• 2010 Credit Suit
• Liars & Cheats
• CreditFactors
• Fight Back!!!
• RESISTANCE
• TRADO
• News Releases
• Contact

NACA - Consumer Lawyers EXPOSED

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Attorney responds to my accusations of NACA attorneys’ cream skimming

Dear Christine:

I’m not sure what you mean by “cream skimming” [I can infer, of course, but I’ve never heard the rather strange phrase], but I read with interest your comments re: the FCRA attorney who wanted to charge $200 for an initial review of a putative claim/case. And I respectfully but vehemently disagree with your contentions and conclusions.

Cream skimming - the Google search results. 

“Cream skimming” is often used in reference to insurance, but generally applies to all who only seek the most profitable business.  In a capitalistic society this is acceptable conduct, however, it is NOT acceptable conduct for “consumer advocate” attorneys.

The attorneys are looking for the most profitable consumers, the slam dunk fat settlement checks while ignoring 99%+ of the consumers with credit problems.

To be sure, his response was almost precisely what mine would have been/would be [although I bill at $190/hr.], and what you and many other consumers/potential clients don’t seem to understand is that all we attorneys have to offer is our valuable time. Moreover, if we were to spend an hour reviewing each referral case that contacted us, we’d be left with no billable time whatsoever.

I fully understand that.  After all, I’ve been working 12-14 hours a day 360 days/yr and I’m BROKE.

And how do you expect an attorney is supposed to become familiar with the facts and nuances of a case before deciding how or whether to proceed? Are you suggesting we/they simply accept every contention and fact as presented by the putative client - and even if everything they stated was 100% accurate, it would be impossible to advise competently without reviewing the physical documents, etc. from that particular file/case.

Credit reporting isn’t exactly rocket science.  Yes, it’s complicated, but not THAT complicated—after all, consumers with an 8th grade education are supposed to understand it.  I know that some consumers lie and misunderstand the reports and results, but how can a “consumer advocate” limit services only to consumers with the cash or credit to PAY $200 for a review that will leave the consumer with no benefit?

It’s obvious that the attorneys are lacking an understanding of the value of $200 to consumers with credit problems.

Believe me, while I happen not to be affiliated with NACA in any way [that I’m aware of], you can rest assured I’m extremely passionate about and experienced in - both professionally and personally [I’ve sued the CRAs in Federal Court as Plaintiff/attorney pro se](see [redacted]) - litigating against those in the Credit/Banking industry. Yet that doesn’t mean that I’m going to give away my time - the only thing I have in/by which to earn a living - to every referral or wronged consumer who walks into or calls my office.

You can’t call yourself a “consumer advocate” if you’re NOT willing to give away at least some of your time to benefit consumers.

Indeed, I’ve never taken a FCRA/TILA/FDCPA case on a contingency fee basis and it is unlikely I ever will. For as you should know as well as anyone, the likelihood - not to mention amount - of recovery of attorney’s fees in these cases is very low, and one has to believe the ultimate (and hopeful) credit improvement and related benefits [e.g. lower interest rates for future borrowing, etc.] are worthwhile enough to pursue [or, in the case of debt collectors, defend] it on an hourly basis.

You certainly have the right to only seek “worthwhile” business, the wealthy consumers—as long as you don’t call yourself “consumer advocate.” But I would NOT hire you—under the LAW a consumer is entitled to recover attorneys fees and nobody should have to PAY anything to get the benefits of COMPLETE and ACCURATE credit reports.  If you don’t think that the court’s awards are sufficient, PROVE it.  DOCUMENT it.  CHANGE the law.

If in fact attorneys can’t survive due to the low attorneys fees awarded by the courts, NACA’s website should change its headline from “know your rights” to “we can’t help most consumers” and document the need for legislative changes. 

Instead, NACA MISREPRESENTS the facts and if fails to disclose that most “consumer advocate” attorneys will only represent wealthy consumers and/or with slam dunk claims and huge damages.

The FCRA should have much higher minimum statutory damages, at least $1000 PER willful violation and if legal fees awarded by the courts are too low, that can also be addressed by the legislature.  The legislature ought to define “willful” as any incorrect reporting in response to the consumer’s dispute.

