Se Habla Español | Nou Pale Kreyòl

Our family is here
to help your family

Case Results

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

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

Proof of Standing and Demand Letter

Our client, C.H., took out a loan with Homecomings Financial Network back in 2005. The loan included fairly standard terms – a fixed interest rate, interest only payments for a period of time, and paragraph 22 protection within the Mortgage. Our client proceeded to make normal mortgage payments until May 1, 2013 when they defaulted on their loan.

Eventually, a foreclosure complaint was filed against our client in 2015. Deutsche Bank, as Trustee for Trust X filed the action as the named Plaintiff. Attached to the complaint was a copy of the Note bearing a specific indorsement to the named Plaintiff. Also attached to the complaint was a copy of the Mortgage and a Power of Attorney between the Plaintiff and Ocwen, the loan servicer, executed in 2013. On the Note, the last indorsement was by Ocwen, attorney in fact, for Deutsche Bank, indorsing the Note to Deutsche Bank as Trustee for Trust X.

The action went through a typical path – motion to dismiss, answer and affirmative defenses and discovery. Regarding the answer and affirmative defenses, and particular to this case, we raised standing and compliance with conditions precedent as defenses. The Bank relied to the defenses, but only asserted a general denial. The Bank did not assert any avoidances to our defenses.

Prior to trial, the Bank disclosed copies of their trial exhibits. Many documents were provided, included the complete Pay History, a Bailee Letter, Hello/Goodbye Letters, the HUD-1 Statement, the Demand Letter, the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, the Mortgage Loan Schedule, the Standard Terms of the PSA and the Comment Log. After reviewing the trial exhibits, two main defenses came to light – standing and conditions precedent.

Regarding standing, the last indorsement on the Note was done by Ocwen, acting under a power of attorney. The only Power of Attorney provided was the one attached to the complaint, indicating that Deutsche Bank, as Trustee for Trust X, authorized Ocwen to service the loan, however the Power of Attorney was not executed until 2013. Compared to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, which stated that loan documents must be indorsed either in blank or to the Trustee, and that the cutoff date to include properly indorsed notes in the Trust was 2005. On cross examination, I specifically had the witness read the relevant sections of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, the last indorsement, and the Power of Attorney. This proved to be a troubling issue for the Judge, who agreed with me that the Plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Note was indorsed to the Trust prior to 2005 since the Power of Attorney was dated in 2013.

Regarding conditions precedent, the Demand Letter appeared to be addressed to the property address, however the Comment Log did not provide any specific details about whether the letter was actually sent. The Comment Log in particular stated the date of the letter (8/7/13) and the comment associated with that date said “Breach”. It did not stated if it was mailed out or not. On cross examination, I had the witness admit that the Comment Log referenced other letters (solicitation letters) and the entries associated with those letter did specify if the letter was sent or not, but the entry associated with the Demand Letter did not indicate one way or the other. Additionally, the witness admitted that they use a 3rd party vendor to send out their mail, but that he was unaware of the vendor’s name, where they are located, or what policies and procedures they have in place to make sure the Demand Letter was mailed out to our client. The Judge found that the Bank did not put forth sufficient evidence to prove that the Demand Letter was actually mailed out. Between these two issues the Judge granted our Motion for Involuntary Dismissal.

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

Consumer Victory in Identity Theft

Our client received a series of bills from debt collectors as to an alleged consumer debt account which they never authorized, never applied for and simply never had anything what to do with whatsoever. There were a few possibilities. The creditor may have confused our client with another. The creditor may have had a clerical error. Most likely was that our client had been the victim of identity theft and the information available to us indicated that this would likely be the case.

Our office prepared a lawsuit on our behalf against the debt collector for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in that they misrepresented the character, amount and legal status of a debt by claiming that a debt was due when no debt was due at all. The case was litigated for a number of months but ultimately proved successful for our client. While the precise details of the settlement must be kept confidential, as well as the name of our client, the debt collector ultimately agreed to cease any attempt to collect the debt in the future, pay our client for harassing them and also pay a portion of the attorney fees that our office expended litigating the case. Our client was very happy with the ultimate 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.

