Blogs
California Attorney General files a lawsuit against Navient and subsidiaries, Pioneer and General Revenue Corp., alleging violation of California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws
Misrepresenting the order in which the company would apply extra loan payments and failing to properly discharge federal student debt for borrowers with a total and permanent disability.
According to articles in the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times – at issue is a practice to mislead student loan borrowers about the important difference between forbearance and income based repayment programs. Navient encouraged borrowers to postpone payments through forbearance, knowing that interest continued to add up, which would result in a dramatic increase in the overall debt. When there was a most cost effective option – enrolling the borrower in an income-driven repayment plan that would avoid unnecessary fees and costs.
Navient “games” the system – steering borrowers to forbearance in order to charge higher rates
According to The Washington Post’s Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, “consumer advocates say loan servicers steer borrowers toward forbearance because it requires substantially less paperwork than enrolling them in low-cost plans that peg monthly payments to a percentage of income. Navient has long countered that it has one of the highest rates of enrollment in income-driven plans, denying there is a nefarious plan afoot to deny borrowers the option.”
Claims against Navient and subsidiaries for providing false information.
The lawsuit also includes claims from Becerra that Navient’s subsidiaries violated California law by, among other things, providing false information about collection fees on loans people were trying to get out of default
Navient lied to those with disabilities.
The lawsuit also claims that Navient and its subsidiaries inaccurately tell borrowers that disability loan forgiveness requires a permanent inability to work, although no such requirement exists.
Our students can’t afford to be cheated out of any more money than they legally owe simply because Navient knew how to game the system, Becerra said in a release about the lawsuit.
Navient Overcharged military service members.
Navient claims lies were merely “processing errors”.
REALLY!!! Just how many “errors” do you have to make before it becomes obvious this is a standard business practice? Just ask Wells Fargo.
More posts about Wells Fargo’s scams on their customers:
More from the Washington Post:
They would like to hear if you have experienced issues with paying your student loan? Send your comments to [email protected]. Please include your name, city and state. In the subject line put “Student Loans.”
Additional articles from the Washington Post:
The post Navient’s Latest Student Loan Scam appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Bankruptcy & Foreclosure Attorney.
California Attorney General files a lawsuit against Navient and subsidiaries, Pioneer and General Revenue Corp., alleging violation of California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws
Misrepresenting the order in which the company would apply extra loan payments and failing to properly discharge federal student debt for borrowers with a total and permanent disability.
According to articles in the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times – at issue is a practice to mislead student loan borrowers about the important difference between forbearance and income based repayment programs. Navient encouraged borrowers to postpone payments through forbearance, knowing that interest continued to add up, which would result in a dramatic increase in the overall debt. When there was a most cost effective option – enrolling the borrower in an income-driven repayment plan that would avoid unnecessary fees and costs.
Navient “games” the system – steering borrowers to forbearance in order to charge higher rates
According to The Washington Post’s Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, “consumer advocates say loan servicers steer borrowers toward forbearance because it requires substantially less paperwork than enrolling them in low-cost plans that peg monthly payments to a percentage of income. Navient has long countered that it has one of the highest rates of enrollment in income-driven plans, denying there is a nefarious plan afoot to deny borrowers the option.”
Claims against Navient and subsidiaries for providing false information.
The lawsuit also includes claims from Becerra that Navient’s subsidiaries violated California law by, among other things, providing false information about collection fees on loans people were trying to get out of default
Navient lied to those with disabilities.
The lawsuit also claims that Navient and its subsidiaries inaccurately tell borrowers that disability loan forgiveness requires a permanent inability to work, although no such requirement exists.
Our students can’t afford to be cheated out of any more money than they legally owe simply because Navient knew how to game the system, Becerra said in a release about the lawsuit.
Navient Overcharged military service members.
Navient claims lies were merely “processing errors”.
REALLY!!! Just how many “errors” do you have to make before it becomes obvious this is a standard business practice? Just ask Wells Fargo.
More posts about Wells Fargo’s scams on their customers:
More from the Washington Post:
They would like to hear if you have experienced issues with paying your student loan? Send your comments to [email protected]. Please include your name, city and state. In the subject line put “Student Loans.”
Additional articles from the Washington Post:
The post Navient’s Latest Student Loan Scam appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Bankruptcy & Foreclosure Attorney.
National Credit Adjusters, LLC and Bradley Hochstein admit to illegal consumer debt collection practices.
Company and Its Former CEO Engaged In Illegal Debt Collection Practices
(Reprint from CFPB announcement 7/13/18) The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) announced a settlement with National Credit Adjusters, LLC (NCA), a privately-held company headquartered in Hutchinson, Kansas, and its former CEO and part-owner, Bradley Hochstein.
