November 22nd, 2011 by Admin
Well it’s hardly news anymore but there was another Countrywide class action lawsuit certified today. This latest one is also concerning mortgage-backed securities. Again, Countrywide is being sued over its practices of selling mortgage-backed securities and using false or misleading documents to hype the product.
The plaintiffs in the Countrywide class action lawsuit are some retirement funds, including representatives from the Iowa Public Employees’ System and a benefits administrative board for the United Methodist Church.
Bank of America will have to weigh in at some point on this Countrywide class action lawsuit because they own Countrywide. However, they were not available for comment. The case is quite large, as Countrywide sold billions of dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities. By 2008 they were all classified as junk bond status and the plaintiffs lost lots of money, which is the stimulus for the Countrywide class action lawsuit.
July 30th, 2011 by Admin
President Obama’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) program is the center of attention again, as mortgage holders sue in a Bank of America foreclosure class action lawsuit. The lending giant’s participation in the Federal government’s program, which was designed to prevent foreclosure, has landed it in yet another class action lawsuit over its handling of the cases. Plaintiffs in the case allege that Bank of America loan officers delayed their modification processes by requiring them to submit the same financial documents over and over, delaying the road to permanent modification of their loans so they could avoid foreclosure.
The HAMP situation works like this: banks modify interest rates and principal forbearance so borrowers’ monthly payments are lowered and they can keep their homes. There is a three month temporary status of the modification, where the monthly payment is reduced by $500. After that, the loan will be permanently modified. But in plaintiffs’ cases, the bank claimed they lost paperwork each time they called to inquire about the status of the modification of the mortgage. The Bank of America foreclosure class action seeks to force the bank of grant permanent status to loan modifications of several plaintiffs in the state of Arizona.
A similar loan modification class action lawsuit was filed this past February, also against Bank of America.
July 20th, 2011 by Admin
Genesis Financial Solutions (GFS), NCO Portfolio Management Inc. and WebGank are defendants in a credit card offer class action lawsuit. The class action status was approved this week in the Northern District of Texas.
Plaintiff is Mark Myers and the finance class action lawsuit was announced by a law firm that has offices throughout the country and who specializes in class action lawsuits concerning the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
The credit card offer class action lawsuit alleges that plaintiffs were tricked by NCO Financial Services and GFS Financial Solutions by an important mailing concerning their debt, disguised to look like a pre-approved credit card offer.
When a debt collection agency buys credit card debt, the holder of that debt has certain rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). One of these is a mini Miranda warning. It identifies the debt collector and informs the debtor of his rights to dispute the alleged debt within 30 days.
Well, this mini Miranda letter sent by GFS and NCO Financial Solutions was allegedly disguised to look like junk mail and was thrown away by plaintiffs. Not only that, but if the debtor signed the pre-approved credit card offer, that signature was validating the debt. Debtor also waives rights to dispute the alleged debt by accepting the credit card offer.
June 18th, 2011 by Admin
Bank of America is sued again over its foreclosure practices, this time by shareholders. Investors in the lending giant say the bank hid negative impacts of foreclosures on its mortgagees, leading them to buy shares when they otherwise may have thought twice. Bank of America had enormous numbers of risky mortgages and foreclosures on the books, but did not have the staff to process all the paperwork, says the Bank of America shareholder lawsuit, which seeks class action status.
When the US Attorney General announced last year they would be investigating the foreclosure processes of Bank of America and other large lending banks, share prices fell sharply. The plaintiffs in this Bank of America foreclosure class action happen to be a union benefit plan that bought B of A shares at a high of $19.01. After the plan bought 25,000 shares, the Attorney General announcement came and shares dropped to $12.60, according to the Bank of America lawsuit documents.
This lawsuit was filed in February, the same month the lending giant was also sued for foreclosure practices relative to its participation in President Obama’s HAMP plan, a federal loan modification program. Another Bank of America HAMP class action is in the works as well.
May 18th, 2011 by Admin
Today a Federal judge certified the Chase credit card check class action lawsuit. The lawsuit against Chase bank alleges that the company raised minimum payments and interest rates after customers were told they would have one permanent low interest rate. The issue revolves around the checks that come with the Chase credit card, which are like loans on the card. They are sometimes called “check loans”.
Chase had filed a motion to strike the case or complaint but Judge Maxine M. Chesney not only denied that motion but was also the one to certify the class action against the bank.
Plaintiffs allege they received credit cards from Chase Bank and were promised a 2% minimum monthly payment on the outstanding balance on the card. The Chase credit card came with the credit card checks, which were supposed to have a fixed APR. The Chase credit card check class action lawsuit alleges that Chase Bank raised the minimum monthly payment from 2% to 5%. The class action alleges that Chase was trying to force the higher APR…the consequence of not doing so would trigger a very high interest rate, almost 30%.
The class action charges Chase Bank with breaching good faith which is implied in customer contracts and fair business practices.
April 23rd, 2011 by Admin
A Target debt collection lawsuit has been filed in Federal Court this week over its debt collection practices. In a commercial fraud case that’s bound to gather strength as more credit card customers of Target National Bank learn of the Target debt collection lawsuit, it’s alleged that the defendant used false affidavits to try and collect money.
