Search

Plaintiff alleges that it did not agree to Security Procedures of bank sufficient to shift liability for unauthorized wire transfers.

Consumer liability for unauthorized transfers under California UCC Article 4A. Consumer alleges that bank failed to establish and/or follow a commercially reasonable security procedure.

Consumer liability for unauthorized transfers under Virginia UCC Article 4A. Consumer alleges that it did not agree to any security procedure sufficient to shift liability to consumer.

This is a settlement of an administrative action before the California Department of Business Oversight where the department claimed that litigation advance contracts were loans under California law and that the company’s offerings violated California loan law.

The FTC brings this action in a Georgia federal court under FTC Act § 13(b to obtain temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of ill-gotten monies, and other equitable relief for Prog Leasing’s unfair or deceptive practices in connection with the marketing, offering for sale, and sale of rent-to-own payment plans.

This is a first amended complaint in an action in Michigan federal court brought by Legal Aid of Western Michigan against a servicer of the consumer’s land contract, alleging the servicer has failed to properly service the land contract, in violation of the contract, federal law, and Michigan law. Plaintiff files this action to specifically enforce the contract between the parties, and for monetary damages.  This complaint was submitted by John Smith, Legal Aid of Western Michigan.

This is a first amended federal court complaint in the E.D.N.Y. against a foreclosure law firm concerning the collection and threatened foreclosure of a “zombie” second mortgage debt, involving the attempt to collect time-barred debt. The New York homeowners were shocked to find themselves in foreclosure on second mortgage loans that had long disappeared, the servicers having long since ceased to send mortgage statements, sometimes for a decade or more—even though federal regulations required such statements to be sent monthly.

This is a summary judgment motion in California’s challenge in the Northern District of California to an OCC rule.  The OCC rule allows non-bank assignees of national banks to charge the same interest rate that a national bank could charge even where state law would otherwise prohibit such a charge by a non-bank.

This is a charge letter sent by the Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation to Fortiva Finanical, Bank of Missouri, and Atlanticus warning them of an administrative hearing concerning unlicensed lending activity involving instalment loans.  Even if Bank of Missouri was the true lender, and could avoid the licensure requirement, Fortiva and Atlanticus under Maryland law were required to obtain a license to assist consumers in obtaining a loan extension and to collect on such loans.

This is a Money Advisory 2012 magazine article discussing some retailers’ attempts to limit consumer rights under the Fair Credit Billing Act when consumers dispute with their credit card issuer charges assessed by the retailer.  For example, retailers may require the consumer to dispute the charge initially or even only with the retailer, and not seek a chargeback from the card issuer.

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

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.