Law Suit Filed: Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action

What are you looking for? Home Page >> Lawsuits Filed >> Lawsuit: Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action Please click here for a free evaluation of your claim Las Vegas, NV: A foreclosure class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of 16 Nevadans against five companies hired by banks and lenders to handle the foreclosures on properties owned by the plaintiffs and one additional defendant who purchased property through the foreclosure process. The lawsuit claims illegal debt collection activities and deceptive trade practices by the defendants against the plaintiffs during the foreclosure process as the defendants were not licensed or registered in the State of Nevada to carry out the foreclosure process. The plaintiffs are Nevadans who not only lost their houses in one of the hardest hit real estate markets, but were also adversely affected by foreclosure companies that did not follow the law during the foreclosure process. The lawsuit names as defendants: Quality Loan Service Corporation; Appleton Properties, LLC; MTC Financial, Inc. dba Trustee Corps; Meridian Foreclosure Service dba MTDS, Inc. dba Meridian Trust Deed Service; National Default Servicing Corporation; and California Reconveyance Company. The lawsuit seeks to compensate the plaintiffs and compel the defendants to surrender all fees collected for many thousands of foreclosures during the time they were operating illegally. The case was filed as a class action lawsuit because there are thousands of potential plaintiffs who were victims of these foreclosure companies. The lawsuit alleges that the debt collection activities of the defendants are and/or were illegal and improper because each of the defendants did not hold a license to engage in debt collection activities in the State of Nevada and each also failed to register as a foreign debt collection agency with the Nevada Financial Institutions Division. The illegal and improper debt collection activities include the issuance of debt-related notices, demands, collection communications and/or foreclosure sales and processes. In addition, the plaintiffs also claim deceptive trade practices, consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, trespass, quiet title and in two instances, elder abuse. Plaintiffs are asking for compensatory and consequential damages in excess to $10,000, disgorgement of any amounts paid to defendants for their respective illegal and improper debt collection activities, attorney's fees and injunctive relief. Nevada Illegal Foreclosure Class Action Legal Help If you or a loved one has suffered damages in this case, please click the link below http://chapter-7bankruptcysite.com and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/nevada-foreclosure-companies-class-action-illegal.html?ref=rss

Law Suit Filed: Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action

What are you looking for? Home Page >> Lawsuits Filed >> Lawsuit: Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action Nevada Foreclosure Companies Face Illegal Debt Collection Class Action Please click here for a free evaluation of your claim Las Vegas, NV: A foreclosure class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of 16 Nevadans against five companies hired by banks and lenders to handle the foreclosures on properties owned by the plaintiffs and one additional defendant who purchased property through the foreclosure process. The lawsuit claims illegal debt collection activities and deceptive trade practices by the defendants against the plaintiffs during the foreclosure process as the defendants were not licensed or registered in the State of Nevada to carry out the foreclosure process. The plaintiffs are Nevadans who not only lost their houses in one of the hardest hit real estate markets, but were also adversely affected by foreclosure companies that did not follow the law during the foreclosure process. The lawsuit names as defendants: Quality Loan Service Corporation; Appleton Properties, LLC; MTC Financial, Inc. dba Trustee Corps; Meridian Foreclosure Service dba MTDS, Inc. dba Meridian Trust Deed Service; National Default Servicing Corporation; and California Reconveyance Company. The lawsuit seeks to compensate the plaintiffs and compel the defendants to surrender all fees collected for many thousands of foreclosures during the time they were operating illegally. The case was filed as a class action lawsuit because there are thousands of potential plaintiffs who were victims of these foreclosure companies. The lawsuit alleges that the debt collection activities of the defendants are and/or were illegal and improper because each of the defendants did not hold a license to engage in debt collection activities in the State of Nevada and each also failed to register as a foreign debt collection agency with the Nevada Financial Institutions Division. The illegal and improper debt collection activities include the issuance of debt-related notices, demands, collection communications and/or foreclosure sales and processes. In addition, the plaintiffs also claim deceptive trade practices, consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, trespass, quiet title and in two instances, elder abuse. Plaintiffs are asking for compensatory and consequential damages in excess to $10,000, disgorgement of any amounts paid to defendants for their respective illegal and improper debt collection activities, attorney's fees and injunctive relief. Nevada Illegal Foreclosure Class Action Legal Help If you or a loved one has suffered damages in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/nevada-foreclosure-companies-class-action-illegal.html?ref=rss

