How to Get Out of Debt With the Get Out of Debt Guy » hsbc

Romanian Citizen Busted For $1.5 Million Fraud Ring Of HSBC Customers

Amanda Miller — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:57:56 +0000

Last Thursday it was announced that Laurentiu Ilian Bulat was arrested yesterday for allegedly participating in a fraud ring that stole at least $1.5 million from HSBC customer bank accounts by installing “skimming” devices on more than 40 ATMs in Manhattan, Long Island, and Westchester, New York.

According to the Complaint since May 2011, the U.S. Secret Service, together with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, has been investigating an ATM skimming fraud ring that has targeted HSBC branches in the New York City Metropolitan area.

Skimming is an illegal activity that involves the installation of an electronic device, usually undetectable by ATM users, that surreptitiously records the user’s bank account information and corresponding PIN, thereby enabling criminals to use that information to steal money from the bank customer’s accounts.

Bulat was identified through the review of bank surveillance video as being the ring’s “installer.” He allegedly installed skimming devices on at least 40 ATMs at HSBC branches in Manhattan, Westchester, and Long Island. The skimming technology used by Bulat and his co-conspirators included: (i) devices surreptitiously placed over the ATM card readers, which recorded the encoded information on the bank cards as they were swiped through the readers; and (ii) small pin-hole cameras installed on the ATMs that made a video recording of the customers’ PINs as the numbers were entered into the ATM machines.

After a period of time, members of the ring retrieved the skimming devices from the compromised ATMs, downloaded the information stored on the devices, and then matched the stolen account numbers retrieved from the card readers with the corresponding PINs recorded by the pin-hole cameras. The ring then encoded the stolen bank account information onto plastic cards, and used them, along with the corresponding PINs, to make unauthorized cash withdrawals directly out of the compromised bank accounts of the victim customers. The ring has stolen an estimated $1.5 million from the compromised accounts through this fraud.

Bulat was arrested yesterday morning, after being observed on HSBC bank video surveillance installing skimming devices on two ATMs located at a Manhattan branch. U.S. Secret Service agents, upon notification by HSBC personnel, immediately went to the branch, confirmed that skimming devices had been placed on the two ATMs – including card readers and pin-hole cameras – and established surveillance. BULAT was observed returning to the ATM machines later in the morning, apparently to manipulate the skimming devices, and was placed under arrest. When BALUT was arrested, he was in possession of a flathead screwdriver, which agents say is typically used to place and remove the skimming devices.

Bulat is a citizen of Romania who is illegally in the United States on an overstayed visa. He is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and one count of bank fraud. If convicted, he faces a maximum sentence of 60 years in prison.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said: “ATM skimmers are high tech bank robbers. Instead of using a gun and a note, skimmers use fake card readers and hidden cameras to steal a customer’s information to get to that customer’s money and take it. Often it happens completely undetected. Yesterday, Laurentiu Bulat was detected and arrested bringing to an end his alleged role in an ATM skimming spree. Our investigations in this case specifically, and in ATM skimming cases generally, remain very much ongoing” – Source.

If you have been scammed and would like to file a scam report, please click here.

I Want to Pay HSBC But They Won’t Take My Money. – Steven

Steve Rhode — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:43:15 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

“Dear Steve,

I have an account with hsbc I could not afford the crazy interest rates they imposed on me So I was paying what I could and they closed my Account, I want to commit to a repayment plan but They refuse to talk! What should I do?

I am a government worker and I’m afraid of losing My security clearance

How can I make payments on this debt of 11k I can’t afford the whole balance

Steven”

The Answer:

Dear Steven,

The first step would be to contact a trustworthy credit counseling group that can talk to you about putting that on a payment plan that would get you back on track with HSBC.

Click here for credit counseling information. After you talk to the credit counseling group, if the payment they come up with isn’t affordable for you then come back and let me know in the comments below and we’ll look at other options.

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

If you have a credit or debt question you’d like to ask just use the online form. I’m happy to help you totally for free.

Will HSBC Honor the Settlement They Agreed To? – Juliana

Steve Rhode — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:09:49 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

“Dear Steve,

Hi, I have two HSBC credit cards and total balance of both cards about USD3600. I was a student back then, and now, I left USA for good to return to my hometown. However, I dont have a permanent job and my salary is about usd600 monthly. I couldnt pay my credit cards and have been 8 months since I made the last payment.

Last week I called HSBC recovery department and explained them my current financial situation and they offered me a settlement program, of which I paid:

a) about USD800 for my 1st credit card. (USD266 monthly for 3months). HSBC will send a formal letter and I will receive it in the week of July 24th, 2011.

b) about usd700 for my 2nd credit card. (have to pay lump sum)

and I agree for the settlement and will pay by End of July 2011.

I agree to

However, I googled online, and found several people have upset situations with HSBC. even though they paid the settlement amount, HSBC keeps on harrassing and still ask for payment the next month.

I am so worried upon reading all the comments. Therefore, I would like to ask for advice. What kind of documents should I ask HSBC in order to protect me against any bad circumstances later on? What do usually appear on credit card statement after I paid the required settlement amount?

I really hope that you could help me with these questions.

thank you

Juliana”

The Answer:

Dear Juliana,

People report that HSBC is not honoring the settlement agreements they make without proof they made them. What I’m hearing is they are saying they have changed their mind either just before or after the last payment.

This can all be addressed now. It sounds like you and HSBC came to an understanding on how this would be dealt with. As them to put the offer in writing now, before you make any more payments. If they won’t then I think that gives you a clue what their intention is.

On the credit report the part you agreed to pay will show as paid. The part you settled will appear as an uncollectible bad debt and written off.

Please post your responses and follow-up messages to me on this in the comments section below.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

If you have a credit or debt question you’d like to ask just use the online form. I’m happy to help you totally for free.

