The California Department of Real Estate Issues “CONSUMER ALERT” Warning Consumers About “Mass Joinder” Lawsuits
The California Department of Real Estate has issued the following “CONSUMER ALERT” warning consumers about claims being made by marketers of “Mass Joinder” Lawsuits. ¬†I have provided two links to the California Department’s Website containing the text of the “Alert,” but have also re-posted it in its entirety to help broaden the distribution of the document. ¬†Mandelman
FRAUD WARNING REGARDING LAWSUIT MARKETERS REQUESTING UPFRONT¬†FEES FOR SO-CALLED ‚ÄúMASS JOINDER‚ÄĚ OR CLASS LITIGATION PROMISING¬†EXTRAORDINARY HOME MORTGAGE RELIEF
By Wayne S. Bell,¬†Chief Counsel, California Department of Real Estate
I. HOME MORTGAGE RELIEF THROUGH LITIGATION (and ‚ÄúToo Good to Be True‚ÄĚ¬†Claims Regarding Its Use to Avoid and/or Stop Foreclosure, Obtain Loan Principal¬†Reduction, and to Let You Have Your Home ‚ÄúFree and Clear‚ÄĚ of Any Mortgage).
This alert is written to warn consumers about marketing companies, unlicensed entities,¬†lawyers, and so-called attorney-backed, attorney-affiliated, and lawyer referral entities¬†that offer and sell false hope and request the payment of upfront fees for so-called ‚Äúmass¬†joinder‚ÄĚ or class litigation ¬†that will supposedly result ¬†in extraordinary home mortgage¬†relief.
The California Department of Real Estate (‚ÄúDRE‚ÄĚ or ‚ÄúDepartment‚ÄĚ) previously issued a¬†consumer alert and fraud warning on loan modification and foreclosure rescue scams in¬†California. ¬†That alert was followed by warnings and alerts regarding forensic loan audit¬†fraud, scams in connection with short sale transactions, false and misleading¬†designations and claims of special expertise, certifications and credentials in connection¬†with home loan relief services, and other real estate and home loan relief scams.
The Department continues to administratively prosecute those who engage in such fraud¬†and to work in collaboration with the California State Bar, the Federal Trade¬†Commission, and federal, State and local criminal law enforcement authorities to bring¬†such frauds to justice.
On October 11, 2009, Senate Bill 94 was signed into law in California, and it became¬†effective that day. ¬†It prohibited any person, including real estate licensees and attorneys,¬†from charging, claiming, demanding, collecting or receiving an upfront fee from a¬†homeowner borrower in connection with a promise to modify the borrower‚Äôs residential¬†loan or some other form of mortgage loan forbearance.
Senate Bill 94‚Äôs prohibitions seem to have significantly impacted the rampant fraud that¬†was occurring and escalating with respect ¬†to the payment of upfront fees for loan¬†modification work.
Also, forensic loan auditors must now register with the California Department of Justice¬†and cannot accept payments in advance for their services under California law once a¬†Notice of Default has been recorded. ¬†There are certain exceptions for lawyers and real¬†estate brokers.
On January 31, 2011, an important and broad advance fee ban issued by the Federal¬†Trade Commission became effective and outlaws providers of mortgage assistance relief¬†services from requesting or collecting advance fees from a homeowner.
Discussions about Senate Bill 94, the Federal advance ¬†fee ban, and the Consumer¬†Alerts of the DRE, are available on the DRE‚Äôs website at www.dre.ca.gov.
Lawyer Exemption from the Federal Advance Fee Ban —
The advance fee ban issued by the Federal Trade Commission includes a narrow and¬†conditional carve out for attorneys.
If lawyers meet the following four conditions, they are generally exempt from the rule:
- They are engaged in the practice of law, and mortgage assistance relief is part of¬†their practice.
- They are licensed in the State where the consumer or the dwelling is located.
- They are complying with State laws and regulations governing the ‚Äúsame type of¬†conduct the [FTC] rule requires‚ÄĚ.
- They place any advance fees they collect in a client trust account and comply with¬†State laws and regulations covering such accounts. This requires that client funds¬†be kept separate from the lawyers’ personal and/or business funds until such time¬†as the funds have been earned.
It is important to note that the exemption for lawyers discussed above does ¬†not allow¬†lawyers to collect money upfront for loan modifications or loan forbearance services,¬†which advance fees are banned by the more restrictive California Senate Bill 94.
But those who continue to prey on and victimize vulnerable homeowners have not given¬†up. They just change their ¬†tactics and modify their sales pitches to keep taking¬†advantage of those who are desperate to save their homes. ¬†And some of the frauds¬†seeking to rip off desperate homeowners are trying to use the lawyer exemption above to collect¬†advance fees for mortgage assistance relief litigation.
This alert and warning is issued to call to your attention the often overblown and¬†exaggerated ‚Äúsales pitch(es)‚ÄĚ regarding the supposed value of questionable¬†‚ÄúMass Joinder‚ÄĚ or Class Action Litigation.
Whether they call themselves Foreclosure Defense Experts, Mortgage Loan Litigators,¬†Living Free and Clear experts, or some other official, important or impressive sounding¬†title(s), individuals and companies are marketing their services in the State of California¬†and on the Internet. ¬†They are making a wide variety of claims and sales pitches,¬†and offering impressive sounding legal ¬†and litigation services, with quite¬†extraordinary remedies promised, with the goal of taking and getting some of your¬†money.
