Legal
Monday, January 25, 2010
WV AG McGraw sues Capital One AGAIN - unconscionable practices - re-aging debts
I’ve previously written about the Capital One practice to offer NEW accounts WITH old charged off debts. I’m glad to see that McGraw is TRYING to do something about it.
What’s wrong with the OTHER 49 AGs?
And I wonder WHY he can sue them again. In 2008, he sued Capital One and they promptly converted to a NATIONAL bank. The states have NO power to enforce the laws against NATIONAL banks, as Wells Fargo litigated in California years ago.
I’m sure you can see what’s going on. The BANKERS are running Washington D.C. and of course their REGULATORS, the Federal Reserve Banks, do NOTHING!
Long time readers may recall that I sued the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and its VP and Senior Legal Counsel James McAfee in 2003 to MAKE them enforce the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Of course they were dismissed and did NOT enforce anything.
I’m not going to post the links here because we are in the middle of launching Liars and Cheats EXPOSED HEADLINES.
If you read Rense.com, you’ll recognize the format, although we’re changing it a little and we substitute credit and collection news for his Zionist news. All headline links will be archived so that you can find OLD news and I’ll try to find the OLD but VERY relevant articles about Wells Fargo’s California litigation establishing that the states’ AGs have NO jurisdiction over NATIONAL banks.
I’m so incredibly sick and tired of everybody harping on derivatives and BS that has absolutely NOTHING to do with our problems.
ALL major banks should have FAILED and made room for community banks like the Common Good Bank.
The only reason the big NATIONAL banks ARE successful is because they engage in CRIMINAL practices with impunity.
HEADLINES will be a lot more than random links and I will document these allegations.
Of course I’ll still be writing about credit and collection news here and I’ll definitely try to look into why McGraw CAN sue Capital One again. I’ll have to get the court filings, watch what happens. And that takes time and money.
So please vote with your dollars and support Liars and Cheats EXPOSED!
Legal • Regulators - legislators • Credit - Collection - Economic News • (2) Comments • Permalink
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Video: FTC investigates CLOSED Mann Bracken (bk?) and Fred Hanna
This is hilarious. The FTC finally decides to investigate Mann Bracken—after they CLOSED!
This is the fallout of MN AG Swanson’s putting an end to the NAF arbitration services.
MN AG Swanson rocks: no more consumer debt arbitration!—FDRS update
According to the video at http://www.wsbtv.com/video/22124217/index.htmlhttp:/www.wsbtv.com/video/22124217/index.html the FTC is also looking at Fred J. Hanna & Associates, another notorious debt collection law firm.
Here’s an article about the FTC requesting information from the major debt buyers:
FTC Orders Buyers of Consumer Debt to Submit Information for Study of Debt Purchasing Industry
In the WSBTV video they interview consumer lawyers who probably will NOT get paid as it is likely that Mann Bracken will file for bankruptcy so they don’t have to pay the judgments against them.
And the difference between YOU filing for bankruptcy and a corporation or law firm going bankrupt is that YOU have to be poor while the owners and officers of these bankrupt companies can be millionaires.
The only upside for the people who were sued by Mann Bracken or lost in arbitration is that they may be able to avoid judgments or have them vacated.
Nothing will change in the industry.
The CREDITORS will simply hire lawyer scum with a different name and even if judgments are vacated, they can sue again UNLESS the statute of limitations expired OR the debtor can get a judgment against the creditor due to their attorney misconduct.
While the original creditors are EXEMPT from the federal FDCPA and NOT liable for their debt collectors’ actions, they CAN be held accountable for STATE law violations. Chase settled for their collection attorney’s violations under state law. (The complaint is at the CreditFactors legal knowledgebase).
You have NO private right of action for violations of FEDERAL privacy laws.
Banks are violating privacy laws when they sell charged off accounts INCLUDING your personal information to debt buyers. ANY CRIMINAL can purchase ALL your identifying information and I’ve previously posted about the CRIMINAL conduct of debt buyers.
I’ve been dealing with Cohen & Slamowitz, another infamous debt collection law firm and it’s incredible how they operate. While they were ordered to submit data about default judgments due to false affidavits of service to the court so they could be vacated, Cohen and Slamowitz couldn’t care less that they again used a server who falsified the affidavit of service.
They just don’t care.