How Can I Settle My HSBC Credit Card. – Scott

Michael Bovee — Wed, 18 May 2011 15:13:56 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

“Dear Michael,

Have an HSBC CREDIT CARD, have paid almost $237 in interest on a debt of $710, want to settle, make an arrangement, not in default, but in current status, how can I go about submitting an offer, to whom should I contact to settle the debt for less than the amount that is currently due, $506.77

Scott”

The Answer:

Hi Scott,

Settling accounts for less than the balance owed is typically only an option after you have missed payments and are in advanced stages of delinquency. I would not recommend you attempt this given the information you provided for the following reasons:

Settling smaller balance accounts will often not make sense given the fact that settlements require you be delinquent. Missing payments mean late payment penalties and increased interest rates. In order to save the most in settlement it requires you to have missed many months of payments. This means many months of late fees and interest charges and perhaps over limit fees when your limit is reduced to what is currently owed. When it comes time to settle for the most favorable amount you balance is now inflated to place where if you settle for 50% you may end up paying what you owed before you fell behind. You will have saved nothing.
Were you to achieve marginal savings through settlement on a small balance account, you will have still negatively impacted your credit report and score increasing the cost of future loan products for a period of time. Not a big deal if you cannot pay a debt regardless of credit impacts, but if you have the choice and ability to save a couple hundred bucks compared to increased costs of future credit products, did you save anything in the long run? Probably not.

Debt settlement is triage when your only remaining alternative is bankruptcy. It is not a tool to be considered out of convenience, but from necessity and a thorough risk reward analysis weighed beside your current and near future financial capabilities.

Is there additional information you can provide that would suggest you are stuck in a place where continued timely payments to HSBC are going to create a hardship? If so, please provide more details in the comment section below.

Michael Bovee has worked with financially challenged consumers for the past 17 years and is a recognized expert in his field. Michael founded Consumer Recovery Network (CRN) in 2006. CRN offers debt settlement services and educational resources nationwide. He has served as its president since 2006.

If you have a debt related question you’d like to ask, just use the online form.

Lawsuit Reveals How a Middleman Is Blocking Mortgage Modifications for Homeowners

ProPublica — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 21:21:54 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

by Paul Kiel, ProPublica

Pamela Jeter of Atlanta, Ga., has been trying to get a mortgage modification for more than two years. She seems like an ideal candidate. She has shown she can stay current with a reduction in her monthly mortgage payments. Everybody would seem to win. Even the investors who ultimately own her loan think she should be able to get one. So, why is Jeter facing foreclosure?

A bank that she didn’t even know is involved with her loan has thrown up a roadblock to modifications. At least tens of thousands of other homeowners have shared a similar plight. Jeter’s case is a window into a broken system where even though the actual investors, when asked, say they want to allow modifications, the bank that acts as their representative has refused to allow them.

Two big banks act as middlemen between the homeowners like Jeter who make payments and the mortgage-backed securities investors who ultimately receive them. The banks’ jobs were supposed to be relatively hands-off, devoted more than anything to processing homeowner payments. When the housing bubble burst, they faced new demands.

One of those middleman roles is well-known to homeowners: the mortgage servicer, responsible for collecting homeowner payments and evaluating requests for a modification.

But it’s another middleman that’s proven the real barrier for Jeter: the trustee, who is supposed to be the investors’ representative, making sure the servicer is maximizing investors’ returns and distributing checks to them. HSBC is the trustee for the pool of loans of which Jeter’s is a part — and it’s refused to approve any modifications for loans like hers, saying the contracts around the mortgages simply don’t allow it.

The good news for Jeter is that, in what seems an unprecedented step, her servicer OneWest has taken HSBC to court in order to allow modifications. It filed suit in June of last year.

But in a sign of just how convoluted the mortgage world has become, OneWest is also pushing to foreclose on her. A recent sale date was avoided only after her lawyer threatened to sue.

Jeter’s loan was typical of the boom years. In order to help pay for improvements on her home in 2007, she’d refinanced into an interest-only adjustable-rate loan. That loan was bundled with thousands of others by a Wall Street bank and sold off to investors (pension funds, hedge funds, banks etc.).

That’s where the trouble started. In Jeter’s loan pool and nine others, the contracts laying out the servicers’ responsibilities and powers contradict each other. OneWest’s lawsuit seeks to sort out that contradiction.

One document, a private contract between the servicer and the Wall Street bank that bundled the loans, explicitly forbids servicers from modifying loans in the pools in a way that would reduce homeowner payments. But other contracts — that investors could see — explicitly allow such modifications.

It’s become a familiar problem during the foreclosure crisis, dealing with the aftermath of the banks’ corner-cutting and sloppy paperwork of the housing boom.

No one appears to have tried to sort out this mess until 2009, when OneWest requested that HSBC, the trustee, allow modifications. The administration had just launched the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), which pays servicers and investors subsidies to encourage affordable modifications. Under the program, modifications occur only when they will likely bring a better return to investors than foreclosure.

But HSBC refused to authorize any modifications, saying the contracts prohibit them. It’s obligated to act in investors’ interest, and it feared getting sued by those who didn’t want to cut homeowners’ payments. The dispute dragged on for months. Ultimately, HSBC offered to allow modifications only if OneWest accepted the risk of getting sued by investors, but OneWest wouldn’t.

OneWest was in an increasingly difficult situation, it says in its suit. It faced potential suits from investors if it modified loans, and if it didn’t, homeowners in the pool might sue.

In late June 2010, with HSBC still not budging, OneWest filed suit, asking a federal judge to decide whether modifications should or should not be allowed.

The case suggests that when investors themselves are asked, they will approve modifications. HSBC polled the investors in the 10 pools after the suit was filed. A large majority favored allowing modifications. Based on those results, HSBC said in a court filing in January that it did not oppose OneWest’s request for a judge to intervene and that if the judge declared modifications were allowed, that would be fine with them.

In the meantime, 3,000 homeowners like Jeter whose mortgages are caught up in the dispute have been unable to get any reduction in payments. When OneWest filed its suit, it said at least 800 of the loans seemed eligible for an affordable government-sponsored modification but couldn’t actually be modified because of HSBC’s stance. Those homeowners “are facing the possibility of losing their homes through potentially avoidable foreclosures every day,” it said.

It’s not clear how many of those homeowners have since been foreclosed on. OneWest said in a statement that it had no choice in pursuing foreclosure: It’s “contractually obligated to continue servicing loans in accordance with the terms of the underlying securitization documents.”

The suit is remarkable not only because it seems unique — close observers said they hadn’t seen another example of a servicer going to court against a trustee — but also because it lays bare a relationship that is usually a mystery to homeowners and investors in securitized mortgages.