Law Suit Filed: Fisker employment lawsuit

Home > Lawsuits > Fisker employment lawsuit Fisker Faces Employment Class Action Lawsuit Over WARN Act Violations April 9 2013 Houston, TX: An employment class action lawsuit has been filed against Fisker Automotive for failure to provide 60 days notice to employees who were part of recent mass layoffs. Those layoffs are in violation of US and California labor laws. Specifically, the US Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, a federal law, stipulates that companies with over 100 employees must provide 60 days notice prior to laying off their employees. There is also a similar requirement in place under California state law. The employment lawsuit against Fisker alleges the company failed to pay the employees their Bankruptcy Attorney 60 days pay and benefits that they would have been received had they been provided their duly entitled 60-day notice. Further, the lawsuit claims Fisker failed to notify California's state Employment Development Department of its layoff plans, as well as the local workforce investment board, as well as the top elected officials in Anaheim and Orange County. Fisker Employment Class Action Legal Help If you or a loved one has suffered similar damages or injuries, please fill in the form to the right and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation. Last updated April 9 2013 Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/Fisker-Employment-Class-Action-Lawsuit.html?ref=rss

Settlement: Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement

Home > Settlements > Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement April 17 2013 New York, NY: Bank of America has reached a settlement in the pending securities fraud class action lawsuit brought by investors who purchased mortgage investments from Countrywide Financial. BoFA acquired Countrywide in 2008. The proposed settlement would see BoFA pay $500 million to settle the lawsuit, which would be paid out to plaintiffs that include Dubai's Mashreq Bank and public and union pension funds in California, Maine, Nevada, Vermont and Washington states. The plaintiffs claimed they were misled about the risks of securities they bought from California-based Countrywide between 2005 and 2007. The settlement surpasses the $315 million accord reached with Merrill Lynch in May 2012, making it the largest to resolve federal class-action litigation over mortgage-backed securities since the financial crisis began. The accord requires court approval. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer here. at no cost or obligation, please click the link below. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/bank-of-america-reaches-500m-settlement-countrywide.html?ref=rss

Law Suit Filed: Saxon Mortgage Faces Class Action Over Alleged Illegal Use of HAMP

Home > Lawsuits > Saxon Mortgage Faces Class Action Over Alleged Illegal Use of HAMP Saxon Mortgage Faces Class Action Over Alleged Illegal Use of HAMP April 7 2011 San Francisco, CA: Saxon Mortgage Inc, the mortgage service division of Morgan Stanley, is facing a a potential class action lawsuit alleging that the company uses the Homeowners Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) to attract customers into making "trial" payments on loans it has no intention of ever permanently modifying. Filed in Northern California, the suit, titled Gaudin v. Saxon Mortgage Services Inc, alleges a pattern of misconduct by Saxon of collecting trial payments, delaying the processing of loan modifications, and then denying the application altogether for demonstrably false reasons. According to the suit, Marie Gaudin, lead plaintiff and owner of a San Francisco bridal boutique that suffered hard times as a result of the recession brought on by the sub-prime mortgage crisis, asked Saxon for loan modification on her home. Gaudin was directed to Saxon's "Home Preservation Department" and subsequently asked to provide extensive documentation of her financial condition, which she did. She was assured by Saxon that they were "committed to assisting you in any way we can to complete the [the loan modification]. We want to help!" She received a written agreement from them that appeared to promise a permanent HAMP loan modification after she made three "trial" payments as proof she could handle the loan repayments. The complaint notes that Saxon instead delayed the processing of the HAMP loan modification, while urging Gaudin to continue making trial payments. However, after receiving numerous trial payments and fulfilling the rest of her obligations under the agreement Saxon denied her a permanent HAMP modification. They falsely claimed that Gaudin had failed to make payments or comply with document requests. Saxon's correspondence with Gaudin shows a pattern of inaccurate and irresponsible behavior on the part of a major global bank. The company claimed that she did not make payments, while in the same letter actually acknowledged that she was current on all payments. It also claimed that the U.S. Treasury Department was involved in reviewing HAMP applications. The class action alleges that Saxon's breach of contract, rescission and restitution, deceptive debt collection practices violated California's Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (Rosenthal Act) and fraudulent, unlawful, and unfair business practices under California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL). Saxon Mortgage HAMP Class Action Legal Help If you or a loved one has suffered damages in this case, please fill in the form to the right and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or http://www.socallawsupport.com/ obligation. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/saxon-mortgage-faces-class-action-illegal-use-of.html?ref=rss