I described the issues in more detail at Summary - the lawyers are the last piece in the corruption puzzle, Is there ANY way to fix this broken system?

I could make a good living if I could give legal advice and negotiate settlements for a fee.  Almost all my clients (99%) are “Credit Activists” who at minimum allow me to use their credit reports to document credit reporting problems.  Some even go further and contact legislators and TRY to make a difference. 

NACA attorneys fail to document the systemic violations and fail to reach out to consumers for assistance with legislative changes.  That’s because they have a “good thing” going for themselves. 

As the record shows, the FCRA has been weakened by the 2003 FACT Act and convoluted with a lot of GARBAGE—collectively all “consumer advocates” were unable to successfully counter the corporate lobbyists and lying executives.

Why doesn’t NACA at least ADMIT it? 

A “consumer advocate” ought to care about people with financial and credit problems. 

We need legal representation for ALL with claims, a FAIR legal system, resources for pro se litigants, equal rights for all—not just for the wealthy.

NACA miserably fails to do anything for the general public and it is merely a lead generation system for its members.

Update 4/12/07:

Got permission to post the attorney info: 

Auden L. Grumet, Esq.
The Law Office of Auden L. Grumet, LLC
http://www.atlantalawyer.org


Physical Office Address:

1718 Peachtree St., N.W.
Peachtree 25th Bldg.
South Tower, Suite 1080
Atlanta, GA 30309

I always redact identifying info, most people want to remain anonymous, but I appreciate it when readers don’t mind disclosing who they are.  Really wish I got some comments from NACA too. 

One cannot expect a competent solo practitioner to review consumer claims free of charge on a regular basis.  But any large firm and especially an organization like NACA ought to have personnel to review the credit disputes and reports and assess the claims AND provide a WRITTEN analysis of the legal claims, maybe for a $50 or so fee.

Over the years I’ve had many readers/clients get free initial consultations, but the attorneys were often completely incompetent (or cream skimming) and falsely stated that there were no FCRA or FDCPA violations.  Often it’s probably how they get rid of undesirable clients, I suppose they assess potential clients by their attire, race, car, employment, income ...  The working stiffs don’t have high damages, so there won’t be large settlement checks.  Just because you get something free, doesn’t mean that it’s good.

NACA and the “consumer advocates” ought to have web pages with information about what constitutes a “desirable” client, explaining the basics, that disputes with creditors don’t get you claims you can sue for, that disputes with collectors must be made in writing, etc.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Cream skimming NACA “consumer advocate” FCRA attorney - $200 review fee

Most attorneys representing consumers join the the National Association of Consumer Advocates to assist with cream skimming for the most lucrative cases. I have posted previously about my futile attempts to communicate with NACA.  Well, I communicated all right, just never got a response.  The recently redesigned NACA site states:

“Consumer Resources - Know Your Rights!”

Yeah, the right to PAY “consumer advocate” attorneys who value their working relationships with the CRAs’ lawyers more than seeking justice for consumers.

However, since I have another client with incorrect verifications by the CRAs, I recommended contacting NACA attorneys since I don’t have the time to volunteer to help her sue pro se.  And you never know, not ALL lawyers suck.

Here’s the response my client got from a NACA attorney:

FCRA cases can be very complicated. There are many traps to fall into and what looks like a good case may not necessarily be a good case. Frequently, the case has potential, but more needs to be done to work it up. Credit Reporting Agencies have attorneys who specialize in defending these actions. Every case has to be a good case and worked up properly to be successful.

I will review what you have for a one hour fee, which is $200. From there, if you have a good case or the potential for a good case, I may be willing to take it without charging you fees for the potential recovery from the creditor or credit reporting agency.

I want to caution you it is unlikely I would take on cases against all four agencies at the same time on a contingency basis unless these are all unbelievably good cases.

...

I don’t know why he’s talking about “all four agencies”, maybe he meant the creditor and the 3 bureaus.

So what exactly are the consumers’ rights?

To pay a “consumer advocate” attorney $200 for an hour to review the case.