Target credit cards are issued by a subsidiary bank, Target National Bank. The Target debt collection lawsuit, brought by a western Pennsylvania woman, alleges that bank used false affidavits to go after debtors, causing a myriad of financial problems for the plaintiffs. Among the wrongdoings performed by the commercial fraud (false affidavits) were rubber-stamping affidavits used to collect credit card debt, rather than reviewing case by case. Rubber-stamping affidavits generally cause cases to be included in processes where they don’t belong, like debt collection.
Plaintiffs are seeking damages as well as halting of the debt collection practices now in place by Target National Bank. The Target customers allege they have paid their debts, but have incurred costs such as legal fees, have had their credit scores damaged, and have lost lawsuits all because of the allegedly false affidavits which were made so by the rubber-stamping performed by a Target National Bank official.
Debt collection affidavits were allegedly false and misleading because they state that the documents used to collect debts were personally reviewed by the signer. However, the Target debt collection lawsuit alleges the signer never reviewed, but rather just signed the affidavits without reading them, a practice known as rubber-stamping.
April 22nd, 2011 by Admin
A settlement was reached this week on yet another wrongful foreclosure lawsuit. This class action settlement was reached by officials at JP Morgan to the tune of $56 million after the finance giant admitted errors in its handling of military mortgages. The military lending class action came to a close with announcement of the settlement, and servicemen and women will receive compensation, with some getting their homes back.
JP Morgan admitted mistakes in the wrongful foreclosure lawsuit with military personnel, after the class action revealed violations of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act was enacted in 1942 to help military service personnel with financial matters. In particular, JP Morgan violated a section of the Act which requires banks to very thoroughly examine mortgage-holders’ financial histories and foreclosure case before actually foreclosing on a home owned by military service men and women.
Ten homes have so far been returned to military personnel who were foreclosed upon wrongfully. Almost half of the $56 million JP Morgan lawsuit settlement will go directly to military people who went through foreclosure with the company. The other half goes to reducing interest rates of existing military mortgages and to continued return of foreclosed homes.
March 19th, 2011 by Admin
A Chase class action lawsuit was filed back in July 2009 in the District Court of Northern California. The giant credit card company faces allegations that they lured customers into a debt consolidation plan only to raise the minimum payment from 2% to 5% and begin charging a $10 fee after customers signed contracts. The package deal was very attractive to their credit customers, and offered low APR on balance transfers and checks. The APR on checks and balance transfers was advertised by Chase to be fixed and low. By low they meant 2%.
The debt consolidation offer was extended to Chase’s most credit-worthy customers and was a very attractive package. The fixed, low APR was to remain fixed and low for the lifetime of the loan balance. The offers were given to Chase Credit Card customers starting in 2006. This was at the beginning of the country’s financial meltdown and credit crisis so a large percentage of Chase credit card customers took part in the offer and signed up for the consolidation offers.
The basis of the Chase class action lawsuit began in November 2008, just two years after the launch of the fixed, low APR loan program. Chase began notifying loan holders that they would be actually raising the supposedly fixed APR and also charging fees. The fee was a $10 service fee, which by now Chase says it has refunded. The formerly low APR of 2% went up to 5%, so the word fixed became meaningless at that point. Chase had broken the terms of the contract, alleges the Chase minimum payment class action lawsuit.
February 27th, 2011 by Admin
A judge approved a Countrywide class action lawsuit settlement in Federal Court this week. The settlement was worth over $600 million, and represents one of the largest financial class action lawsuits to stem from the subprime mortgage fiasco of the past few years. The company is now owned by Bank of America, who is of course involved in the settlement and setting aside of funds to settle cases against the company.
The Countrywide Class Action Lawsuit was brought by plaintiffs who allege they were mislead about the company’s financial status. Specifically, they allege they were mislead about Countrywide’s lending practices and about the financial condition due to involvements in risky lending behavior…subprime mortgages to be exact. Spokespeople for Bank of America said they have agreed to settle the Countrywide Class Action Lawsuit in order to offset litigation costs and continuing uncertainty about the case. They have agreed to set aside funds for future possible cases, should investors who have opted out of the current Countrywide Class Action Lawsuit settlement, decide to file suits.
Some of the major investors in Countrywide have indeed opted out of the current Countrywide Class Action Lawsuit, including several public employee retirement management companies. They may decide to file Countrywide Class Action Lawsuits in the future, which is why Bank of America has set aside the above-mentioned funds, to the tune of $22.5 million. In all, there are around 30 major investors who opted out of the current suit, meaning the current Countrywide Class Action settlement will not cover these investors.
February 8th, 2011 by Admin
Current and former employees of Coinstar Inc have accused the company of securities fraud. Employees who participated in the company’s 401K program may soon file a Coinstar Inc class action lawsuit under allegations of ERIS violations.
ERISA is a set of Federal rules that says employee can sue their company if said company puts their stock options at risk. Companies who manage retirement funds have an obligation to manage the funds properly and to the benefit of their clients. ERISA, which stands for Employee Retirement Income Security Act, makes it illegal for retirement fund managers to neglect their fiduciary duty. This Coinstar Inc class action lawsuit involves employees who purchased stock as part of a retirement plan at Coinstar between November 28, 2010 and January 13, 2111, may participate in forming a Coinstar Inc class action lawsuit.