I do have the recorded calls and faxes and my client is trying to get the case dismissed with prejudice and he will submit his complaint to the NY AG Cuomo.
During our efforts to find a NY attorney for him we found the Mark Cella (FDRS) of NY, a hustler claiming to be an attorney.
I sure couldn’t find an attorney listing for Jerry Lee “Esq.” (Lee & Associates) and his website SCREAMS fraud. He targets people sued by major debt buyers and collection lawyers. And I don’t have the time and money to pursue every fraudster like the thugs at FDRS.
It’s so frustrating to see so much OBVIOUS fraud and people just fall for these scams, grasping at straws.
Legal • Credit - Collection - Economic News • (0) Comments • Permalink
Monday, January 04, 2010
Pro se litigant murder suicide at Las Vegas federal building after dismissal of suit
At this point we can only guess what went on in Johnny Lee Wicks’ mind when he decided to go on a killing spree.
2 dead in Las Vegas federal building shootout
By KEN RITTER and DEVLIN BARRETT Associated Press Writers © 2010 The Associated Press
Jan. 4, 2010, 6:31PMLAS VEGAS — A gunman who opened fire with a shotgun at a federal building Monday, killing a court security guard and wounding a U.S. marshal before he was shot to death, was upset over losing a lawsuit over his Social Security benefits, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press.
The two officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case, said 66-year-old Johnny Lee Wicks opened fire with a shotgun at a security checkpoint, touching off a running gunbattle with deputy U.S. marshals.
Although the investigation is continuing, the officials said evidence points to Wick’s anger over his benefits case as the motive for the shooting.
Court records show Wicks sued the Social Security Administration in 2008, alleging he was the victim of racial discrimination because his benefits were reduced when he moved from California to Nevada in January of that year. The case was thrown out and formally closed last Sept. 9.
Gunfire erupted at the courthouse moments after 8 a.m., at the start of the work week, and lasted for several minutes. Shots echoed around tall buildings in the area, more than a mile north of the Las Vegas Strip. An Associated Press reporter on the eighth floor of a high-rise within sight of the federal building heard a sustained barrage of gunfire.
A passer-by said he counted at least 40 shots.
“The first shot that I heard was a shotgun blast. I knew it wasn’t fireworks,” said Ray Freres, 59, a sandwich shop manager and Vietnam veteran who said he was behind the federal court building at the time.
“I heard an exchange of gunfire. I was watching the street,” Freres told the AP. “If they were coming my way, I was going the other way.”
The U.S. Marshals Service said the victims included a 48-year-old deputy U.S. marshal who was hospitalized and a 65-year-old court security officer who died.
The dead guard was Stanley Cooper, a retired Las Vegas police officer employed by Akal Security, said Jeff Carter, spokesman for the Marshals Service in Washington.
Las Vegas police did not immediately provide information about Cooper. Carter said he was a police officer for 26 years and became a federal court security officer in Las Vegas in 1994.
Authorities did not immediately release the names of the wounded marshal.
U.S. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., told reporters it appeared the gunman acted alone and the shooting was not a terrorist act.
In a handwritten lawsuit filed in March 2008, Wicks complained that his Social Security benefits were cut following his move and accused federal workers of discrimination because he is black.
“This case from the start was about race,” Wicks wrote in the seven-page complaint, which has occasional spelling and grammatical errors.
“Lots of state worker(s) and agencies have took part in this scam mainly for old blacks who are not well educated,” he wrote.
Wicks claimed the benefits reduction actually began in the state of California, after he had a stroke and wasn’t able to go to government offices to protest an earlier benefit reduction.
He also claimed that Social Security staff called his new landlord in Las Vegas and told her not to help him.
“I didn’t see it or hear it but I know it happen(ed),” Wicks wrote.
The case was formally dismissed Sept. 9 by U.S. District Court Judge Philip Pro in Las Vegas following a hearing Aug. 17 before federal Magistrate Judge George Foley Jr.
FBI Special Agent Joseph Dickey said the gunman, dressed in black pants, shirt and jacket, opened fire in front of a set of security metal detectors just inside the rotunda of the federal building,
“From what witness accounts have said, he walked in with a shotgun underneath his jacket and opened fire when he opened the doors,” Dickey said. “Seven officers responded and returned fire.”
Ensign said the guard who died had been shot in the chest.
A YouTube video recorded the sound of the running firefight as the man retreated across Las Vegas Boulevard toward another federal building and a historic school.
“I could see guards and everything coming out, and then all of a sudden I just started hearing pop, pop, pop. I mean, just like 30 or 40 shots,” said Troy Saccal, a tax services manager who was arriving for work at the time.
Saccal said he thought he saw one guard slump to the ground and another move to help him.
The gunman died moments later in the bushes outside the restored Fifth Street School, where his body remained for several hours.
A Las Vegas police spokeswoman, Officer Barbara Morgan, said the man had been shot in the head.
John Clark, director of the U.S. Marshals Service in Washington, called the security officers heroes.
“The brave and immediate actions of these two individuals saved lives by stopping the threat of a reckless and callous gunman,” Clark said in a statement.
...
___
Barrett reported from Washington. Associated Press Writer Oskar Garcia in Las Vegas contributed to this report.
I know like few others that the TRUTH does not matter in MOST American courts and that MANY judges despise pro se litigants. Unlike Wicks, I just accept the facts and I no longer expect justice. My own litigation serves only to document and publicize the corruption of the courts, judges and attorneys and I’d be EXTREMELY surprised to see ANY pro se litigant prevail in court.
The system is designed to benefit the elite and whoever can hire the best liar wins. I know for a fact that many people on disability constantly have to fight to get keep their benefits and that the government counts on people giving up and quietly dying.
I have a neighbor who receives somewhat over $600/month in social security. He applied for food stamps and they told him that he’s eligible to receive about $80 in reimbursement of the deduction for Medicare. I can’t even believe that they have the nerve to deduct ANYTHING from such a small social security check.
So my neighbor was excited about these benefits until he got the notice that his application for reimbursement was denied because he failed to apply.
HUH?
How can you deny an application that doesn’t exist?
The AZ Department of Economic Security told him about those benefits during his interview. Did they forget to check some box on the application?
Since my neighbor doesn’t have a phone, I’m listed as contact and I called the person who denied the application that doesn’t exist. I left a detailed message on his voicemail and requested a call back several weeks ago. I’m still waiting for that call to be returned.
So now I have to APPEAL for my neighbor to find out what’s going on. BTW, he served in the military and worked until he retired a couple years ago DESPITE a brain injury as a child. He is just not capable of filling out forms and dealing with this crap. We just took him shopping the other day and realized that he had never used a credit or debit card and he may never be able to use the electronic “food stamp” card without help.
There’s just no room in America for people who aren’t money “smart”.
So I suspect that Wicks couldn’t accept the dismissal of his case and that he felt that his social security benefits should not have been reduced. It doesn’t surpise me that the litigation brought out the worst in him, but it’s unlikely that he left an essay describing the reasons for his murder/suicide mission like Robert Flores.
Over six years ago I posted about Robert Flores’ Communications from the Dead at the now closed CreditForum.org. He killed 3 professors before killing himself in 2002: 4 Dead In Univ. Of Arizona Shooting
There have been many suicide/murders since, but I have yet to see anything close to Flores’ detailed description of the many injustices the working people suffer.
Monday, October 12, 2009
White v Experian class action: how to claim your award for incorrectly reported discharged accounts
I analyzed the proposed settlement last year:
White v. Experian et al: CRAs must update SOME discharged accounts after bankruptcy filing
The class lawyers certainly sold out to the credit bureaus, but at least you can get some CASH instead of worthless credit monitoring and incomplete credit reports. The settlement fund is $45 million and I believe the attorneys’ fees come out of the fund too.
You can read the details and submit your claim at http://www.bankruptcydischargesettlement.com/
The highlights:
Overview
There is a proposed settlement with TransUnion LLC, Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and Equifax Information Services LLC ("Defendants") in a class action lawsuit about whether they violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA") and state laws when reporting debts that had been discharged in bankruptcy as not discharged, whether Defendants conducted proper investigations of consumer disputes regarding such debts, and whether consumers were damaged as a result. The Settlement will provide payments of damage awards from a $45 million settlement fund. If you qualify, you may send in a claim form to get benefits, or you can exclude yourself from the Settlement, or object to it.
The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants violated the FCRA and related state laws by incorrectly reporting debts discharged in bankruptcy on credit reports. The Court did not decide which side was right. But both sides agreed to the Settlement to resolve the case and get benefits to customers.
Before any money is paid, the United States District Court for the Central District of California ("the Court") will have a hearing to decide whether to approve the Settlement.
Who Is Included in the Settlement Class?
You are a Class Member eligible for benefits if you received a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy order of discharge and you have had a credit report issued by a Defendant between March 15, 2002 and May 11, 2009 (or, for California residents in the case of TransUnion, between May 12, 2001 and May 11, 2009) that contained debts, accounts, judgments, or other obligations discharged in your bankruptcy that were not reported as discharged.
I have no idea WHY Californians receive special treatment.
You can file your claim online if you received the postcard mailing:
http://www.bankruptcydischargesettlement.com/claim.php3
Claim Form
•If you received a Notice in the mail, click here to access and submit the Claim Form online by providing BOTH your Claim Number and Control Number (located to the right of your pre-printed address).
•If you did not receive a Notice in the mail, click here to download, and mail in a personalized Claim Form.
•Click here to download a blank, non-personalized Claim Form.
WHICH option do you need to check?
Option 1: I cannot make the certification required for Option 2, but I wish to receive a Convenience Award which is estimated to be about $20, depending on how many people choose this Option. I believe that there have been one or more errors in my credit reports regarding debts discharged in bankruptcy.
Option 2: I hereby CERTIFY that I believe I have been damaged by an error in my credit reports regarding debts discharged in bankruptcy with respect to one or more of the following transactions (check as many as apply) and wish to receive an Actual Damage Award, which is estimated to range from $150 to $750, depending on the transaction involved and on how many people choose this option.A denial of employment I applied for Date: (MM/YYYY)
A mortgage loan or a housing
rental I sought Date: (MM/YYYY)
A credit card, auto loan, or other credit applied for, or payment of a discharged debt to obtain credit Date: (MM/YYYY)
Obviously, you’ll get a lot more cash if you choose option two and you have multiple claims.
How do you determine the DATE and HOW do they “verify” your submission?
I’m GUESSING that they will check the credit reports for some or all the people who claim actual damages and that they’ll be looking for a CREDIT INQUIRY in the month you listed as date. Most people will have to check their credit reports to obtain the month/year of the decline. Few people will remember YEARS later. Your CURRENT consumer credit report only lists inquiries for the last couple of years. Hopefully you kept your old reports and my clients can contact me and I can probably retrieve their old reports from storage.
The credit bureaus often have access to the credit reports they provided to you for many years and that’s how they can check whether you actually applied for a mortgage or credit. I doubt that they can expect consumers to KNOW when they were declined so many years after the fact, so I would just guess if I didn’t have the old credit reports. Proving that you were in fact damaged is fortunately NOT required.
While they ask you to CERTIFY the information you provide, you’re NOT committing perjury if you’re submitting an incorrect information.
Don’t let your having to GUESS the date deter you from submitting your claim. The credit bureau employees actually commit perjury all the time and the judges couldn’t possibly care less.
You can check MULTIPLE options if you were DAMAGED.
Damages include an approval at a higher rate, more points, lower loan amount, etc.
If everybody with damages claims their award, $45 million isn’t going to go very far. We have about 8 years covered, discharged accounts are reported for about 7 years, so we’re probably looking at over 20 million people. (See the stats from 1999 - 2003). In my experience, at least one of the credit bureaus reported discharged accounts incorrectly at one time or another.
It’ll be interesting to see how many people claim their award.
Legal • 2009 White v. Experian class action settlement - incorrect after bankruptcy reporting • (0) Comments • Permalink
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
FTC settlement with payday lenders: fines and compliance - debts are erased?
What a strange settlement:
An international Internet payday lending operation will pay $1 million to settle Federal Trade Commission and State of Nevada charges that it failed to disclose key loan terms and used unlawful debt collection tactics.
The defendants operated from the United Kingdom and targeted consumers in the United States, who were misled into believing that the defendants operated from Nevada. According to a complaint filed by the FTC and Nevada in 2008, the defendants told consumers that the loans had to be repaid by their next payday with a fee ranging from $35 to $80, or the loans would be extended automatically for an extra fee debited from consumers’ bank accounts until the loans were repaid.