While there are lawyers and law firms which ¬†are legitimate and qualified to handle¬†complex class action or joinder litigation, you must be cautious and BEWARE. ¬†And¬†certainly check out the lawyers on the State Bar website and via other means, as¬†discussed below in Section III.¬†II.
QUESTIONABLE AND/OR FALSE CLAIMS OF THE SO-CALLED MORTGAGE LOAN¬†DEFENSE OR ‚ÄúMASS JOINDER‚ÄĚ AND CLASS LITIGATORS.
A. ¬†What are the Claims/Sales Pitches?¬†¬†¬† They are many and varied, and include:
- You can join in a mass joinder or class action lawsuit already filed against your¬†lender and stay in your home. ¬†You can stop paying your lender.
- The mortgage loans can be stripped entirely from your home.
- Your payment obligation and foreclosure against your home can be stopped when¬†the lawsuit is filed.
- The litigation will take the power away from your lender.
- A jury will side with you and against your lender.
- The lawsuit will give you the leverage you need to stay in your home.
- The lawsuit may give you the right to ¬†rescind your home loan, or to reduce your¬†principal.
- The lawsuit will help you modify your home loan. ¬†It will give you a step up in the¬†loan modification process.
- The litigation will be performed through ‚Äúpowerful‚ÄĚ litigation attorney¬†representation.
- Litigation attorneys are ‚Äúturning the tables on lenders and getting cash settlements¬†for homeowners‚ÄĚ.¬†In one Internet advertisement, the marketing materials say, ‚Äúthe damages sought in your¬†behalf are nothing less than a full lien strip or in otherwords [sic] a free and clear house if¬†the bank can‚Äôt produce the documents they own the note on your home. ¬†Or at the very¬†least, damages could be awarded that would reduce the principal balance of the note on¬†your home to 80% of market value, and give ¬†you a 2% interest rate for the life of the¬†loan‚ÄĚ.
Please don‚Äôt be fooled by slick come-ons by scammers who just want your money. Some¬†of the claims above might be true in a particular case, based on the facts and evidence¬†presented before a Court or a jury, or have a ring or hint of truth, but you must carefully¬†examine and analyze each and every one of them to determine if filing a lawsuit against¬†your lender or joining a class or mass joinder lawsuit will have any value for you and your¬†situation. ¬†Be particularly skeptical of all ¬†such claims, since agreeing to participate in 4¬†such litigation may require you to pay for legal or other services, often before any legal¬†work is performed (e.g., a significant upfront retainer fee is required).
The reality is that litigation is time-consuming (with formal discovery such as¬†depositions, interrogatories, requests ¬†for documents, requests for admissions,¬†motions, and the like), expensive, and usually vigorously defended. ¬†There can be¬†no guarantees or assurances with respect to the outcome of a lawsuit.
Even if a lender or loan owner defendant were to lose at trial, it can appeal, and the¬†entire process can take years. ¬†Also, there is no statistical or other competent data¬†that supports the claims that a mass ¬†joinder and class action lawsuit, even if¬†performed by a licensed, legitimate and trained lawyer(s), will provide the¬†remedies that the marketers promise.
There are two other important points to be made here:
First, even assuming that the lawyers can ¬†identify fraud or other legal violations¬†performed by your lender in the loan origination process, your loan may be owned by an¬†investor ‚Äď that is, someone other than your lender. ¬†The investor will most assuredly¬†argue that your claims against your originating lender do not apply against the investor¬†(the purchaser of your loan). And even if your lender still owns the loan, they are not¬†legally required, absent a court judgment or order, to modify your loan or to halt the¬†foreclosure process if you are behind in your payments. ¬†If they happen to lose the¬†lawsuit, they can appeal, as noted above. Also, the violations discovered may be minor¬†or inconsequential, which will not provide for any helpful remedies.
Second, and very importantly, loan modifications and other types of foreclosure relief are¬†simply not possible for every homeowner, and the ‚Äúsuccess rate‚ÄĚ is currently very low in¬†California. ¬†This is where the lawsuit marketing scammers come in and try to convince¬†you that they offer you ‚Äúa leg up‚ÄĚ. ¬†They falsely claim or suggest that they can guarantee¬†to stop a foreclosure in its tracks, leave you with a home ‚Äúfree and clear‚ÄĚ of any¬†mortgage loan(s), make lofty sounding but ¬†hollow promises, exaggerate or make bold¬†statements regarding their litigation successes, charge you for a retainer, and leave you¬†with less money.
III. ¬†THE KEY HERE IS FOR YOU TO BE ON GUARD AND CHECK THE LAWYERS OUT¬†(Know Who You Are or May Be Dealing With) – Do Your Own Homework (Avoid¬†The Traps Set by the Litigation Marketing Frauds).
Before entering into an attorney-client relationship, or paying for ‚Äúlegal‚ÄĚ or litigation¬†services, ascertain the name of the lawyer or lawyers who will be providing the services. ¬†Then check them out on the State Bar’s website, at www.calbar.ca.gov. Make certain¬†that they are licensed by the State Bar of California. ¬†If they are licensed, see if they have¬†been disciplined.
Check them out through the Better Business Bureau to see if the Bureau has received¬†any complaints about the lawyer, law firm or marketing firm offering the services (and¬†remember that only lawyers can provide legal services). And please understand that this¬†is just another resource for you to check, as the litigation services provider might be so¬†new that the Better Business Bureau may have little or nothing on them (or something¬†positive because of insufficient public input).
Here’s another link to the California Department of Real Estate’s page containing this fraud warning: