From Collecting Disputed Debt

William came to Loan Lawyers because he was receiving numerous auto-dialed and/or pre-recorded message phone calls on his cell phone from a debt collector trying to collect an outstanding credit card balance. The phone calls were causing a major disruption in his everyday life, affecting his ability to work and make a living. A majority of the phone calls made to William were disconnected when he answered but on a couple occasions, he spoke to a person and smartly informed them to stop calling his cell phone. William’s attempts to have the debt collector stop calling did not stop the debt collector from using an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message to contact William on his cell phone. William disputed that he owed the amount alleged by the debt collector, tried to explain the dispute to the debt collector but the debt collector would not listen to William, and continued to harass him. Thankfully, William found the relief he was looking for from the help of the staff at Loan Lawyers. With Loan Lawyers representing him, William filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the debt collector for violation of the TCPA and FCCPA. William alleged that the debt collector willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA by calling his cell phone with an auto-dialer and/or pre-recorded message without William’s prior consent.

Under the TCPA, a person can receive $500 in damages for each violation or $1,500 for each violation if the defendant willfully or knowingly violated the TCPA. The matter was resolved and William no longer receives phone calls from that debt collector on his cell phone. William can now move on with his life away from the debt collector’s disrupting phone calls that haunted him thanks to the staff and lawyers at Loan Lawyers.

Loan Lawyers has saved over 1,500 homes in South Florida from foreclosure, eliminated over $100 million dollars in mortgage principal and consumer debt, and collected millions of dollars on behalf of our clients due to bank, loan servicer, and debt collector violations. Contact Loan Lawyers to find out how we may be able to help you.

Share:
Twitter Facebook Google LinkedIn Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories Success Stories

*Results may not be typical. You may not have as beneficial a result

  • ABC News
  • American Civil Liberties Union
  • CBS 4
  • CNN
  • Daily Business Review
  • Florida Trend's - Florida Legal Elite 2014
  • Florida Trend's - Florida Legal Elite 2014
  • National Association of Consumer Advocates
  • National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys
  • NBC News
  • National Consumer Law Center
  • The New York Times
  • Avvo
  • Avvo
  • Avvo
  • Avvo