It’s often hard for homeowners to tell if a servicer is correctly citing an investor restriction when denying a modification. Servicers have cited investor restrictions when denying modifications for at least 30,000 homeowners, according to a ProPublica analysis of Treasury Department data. A Treasury spokeswoman said auditors examining such denials had found they were almost always legitimate. That’s not an experience shared by homeowner advocates.

While there are clear cases where the contracts prohibit modifications, homeowner advocates say servicers often falsely claim their hands are tied, blaming “the investor” when there’s really no restriction on modifying loans. In a number of cases, said Jeff Gentes, an attorney at the Connecticut Fair Housing Center, servicer employees have told his clients that there was an investor restriction, when a little bit of digging showed that’s not true. We reported on this problem last year.

That’s also an experience shared by OneWest homeowners. Briant Humphrey of southern California says OneWest told him repeatedly for months that an investor in his mortgage wouldn’t allow a modification. But that doesn’t appear to be true. OneWest declared in its suit against HSBC that, of the 500,000 or so mortgages it services, the only ones not eligible for possible modification were the loans at issue in the suit. Humphrey’s loan is not one of them.

His case is notable for another reason: Humphrey happens to be friendly with one of the Treasury officials in charge of HAMP, Laurie Maggiano. After narrowly avoiding a foreclosure by declaring bankruptcy, Humphrey was able to speak with Maggiano, and he credits her with finally getting higher level attention at OneWest. His case is currently in review again.

Overall, investor restrictions have been a relatively minor problem compared to the many other barriers homeowners have faced in a quest for a modification. They represent about 2 percent of the 1.9 million total homeowners who’ve been denied. In most cases, the contracts written when the securities were sold give the servicer clear authority to provide modifications.

In the cases when there actually is a restriction in the documents, the servicer is supposed to at least try to get permission. The HAMP rules require the servicer to send a letter to the trustee requesting that modifications be allowed.

But even that small step has proven too much for many servicers. Last summer, a director at Deutsche Bank, one of the largest trustees, told ProPublica that such requests “never happen.” Deutsche Bank did not respond when asked if that was still the case.

In cases where there’s a clear contractual bar to modifications, the servicer and trustee could take the initiative to change the contracts by having the investors vote on it or, if voting isn’t required, amend the contract themselves.

But in general, said Gentes, the housing attorney, servicers are slow to investigate and eliminate bars to modification. Servicers are paid a low, flat rate per loan and are motivated to keep costs down. “The costs of removing an investor restriction are often borne by the servicers, and so extensive amendment rules often mean that servicers won’t pursue it.”

Trustees, who get paid even lower fees, are no different, said Bill Frey of Greenwich Financial Services, which specializes in mortgage-backed securities. “They’re very, very prone to inaction.”

Both, as middlemen, don’t bear the loss when a home is foreclosed on.

As for Jeter, eight months after OneWest filed suit to allow modifications, she is facing foreclosure for the fifth time.

Self-employed, she hit trouble in 2008 because of the recession. After failing in attempts to refinance into a conventional loan, she started talking to her servicer, then called IndyMac, about a modification. (OneWest was formed from the remains of the failed bank IndyMac. It has recently been under scrutiny from regulators for its foreclosure practices, along with other of the country’s largest servicers. )

An employee told her she had to miss several payments in order to qualify for a modification — a common experience for homeowners.

“I hadn’t done anything like that before,” she said. “It was a crazy thought.” But because she’d been assured that was the only path to a modification, she did it.

Several months later, OneWest put her on a six-month temporary payment plan that cut her payments almost in half from $3,500 to $1,850.

She made those payments, but still there was no modification. “I regret to inform you that your particular loan is in a group of loans that the investor will not modify,” a OneWest employee wrote her in an October 2009 email, telling her to either pay off her mounting late payments or face foreclosure.

The modification application process continued, however, and the reasons for denial proliferated. She was told at one point to get more income, so she took in tenants. She was asked over and over for the same paperwork — as we’ve reported, a typical experience. In all, she says she’s applied for a modification about 10 times.

“It’s been pure hell,” she said. “I’ve heard every excuse in the book.”

Because of the mounting arrears and slumping housing market, she now owes more than her home is worth.

The effort has been a constant preoccupation for years now, and she’s communicated with other frustrated OneWest homeowners across the country. Turning OneWest’s fears of homeowner lawsuits into reality, she hired a lawyer who prepared a suit in case OneWest attempted to foreclose. In March, OneWest postponed seizing her home at the last minute. OneWest has offered another temporary payment plan, but Jeter is wary that it will end like the last one, with her payments simply lost. Currently, her home is set to be foreclosed next week.

In the meantime, HSBC and OneWest are awaiting a ruling in their lawsuit. The judge’s ruling could, as HSBC says in a filing, “cut that Gordian knot” and allow OneWest to provide a modification. The question for Jeter is whether that would come too late.

Follow on Twitter: @paulkiel

HSBC Gets Some Heat Over Ill-Marketed Payment Protection Plan

Amanda Miller — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:29:17 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

HSBC, “The World’s Local Bank,” is getting a lot of local and state-wide criticism today as suits are being filed against them for their poorly explained and ill-marketed “Payment Protection Plan”. Those especially impacted by this were wrongfully targeted and unqualified recipients of this plan including, retirees, people already on disability and part-time employees. – Source

As an HSBC card holder I’m all too familiar with this offer. It seems like every other week I get an e-mail or a message in my account inbox for the opportunity to “freeze or cancel the balance on this account” should a “covered event” occur.

HSBC claims they will cover:

Short term and long term Involuntary Job Loss
Temporary and Permanent Disability
and more Covered Benefits

Balance Freeze:
Hospitalization
Marriage
Childbirth/Adoption
Identity Theft
And Much More
Balance Cancellation:
Permanent Disability
Long Term Involuntary Unemployment
Loss of Life

To hear the pitch of the plan that can be heard via the HSBC Customer Service line play the video below.

[quicktime]http://getoutofdebt.org/wp-content/uploads/hsbc.m4v[/quicktime]

“Personal Account Protection is only $1.35 per $100 of your statement ending balance each month. You owe nothing when your statement ending balance is zero!”

Shelling out only $1.35 per $100?? That’s often less than a small coffee! You can handle that, right? While this seems like chump change at first, it certainly adds up. For example, if you hold a balance of around $15,000 on your card your monthly charge for this protection alone would be $202.50. That’s $200 owed on top of your monthly payment towards the debt!