Settlement: Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action

Home > Settlements > Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action April 13 2011 New York, NY: A preliminary settlement has been reached by Ameriprise Financial and its brokerage unit, Securities America Inc, and clients who allege in they lost roughly $400 million on fraudulent private placements. The preliminary agreement would see Securities America pay $80 million, further to a separate agreement in which SA has agreed to pay $70 million. If approved, the settlement would mean a recovery of 40 cents on the dollar, after fees. If approved, the majority of the settlement will be paid by Ameriprise. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please fill in the form to the right. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/ameriprise-agrees-preliminary-settlement-in.html?ref=rss

Settlement: Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement

Home > Settlements > Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement Bank of America Reaches $500M Settlement April 17 2013 New York, NY: Bank of America has reached a settlement in the pending securities fraud class action lawsuit brought by investors who purchased mortgage investments from Countrywide Financial. BoFA acquired Countrywide in 2008. The proposed settlement would see BoFA pay $500 million to settle the lawsuit, which would be paid out to plaintiffs that include Dubai's Mashreq Bank and public and union pension funds in California, Maine, Nevada, Vermont and Washington states. The plaintiffs claimed they were misled about the risks of securities they bought from California-based Countrywide between 2005 and 2007. The settlement surpasses the $315 million accord reached with Merrill Lynch in May 2012, making it the largest to resolve federal class-action litigation over mortgage-backed securities since the financial crisis began. The accord requires court approval. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please click the link below. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/bank-of-america-reaches-500m-settlement-countrywide.html?ref=rss

Settlement: Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action

Home > Settlements > Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action April 13 2011 New York, NY: A preliminary settlement has been reached by Ameriprise Financial and its brokerage unit, Securities America Inc, and clients who allege in they lost roughly $400 million on fraudulent private placements. The preliminary agreement would see Securities America pay $80 million, further to a separate agreement in which SA has agreed to pay $70 million. If approved, the settlement would mean a recovery of 40 cents on the dollar, after fees. If approved, the majority of the settlement will be paid by http://chapter13bankruptcysite.com Ameriprise. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please fill in the form to the right. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/ameriprise-agrees-preliminary-settlement-in.html?ref=rss

Law Suit Filed: Fisker employment lawsuit

Home > Lawsuits > Fisker employment lawsuit Fisker Faces Employment Class Action Lawsuit Over WARN Act Violations April 9 2013 Houston, TX: An employment class action lawsuit has been filed against Fisker Automotive for failure to provide 60 days notice to employees who were part of recent mass layoffs. Those layoffs are in violation of US and California labor laws. Specifically, the US Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, a federal law, stipulates that companies with over 100 employees must provide 60 days notice prior to laying off their employees. There is also a similar requirement in place under California state law. The employment lawsuit against Fisker alleges the company failed to pay the employees their 60 days pay and benefits that they would have been received had they been provided their duly entitled 60-day notice. Further, the lawsuit claims Fisker failed to notify California's state Employment Development Department of its layoff plans, as well as the local workforce investment board, as well as the top elected officials in Anaheim and Orange County. Fisker Employment Class Action Legal Help If you or a loved one has suffered similar damages or injuries, please fill in the form to the right and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation. Last updated April 9 2013 Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/Fisker-Employment-Class-Action-Lawsuit.html?ref=rss