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

Multiple Loan Modifications

Contrary to popular belief, the banks are not always the ones dragging their feet; sometimes the borrower is the party responsible for being untimely. A middle-aged client initially retained Loan Lawyers, LLC in January of 2014 with the goal of modifying her mortgage loan to more affordable terms. Of important note is the fact that the client originally mortgaged her home in late 2008, and she had already modified her mortgage loan twice (once in 2010 and again in 2013) before retaining Loan Lawyers, LLC to attempt to modify her mortgage loan yet again.

While the loan modification process differs, often substantially, depending on the particular lender, even the most cooperative of lenders typically will not agree to modify a mortgage loan more than once within a year’s timeframe and any more than twice throughout the life of the loan. Consequently, the moment our client retained us to attempt yet a third modification of her mortgage loan within roughly a five-year period, the odds were already stacked greatly against her.

Our client’s original mortgage loan consisted of monthly principal and interest payments in the amount of $832.86, at an annual interest rate of 6.5%. Our client allegedly defaulted on her second loan modification in April of 2013, and the bank subsequently filed for foreclosure against her home. After retaining Loan Lawyers, LLC, unfortunately our client proved extremely difficult to contact, was consistently late in responding to us, and often failed to provide us all of the necessary information and documentation required to efficiently process her third loan modification application. Nevertheless, we did not give up in our efforts to maintain communication with our client; we aggressively fought the bank in Court and were able to successfully cancel the foreclosure auction of our client’s home four times; and we finally achieved a third loan modification for our client that resulted in a $10,000.00 principal reduction, a significantly reduced interest rate of 3.75%, and monthly principal and interest payments of $796.44.

Due to our persistence with both the bank and our own client, Loan Lawyers, LLC was ultimately able to obtain a competitive loan modification on behalf of our client, despite her needing a substantial amount of extra care and attention from our office during the long journey to attaining her goal. If you are looking to modify the terms of your existing mortgage loan, please do not hesitate to contact us to discuss your options. 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

Confession of Error

In 2007, our client, M.M. took out a loan with her lender. The underlying Mortgage included an acceleration clause at paragraph 22, requiring notice to her upon default and prior to the bank filing a foreclosure action. In mid-August of 2015, the Plaintiff did file a foreclosure action and alleged that our client failed to make a payment in 2010. Filed with the Complaint was a copy of the Note and Mortgage; however no copy of the acceleration letter was filed with the Court.

In response to the Plaintiff’s Complaint, our client filed an Answer and Affirmative Defenses and specifically denied that the Plaintiff complied with all conditions precedent – that they did not provide her with an acceleration notice pursuant to paragraph 22 of her Mortgage. The Plaintiff did file a Reply; however their only position regarding the paragraph 22 defense was to deny that they failed to provide our client with the pre-foreclosure notice.

On March 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment along with several affidavits to support their motion. Aside from alleging that there were no material facts that would preclude summary judgment, the Plaintiff’s affidavits did not state that an acceleration letter was ever provided to our client. Moreover, an acceleration letter was never provided to the Trial Court in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment.

We filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment on May 16, 2016, along with our client’s Affidavit stating that she did not receive an acceleration letter. The Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment hearing was set for May 18, 2016, and after brief oral arguments, the Court decided it wanted to reset the hearing so it could further review our client’s opposition. On May 23, 2016, the Trial Court heard again the Motion for Summary Judgment and found that our client’s response and opposition were untimely. We promptly filed a Motion for Rehearing on May 25, 2016 and pointed out to the Court that our client’s opposition and affidavit were in fact timely.

The Plaintiff filed an opposition to our Motion for Rehearing and on June 27, 2016, the Trial Court permitted oral arguments concerning our client’s Motion for Rehearing. Ultimately, the Trial Court ruled that our client’s opposition was timely, but found that on the merits, there was no genuine issue of material facts to preclude summary judgment. In response, we filed our Notice of Appeal to the 3rd District Court of Appeals.

Our Initial Brief was filed on February 13, 2017 which outlined the significant errors committed by the Plaintiff and the Trial Court for granting summary judgment. The Plaintiff asked for a brief extension of time to file their Answer Brief, however on May 4, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Confession of Error. They admitted that without proof of the acceleration letter, summary judgment was improper. The Appellate Court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case back to the Trial Court to resolve the matter through a non-jury trial.