This is what my book will be about, documenting the “consumer advocate” scams, the systemic exploitation of consumers with credit issues, not only by the creditors, but by the lawyers and organizations who claim to be “consumer advocates.”

And that’s why we need to get rid of the laws prohibiting the practice of law without license.

Consumers need to be allowed to assist each other for a FEE.  I could write up the entire complaint for my client for the $200 that this MORON “advocate” attorney wants for a review (resulting most likely in a DECLINE to take the case)—but if I did that, I’d commit a felony.  And I can’t do it free of charge, I have NO spare time. 

This URL sent to NACA’s Ira Rheingold, Executive Director and General Counsel.  I’ve never received a reply from him, but want to ensure they can’t claim that they don’t know about their attorneys’ conduct.

Thursday, September 15, 2005

“Consumer advocate” attorney David Szwak on crack? Or naturally vile?

Just as I thought I’ve seen it all. 

David Szwak must be OUT OF HIS MIND! 

Whether you need a laugh or you just want to know the truth about “CONSUMER ADVOCATE” lawyers, check out

Cream skimming CONSUMER ADVOCATE lawyers sold out to the corporations

He actually defends the Trans Union and Equifax lawyers, which of course puts him in line with Choi.  They have a working relationship with CRA and major creditor lawyers.  It’s just like on TV when you see the opposing lawyers screaming at each other in court, and on the way out they make jokes about their clients and decide where to have lunch.

The SUMMARY is more for attorneys with a functioning brain and a true interest in trying to salvage what little is left of consumer rights.  But David Szwak’s e-mails to me are absolutely hilarious.  Why doesn’t he just post on every credit site and in his signature:

“I’m an asshole! I’m an asshole! I’m an asshole! I’m an asshole! I’m an asshole!”

David Szwak has to be the top contender for the 2005 Moron of the Year Award.  Well, maybe he just has a mental problem and can get some help.  I hope so.

I wouldn’t be surprised to get the summons next week, for defaming him, for running a credit repair organization and whatever else he’s been threatening me with.  Seeing is believing.  I keep checking his emails to see if they’re forged (it wouldn’t be the first time that happened)—but he replied to my notification of the postings, so there’s no question the mails came from his email account.

I’m sorry I haven’t posted about anything else, there is so much going on, but I’ve got another filing deadline and this has turned into major project.

David Szwak: “By the way, are you solvent?”

I don’t know why he asked me that in response to yesterday’s posting about MyFairCredit.com.

I answered at the new topic at Fight Back:

Cream skimming CONSUMER ADVOCATE lawyers sold out to the corporations

And I had a few questions too.

These lawyers don’t have the slightest clue what the problem is.  Strange, I thought I was pretty clear in my posting.  It reminds me of my court filings.  I talk about one thing, and the defendants and the judges talk about something entirely different.

Is it my English?

Maybe we’ll get into a constructive discussion. Maybe not.  We shall see.

All attorneys are invited to post their input at Fight Back.

Tuesday, September 13, 2005

MyFairCredit.com is cream skimming for corrupt consumer lawyers

You may recall my recent posting about MyFairCredit.com

On 8/22/05 I sent my request for representation to Hyung S. Choi. His resume is quite impressive.

On 8/27/05, I sent the email again.  Since I still didn’t have a response, I finally called Mr. Choi today to inquire whether no response means “not interested.” He promptly called me back.

Unfortunately, I can now tell you with certainty that the CONSUMER lawyers are the problem, not the CRAs, banks and creditors.

I told him about my cases and nothing sounded familiar to him, he said he gets a lot of e-mail.  I then told him about my websites, he remembered having been to my now closed creditforum.org years ago, but he had no idea what I’ve been doing.  So I gave him this URL, and it didn’t take long until he told me that there was no way that he would represent me because I filed the AZ Bar Complaint (currently still prominently linked to your left) about the lying scum sucking bottom feeding Capital One attorneys Joseph Udall, Kathleen A Biesterveld and Kevin D Quigley.

Mr. Choi said he knows them and I hope this is a fairly accurate quote:  “A federal judge would not look kindly on someone who filed a Bar complaint.”

