Latest Posts
Home > Debt Relief Industry > When It Comes to Connecticut Why Are Debt Relief Companies So Stupid?

When It Comes to Connecticut Why Are Debt Relief Companies So Stupid?

It seems like every few weeks I’m covering administrative actions against debt relief companies in Connecticut. I’m sure the State is as sick and tired of issuing these fines and penalties as I am of covering them. Yet companies seem to insist in selling services in Connecticut without the proper licensing.

Here is the latest round of debt relief companies to get spanked in Connecticut.

Elite Financial Solutions

1. Respondent is a Delaware corporation with offices at 1180 SW 36th Avenue, Suite 205, Pompano Beach, Florida and 6278 North Federal Highway, Suite 109, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

2. From at least April 2012 to the present, Respondent offered debt negotiation services via the Internet and made various claims with respect to such services, including “[b]e completely debt free in as little as 12-36 months” and “[l]et us lower your debts as low as 25% to 75% of what you owe!” In addition, Connecticut is listed on its website whereby consumers, upon completion of a form, could request a free phone consultation from Respondent regarding its services.

3. On April 16, 2012, a Connecticut resident entered into a Client Agreement with Respondent for debt negotiation services of unsecured debt. In particular, the Client Agreement stated that “EFS agrees to negotiate with Client’s unsecured creditors in order to formulate a single payment debt settlement plan with Client’s creditors that reduces Client’s debt to an amount satisfactory to Client under the terms and conditions of this agreement”.

4. The Client Agreement requires that the Connecticut resident pay to Respondent an initial set up fee of $963.33 in three payments of $321.11, a monthly service fee of $39.00, and for each account settled, 15% of the amount saved. Such fees were in excess of amounts that debt negotiators may charge pursuant to the Schedule of Maximum Fees established by the Commissioner on or about October 1, 2009 (“Schedule of Maximum Fees”). The Schedule of Maximum Fees permits a debt negotiator of unsecured debt to collect total aggregate fees, including the initial fee and service fees, not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount by which the consumer’s debt is reduced. In May 2012, the Connecticut resident made one payment of $321.11, which was subsequently refunded by Respondent.

5. At no time relevant hereto has Respondent been licensed to engage or offer to engage in debt negotiation in this state, nor does Respondent qualify for an exemption from such licensure.

NOW THEREFORE, notice is hereby given to Respondent that the Commissioner intends to issue an order requiring Respondent to CEASE AND DESIST from violating Section 36a-671(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and impose a CIVIL PENALTY upon Respondent as set forth herein, subject to Respondent’s right to a hearing on the allegations set forth above.

If Respondent does not request a hearing within the time prescribed, the Commissioner will issue an order that Respondent cease and desist from violating Section 36a-671(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and may order a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) per violation be imposed upon Respondent. – Source

Bruce S. Weiner, Consult Legal Group

Having read the record, I HEREBY ORDER, pursuant to Sections 36a-671a(b) and 36a-671a(c) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, and Sections 36a-52(a) and 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, that:

1. Bruce S. Weiner Attorney At Law d/b/a Consult Legal Group CEASE AND DESIST from violating Section 36a-671(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, in effect prior to October 1, 2011;

2. Bruce S. Weiner Attorney At Law d/b/a Consult Legal Group REPAY FEES in the amount of Two Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-Five Dollars ($2,995) to the Connecticut resident identified in Exhibit A attached hereto and REPAY ALL FEES paid to Bruce S. Weiner Attorney At Law d/b/a Consult Legal Group by the Connecticut residents identified in Exhibit B attached hereto by cashier’s check, certified check or money order, no later than ten (10) days from the date this Order is mailed, and shall provide Carmine Costa, Director, Consumer Credit Division, Department of Banking, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1800, or [email protected], evidence of such repayments;

3. A CIVIL PENALTY of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) be imposed upon Bruce S. Weiner Attorney At Law d/b/a Consult Legal Group, to be remitted to the Department of Banking by cashier’s check, certified check or money order, made payable to “Treasurer, State of Connecticut”, no later than thirty (30) days from the date this Order is mailed; and