My personal favorite part of the fine print in the agreement is when discussing the cost of the plan you have to acknowledge that you, “will be conveniently charged” for the amount. I’ve never understood any bank, phone company or cable provider’s delusion of “convenience”. To me, convenience is finding a cookie in proximity to my glass of milk, not a creditor reaching into my wallet once a month.

Personally, I’ve never been enrolled in this “convenient” service either by choice or forceful enrollment but the same cannot be said for some of HSBC customer’s.

Recent events and federal class action suits claim that card holders are being enrolled in this “virtually worthless” plan “without notice and solicits retirees and disabled people to pay for the plan knowing they do not quality for its benefits.” In this case it is claimed that HSBC is violating the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act by not disclosing the terms of the Protection coverage before enrollment. It is alleged that this plan should be subject to insurance regulations but is not considered an ‘insurance’ plan through the bank. The class action suit involves more than 100 class members and “possibly hundreds of thousands of individuals who were HSBC customers throughout the State of Illinois who are geographically dispersed such that the joinder in one action would be impracticable.” – Source

The Payment Protection plan is marketed throughout direct mail and telemarketing which has been seen by many to be a deceptive and misleading process and plan. By charging for enrollment into this plan, “known as ‘slamming’,” HSBC allegedly violates Illinois’ statutory and common law. In the recent class action it has been said that, “every slamming victim was enrolled without their consent. That is, they did not agree to contract with HSBC for Payment Protection and did not assent to pay for Payment Protection, regardless of the terms and conditions of the plan.” – Source

HSBC markets this product with the catch phrase, “In Good Times And Bad, We’ve Got You Covered.” The service’s purpose is to freeze or cancel required minimum payments and interest should a major life event occur. In return for the service customer’s contribute to the monthly fee for the protection. However, for some customer’s the plan has been “unilaterally imposed” upon them. For others, “no written materials explaining the terms and conditions were ever provided to subscribers.” – Source

According to the lawsuit filed, it is alleged that “HSBC does not make any effort to determine whether subscribers become ineligible for Payment Protection benefits after the plan is sold. Accordingly, when subscribers’ employment or health statuses change, they will continue to pay for the product even though they may no longer be eligible for benefits under the plan.” Supposedly HSBC has increased profits by millions of dollars with this approach and product that essentially provides zero benefits to some enrolled. – Source

As a consequence, HSBC bills thousands of retired persons (many of whom are senior citizens), along with the unemployed, self-employed, part-time or seasonal Illinois residents, as well as disabled individuals, for Payment Protection coverage, even though their employment or health status prevents them from receiving benefits under the plan (and will not refund the Protection premiums after denying a customer for a claim). – Source

“According to the written materials which are only provided after the subscriber has already been enrolled in the plan, the following restrictions on Payment Protection are imposed, but because they are in small print and in incomplete, indecipherable, misleading and obfuscatory language, are not readily comprehensible to consumers:

Source

Apparently, if you were to call an HSBC call center to proceed with a claim over the phone the employees are given authority to deny claims immediately yet not able to approve them over the phone. The entire plans appears to be a “contract of credit insurance” and it’s been claimed that HSBC, “does not call it insurance to duck state insurance regulations.” – Source

HSBC knows that for those subscribers who choose to pay for Payment Protection, few will ever receive benefits under the plan and even for those that do, the amounts paid in “premiums” will usually exceed any benefits paid out. – Source

“As a result of HSBC’s actions which constitute unjust enrichment, Plaintiff and the Class suffered actual damages for which HSBC is liable. HSBC’s liability for those damages should be measured by the extent of its unjust enrichment.” – Source

Folks, for your convenience, be sure to double check those credit card statements for extraneous charges in case you happen to be enrolled in a plan you do not wish or need to be enrolled in. If you have been enrolled in a service like this but were never provided with written material, checking your statements is the only way to know if you’re being charged for a plan like this.

As always…Stay educated. Stay strong. Seek help.

For additional information contact Miller Law, LLC. 115 S. LaSalle Street Suite 2910 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 332-3400

- Complaint
- CourtHouse Article

Is HSBC Screwing Consumers in Debt Settlement?

Steve Rhode — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:54:57 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

According to some of my debt settlement friends with the AACC, this HSBC dirty trick is real and they’ve seen evidence of it.

It is alleged that HSBC has been setting consumers up to fail on their debt settlement programs, including those put forward by lawyers. The complaint says HSBC agrees to a debt settlement in installments and then when just a few payments are left to be made, HSBC refuses the remaining payments and goes back after the consumer.

In January of 2010 the Plaintiff, Chastity Bradley, through her attorney, entered into a settlement agreement with HSBC. HSBC agreed to accept $481 as payment in full and Chastity began making payments. HSBC cashed all the other payments except for the last one which they are alleged to have returned, rejected. HSBC then demanded the full balance even though a settlement agreement was in place and payments made. – Source

This case was filed by Bruce Warren, Esq., Brent Vullings, Esq., Warren & Vullings, 93 Old York Road, Suite 333, Jenkintown, PA 19046. 215-745-9800.

Has anyone else run into a similar situation? If so, post your comments below.

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

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.

Class Action RICO Suit Alleges Tens of Thousands of New York Foreclosure Frauds Orchestrated by “Foreclosure Mill” Attorney & Banks

Steve Rhode — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 16:44:16 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

The following is a press release from the credit or debt world. The publication of this release by this site is not an endorsement of the release.

New York, NY (PRWEB) August 20, 2010

On August 17, 2010, attorney Susan Chana Lask filed a Federal Class Action Complaint on behalf of tens of thousands of New York State homeowners who lost their homes to an alleged foreclosure fraud orchestrated for years by a New York “foreclosure mill” attorney and major mortgage companies. The case is filed in the US District Court, Eastern District of New York, entitled “Connie Campbell against Steven Baum, MERSCORP, Inc, et al.”, Case #10CV3800. It alleges RICO civil racketeering, RESPA, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act violations and that homeowners paid inflated foreclosure and other fees fictionalized by Mr. Baum who profited from the scheme since 2005.