I asked Mr. Choi several times to e-mail for posting here why he won’t represent me and he declined to do so.  I told him how I hate to have to read between the lines ... he refused and told me that I could publish whatever I want.

Is Mr. Choi saying that his reputation would suffer and the judges would rule against him if he decided to represent a consumer who got tired of the lies and perjury and filed a Bar complaint?

I talk about corruption a lot, but I really didn’t think that FEDERAL JUDGES are that CORRUPT!

Of course I know about Cybil Edwards (did I spell the name wrong, where are the sites about her case?) and many of these political cases where people got railroaded.  But, my suits are about very basic credit reporting issues, not at all important to national security or politics.  Right?

I obviously don’t know whether Mr. Choi’s concerns about the federal judges are correct—and I have no way to find out whether his career would really be over or seriously damaged if he represented me.

However, once again, just follow the money:

Experian, Trans Union, Equifax, Capital One, .....

So, I think the real reason is that Mr. Choi doesn’t want to strain his “working relationship” with scum like Udall, Biesterveld and Quigley.  I’m sure they would be very upset if he *sincerely* represented me, although they are not party to my 1st case and I wasn’t even looking for an attorney for the case with Cap One right now.  (See my e-mail to attorney Choi below.)

By “sincerely” I mean immediately getting a preliminary injunction requiring that Capital One report the credit limits on MY reports.

Why is Capital One still refusing to report the limits after 2.5 years of litigation?

BECAUSE THEY CAN.

My Demand for a new FFIEC Advisory Letter Requiring the Reporting of Credit Card LIMITS to CRAs

I read Hyung Choi’s bio, interesting cases, but Capital One isn’t mentioned.  Neither are the credit bureaus.  They are the consumer lawyers’ goldmine.

Every secret settlement is another fat paycheck.

And through the SECRET settlements, the consumer lawyers ensure that they get to file the exact same suits again and again and again—they just change the plaintiff’s name and maybe a few specifics. 

There is really NO reason for Capital One not to be reporting the credit limits.  The FRCA is so clear cut, requiring creditors to report “complete and accurate.”

Yet, the lawyers do nothing - except for arranging secret deals.

The Braun Law Group has a class action against Cap One regarding the limits.  I’ve asked for the case # so I could get the filings through PACER, thought that might help me.  I got nothing. 

I’ve had a lot of bad things to say about class action lawyers lately, you may have read my recent posting:

The WORST class settlement EVER was negotiated by Lewis Stephen Kahn, Kahn Gauthier Law Group

And here’s some more on secret settlements:

The Ameriquest offer and why confidential settlements suck

Not ALL lawyers suck.  I know a couple lawyers who really cared about representing people for what’s RIGHT—seeking JUSTICE—not just for a paycheck.  One of them quit out of frustration, after struggling to get through law school as a single mom.  One didn’t make it - but might be back.  Probably transformed and part of the system - and as corrupt as almost all are in the consumer credit reporting scene.

Recently a lawyer contacted me about the reporting of judgments that are paid in a timely manner. 

Why does exercising your right to seek justice in court mean that your credit has to be destroyed even if you pay the judgment right away?

So, not all lawyers suck, just most and especially the ones that have the skills and power to make a difference, but choose to go cream skimming instead.

I’ve seen so many consumers get screwed by their lawyers.

In one case a nationally known FCRA attorney settled for a few thousand (mostly his legal fees) without his client’s permission and then testified on behalf of Equifax to enforce the settlement.  I promised the consumer confidentiality, so I’m not going to post who that asshole is. The judge ruled in favor of the consumer.

According to the reader feedback I get, most cases are settled for deletion and maybe a few hundred or thousand dollars.  In almost all cases the attorney fees are much higher than the consumer’s share.  And those are the lucky readers, at least 99% never find an attorney to take their case on contingency.

I don’t think that any reader has ever submitted a judgment or a settlement for posting UNLESS the consumer litigated pro se.

There are three types of lawyers:

1) They specialize in FCRA/FDCPA cases—some good lawyers and some who fake it, mostly cream skimming.

