This is a 2023 FDCPA class class complaint dealing with a consumer disputing a debt and asking for verification.  When the account was collected by a second agency, the consumer's requests were ignored and a new letter was sent. The complaint was drafted by the Illinois firms of Philipps & Philipps and SMITHMARCO.

This is a 2023 FDCPA complaint that takes care to plead facts to support constitutional Article III standing in federal court. The complaint specifies the plaintiff's concrete injury from an invasion of her privacy, seclusion, and the right to counsel; from her emotional distress; and from the cost to her of additional time, money, and effort to assert her rights. The complaint was drafted by the Illinois firm of Philipps & Philipps.

This is motion to set aside a default judgment on a foreclosure action concerning a reverse mortgage and leave to file an answer and defenses. The excusable neglect is based on the homeowner’s age and cognitive difficulties.

This is a notice of taking the Florida deposition of a corporate representative in a case involving an attempt to foreclose on a reverse mortgage based on non-occupancy where the property was in fact occupied, including a list of documents that the deponent should bring and be prepared to describe.

This is a Florida motion to add a claim for punitive damages to existing counterclaims that allege various torts in a case where the lender attempted to foreclose on a reverse mortgage based on non-occupancy where the property was in fact occupied, where the lender should clearly have known the property was occupied.

This is a notice of taking the Florida deposition of a corporate representative in a case involving an attempt to foreclose on a reverse mortgage based on non-occupancy where the property was in fact occupied, including a list of documents that the deponent should bring and be prepared to describe.

This is a request for admissions sent by a Florida homeowner to the reverse mortgage lender seeking the lender’s admission that the home was in fact occupied, despite the lender taking actions as if the home was unoccupied.

This is a sample affidavit stating that the homeowner is occupying a residence. This sample affidavit can be used to verify that the borrower is occupying the home in connection with a mortgagee’s acceleration of the debt or attempted foreclosure based on non-occupancy. It can be helpful to also attach any supporting documents, such as utility bills, to show that the property is occupied. The servicer may also want the borrower to sign their standard occupancy form.

This is a 2019 defense to a foreclosure action on a reverse mortgage and counterclaims by a class of consumers against the reverse mortgage lender, filed by Mehri & Skalet and Legal Counsel for the Elderly in Superior Court for the District of Columbia.  The reverse mortgage lender ignored the provision set out in the deed of trust and federal law that non-borrowing spouses are entitled to a deferral of due and payable status when the borrower spouse dies, as long as they continue living in their homes.  Claims involve breach of contract, bad faith, unclean hands,

This is a case involving a pre-2014 reverse mortgage.  This is a reply pleading by HUD in support of its motion to dismiss the homeowner’s cross-claim against HUD in the Wilson case.  HUD’s initial brief and the homeowner’s reply brief are also included as a companion material to this treatise. The spouse of a now-deceased borrower on a HUD insured reverse mortgage challenged HUD’s pre-2014 reverse-mortgage insurance program requirements as either unlawful or arbitrary.

This is a case involving a pre-2014 reverse mortgage.  This is a reply pleading by the HUD in support of its motion to dismiss the homeowner’s cross-claim against HUD in the Wilson case.  HUD’s initial brief and the homeowner’s reply brief are also included as a companion material to this treatise. The spouse of a now-deceased borrower on a HUD insured reverse mortgage challenged HUD’s pre-2014 reverse-mortgage insurance program requirements as either unlawful or arbitrary.

This is a case involving a pre-2014 reverse mortgage.  This is the consumer’s pleading in Wilson in response to HUD’s motion the homeowner’s crossclaim against HUD. HUD’s brief and reply brief are also included as a companion material to this treatise. The spouse of a now-deceased borrower on a HUD insured reverse mortgage challenged HUD’s pre-2014 reverse-mortgage insurance program requirements as either unlawful or arbitrary and that the crossclaim is moot.

This is a 2018 complaint brought by Atlanta Legal Aid against HUD in federal court in the Northern District of Georgia involving an APA challenge involving a pre-2014 HECM reverse mortgage.  The claim is that HECM regulations do not sufficiently protect surviving spouses who are not listed on a reverse mortgage, so as to allow the surviving spouse to stay in the home.

These two sample allegations could be added to a complaint challenging HUD’s pre 2014 MOE (mortgage option election) requirement that the spouse obtain good, marketable title or legal right to remain in the property within 90 days of the borrower’s death.

This is a 2019 complaint filed by Legal Services of Northern California in California Superior Court involving a reverse mortgage.  Soon after the plaintiff’s husband’s death, the plaintiff applied to the creditor to stay in her home through the MOE (mortgage option election) program. However, defendants erroneously denied her application and instead started the foreclosure process. The complaint seeks to stop the imminent foreclosure sale and compel defendants to honor her MOE application and allow her to remain living in her home.