The action seeks to return tens of thousands of foreclosed homes to their owners or the values thereof and hundreds of millions in punitive damages against Mr. Baum, MERSCORP and HSBC.

Attorney Susan Chana Lask discovered the alleged foreclosure scheme after her client lost her 1.7 Million Dollar Brooklyn Caroll Gardens Brownstone home to a $190,000 mortgage foreclosure filed by attorney Steven Baum for HSBC. The foreclosure court filings were false as filed in HSBC v. Cncepcion Campbell, et al, New York Supreme Court, Kings County, Index #20393/07 . Steven Baum’s foreclosure complaint he filed was for HSBC against Ms. Campbell . It admits the loan was never assigned to HSBC, yet he sued for HSBC. A later Satisfaction of Mortgage was not filed for HSBC but for a company named MERS, admitting HSBC never owned the loan and the foreclosure complaint should have never been filed in the first place. The actual Mortgage was always in MERSCORP’s name and never assigned as required by law. Just who owns the loans Steven Baum forcloses on is a deliberate mystery and potentially tens of thousands of New York homeowners lost their homes on a mystery.

But there’s more. The documents filed in the Courts are signed by attorneys from Mr. Baum’s office under penalty of perjury that they are filing with knowledge of the transaction; however, they have no knowledge as they admit they do not have the documents they attest to in their office. In fact, in the later case filed of Concepcion Campbell v. Walendowski, et. al., New York Supreme Court, Kings County, Index # 08-3467, when Ms. Lask subpoenaed Mr. Baum’s firm for the original Note, they responded it was not needed and refused to produce it; implying they never had it yet they swear they reviewed it in their court filings “under penalty of perjury.” Also, in the original foreclosure case of HSBC, they file documents by an alleged officer of MERS named Rebecca A. Cosgrove by a notary in “Erie County”. But MERS is located in Virginia and Erie County is in Buffalo New York where Steven Baum’s office is. It is suspect that Ms. Cosgrove is even an officer of MERS, no less that she flew all the way to Buffalo NY for the day just to sign a document before a notary. In fact, other courts recently discovered these same false notaries and “officer” claims in other cases involving Mr. Baum and MERS.

“Mr. Baum is an attorney who knows better, yet his foreclosure filings for parties who have no standing to sue confuse the courts and homeowners while he and his banking clients profit tremendously by throwing people on the streets after their bad loans sold by the very same banks become unaffordable to innocent people.”, says Susan Chana Lask.

The aforementioned false foreclosure filings potentially hit tens of thousands of New Yorkers who were foreclosed upon. “Courts have rules and laws are made to be followed. Corporate America needs to follow the rules and be accountable just like the rest of us, else we’re all victims to one big Bernie Madoff scam,” says Lask.

Courts blast Mr. Baum for his sloppy filings claimed to be deliberate to hasten foreclosures on unwitting homeowners and courts. On July 29, 2010 NY County Supreme court Judge Alice Schlessinger summed up a MERS foreclosure as “I am unable to say with any confidence that this was an honest transaction.” (Index #109824/05). The Manhattan US Trustees office started an investigation of Steven Baum months ago.

His tens of thousands of filings hit innocent and desperate people victimized by the present economic crisis who don’t know how to defend themselves nor have the money for an attorney, according to Susan Chana Lask and courts as referenced above. People lose their property for false filings.

This process allows banks to avoid recording loans in the proper name, which saves the banks county clerk recording fees and allows them to resell the mortgage under different names that are hard to trace if not recorded. “They profit at every angle, starting with all the fees they getfrom the initial mortgage closing, then reselling it on the market to investors, right down to taking someone’s house away to sell it for more money on top of everything they already got”, says attorney Susan Chana Lask.

Source: Susan Chana Lask, Esq.

HSBC Withdraws Settlement Offer. What Can We Do About It? – Scott

Steve Rhode — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:41:26 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

“Dear Steve,

My wife’s HSBC credit card balance was about $4,600.00. She received a letter in early February, 2010, saying that if she made a payment of $2721.00 (about 60%) they would write off the remaining $1900.00 (about 40%). The letter stated they needed the payment by February 17, 2010.

My wife called HSBC and told them she would like to take them up on their proposed settlement, but she could not authorize such a payment until February 28 when we were to receive our Federal Income Tax Return. The representative said that would be fine and made arrangements for the $2721 to be automatically withdrawn from our checking account on February 28, 2010.

A couple days before February 17 a letter arrived in the mail from HSBC informing my wife to make sure the funds were available in our account to be withdrawn on February 17th. In a panic, my wife called HSBC and the representative assured her that the date on the letter was a typo and that everything was set for the settlement to be withdrawn on February 28th as planned. On February 23 we received a confirmation letter from HSBC stating that the settlement amount would be withdrawn on February 28 as agreed upon.

Yesterday, March 17, 2010, my wife received a monthly statement from HSBC, thanking her for her payment of $2721.00, but instead of showing the account closed and with a zero balance as agreed upon, it shows the account closed with a remaining balance of about $1,900.00. My wife called HSBC and the first representative said there was nothing he could do(he claimed she had made a settlement for a withdraw on February 17th and since the payment was late the settlement is void), so my wife asked to speak with his supervisor. That lady said there was nothing she could do (despite she said, that there are notes on the account regarding my wife speaking with both representatives prior to the letter from February 23rd) and told my wife she would have to speak directly with the settlement department. She gave my wife the 800 number and said that the settlement departments hours are Monday thru Friday, 12-4PM (central time). My wife is an elementary school teacher and is going to have
to try and contact HSBC during her lunch hour today since the account is in her name and I’m not listed as an authorized person.

We have the documentation that HSBC agreed to a settlement and now they are trying to renig on it…what is our best way of resolving this situation?

Scott”

The Answer:

Dear Scott,

Do you have anything in writing from HSBC that the settlement offer had been modified for the 28th?

Please update me on your progress by posting updates here in the comments section of your question. I’m very interested in how this works out for you.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

If you have a credit or debt question you’d like to ask just use the online form. I’m happy to help you totally for free.

The Repo Man Took My Car for HSBC Bank. – Nesie

Steve Rhode — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:39:33 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Nesie

“Dear Steve,

My car was repossessed by HSBC Bank on Tuesday, March 17. I am four months past due which includes the month of March (monthly payment is 538.70). I cannot afford a payment of $538.70 because: share rent is $525.00, monthly gas/toll is $240.00, groceries $200, insurance $250, IRS payment plan $100. My net monthly income is approximately $2,074.00.

