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.
Pleadings and Discovery
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 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 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
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 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 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.
Federal Court Complaint Concerning Servicer Reneging on Mortgage Loan Modification (Bank of America)
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.
Connecticut Federal Court Complaint for Servicer’s Inadequate Response to Requests for Information and for Mortgage Modifications (CitiMortgage)