Settlement: $3.9M Breach of Contract Lawsuit Settlement

Home Page >> Settlements >> $3.9M Breach of Contract Lawsuit Settlement $3.9M Breach of Contract Lawsuit Settlement Please click here for a free evaluation of your claim Los Angeles, CA: A $3,907,000 settlement has been reached in an unfair business practices lawsuit brought against Wyndham, a time-share company. The settlement, which involves a $3,192,000 award for fraud and a $715,000 for breach of contract, among other things, was brought against Wyndam by Casablanca Express. Over a 19 year period, Casablanca Express and Wyndham built a business relationship whereby Casablanca helped Wyndham market and sell its timeshare products. At Wyndham's request, Casablanca worked almost exclusively for Wyndham. As part of the contract between the parties, Wyndham agreed to give Casablanca a "wind-down" severance agreement, whereby Wyndham would pay Casablanca for three years after terminating its relationship with Casablanca so as to allow Casablanca time to rebuild its business with other clients. Wyndham also promised to give Casablanca the right of first refusal on all travel certificates used by Wyndham. In October 2008, claiming it needed help during the recession, Wyndham requested that Casablanca waive the wind-down clause in exchange for promises of a long-term, growing and exclusive business relationship going forward. At the time Wyndham asked for the deletion of the wind-down clause Wyndham had secretly decided to cease doing business with Casablanca. Shortly after Casablanca agreed to delete Bankruptcy Lawyer the wind-down provision of the agreement (and give up other financial entitlements) in exchange for the promise of a long-term, growing and exclusive business relationship going forward, Wyndham abruptly ceased doing business with Casablanca. Loss of the value of the wind-down clause was valued at $6 million, and, lost profits on the breach of the right of first refusal provision of the contract in the amount of approximately $1 million. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please click the link below.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/3-9m-breach-of-contract-lawsuit-settlement.html?ref=rss

US trustee to support parallel bankruptcy against Dunne

"An Irish bankruptcy case is necessary in this matter for an expeditious, economical and just liquidation of the bankruptcy estate and distribution of its property," Mr Coan said in the filing. Irish creditors The "overwhelming majority" of Mr Dunne's creditors, contract parties and co-debtors are located in Ireland, he said. He argued that the validity of creditor claims against Mr Dunne's estate would also depend in large part, if not entirely, on the application of Irish law. Mr Coan noted that Ms Killilea had sought to dismiss a separate legal action taken in Connecticut by the National Asset Management Agency on the grounds that a US court had no jurisdiction to resolve issues between foreign nationals regarding asset transfers that occurred outside the United States. The rights and interests of Mr Dunne's "non-insider creditors" must outweigh the interests of Mr Dunne's wife who is herself an Irish citizen in the US on a three-year visa, the trustee said. Creditor meeting On Tuesday Mr Dunne was due to meet his creditors for the first time since filing for bankruptcy in Connecticut, where he now lives, but he filed papers seeking to postpone the meeting after Ulster Bank brought the motion to bring parallel bankruptcy proceedings in Ireland against him earlier this month.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/us-trustee-to-support-parallel-bankruptcy-against-dunne-1.1414679

How Minor Blew Tech Fortune on Way to Bankruptcy

"Choosing Chapter 7 is clearing the slate," said Bob Rattet, a bankruptcy lawyer in White Plains, New York. "He isn't required like Middle America to pay his debts, because they're mostly business-related." The bankruptcy petition, filed May 24 in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Los Angeles, listed assets of as much as $50 million and debt of as much as $100 million. In Chapter 7, an impartial trustee is appointed to administer the case and sell assets such as automobiles. Fresh Start Chapter 7 is designed to give an individual a "relatively fast" fresh start and usually doesn't give creditors "any significant dividends," said Harvey Miller, lead bankruptcy lawyer to defunct Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-05-30/cnet-founder-minor-files-for-bankruptcy-after-selling-artworks