As described in the consent order (below), the Bureau found that NCA and Hochstein used a network of debt collection companies to collect consumer debt on NCA’s behalf. Some of those companies engaged in frequent unlawful debt collection acts and practices that harmed consumers, including by representing that consumers owed more than they were legally required to pay, or threatening consumers and their family members with lawsuits, visits from process servers, and arrest, when neither NCA nor the collection companies intended or had the legal authority to take those actions. NCA and Hochstein continued placing debt with those companies for collection with knowledge or reckless disregard of the companies’ illegal consumer debt collection practices. NCA and Hochstein also sold millions in consumer debt to one of those companies with knowledge or reckless disregard of the company’s illegal consumer debt collection practices.
The Bureau found that NCA and Hochstein violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 and that NCA violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Illegal actions by National Credit Adjusters and Bradley Hochstein.
Under the terms of the consent order, NCA and Hochstein are barred from certain collection practices and Hochstein is permanently barred from working in any business that collects, buys, or sells consumer debt. The order imposes a judgment for civil money penalties of $3 million against NCA and $3 million against Hochstein. As explained in the order, full payment of those amounts is suspended subject to NCA paying a $500,000 civil money penalty and Hochstein paying a $300,000 civil money penalty.
The consent order is available at: https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/bcfp_national-credit-adjusters_consent-order_2018-07.pdf
The post National Credit Adjusters, LLC (NCA) & Hochstein Guilty of Consumer Fraud appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Bankruptcy & Foreclosure Attorney.
National Credit Adjusters, LLC and Bradley Hochstein admit to illegal consumer debt collection practices.
Company and Its Former CEO Engaged In Illegal Debt Collection Practices
(Reprint from CFPB announcement 7/13/18) The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) announced a settlement with National Credit Adjusters, LLC (NCA), a privately-held company headquartered in Hutchinson, Kansas, and its former CEO and part-owner, Bradley Hochstein.
As described in the consent order (below), the Bureau found that NCA and Hochstein used a network of debt collection companies to collect consumer debt on NCA’s behalf. Some of those companies engaged in frequent unlawful debt collection acts and practices that harmed consumers, including by representing that consumers owed more than they were legally required to pay, or threatening consumers and their family members with lawsuits, visits from process servers, and arrest, when neither NCA nor the collection companies intended or had the legal authority to take those actions. NCA and Hochstein continued placing debt with those companies for collection with knowledge or reckless disregard of the companies’ illegal consumer debt collection practices. NCA and Hochstein also sold millions in consumer debt to one of those companies with knowledge or reckless disregard of the company’s illegal consumer debt collection practices.
The Bureau found that NCA and Hochstein violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 and that NCA violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Illegal actions by National Credit Adjusters and Bradley Hochstein.
Under the terms of the consent order, NCA and Hochstein are barred from certain collection practices and Hochstein is permanently barred from working in any business that collects, buys, or sells consumer debt. The order imposes a judgment for civil money penalties of $3 million against NCA and $3 million against Hochstein. As explained in the order, full payment of those amounts is suspended subject to NCA paying a $500,000 civil money penalty and Hochstein paying a $300,000 civil money penalty.
The consent order is available at: https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/bcfp_national-credit-adjusters_consent-order_2018-07.pdf
The post National Credit Adjusters, LLC (NCA) & Hochstein Guilty of Consumer Fraud appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Bankruptcy & Foreclosure Attorney.
Another Fairfax County Family Wastes Thousands with Freedom Debt Relief. I filed a bankruptcy case this week for Alexander and Alina yesterday. They had been enrolled with Freedom Debt Relief for over five years–the longest enrollment I ever heard of. And according to Freedom Debt Relief, they had only four monthly payments to go […]
The post Another Family Wastes Thousands with Freedom Debt Relief by Robert Weed appeared first on Robert Weed.
Depending on your situation, bankruptcy may be the best way to avoid foreclosure and keep your home. Before filing bankruptcy, you should step back and assess your individual situation. Just because something works for someone else does not mean it is the best option for you. Each person’s situation is unique to their specific circumstances. Some things you should consider before filing bankruptcy:
The post Is Bankruptcy the Best Way to Avoid Foreclosure and Keep Your Home? appeared first on Tucson Bankruptcy Attorney.
By Dan Rivoli
City taxi drivers’ patience meter is running out.
The New York Taxi Workers Alliance rallied outside City Hall on Tuesday as cabbies said they want new regulations to boost wages and the values of yellow taxi medallions.