4. This Order shall become effective when mailed. – Source

Andrea Loveless, The Law Offices of Andrea Loveless, America Financial Law

WHEREAS, Loveless is a purported California limited liability partnership with an office at 1 Spectrum Pointe, Suite 300, Lake Forest, California;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division of the Department of Banking (“Department”), conducted an investigation pursuant to Section 36a-17(a) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes into the activities of Loveless to determine if it had violated, was violating or was about to violate the provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, as a result of such investigation, on July 20, 2012, the Commissioner, acting pursuant to Section 36a-52(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, Section 36a-671a(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and Sections 36a-671a(c), 36a-52(a) and 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, issued a Temporary Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Issue Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Impose Civil Penalty and Notice of Right to Hearing against Loveless (“Notice”), which Notice is incorporated by reference herein;

WHEREAS, on July 23, 2012, the Notice was mailed to Loveless by certified mail, return receipt requested (Certified Mail Nos. 70110470000225730096, 70110470000225730102 and 70110470000225730409);

WHEREAS, on July 25, 2012, Loveless received the Notice sent by Certified Mail No. 70110470000225730409; on July 30, 2012, Loveless received the Notice sent by Certified Mail No. 70110470000225730096; on August 1, 2012, the Notice sent by Certified Mail No. 70110470000225730102 was returned to the Department marked “Return to Sender – Attempted Not Known – Unable to Forward”; and no request for a hearing has been received by the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, the Notice alleged that Loveless engaged in debt negotiation in this state without obtaining the required license, which constitutes a violation of Section 36a-671(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, in effect prior to October 1, 2011. Such violation forms the basis to issue an order to cease and desist pursuant to Section 36a-671a(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, and impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 36a-671a(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes.

WHEREAS, Section 4-177(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 36a-1-55(a) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies provide that a contested case may be resolved by consent order, unless precluded by law;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner and Loveless now desire to resolve the matters alleged in the Notice and set forth herein;

WHEREAS, Loveless voluntarily agrees to consent to the entry of the sanctions described below without admitting or denying any allegation contained in the Notice and set forth herein and solely for the purpose of obviating the need for further formal administrative proceedings concerning the allegation contained in the Notice and set forth herein;

WHEREAS, by letter dated July 30, 2012, Loveless represents that as of February 2010, Loveless ceased and desisted from engaging or offering to engage in debt negotiation in this state;

WHEREAS, as of October 30, 2011, Respondent had refunded $750 to one of the Connecticut residents listed in Exhibit A attached hereto, and had refunded $1,500 to the other Connecticut resident listed in Exhibit A attached hereto;

WHEREAS, Loveless herein represents that it is not aware of any additional Connecticut clients other than those noted in Exhibit A attached hereto, who had retained Loveless for debt negotiation services since October 1, 2009;

WHEREAS, Loveless herein represents that the alleged violation contained in the Notice and set forth herein shall not occur in the future;

WHEREAS, Loveless agrees that the Notice may be used in construing the terms of this Consent Order and agrees to the language of this Consent Order;

AND WHEREAS, Loveless, through its execution of this Consent Order, voluntarily agrees to waive its procedural rights, including a right to a hearing as it pertains to the allegation contained in the Notice and set forth herein, and voluntarily waives its right to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Consent Order.

CONSENT TO ENTRY OF SANCTIONS

WHEREAS, Loveless, through its execution of this Consent Order, consents to the Commissioner’s entry of a Consent Order imposing the following sanctions:

1. No later than the date this Consent Order is executed by Loveless, Loveless shall remit to the Department of Banking by cashier’s check, certified check or money order made payable to “Treasurer, State of Connecticut”, the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) as a civil penalty;

2. Loveless shall immediately cease and desist from engaging or offering to engage in unlicensed debt negotiation activity in Connecticut, in violation of Section 36a-671(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, in effect prior to October 1, 2011; and

3. No later than November 30, 2012, Loveless shall repay the balance of fees paid by the Connecticut residents identified in Exhibit A by cashier’s check, certified check or money order; and shall promptly provide satisfactory evidence of such repayments to: Carmine Costa, Division Director, Consumer Credit Division, Department of Banking, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1800, or [email protected]Source

Christopher Rojas, Legacy Holding Group, Lauren Rojas

1. Respondents are individuals with an office at 3115 South Price Road, Suite 130, Chandler, Arizona.

2. On May 16, 2011, a Connecticut resident, while physically present in this state, completed an application to engage the services of Respondents for debt negotiation services in connection with the Connecticut resident’s mortgage on residential property located in this state (“Application”).