Since I lived at home with my parents and now with my sister, I have always borrowed to make ends meet. I have credit card debts, an outstanding loan from my older sister of $1,100.00 that have put us at odds, and other miscellaneous bills as well as student loans that will be starting soon. I own a 2001 Hyundai Elantra – fully paid; I have no kids; I have no savings.

Assuming that I can find someone to give me a loan against the Hyundai, should I use it as collateral to get my car out of repo? I will need a significantly lower payment plan than the $438.70 I was offered by HSBC OR should I allow the process to continue and make arrangements to pay at a comfortable level OR what do you recommend?

Nesie”

The Answer:

Dear Nesie,

I would contact HSBC and see what they are willing to do. I’m impressed that they were willing modify the loan at all.

If they refuse to modify the loan so it is affordable I would not borrow against your Hyundai to recover your other car.

The bad news here is that you are going to get with a huge bill for the car that was repossessed. HSBC will send you a bill for the difference in the loan balance and the small amount they sell the car for at auction.

At the heart of this issue is the fact that it just sounds like the car was not affordable at all based on your current income and expenses and the fact that you will need to start paying back your student loans soon.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

I Have an Account With HSBC And They Don’t Want to Settle. – Arvin

Steve Rhode — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:04:16 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Arvin

“Dear Steve,

I opened an account with HSBC in 2004 for $1,600. I have been making my monthly payments even more than the minimum monthly payment required. However, due to my current financial hardship, I was not able to pay monthly. The interest rate is 23.80% and penalties kept adding to my account in the amount of $39.00. The late charges and interest every month totals to $60.38.

I have calculated the payments I made for almost 3 years and the total is much, much more than what I owe. The last statement I received dated September 10, 2008 still showed I owe $1,096.77 from the original $1,600. On October 7, 2008, I wrote a letter to HSBC and explained my predicament, and to request some consideration and offered an amount of $300, which is all I can afford to settle and close my account. I never received any response whether my offer for settlement is acceptable or not.

I finally received a letter on November 13, 2008 from a collection agency. My balance showing is in the amount of $1,220.49. I called the collection agency and explained my request to HSBC but they will not listen to my explanation because accordingly, I signed a contract with HSBC. They are now threatening to bring my case to a small claim court if I do not pay. I cannot afford to pay a lawyer as I am still going to school and working at the same time. Can I get help in my case from any government agency?

Thank you.

Arvin”

The Answer:

Dear Arvin,

I think you just learned a valuable lesson about financial products.

When you opened the loan with HSBC you entered into a legal contract with them to repay the loan. That contract covered the terms and conditions of the deal, including what would happen if you defaulted.

Paying back a debt with interest will always result in payments being more than the original amount, and the more penalty and late fees that get added on top of a jacked up interest rate, the amount repaid will be huge.

I’m not surprised that HSBC would not take a $300 settlement. That’s not enough for them to waste their time with. You’re going to have to get your offer up around $800 probably.

It sounds like your only option is to let the case go to court. Unfortunately, you will probably lose because the lawyers will point to the contract you signed as your agreement to repay. There is no government program for this situation since this is what happens when everyone defaults on a financial contract.

The only legal intervention available is bankruptcy but that will cost more than you owe.

You might have to do what many others have done, get a second job or drop out for a semester to make enough to pay the debt.

It all sounds grossly unfair and sucks. Welcome to financial reality.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

I Fired My Debt Management Company And Now I’m Going to Settle My Own Debt. Should I Hire a Lawyer? – Jannelle

Steve Rhode — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:53:03 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Jannelle

“Dear Steve,

I have dropped my debt management company and am trying to negotiate with Chase and HSBC. I’ve composed a letter to them offering 40% of the balance owed. Am I better off hiring a lawyer to send this letter, or should I send it on my own?

Jannelle”

The Answer:

Dear Jannelle,

That’s a really good question. The answer isn’t quite as clear cut as you’d hope.

Typically the best settlement offers are going to come after being 90 days delinquent. Doing that will trash your credit and lead to a lot of collection pressure. Most people can’t make it through those stressful and tough times and risk getting sued just to get a good settlement offer.

Hiring a local attorney to do this for you has some advantages. Most of all it is a third party and that person is not emotionally attached to the debt and can’t be manipulated as easily as you can. That’s not a reflection about you, but a fact that you are easier to scare and lie to in order to manipulate, than a professional third party.

As far as sending the debt settlement letter, see this post about a sample debt settlement letter, “Iâ€™ve Had Problems Working With a Debt Settlement Company and Iâ€™m Looking for a Sample Debt Settlement Letter. â€“ Kerry.”

If you could find a professional debt settlement company that would represent you for less than $500 and agree to refund your fees if they were not successful in obtaining the desired result, that may be an option as well.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

New UK Debt Relief Trickery Now Labeled a Scam

Steve Rhode — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 21:53:29 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Basil and Amanda Rankie in the UK took matters into their own hands when it came to dealing with MBNA, Capital One, HSBC, and other credit card debts. Using contract law in the UK they were able to get the court to nullify their credit agreements and wipe off their debt.

This isn’t a new trick. There has been a question about the enforceability of credit agreements in the UK for some time now. And this created an explosive industry in the UK to challenge similar agreements and claim that they could be terminated.

As you would expect, the UK government didn’t take very kindly to this and have been working to crack down on these debt elimination companies with accusations that they are unfairly taking advantage of consumers.

Well the Rankine’s decided their approach had legs so they started up a website to sell their credit agreement cancellation services to others. And here is where I think they ran into trouble.

Their business model was curious and it perplexed me that that they would “buy” credit card agreements off of individual consumers and fight them. Unless there is a huge legal loophole involved here I can’t see how they could purchase the debt without the acceptance of the original creditor.

Apparently the Office of Fair Trading in the UK (equivalent of the FTC in the U.S.) was very skeptical of the claims themselves. The OFT came out and said that companies offering to help people become debt free through buying or selling on debts is a ‘debt sale scam’ and warned consumers to steer clear of them. It argues the law does not permit the sale of debt without the original lender’s permission.

Daniella Lipszyc, a specialist in contact law with Ultimate Law in Altrincham, Cheshire, said the central issue here is a loophole Basil has identified: lenders terminate a contract after a borrower falls behind in repayments, before they ask for the whole amount to be repaid.

This loophole is the window created – after the contract has been terminated – that the Rankines are using to sidestep contract law to buy debt.

Daniella said: ‘They are right, technically. The problem is they want to assign the liability for the debt to themselves, which is the bit I can’t see working. The liability for the debt is a personal one, much like a personal injury claim; you can’t assign a personal injury claim to someone else – it’s yours alone, it’s personal. There’s also an implied obligation to repay the debt.

‘Whether this holds up in a court of law remains to be seen.’ Source

The Rankine’s company, Credit Card Killer, charges clients a flat fee of £450 plus 10% of the outstanding debt for a loan agreement, in return for ‘buying’ it off them for a nominal payment of £1. There is a further charge of £350 plus 10% for additional agreements.

I’m sure this isn’t the last we’ve heard about this but don’t get your hopes up that this has become an easy way out of debt in the UK or the U.S.

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

HSBC is Suing Me But I Already Told Them I Can’t Afford Their Minimum Payment. – Wayne

Steve Rhode — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:40:39 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Wayne

“Dear Steve,

Over the past six months or so we have gotten behind on an HSBC account. With each letter we received from HSBC and now a debt collection company we have explained our financial situation and asked for a lower payment we canmake. Each letter (the first two were sent with delivery confirmation and the second two were sent certified) we asked for a response. We have never received the first response.

Last night we had the “knock on the door”, a lady tried to deliver a summons. I suppose she will be back today. The reason for falling behind/defaulting on the unsecured loan: Home damage from Hurricane Ike; Medical and food bills (I am diabetic), our car was totalled and we had to come up with another. Two weeks after getting the car the transmission failed. Our dog broke it’s leg, on and on and on……

Do I have any defense since I sent the letters asking for a payment I could make? What happens if I am sued and I lose and I still don’t have 1,500 – 2,000 dollars to pay?

Wayne”

The Answer:

Dear Wayne,

Your only way to have any legal rights and legal protection at this point is going to be bankruptcy. No other debt solution gives you any legal control over your creditors.

Bankruptcy will kill the suit against you which you will probably lose just as a matter of law. You made a promise to pay that you are doing as agreed.

Just because you did the right thing and tried to work something out with HSBC does not mean that they either had a responsibility to respond or do it.

Just accept the summons and then go and meet with a local bankruptcy lawyer and discuss what bankruptcy will mean for you. Most bankruptcy lawyers offer a free bankruptcy consultation to review your situation and answer all of your questions.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

P.S. Be sure to read ‘The Secret of Surviving Through Difficult Economic Times. What I Learned On My Journey‘.

I Bought an HP Computer Using Their Credit Card But I’m Being Penalized – Karen

Steve Rhode — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:40:01 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Karen

“Dear Steve,

I bought an HP computer with their credit card deferring the payment for 6 months. Missing the first payment $65 they charged a $39 late fee. I made double the payment to cover both. Since then payments were $150, 2 @ $120, $200. The late fee is still showing as a separate entity with its own finance charges. No amount of payment has deleted it.

Why are they doing this and how can I get that charge paid to stop the additional interest charges? Thanks

Karen”

The Answer:

Dear Karen,

It appears that the HP credit card is actually a product of HSBC Bank Nevada. The lousy thing about their online application process is that you can’t view the card terms and conditions before you give up all your personal information. That should be outlawed. I just email Senator Chris Dodd about this practice and asked his office to look into this practice further.

Here is what the terms on the HP site say about the card.

*90 Days No interest, No payments on all categories. *Same as Cash offer on HP Home & Home Office Store credit card purchases. No Finance Charges if purchase is paid in full in 90 days. If the purchase is not paid in full or Account not kept current, Finance Charges are assessed from purchase date and Minimum Monthly Payments required. Minimum Finance Charge $1. Certain rules apply to the allocation of payments and Finance Charges on your promotional purchase if you make more than one purchase on your HP Home & Home Office Store credit card. Call 1-888-367-4310 or review your cardholder agreement for information. For Accounts generated on or after 3/27/01: Variable Standard Rate APR: 17.65% as of 05/05/09. Variable Default Rate APR: 24.99% as of 05/05/09. For Accounts generated before 3/27/01: The Standard Rate is 19.2% APR. Offer valid 5/04/09-10/31/09.

What that indicates to me is that any additional charges against your account will be billed separately and will not be paid off until the original balance is paid in full.

Your best best at this point would be to call customer service at HSBC bank, using the number on the back of your card, and ask them for instructions on how to pay the late charge specifically. They might tell you that it’s not possible. You see banks make extra money from people by charging fees and having ridiculous terms to catch you in these traps.

It sucks but I bet if I could see their full terms and conditions for the card I could point out where they spelled out how they were going to screw you over. Banks are pretty good about doing that in the fine print because they know that nobody reads it.

Big Hug!

@GetOutOfDebtGuy

Banks Agree to Wipe Out Up to 40 Percent of Credit Card Debt But Watch Out.

Steve Rhode — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:51:17 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Credit card lenders include Discover Financial Services LLC, Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Capital One Financial Corp., American Express Co. and HSBC Holdings have finally come together with the help of the National Foundation for Credit Counseling, Consumer Federation of America and the Financial Service Roundtable to start the process of creating a debt solution, other than bankruptcy or credit counseling.

That could be potentially really good news for consumers as it starts to make some major movement towards the perfect debt assistance program I outlined before.

At the heart of this new initiative is the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency giving banks permission to write off up to 40 percent of the balance owed on credit cards on a case by case basis. If banks did this it would give consumers a possible solution to pay what they can afford without bankruptcy. That is good news.

But with every good news story there is a catch, and pretty significant ones at that. Banks don’t want to book the loss on the loan until the consumer pays off the reduced balance through a payment plan. That will mask the true losses by the banks under this plan for years. But the primary reason for this is probably because the banks want to and will come back in full force and vengeance to collect the total amount due and then some, if consumers fail to complete the entire plan as scheduled. That could be very dangerous for consumers that have a slip or two during the long and difficult 60 months of repayment.