2) The lawyers who take your retainer, they don’t know shit and just rip you off.  A great way to find those is to join Prepaid Legal.  Yes.  I got that desperate and that’ll be a separate posting.

3) Lawyers who are your personal friends or relatives, don’t know anything about credit, but are willing to learn and to write a letter.  That’s often a consumer’s best chance of at least getting the credit reports corrected.

I’ve got great documentation and I haven’t lied to the court or submitted false disputes to the CRAs.  I did nothing wrong - other than to stand up for my rights and to publish what’s really going on in the legal profession and in the courts.  I didn’t expect any attorney to take my case, they didn’t want it 3 years ago.  But, I had an obligation to see what MyFairCredit is all about and I don’t want to be an armchair quarterback.  So, now I know, and you know.

A reader’s MyFairCredit experience:

She wasted her time and money to go to an appointment “downtown”, only to be told that she has no recourse against AmEx due to the incorrect reporting of a business account.

What a freaking idiot - licensed to practice law.  The attorney told the reader that as a business owner, the consumer was supposed to be more sophisticated and that AmEx is excluded from the FCRA when reporting business accounts.  It’s hard to believe a lawyer would say something so stupid.

In an interview about nano tech and amazing stuff in development, including not having to sleep anymore, Joel Garreau just said on the radio:

“… or lawyers who don’t sleep anymore, what a horrifying thought that is.”

Maybe a bunch of lawyers are already in a pilot study ... that sure would explain a lot.

EVERY account reported on a consumer credit report is covered by the FCRA.

Now that I think about it, no lawyer could be so stupid.  The lawyer probably didn’t think there was enough money in the case and just said that to get rid of the consumer, maybe she’s the wrong color or wasn’t dressed well and didn’t appear very damageable.  Not worth the effort.

I wish people would just come forward and post names.  Americans are so afraid .... and as my own experiences show, rightfully so.

Summary:

MyFairCredit is cream skimming for “sexy” cases.

If you have damages due to ID theft, preferably documented by mortgage declines and even better, the loss of your house, you have large medical bills, Prozac or Valium prescriptions, your psychiatrist will testify about your suffering and mental anguish, and no PRIOR medical problems—you’ll have attorneys lining up.

MyFairCredit is the equivalent of the mortgage fax with nothing but false advertisements

I’ve lost my respect for NACA too.  Nothing but another organization to help lawyers exploit consumers.  I’ve reposted some of their calls for action, regarding the bankruptcy reform and mandatory arbitration.  It’s all so freaking lame.  And obviously NOT working!

Not one of those damned lawyers has made a difference.  Not to my credit rating, and not to yours. 

They’re in it for their bank accounts, and let’s face it, that’s what good Americans are supposed to do.  I’m by no means expecting lawyers to work for free, heck, the more they can take from the CRAs and creditors, the better.  But they have NOT even made an effort to change things.  So many lawyers have personally contacted me over the years and assured me how sincere they are.  And I’ve waited and waited and waited for *something* good to happen.

The Chase release was viewed 127,674 times in the first 2 weeks through just one outlet. I have no idea how many times it was accessed at the various sites where it’s reposted, but obviously there’s a tremendous interest.  It takes a PRO SE litigant to come forward, to document the totally illegal Chase rate increases and the Chase contempt for its customers:

Chase Bank USA sued for illegally increasing interest rates and reporting duplicate account to credit bureau Experian

The Target release is next and this posting is an outline for my release on so-called consumer lawyers.  As always, I strive for accuracy and I’d sure like to see what the lawyers have to say.

URL and “I’ll greatly appreciate your comments” e-mailed to:

Hyung S. Choi - (the only AZ attorney listed at MyFairCredit)
David Anthony Szwak - (sent me the request for the link)
Leonard A. Bennett - (made some good case law and testified for Congress, but OBVIOUSLY that made no difference to consumers)
Ira Rheingold - (NACA submitted lots of amicus briefs until 12/04.  What happened in 2005?  And why are consumers rapidly losing more and more rights?  Why have I sent so many readers to NACA and I don’t get any positive feedback?)

And here’s my e-mail with my request for legal assistance and the description of my situation: