The tough regulators in Connecticut just announced an action against America Financial Law Group and The Law Offices of Andrea Loveless.
According to the action made public today, the following facts are asserted by the state.
1. Respondent is a purported California limited liability partnership with an office at 1 Spectrum Pointe, Suite 300, Lake Forest, California.
2. On or about January 21, 2010, a Connecticut resident, while physically present in this state, entered into an Attorney- Client Agreement (“Agreement”) with Respondent and, in connection with such Agreement, the Connecticut resident executed an Authorization to Represent in which the Connecticut resident authorized Respondent to act on such Connecticut resident’s behalf to assist in negotiating, bargaining and delivering to the service/lender/bank/mortgage company listed therein (“Mortgage Company”) such instruments, documents and agreements as such Mortgage Company may require in connection with a potential loan modification of the Mortgage Company’s mortgage secured by property located in Connecticut.
3. In connection with the Agreement, total payment of $3,000 was debited by Respondent from the bank account of the Connecticut resident referred to in paragraph 2 above, 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.
4. On or about February 9, 2010, another Connecticut resident, while physically present in this state, entered into an Agreement with Respondent and, in connection with such Agreement, the Connecticut resident executed an Authorization to Represent in which the Connecticut resident authorized Respondent to act on such Connecticut resident’s behalf to assist in negotiating, bargaining and delivering to the Mortgage Company such instruments, documents and agreements as such Mortgage Company may require in connection with a potential loan modification of Mortgage Company’s mortgage secured by property located in Connecticut.
5. In connection with the Agreement, total payment of $2,995 was debited by Respondent from the bank account of the Connecticut resident referred to in paragraph 4 above, 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.
6. On or about October 1, 2009, the Commissioner established a Schedule of Maximum Fees, which 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 has Respondent been 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 December 6, 2010, the Commissioner received complaints filed by each of the Connecticut residents concerning Respondent’s failure to perform the debt negotiation services contained in the Agreement.
9. As of October 30, 2011, Respondent had refunded $750 to the Connecticut resident referred to in paragraph 2 above and $1,500 to the Connecticut resident referred to in paragraph 4 above. – Source
You are not alone. I'm here to help. There is no need to suffer in silence. We can get through this. Tomorrow can be better than today. Don't give up.
Do you have a question you'd like to ask me for free? Go ahead and click here.
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.
- Who Knew TitleMax Sucked This Bad? - February 23, 2023
- Litigation Practice Group Lawsuit by Business Partner All Service Financial – We Want Our Money - January 24, 2023
- HomeAdvisor and Angi to Pay Up To $7.2 Million and Stop Deceptively Marketing its Leads for Home Improvement Projects - January 23, 2023