This letter is a formal demand for damages due to violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1693, et seq., and various North Carolina laws, including, but not limited to, common law negligence and violations of the Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices statute (“UDAP”), N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1, et seq.

The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Defendant-Appellant AT&T Services, Inc. (AT&T) on the grounds that its automated text message survey system did not constitute an Automatic Telephone Dialing System as defined by the TCPA.

This complaint (the names have redacted to protect identities) was filed in the Federal District Court of Minnesota by Peter F.

These interrogatories (the names have redacted to protect identities) were submitted in a case filed in the Federal District Court of Minnesota by Peter F.

hese document requests (the names have redacted to protect identities) were submitted in a case filed in the Federal District Court of Minnesota by Peter F.

Class action complaint regarding debits and overdraft fees. Filed June 6, 2014.

Federal Court Complaint Against Land Contract Servicer (Statebridge Company)

Federal Court Complaint Concerning Zombie Debt (Richland & Falkowski)

This is a 2021 federal class action complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia concerning the collection of zombie mortgage debt.

Michigan State Court Complaint Concerning Mortgage Loan Servicing After Loan Modification (Owen)

This is a Michigan state court complaint brought in 2013 by Legal Aid of Western Michigan against Ocwen, a mortgage servicer, for failing to properly service the mortgage loan after a loan modification, including improperly computing the loan balance, improper debt collection practices, and failing to reply timely to a qualified written request.  This complaint was filed by John Smith of Legal Aid of Western Michigan.

This is one of three complaints illustrating the use of photographs and images inserted directly into a complaint to visually emphasize facts in a used car case.  The complaints were submitted by Matthew Osborne, a consumer attorney in Northglenn, Colorado.  This complaint is before an arbitrator in an action administered by the American Arbitration Association and involves breach of warranty, undisclosed defects, and misrepresentations concerning repairs performed, and replacement parts inserted into, a used car prior to its sale.

This is one of three complaints illustrating the use of photographs and images inserted directly into a complaint to visually emphasize facts in a used car case.  The complaints were submitted by Matthew Osborne, a consumer attorney in Northglenn, Colorado.  This complaint involves undisclosed wreck damage, failure to properly brand the title, and odometer tampering.

This is one of three complaints illustrating the use of photographs and images inserted directly into a complaint to visually emphasize facts in a used car case.  The complaints were submitted by Matthew Osborne, a consumer attorney in Northglenn, Colorado.  This complaint involves undisclosed wreck damage and undisclosed major vehicle repair problems. 

This is the consumers' reply to the defendant's objection to the consumers' request for attorney fees.  The settled case involved a law firm's use of allegedly unfair debt collection practices when it sought to recover its appointed counsel fees from the indigent defendants it was representing in criminal cases.  Among other reasons why the consumers argued for the court to award them significant attorney fees was the novelty of the case.  The consumers raised claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and civil rights statutes, and the reply goes i

Brief supporting an EFTA claim for an unauthorized transfer between two of the consumer's accounts followed by a wire transfer. The brief rebuts the argument that the internal transfer was not unauthorized under the definition of 15 U.S.C. § 1693b(12) and Reg. E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.2(m) because the consumer received a benefit and because the wire transfer was a separate transaction that had to be analyzed independently.

This is a 2021 first amended complaint in a class action involving land contracts, filed against Vision Property Management in federal court in Michigan. This action arises out of Vision’s discriminatory targeting of Black homebuyers for abusive credit terms in home purchase transactions. Promising these prospective home buyers the American dream of homeownership, Vision ensnared residents in predominantly Black Detroit-area communities in predatory and discriminatory contracts that were structured to fail.

This is a 2017 second amended complaint against Harbour Portfolio in an action involving land contracts, filed on behalf of a number of African-Americans in federal court in Georgia. The action arises out of Harbour Portfolio’s discriminatory targeting of African-American consumers for abusive credit terms in home purchase “contract for deed” transactions, both by intentional targeting and by utilizing practices that have a foreseeable disparate impact on African-American consumers.

This is a 2019 first amended complaint in a class action involving land contracts, filed against Vision Property Management in New Jersey state court. It argues that the contract is an illegal combination of a lease and a rent-to-own sale of real estate, in which the lease is illegal and the rent-to-own transaction is illegal, deceptive, fraudulent, predatory, and unconscionable. The single document into which they are combined is confusing and internally inconsistent.

This is the first amended complaint in a federal action in Michigan alleging misrepresentation of the terms of residential home sales and financing agreements, failure to disclose hidden credit charges, and conducting business in an unfair and deceptive manner. The complaint alleges deceptive promises of homeownership that lured unsuspecting home buyers into predatory and abusive loans that were designed to fail.

This is a consumer’s motion directed to a mortgage servicer asking the court to deem the consumer’s requests for admission admitted. A separate Pleading and Discovery file is a reply to the servicer’s objection, and a proposed order. These documents address frivolous objections commonly raised by corporate defendants including: the document speaks for itself, the facts are public record and may be easily verified by the requestor, and the request seeks admission of a legal theory rather than a fact. Although filed in state court (Maine) it applies the Fed. R. Civ. P.

This is a reply to the servicer’s objection to the consumer’s request to deem the consumer’s admission requests admitted, and also a proposed order. Another Pleading and Discovery file is the consumer’s motion directed to a mortgage servicer asking the court to deem the consumer’s requests for admission admitted.

This is a jury instruction in an FDCPA case that includes 29 separate instructions. Many apply to the FDCPA case, such as nature and element of the claims, violations of the act, least sophisticated standard, bona fide error defense, and actual and statutory damages. Others are of a more general nature, such as the province of the jury, burden of proof, objections, stipulations, duty in deliberating, and verdict forms.

This is an opposition to a motion to dismiss in a case complaining that a debt collector disclosed the consumer’s personal and financial information a letter vendor. The consumers argue that a requirement that financial data be kept confidential does not violate the First Amendment, that the debt collector violated the plain language of 15 U.S.C. s. 1692c(b), and that the debt collector’s statutory construction arguments lack merit.

This is a trial brief in a FDCPA case where the collector threatened foreclosure on the wrong house and tried to collect from the wrong person, the collector had no intent to foreclose, and the collector had no authority to collect the debt. The brief was written by Gregory Reichenbach, a Perrysburg, Ohio attorney, and Edward Icove, a Cleveland, Ohio attorney.

This is a 2021 Wisconsin state court complaint against TAB bank for various terms violating Wisconsin law found in the installment sales agreement.  Prohibited terms included waiver of rights to a class action and injunctive remedies, a requirement that Utah law applied, an attorney fee shifting provision, an excessive bad check charge, shortening of the default provisions, and failing to timely provide the consumer with a contract. This complaint was filed by Eric Crandall of the Crandall Law Firm.

Federal Court Complaint Regarding Servicer’s Refusal to Communicate with Widow (J.P. Morgan Chase)

This is a 2013 Massachusetts state court complaint against a mortgage servicer for advising a homeowner in financial difficulty to fall behind on mortgage payments to obtain a loan modification. After obtaining the modification and making payments, the servicer refused to accept the modification and requested that they apply for a new modification.  When the homeowner reapplied, the servicer lost documents, required repeated submission of the same documents, misrepresented the modification status, and then initiated foreclosure.  The complaint was filed by Kulik Law.

West Virginia State Court Complaint for a Predatory Loan and Servicer Refusal to Process Loan Modification (Wells Fargo)

Georgia Federal Court Complaint Concerning Zombie Debt (United Asset Management)

Federal Court Complaint Concerning VA Foreclosure Prior to Modification Decision (Wells Fargo)

This is a 2017 second amended complaint filed in the Eastern District of Virginia seeking to unwind the foreclosure of a home that had a VA mortgage loan and where the loan holders and servicers did not follow VA regulations in foreclosing on the home.  The foreclosure occurred while a mortgage modification application was pending. The pleadings were drafted by the Law Office of Henry McLaughlin.

Federal Court Complaint Concerning Servicer Reneging on Mortgage Loan Modification (Bank of America)

This is a 2017 federal court complaint in the Maine district court concerning a homeowner who was given an unaffordable loan modification and the servicer subsequently misrepresented the homeowner’s eligibility for a further modification that would have been affordable under HAMP.  The claim is that this conduct by the servicer is fraudulent, and violates RESPA and the state UDAP and state credit statutes, and the conduct is.

Massachusetts Federal Court Complaint for Failure to Offer Permanent Loan Modification (Bank of America)

This is a 2014 federal court complaint against a mortgage servicer for failure to provide a permanent HAMP loan modification even though the homeowner successfully completed the HAMP trial loan modification and where the servicer instead initiated a foreclosure.  The case was brought by Culik Law.

This is a 2020 order by a bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of North Carolina rejecting bank interest rate preemption because the related non-bank lender was the true lender.  The bankruptcy court denied the creditor’s proof of claim because the loan was usurious under North Carolina law and could not be saved because the loan was allegedly initiated by a bank. 

Alabama Federal Court Complaint for Servicer’s Failure to Investigate Servicer Errors (Nationstar)

This is a 2014 federal court complaint in the Southern District of Alabama against a mortgage servicer for failing to properly credit mortgage payments and then failing to investigate such errors or provide requested information. The case was brought by Underwood and Riemer.