Nationstar Mortgage pursues consumers after discharge

April 24, 2013

On March 18, 2013, a lawsuit was filed by James Dooley under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act in United States District Court, Orlando, Florida, alleging that Dooley had a mortgage with Bank of America which eventually went into default. In August of 2011, Mr. Dooley filed for bankruptcy and received a discharge in January of 2012. The mortgage with Bank of America was listed on the bankruptcy schedules. Notwithstanding the discharge of the note, Nationstar Mortgage continued collection activities against Mr. Dooley attempting to collect the discharged debt.

In an unrelated case, another lawsuit was filed in April of 2013 also under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act in United States District Court, Orlando, Florida, alleges that consumers took out a mortgage with MorEquity. In August of 2010, consumers filed for bankruptcy and received a discharge in November of 2010. The mortgage with MorEquity was listed on the bankruptcy schedules. Notwithstanding the discharge of the note, Nationstar Mortgage continued aggressive collection activities against the consumers including collection calls and collection letters attempting to collect the discharged debt.

Both the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act make it unlawful for any person, in attempting to collect a debt, to: “Claim, attempt, or threaten to enforce a debt when such person knows that the debt is not legitimate, or assert the existence of some other legal right when such person knows that the right does not exist.”

Plaintiffs in both lawsuits are seeking statutory and emotional damages against Nationstar Mortgage, LLC and have demanded a trial by jury.


Ocwen Loan, Udren Law Offices, sue consumer after Bankruptcy Discharge

April 18, 2013

A lawsuit filed in April of 2013 under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act in United States District Court, Orlando, Florida, alleges that in November of 2006, the consumer took out a mortgage with the predecessor in title of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. In November of 2009, consumer filed for bankruptcy and received a discharge in April of 2010. The mortgage with Ocwen was listed on the bankruptcy schedules. Notwithstanding the discharge of the note, on March 13, 2013, Ocwen and Udren Law Offices sued the consumer for foreclosure in Osceola County, Florida, on the discharged note and mortgage.

Both the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act make it unlawful for any person, in attempting to collect a debt, to: “Claim, attempt, or threaten to enforce a debt when such person knows that the debt is not legitimate, or assert the existence of some other legal right when such person knows that the right does not exist.”

The consumer is being represented by N. James Turner of Orlando, FL.


Lawsuit: JPMorgan Chase & Co. photographs consumer’s home who has no mortgage

April 3, 2013

A lawsuit filed in April of 2013 under the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act in Seminole County, Florida, alleges that a representative of JPMorgan Chase & Co., was observed photographing the Plaintiff’s home, taking notes and then attaching a collection notice to her front door. Too exacerbate the situation, the JPMorgan Chase & Co. representative was observed by the Plaintiff’s son. The note said: “IMPORTANT – PLEASE CALL JPMorgan Chase & Co. – “WE ARE EXPECTING YOUR CALL TODAY.”

The Complaint goes on to allege that the homeowner had no mortgage or other loan with
JPMorgan Chase & Co.

The Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act makes it unlawful for any person, in attempting to collect a debt, to: “Claim, attempt, or threaten to enforce a debt when such person knows that the debt is not legitimate, or assert the existence of some other legal right when such person knows that the right does not exist.”

The lawsuit relies, in part, on the “least-sophisticated consumer standard” which has at its purpose to expand the consumer protections originally provided by the Federal Trade Commission Act and to ensure that the consumer collection practices laws protect the gullible as well as the shrewd.

Plaintiff is seeking statutory and emotional damages against JPMorgan Chase & Co. and has demanded a trial by jury.