Dorsey Congratulates Partner Katherine Constantine on Appointment as U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Constantine has served on several boards including boards of non-profit organizations dedicated to serving needs of people with disabilities and on the Georgetown Law Alumni Board. She has also been active as a diversity mentor to new attorneys. Ms. Constantine is a 1977 magna cum laude graduate of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and a 1980 graduate of the Georgetown Law Center. "Kathie Constantine is a preeminent bankruptcy lawyer with a national reputation," noted Ken Cutler, Managing Partner of Dorsey & Whitney. "We are very proud of her achievements and of this appointment.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/mn-dorsey-whitney-llp-idUSnBw306542a+100+BSW20130530

Joe Francis Says Bankruptcy Trustee Aims to Destroy Girls Gone Wild

He later apologized. Since April, Francis and his girlfriend Abbey Wilson have been banned from Girls Gone Wild's Santa Monica headquarters. His attorneys recently complained that the restraining order is getting in the way of other businesses that operate out of the space, including the sale of reality TV star Kim Kardashian's skin care line. But overall, Francis said that the restraining order is a pretty sweet deal. "I never went to the office anyway, you know what I'm saying?" he said, pausing to laugh at his luck. "Like, like if you had a get out of work free card, you'd take it too… I still get a check, you know? I just don't have to do anything." Francis, who spent 11 months in jail on federal tax charges, said he isn't a Girls Gone Wild employee, director or owner.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://blogs.wsj.com/bankruptcy/2013/05/31/%ef%bb%bfjoe-francis-says-bankruptcy-trustee-aims-to-destroy-girls-gone-wild/

Sound Shore Health System Files For Bankruptcy, Blames Medicare Cuts

(John Cantlie/Getty Images) Emergency Response The sequestration would slash funding for the government's emergency response system for disasters such as hurricanes, according to the White House. (Bruce Bennett/Getty Images) Unemployment Benefits Checks for unemployed people looking for work would shrink by up to 9 percent, according to the White House. (J Pat Carter/AP Photo) Homelessness Programs More than 100,000 formerly homeless people would lose their current housing as a result of sequestration, according to the White House. (Mark Lennihan/AP Photo) here. Rental Assistance About 125,000 low-income families would be at risk of losing their housing because of rental assistance cuts, according to the White House. (Barry Gutierrez/AP Photo) Mental Health Programs The sequestration would eliminate care for up to 373,000 "seriously mentally ill" people, according to the White House. (Eric Gay/AP Photo) Food Safety The FDA would conduct fewer food inspections as a result of sequestration, according to the White House.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/sound-shore-health-system-medicare-cuts_n_3362128.html

I Want to File Bankruptcy

When someone is in problem debt they are usually not looking at things with a clear head. They have no experience filing bankruptcy and a mistake in a bankruptcy filing can have serious implications. It is one of those things in life where I think having an experienced licensed professional helping you just makes good sense. Here is what one bankruptcy trustee also has to say. By the way, you can watch the rest of the videos here . Bankruptcy lawyers are like any profession. Some are exceptional people who are caring, compassionate, and kind. Some are not.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-rhode/i-want-to-file-bankruptcy_b_3335876.html

Settlement: Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action

Home > Settlements > Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action Ameriprise Agrees Preliminary Settlement in Securities America Investor Class Action April 13 2011 New York, NY: A preliminary settlement has been reached by Ameriprise Financial and its brokerage unit, Securities America Inc, and clients who allege in they lost roughly $400 million on fraudulent private placements. The preliminary agreement would see Securities America pay $80 million, further to a separate agreement in which SA has agreed to pay $70 million. If approved, the settlement would mean a recovery of 40 cents on the dollar, after fees. If approved, the majority of the settlement will be paid by Ameriprise. Legal Help If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please fill in the form to the right. Submit Claim
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/lawsuit/ameriprise-agrees-preliminary-settlement-in.html?ref=rss