The driver group has advocated for a cap on for-hire cars and to make the meter fare the minimum rate industry wide and give app drivers 80% of trip fare.
The city Taxi & Limousine Commission, meanwhile, proposed a minimum wage standard so app drivers could make $17.22 an hour.
But the taxi drivers group opposed that, arguing that price would be a ceiling.
Bhairavi Desai, director of the alliance, said the focus should be on City Council regulations.
“There’s finally momentum in the City of New York to properly regulate this Wall Street darling,” Desai said, referencing Uber. “We don’t want the Taxi & Limousine Commission to play interference with our momentum.”
TLC spokeswoman Rebecca Harshbarger said the agency is working with the City Council and the industry to address drivers' economic challenges.
The rally followed the release of an over-$1 million Uber ad highlighting its service in the outer boroughs.
“As policymakers contemplate new industry regulations, they must ensure that people who have been ignored by yellow taxi and underserved by mass transit aren’t punished,” Uber spokeswoman Alix Anfang said.
Councilman Barry Grodenchik, who has taxi drivers in his Queens district, said there’s a new sense of urgency from Council Speaker Corey Johnson to add new regulations to the industry, in light of six taxi driver suicides.
“I want it done sooner, rather than later,” Grodenchik said. “My district can’t wait and I don’t think that there’s dilly-dallying going on. It's a very complicated situation.”
“The Council is deeply concerned with the emotional, mental, and financial pain drivers in this industry are currently experiencing and remains committed to finding a legislative solution,” Jacob Tugendrajch, a spokesman for Johnson, said. “The Council continues to work on legislation that would protect drivers, increase fairness and combat congestion.”
Inder Parmar, an Uber driver since 2013 who has cousins and neighbors who drive yellow cabs, backs efforts in the City Council to set a standard fare across the industry.
“Patience is running out,” Parmar said. “City Council, I have a request to them to act on it as soon as possible. This way, we do not see any other driver committing suicide.”
Copyright 2018 New York Daily News.
Married couples that face mounting debt can file for joint bankruptcy together for the purpose of discharging the debts that they cannot pay. This is simply known as a joint bankruptcy or joint Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
A Bankruptcy Attorney Can Help Determine Whether You Qualify for Joint Chapter 7
Allmand Law Firm, PLLC can help you and your family get a fresh start. If debt collectors are after you and it doesn’t seem like you’ll ever be able to pay off your debt, joint Chapter 7 is a powerful option available to help you start over again. Contact us today to discuss your situation with an experienced bankruptcy attorney.
Understanding the Joint Bankruptcy Option
When you and your spouse file for bankruptcy together, you file a single set of bankruptcy papers with the court. You disclose all property, debt, income, and expenses to the court. This information forms the basis of your petition.
The debts can be those owed by you and your spouse individually or debts owed by the two of you together. Any debt that you want to have discharged can be added. The benefit of this is that a single joint petition can discharge any debt that is allowed to be discharged by Chapter 7. There are, however, certain instances in which filing jointly may not make sense. We’ll discuss this in more detail below.
One thing you want to bear in mind is that Chapter 7 discharges your debts by cannibalizing your assets. While some assets can be protected, others cannot. If one spouse files for bankruptcy, any property that they own or property that is owned jointly would be automatically protected. So there is a danger in filing jointly.
Federal and State Bankruptcy Exemptions
Texas allows you to choose whether or not you use state or federal exemption rules to protect your property in bankruptcy. Those who choose either can double the amount of personal property exemptions they claim by filing jointly — up to $100,000. In addition,
Texas offers a homestead exemption for any residence up to 10 acres in a city or 100 to 200 acres in the country, depending on whether or not you have a family. In addition, Texas allows you to exempt one motor vehicle per licensed family member.
Most families will probably choose Texas exemptions, but Texas doesn’t exempt the proceeds of lawsuit settlements even though federal lawsuits would.
A bankruptcy attorney can help you determine which option better suits your situation.
The Pros of Filing a Joint Bankruptcy
- It’s cheaper. Filing for bankruptcy is expensive. It’s cheaper to file jointly than it is to file two separate bankruptcies and will save you money on both attorneys fees and filing fees.
- It eliminates all dischargeable debts. Filing a joint bankruptcy discharges all debts owed by you and your spouse. If one spouse files for bankruptcy, they can only discharge debts owed in their own name.
- It’s more efficient. Filing for bankruptcy is a tedious time-consuming process. When you file jointly you can economize and streamline the process by getting it all done at once.
The Cons of Filing a Joint Bankruptcy
- You expose all of your assets. Any property that is considered valuable can be liquidated by the trustee during a joint Chapter 7. If one spouse owns a lot of property, that property could be up for grabs. It may, in certain cases, be better to expose the assets of only one spouse.
- You owe too much priority debt. There are certain kinds of debt that cannot be discharged by Chapter 7. These include taxes, mortgages, or child support. If you file jointly, you must pay your debts in full through a joint Chapter 13. In most cases, the spouse that owes the debt is better off filing for bankruptcy themselves.
Contact a Bankruptcy Attorney for More Information
An experienced bankruptcy attorney can help you determine if filing a joint Chapter 7 is in your family’s best interest. There are a number of factors that you need to consider. This includes what kind of debt you owe, what assets you have, and what assets you want to hang on to. For more information, contact Allmand Law Firm, PLLC bankruptcy attorneys today.
The post Filing a Joint Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Petition appeared first on Allmand Law.
The June 2018 New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission (TLC) sales results have been released to the public. And as is our practice, provided below are James Shenwick’s comments about those sales results.
1. The volume of transfers rose from May. In June, there were 41 taxi medallion sales.
2. 36 of the 41 sales were foreclosure sales, which means that the medallion owner defaulted on the bank loan and the banks were foreclosing to obtain possession of the medallion. We disregard these transfers in our analysis of the data, because we believe that they are outliers and not indicative of the true value of the medallion, which is a sale between a buyer and a seller under no pressure to sell (fair market value). Another transfer was due to a partnership split, which also does not reflect fair market value and which we have also excluded from our analysis.
3. However the large volume of foreclosure sales (approximately 88%) is in our opinion evidence of the continued weakness in the taxi medallion market.
4. The four regular sales ranged from a low of $172,000 (one medallion), another at $175,000, another at $180,000 and a high of $200,000.
5. Accordingly, the median value of a medallion in June was $177,500.
Please continue to read our blog to see what happens to medallion pricing in the future. Any individuals or businesses with questions about taxi medallion valuations or workouts should contact Jim Shenwick at (212) 541-6224 or via email at j[email protected].
An individual who incurred excessive debt due to a failed business and divorce came to us for a consultation. He was concerned not only with the amount of debt he had, but also about how that debt would impact his credit rating and ability to borrow money in the future. We asked him to prepare the following information for the initial consultation: (1) the amount of money he owed creditors, including any pending lawsuits; (2) the property or assets that he owned; and (3) an after tax monthly budget, starting with the amount of money he made each month after taxes less his ordinary and necessary living and work expenses.
His initial consultation took about an hour, and we discussed how he should deal with the debt from the failed business and divorce. His choices were either workouts with creditors or a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. After reviewing the information supplied by the client, we agreed that workouts with creditors was a better way to proceed then a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.
He made a list of all his creditors, and after reviewing his budget, determined how much of his monthly cash flow he could dedicate to paying his creditors. He contacted each of his creditors, and with advice from James Shenwick, he was able to enter into workouts with all of them.
These workouts generally involve either a single payment of a discounted lump sum to the creditor or payments of money over time against the monies due to the creditor (installment payments). The timeline for these payments to creditors ranged from six months to 18 months.
Another factor that must be considered in doing workouts with creditors (also known as out-of-court settlements) is the issue of “relief of indebtedness income” under § 108 of the Internal Revenue Code(IRC). Section 108 of the IRC provides that if an individual borrows money and does not fully repay a creditor, then he or she is enriched by the amount of debt not repaid to the creditor, which is considered taxable income. In round numbers, the IRC provides that if an individual borrows $100,000 and repays $50,000, then he or she must report $50,000 of income to the IRS and pay tax on that income. Generally, institutional creditors like credit card companies will report this relief of indebtedness income to the IRS via a 1099-R.
This client’s story continues with more good news! After repaying his creditors, he was concerned about his credit score (FICO score) and his ability to borrow money in the future to buy real estate or to lease or buy a car. He obtained a credit report from Credit Karma, and upon review, we noticed several errors. Using a federal and state law known as The Fair Credit Reporting Act, he retained us to contact those creditors and the credit reporting agencies to correct the errors. It took some time and effort, but in approximately three months we were able to correct those errors, and the good news is that he reported to us that he applied for and obtained a new credit card, which showed that he was now creditworthy! He was very excited about this news and thrilled to have reduced his debt and maintained his ability to obtain credit. Individuals with similar issues should contact Jim Shenwick at (212) 541-6224 or [email protected]for a consultation regarding their options for dealing with debt. Jim
Updated daily, this blog will keep you informed on the latest bankruptcy news! 
Learn more about how Bankruptcy works and what you need to know.