Federal Trade Commission vs. Mortgage Relief Companies
Federal Trade Commission sues mortgage relief companies
The Federal Trade Commission recently filed three separate lawsuits against mortgage relief companies – Prime Legal Plans/Reaching U Network, American Mortgage Consulting Group, and Expense Management America. According to the FTC’s allegations, these companies were fraudulently selling mortgage relief services. The companies charged homeowners for various services that were supposed to reduce mortgage payments or otherwise relieve them of mortgage obligations. In reality, the companies accepted payment without providing services. Additionally, the companies violated other laws by, among other things, calling homeowners that were on the do-not-call registry, fraudulently claiming to be associated with government agencies, fraudulently claiming to be attorneys, collecting upfront fees, and claiming to be charities.
It is bad enough that these companies were charging distressed homeowners without providing services. What’s worse is that, by convincing homeowners that their services would be effective, these companies prevented homeowners from pursuing legitimate services and defenses.
According to a recent press release, the FTC has filed more than 40 cases against fraudulent mortgage relief services since 2008. This suggests that such practices might be quite common. Homeowners should always be on guard against potential scams, and should gather as much information as possible about mortgage relief or other debt defense companies before making payments.
The Attorneys at Vaughn, Weber & Prakope, PLLC have experience in Loan Modification Negotiation and Foreclosure Defense. If you have any questions about these areas and would like to schedule a free consultation, call our office at 516-858-2620 today to schedule a free consultation.
Shorten the Divorce Process by Waiver
Shorten the Divorce Process by Waiver
In almost any court proceeding, defendants have 20 to 30 days to answer a complaint. This is even true for uncontested divorces. Even though both spouses may consent to the divorce, and even agree on terms, one spouse will have to initiate the divorce proceeding by filing a complaint with the court. In an uncontested divorce, the defendant may not want to answer the complaint. Since the parties have already agreed to the terms of the divorce, the defendant has no reason to challenge the divorce. But since a defendant has 20-30 days to answer a complaint, there is an unnecessary delay in the process. The defendant can eliminate this waiting period by waiver and allow the case to proceed more quickly. This waiver can be made in the defendant’s affidavit, which is to be filed with the divorce.
Divorce Attorney in Mineola
If you would like to speak with an attorney about expediting a divorce case, The Law Firm of Vaughn, Weber & Prakope, PLLC can help. Call our office at 516-858-2620 today to schedule a free consultation. We are located in the heart of Long Island at 393 Jericho Turnpike, Suite 208, Mineola, NY 11501.
Debt Collectors Pay Price
A debt collector recently charged a borrower $2.95 in interest on a judgement, even though no post-judgement interest had been awarded. A district court decided that this violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, meaning that the debt collector had to pay the borrower $1,000.00, plus legal fees. This might seem like a hefty punishment for such a small amount of money, but that is the penalty for violating the act – even if the violation is minimal. You can read the opinion here.
If you are being harassed by debt collectors, The Law Firm of Vaughn, Weber & Prakope, PLLC is here to help. Call our office at 516-858-2620 today to schedule a free consultation.
Wrongful Arrests and Sealed Records
Wrongful Arrests and Sealed Records
When an individual is acquitted of criminal charges, the arrest and trial record for that charge is sealed. The rationale for this rule is that people who are innocent of criminal charges shouldn’t have a criminal record. After all, arrests, by themselves, mean nothing other than that a person was accused of committing a crime – not that the person actually did anything wrong. Why should an innocent person suffer negative consequences for a false accusation?
But criminal defense can be expensive. And a falsely accused person might want to sue the individual or governmental agency that made or wrongly pursued the criminal accusations for the cost of defending against them.
When this happens, the agency that pursued the case, or the individual that made the accusations, may be able to unseal the criminal records. This, in a sense, is only fair. In order to prevail with a wrongful prosecution claim, the former criminal defendant will have to show that the prosecutors had no reasonable basis for pursuing the criminal charges. The prosecutors wouldn’t be able to prove that they had a reasonable basis for pursuing the claim if they couldn’t access the arrest and pretrial records. Courts have stated that former criminal defendants can use the sealed records law as a “shield” to guard them from the consequences that accompany a criminal record, but not as a “sword” to stop prosecutors from defending their actions.
This policy is fair for the prosecutors, but problematic for the criminal defendant. It means that, in order to pursue a wrongful prosecution or wrongful arrest claim, the former defendant will have to open up arrest records. This could affect the former defendant’s employments, or yield other unwanted results. For this reason, the former defendant will have to argue for limited unsealing.
Criminal Attorney on Long Island
If you have any questions about this or other legal issues, call the Law Firm of Vaughn, Weber & Prakope, PLLC today, at 516-858-2620.
Keep in Touch