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

Ripoff After Payoff

Alan was not the typical client, but unfortunately what he experienced was something I have seen time and time again. Alan story with the Mortgage Servicing division began long after he came to Loan Lawyers. Alan had fallen on hard times and couldn’t keep up with his mortgage payments and care for his family in their times of need. As any responsible parents and husband would do Alan made sure his family could make it through challenging times with food on the table and clothes on their backs, despite all the threats from the bank. The bank’s unwillingness to work with Alan eventually led to a foreclosure action being filed against him. As G-D would orchestrate it, Alan was blessed to have a major financial turnaround, so much so in fact he was able to pay all of the arrears to get his loan current once again and move forward and upward thereafter. The bank agreed and all seemed as though it was right as rain once again. However, Loan Lawyers foreclosure counsel began to notice something was awry and immediately notified the Mortgage Servicing Division of Loan Lawyers to investigate and help Alan, where nothing else seemingly worked. You see, the bank sent Alan a statement showing he was current, but never notified their lawyers. Rather, the bank’s lawyers had motioned the foreclosure court to sell Alan’s home. After examining two key documents it was clear what had to be done. We communicated directly with the bank’s counsel and advised they had better ensure that the foreclosure case doesn’t progress, and instead be dismissed or that firm will ALSO be liable, just as their client, the bank would be. We advised the bank’s counsel of the evidence we possessed and informed them that without a dismissal within 48 hours we are proceeding to both federal court and seeking an order to show cause why the lawyers representing the bank should not be sanctioned. By hour 36, we were able to report to our client his home was safe, and his case was now dismissed. This is all part of the team of Loan Lawyers and the blessing of being part of the Mortgage Servicing Division.

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.

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

Consumer Beats Cable Company

Frequently consumers return cable boxes to their cable companies and months or years down the road are contacted by those companies claiming that years of late fees, penalty fees and rental fees are owed because the box was never returned. This sort of thing sometimes happens due to clerical errors on the part of the cable companies. If you return your cable box or an internet modem, make a copy of the paperwork and keep it someplace where you will be able to find it in ten years because our firm has heard horror stories from a number of people who have had to deal with that sort of headache.

Years ago one of our clients returned a cable box to their cable company and stopped receiving services from them. Years down the road the cable company began sending our client bills in the mail demanding payment for a cable box they had supposedly kept, seeking the value of the box, rental charges as well as years worth of late fees and penalty fees. Our client kept good documentation and we sued the cable company for violations of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, alleging that they tried to collect a debt which was not owed and that they engaged in harassment. The case recently ended, with the cable company agreeing to pay our client thousands of dollars. We took the case on a contingency basis so our client did not even have to pay us a single cent up front.

If you have been the subject of debt collection attempts for debts which you do not owe, please contact our office to find out if we can help you as well.

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.” Mandatory disclosure from The Florida Bar.

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

Shutting Down the Debt Collector

Frank P. 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. 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 Frank P. 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. Frank P.’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 Frank P. on his cell phone. Thankfully, Frank P. found the relief he was looking for from the help of the staff at Loan Lawyers. With Loan Lawyers representing him, Frank P. filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the debt collector for violation of the TCPA. Frank P. 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 Frank P.’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 Frank P. no longer receives phone calls from that debt collector on his cell phone. Frank P. 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.”

*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

House Case Settled!

K.C came to Loan Lawyers seeking foreclosure defense representation from his Home Owners Association (“HOA”). He was facing foreclosure of his homestead over a Claim of Lien for a little under $900! It is true that our clients stopped paying the assessments, but the sad and very unfortunate part about it all, is that our clients never received the Notice of Intent to Foreclose required under the Statute and Case law. Only when our clients were served the foreclosure papers did they attempt to tender payment. Unfortunately, it was a little too late. The lawsuit was filed in 2014 and progressed in the Courts until our Firm got involved. Our office immediately jumped into the case and litigated the file. We filed a very aggressive Answer with multiple Affirmative Defenses which immediately caught the attention of the HOA as well as opposing counsel. We also filed a very aggressive Motion for Summary Judgment and set the same for hearing. It was evident that a number of issues existed that made the HOA nervous. The HOA ultimately decided to Mediation. After 5- hour mediation, the HOA agreed to settle the case instead of litigating this matter any further. We were able to save our client thousands of dollars on the total amount due and owing. With an aggressive and strategic approach, we were able to save our client’s homestead and his wallet in the long run.

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

*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