3. In connection with the Application, the Connecticut resident paid $3,360 to Respondents, which amount is in excess of amounts that debt negotiators may charge for services pursuant to the Schedule of Maximum Fees established by the Commissioner on or about October 1, 2009 (“Schedule of Maximum Fees”).

4. The Schedule of Maximum Fees provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] debt negotiator of secured debt, including Short Sales and Foreclosure Rescue Services, may impose a fee upon the mortgagor or debtor for performing debt negotiation services not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500). Such fee shall only be collectable upon the successful completion of all services stated in the debt negotiation service contract”.

5. At no time relevant hereto have Respondents been licensed to engage or offer to engage in debt negotiation in this state, nor did Respondents qualify for an exemption from such licensure.

6. On March 27, 2012, the Commissioner received a complaint filed by the Connecticut resident concerning Respondents’ failure to perform the debt negotiation services.

THE COMMISSIONER THEREFORE ORDERS, pursuant to Section 36a-52(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, that Christopher Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc. and Lauren Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc., immediately CEASE AND DESIST from violating Section 36a-671(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes in effect prior to October 1, 2011. This Temporary Order shall become effective upon receipt by Christopher Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc. and Lauren Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc., and, unless set aside or modified by a court, shall remain in effect until the effective date of a permanent order or dismissal of the matters asserted in this Temporary Order.

THE COMMISSIONER FURTHER ORDERS, pursuant to Section 36a-671a(c) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-52(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, that: Not later than 10 days from receipt of this Temporary Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Issue Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Impose Civil Penalty and Notice of Right to Hearing, Christopher Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc. and Lauren Rojas d/b/a Legacy Holding Group, Inc. shall:

1. Provide repayment of fees to the Connecticut resident and in the amount identified in Exhibit A by cashier’s check, certified check or money order; and

2. Provide to Carmine Costa, Director, Consumer Credit Division, Department of Banking, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1800, or [email protected], evidence of such repayment and a list of all Connecticut residents with whom it has entered into agreements for debt negotiation services on and after October 1, 2009. Such submission shall include: (a) A copy of each agreement, and (b) a list of each debtor’s name and address and full itemization of each debtor’s payments made pursuant to the agreement, specifying the dates, amounts and to whom such payments were made. – Source

Legal Loan Review

1. Respondent is a California corporation with a place of business at 505 South Villa Real Drive, Suite 100, Anaheim, California.

2. Respondent, at all times relevant hereto, has offered and is offering to engage in debt negotiation services in Connecticut by mail and via the Internet.

3. On or about June 27, 2011, a Connecticut resident, while physically present in this state, entered into a Consulting Agreement with Respondent for debt settlement services (“Consulting Agreement”). On June 27, 2011, in connection with the Consulting Agreement, the Connecticut resident completed an “Owner’s Authorization”.

4. The Owner’s Authorization states, in pertinent part, that:

Without limiting the foregoing, this authorizes my/our Agent to:

a. To talk with and provide to and receive information from the mortgage companies regarding these loans.
b. To negotiate, if warranted, with the mortgage companies on behalf of me/us.
c. To talk with and provide to and receive information from any title company and any escrow agent that is or becomes involved with these loans.
d. To take all acts that are reasonably required to carry out and perform these specific authorities.

5. By check dated June 22, 2011, the Connecticut resident’s spouse remitted $2,995 to Respondent, which amount is in excess of amounts that debt negotiators may charge for services pursuant to the Schedule of Maximum Fees established by the Commissioner on or about October 1, 2009 (“Schedule of Maximum Fees”).