The FTC charged the defendants with violating the FTC Act by using unfair and deceptive collection tactics. The Commission alleged that they falsely threatened consumers with arrest or imprisonment, falsely claimed that consumers were legally obligated to pay the debts, threatened to take legal action they could not take, repeatedly called consumers at work using abusive and profane language, and improperly disclosed consumers’ purported debts to third parties. They also allegedly failed to make required written disclosures to consumers before consummating a consumer credit transaction, such as the amount financed, the annual percentage rate, payment schedule, total number of payments, and any late payment fees, in violation of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z.
The settlement order requires the defendants to pay $970,125 to the FTC and $29,875 to the State of Nevada. The order prohibits them from falsely claiming that consumers may be arrested or imprisoned for failing to pay debts, that they are legally obligated to pay the full amount of a purported debt, and that for nonpayment they are subject to lawsuit, seizure of property, or garnishment of wages. The defendants also are barred from repeatedly calling consumers’ work places, using obscene or threatening language toward consumers and third parties, and disclosing the existence of consumers’ purported debts to third parties.
The order bars the defendants from violating the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z, including by requiring them to make the required TILA disclosures in extending closed-end credit. The defendants must disclose clearly, in writing, in a form consumers can keep and before a transaction is made, the interest rate and other key terms of their loans; a repayment schedule showing dates when consumers’ bank accounts will be debited for the loans; payments and fees for late or non-payment of the loans; and a statement that payday loans may be limited or prohibited in some states. In addition, the order requires them to obtain consumers’ written confirmation that they have received the required disclosures before making a transaction and, when collecting debts, the defendants must provide consumers, upon request, a written statement of amounts and fees paid and due. The order contains record-keeping and reporting provisions to allow the FTC to monitor compliance.
The order also includes provisions relating to alleged violations of Nevada law. The order prohibits the defendants from violating Nevada state consumer protection law when conducting business from the State of Nevada or when selling goods or services to Nevada residents, including failing to be properly licensed, failing to provide notice and disclosure of all material facts as state law requires, and failing to comply with any state or federal law in selling goods or services.
The settling corporate defendants are Cash Today, Ltd., and The Heathmill Village, Ltd. (both registered in the United Kingdom); The Harris Holdings, Ltd. (registered in Guernsey, an island between England and France); Leads Global, Inc., Waterfront Investments, Inc., ACH Cash, Inc., HBS Services, Inc., Rovinge International, Inc.; and Lotus Leads, Inc. and First4Leads, Inc. (both now dissolved); each also doing business as Cash Today, Route 66 Funding, Global Financial Services International, Ltd., Interim Cash, Ltd., and Big-Int, Ltd. The settling individual defendants are Aaron Gershfield and Ivor Gershfield. The FTC dismissed from the case Jim Harris, who was named in the complaint; he has voluntarily entered into a separate agreement with the State of Nevada that governs his future conduct under state law and provides that he will pay the state a civil penalty.
The FTC appreciates the assistance of the United Kingdom’s consumer and competition authority, the Office of Fair Trading, in this matter.
NOTE: Stipulated court orders are for settlement purposes only and do not necessarily constitute an admission by the defendants of a law violation. Stipulated orders have the force of law when signed by the judge.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Frank Dorman
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2674
STAFF CONTACT:
Nadine Samter
FTC Northwest Region
206-220-4479
(FTC File No. X090012)
(Cash Today settlement)
What does THIS mean?
“The order prohibits them from falsely claiming that consumers may be arrested or imprisoned for failing to pay debts, that they are legally obligated to pay the full amount of a purported debt, and that for nonpayment they are subject to lawsuit, seizure of property, or garnishment of wages. The defendants also are barred from repeatedly calling consumers’ work places, using obscene or threatening language toward consumers and third parties, and disclosing the existence of consumers’ purported debts to third parties.”
They can NOT sue for the debts?
The borrowers are NOT legally obligated to pay those debts?
Can they report the debts on the credit?
And what is the FTC doing with the $1 million?
Why are they NOT barring the scum from operating in the US?
Why are they ORDERING the defendants to comply with the law? Isn’t that a given?
When PEOPLE steal from a bunch of corporations and PEOPLE get caught 3 times, they’re looking at LIFE IN JAIL in same states.
Incorporate and you can steal all you want. You may have to hand over some of your profits to the FTC and you may be ordered to stop stealing. If necessary, you can always start a new corporation.
This is one of so many settlements designed to protect the criminals. Truly incredible.
Legal • Regulators - legislators • (0) Comments • Permalink