Worse yet is that rather than in bankruptcy where consumers do not have to pay any income tax on the amount of debt forgiven, in this plan, they will. The group is asking that borrowers be able to defer payment of income taxes they will owe the IRS on the forgiven part of the debt until after the remainder was paid off. You have to pay income tax on forgiven debt, just as if you earned the money. That just puts the banks squarely ahead of the government and leaves the consumer with potentially years of additional debts payments to make after five years of paying back creditors.

No Lingering Tax Liability- Unlike now, where any forgiven debt is taxed by the IRS as if it was earned as income, except for debt discharged in bankruptcy, the IRS needs to not bill consumers for the that amount owed that creditors may write off under this plan. Getting a tax bill for debt you already can’t pay is a strong disincentive for consumers to even bother with repayment. – The Perfect Debt Assistance Program

And the forgiven debt tax issue is a big one. If banks write off a total of $60,000 worth of debt to help you avoid bankruptcy, depending on your tax rate you can wind up with an IRS obligation of $12,000, more or less. Finishing a long and hard repayment schedule over five years only to wind up owing the IRS and paying for another couple of years seems cruel and a huge disincentive.

Scott Talbott, senior vice president at the Financial Services Roundtable is quoted as saying that under this plan “Both parties win”. I’m afraid that is an optimistic statements at this point and while we are potentially headed towards a good plan, we are not there. Right now I’d have to say the current plan heavily favors creditors.

Currently, the only thing the plan does is potentially leads consumers into a five year payment plan that is not binding on the creditors under law, leaves the debtor owing the IRS at a latter date, masks the banks write offs until the reduced debt is paid.

Since the plan is not binding, it will only take the actions of one creditor with excessive collection pressure, or arbitrarily changing their mind to conform with then current bank policy to continue participating to tank the whole repayment plan, maybe years into it. And creditor flip flops are not a worry of something that might happen, they happen now in a normal debt management plan, especially as creditors buy and sell portfolios of debts.

If the plan fails years into the repayment plan, consumers will have wasted years of struggle and payments and potentially be in worse shape than if they just went bankrupt to begin with. In order for this plan to be effective it must be contractually binding, just like an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) in the UK is.

Even though I once served on the board of directors of a consumer credit counseling office that was a member of the National Foundation for Credit Counseling (NFCC), I have been hypercritical of the NFCC in the past, feeling as if they are not doing enough to defend consumers against bad creditor behavior and actions since they are primarily paid by the creditors. But for this effort of trying to create a new solution for debtors I’ll give Susan Keating, the president of NFCC, a provisional thumbs up for finally seeing the light that better solutions for problem debt need to be made available to consumers, other than the traditional debt management plan (DMP).

I also see my old contact at Consumer Federation of America, Travis Plunkett, is quoted as saying that “In this case we have a clear common interest”, we do Travis but we’ve got further to go before this is a good plan for consumers other than bankruptcy, where no lingering tax liability exists and the plan is binding on the creditors. Keep up the good work Travis.

Having spent the past few years in the UK and working with similar plans there, this new debt write off plan being put forward here could be something great but unless we tighten up some major issues, as I laid out in the perfect debt assistance program I’m afraid that it will not be as beneficial for both parties as it could be.

A final sticking point is that this plan only address part of the consumers financial struggles and does not provide a single solution to address all debts, as bankruptcy does. Not mentioned in this plan is how consumers in trouble would be able to incorporate a failing mortgage into one single and coordinated solution handled by a third part in the time of monetary crisis. If a plan can be created that address all the issues and wraps things up into one package, then we’ve got a world class solution.

Keep working on this guys, we are halfway towards a decent debt repayment solution for good people with bad debt.

Steve

Europe puts tight controls on £4bn bank offer

Steve Rhode — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 23:12:48 +0000

From How to Get Out of Debt

Britain’s biggest banks will be offered £4 billion by Europe today to lend to small and medium-sized businesses, in a move that will restrict their ability to impose punitive interest rates.

The banks, including Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS, Lloyds TSB, HSBC and Barclays, will receive the money only if they agree to tight parameters set by the European Investment Bank (EIB) on how it is handed out. There is widespread political anger that banks are forcing businesses to renegotiate loans on harsher terms when they come up for renewal, despite large cash injections from government.

Europe puts tight controls on £4bn bank offer Times Online, UK - 37 minutes ago At the same time the Prime Minister pledged to take action against companies that force people out of their homes for trivial amounts of credit card debt . …

Click Here for totally free debt help, advice and answers.

Read the rest here: Europe puts tight controls on £4bn bank offer

How to Get Out of Debt With the Get Out of Debt Guy » hsbc

Romanian Citizen Busted For $1.5 Million Fraud Ring Of HSBC Customers

Other Related Articles to Read

I Want to Pay HSBC But They Won’t Take My Money. – Steven

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

Will HSBC Honor the Settlement They Agreed To? – Juliana

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

How Can I Settle My HSBC Credit Card. – Scott

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

Lawsuit Reveals How a Middleman Is Blocking Mortgage Modifications for Homeowners

Other Related Articles to Read

HSBC Gets Some Heat Over Ill-Marketed Payment Protection Plan

Other Related Articles to Read

Is HSBC Screwing Consumers in Debt Settlement?

Other Related Articles to Read

Class Action RICO Suit Alleges Tens of Thousands of New York Foreclosure Frauds Orchestrated by “Foreclosure Mill” Attorney & Banks

Other Related Articles to Read

HSBC Withdraws Settlement Offer. What Can We Do About It? – Scott

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

The Repo Man Took My Car for HSBC Bank. – Nesie

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

I Have an Account With HSBC And They Don’t Want to Settle. – Arvin

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

I Fired My Debt Management Company And Now I’m Going to Settle My Own Debt. Should I Hire a Lawyer? – Jannelle

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

New UK Debt Relief Trickery Now Labeled a Scam

Other Related Articles to Read

HSBC is Suing Me But I Already Told Them I Can’t Afford Their Minimum Payment. – Wayne

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

I Bought an HP Computer Using Their Credit Card But I’m Being Penalized – Karen

The Answer:

Other Related Articles to Read

Banks Agree to Wipe Out Up to 40 Percent of Credit Card Debt But Watch Out.

Other Related Articles to Read

Europe puts tight controls on £4bn bank offer

Other Related Articles to Read