6. The Schedule of Maximum Fees provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] debt negotiator of secured debt, including Short Sales and Foreclosure Rescue Services, may impose a fee upon the mortgagor or debtor for performing debt negotiation services not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500). Such fee shall only be collectable upon the successful completion of all services stated in the debt negotiation service contract”.

7. At no time relevant hereto was Respondent licensed to engage or offer to engage in debt negotiation in this state, nor did Respondent qualify for an exemption from such licensure.

8. On or about May 11, 2012, the Connecticut resident filed a complaint with the Commissioner against Respondent concerning the fees paid for debt negotiation services.

9. At no time relevant hereto did Respondent perform or successfully complete the services specified in the Consulting Agreement entered into with the Connecticut resident.

THE COMMISSIONER THEREFORE ORDERS, pursuant to Section 36a-52(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, that Legal Loan Review Inc. a/k/a Legal Loan Review immediately CEASE AND DESIST from violating Section 36a-671(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, in effect prior to October 1, 2011, and Section 36a-671(b) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. This Temporary Order shall become effective upon receipt by Legal Loan Review Inc. a/k/a Legal Loan Review, and, unless set aside or modified by a court, shall remain in effect until the effective date of a permanent order or dismissal of the matters asserted in this Temporary Order.

THE COMMISSIONER FURTHER ORDERS, pursuant to Sections 36a-671a(c) and 36a-52(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, that: Not later than 10 days from receipt of this Order, Legal Loan Review Inc. a/k/a Legal Loan Review shall:

1. Provide repayment of fees to the Connecticut residents and in the amounts identified in Exhibit A by cashier’s check, certified check or money order; and

2. Provide to Carmine Costa, Director, Consumer Credit Division, Department of Banking, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1800, or [email protected], evidence of such repayment and a list of all Connecticut residents with whom it has entered into agreements for debt negotiation services on and after October 1, 2009. Such submission shall include: (a) a copy of each agreement, and (b) a list of each debtor’s name and address and full itemization of each debtor’s payments made pursuant to the agreement, specifying the dates, amounts and to whom such payments were made. – Source

When It Comes to Connecticut Why Are Debt Relief Companies So Stupid?
Get Out of Debt Guy – Twitter, G+, Facebook

I can always use your help. If you have a tip or information you want to share, you can get it to me confidentially if you click here.

When It Comes to Connecticut Why Are Debt Relief Companies So Stupid? by

Share This and Spread the Word

About Steve Rhode

Steve Rhode
Steve Rhode is the Get Out of Debt Guy and has been helping good people with bad debt problems since 1994. You can learn more about Steve, here.
  • JustMe

    But why don’t they ever try and collect? Not very effective if they don’t go after these guys.

    • http://GetOutOfDebt.org Steve Rhode

      Actually they do. Do you have an example where they have not? If so, I’ll be happy to bring it to their attention.

      • Oldnewsusaid

        Uh… Yes! And I sent it to you. And you replied “it’s old news”. Steve, you know very well Connecticut won’t or can’t collect. Why are you suggesting otherwise? I’m not sayin there hasn’t been some company that paid but I sent you one that hasn’t and I know Connecticut has made Zero attempts. Connecticut is a joke! Plain and simple.

      • Likey
      • http://GetOutOfDebt.org Steve Rhode

        Thanks for the link. I sent your example to CT and asked them to give us a public update on that case.

Get My FREE Get Out of Debt Guy Newsletter

It is the smart thing to do.

I promise to keep your email safe and secure.

Close

I want to keep you posted each weekday with just one email about the latest get out of debt news, scam alerts and information to beat back debt.

You can unsubscribe at any time with just one click.

After you subscribe, check your email to confirm your subscription. If the confirmation email does not appear in your inbox in a few minutes, check your spam folder for it. Sometimes it likes to annoyingly hide there.


  • It will keep you posted on the latest scams.
  • You will be alerted to the latest articles.
  • You will wind up smarter than everyone else dealing with debt.