Corruption
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Collection attorneys Nelson & Kennard unfair practices documented
The new Liars & Cheats EXPOSED collection documentary:
Collection Attorneys Nelson & Kennard and Fraudulent Affidavit of Service
They couldn’t care less that my client wasn’t served as process server Tom Miranda with Wakeman Process Service claims.
I found a number of lawsuits against Nelson & Kennard and I purchased the dockets and complaints. I’ll try to post a summary for each case along with the complaints and other relevant documents at Liars & Cheats. As usual, most cases didn’t go to trial and they didn’t even argue their points in motions, but they settled with confidentiality agreements.
In the last couple of years I’ve noticed the increasing disregard for the law by attorneys. They act as if they are above the law and unfortunately that is all too often the truth. Many judges and Bar associations support unfair and illegal collection practices by attorneys.
A good percentage of collection attorneys should be disbarred and be sentenced to do time in prison. Of course that won’t happen, but at least you should be aware of the corruption in our “justice” system.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
AZ State Bar complaint by collection lawyer
Just when I thought I’d seen it all.
Lowlife collection lawyer Jennifer Spiegel with Hammerman & Hultgren filed a complaint with the AZ State Bar alleging that I’m practicing law.
Why would they file this totally false complaint?
They IGNORED an FDRS victim’s notice of being defrauded by FDRS and his request for assistance with pursuing FDRS and Mark Cella. So in 7/09 I faxed the power of attorney and requested a response from attorney Stanley Hammerman. Apparently they didn’t appreciate that and immediately filed the Bar complaint.
I have NO idea why the Bar waited until February to send me their complaint and I finally responded. I’m EXTREMELY busy, but I am SO glad for this complaint because they MADE me take the time to document and publicize what SCUM they license.
Notably, I’m not aware of an investigation of FDRS, Mark Cella, Cathy Quintos et al, the morons who DID practice law and provided my clients with the documents to file in court, resulting in SANCTIONS against them.
Of course these scum sucking bottom feeding lawyers knew that, but couldn’t have cared less. Most lawyers would open the gas valves in Auschwitz if it got them paid. They have no conscience, no ethics, no morals ... THEY are the reason for most of the world’s problems.
The LAWYERS make it possible for bankers to defraud us and for cold blooded murderers to kill millions—with impunity.
So here’s the new blog, with my response to the Bar:
Arizona State Bar supports CRIMINALS, corrupt lawyers and banks
As always, if you’re (near) judgment-proof, STOP paying your unsecured debts to national banks.
Vote with your MONEY!
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Nelnet, JP Morgan and Citi sued for conspiring to defraud tax payers (JPM, C, NNI)
Since I sued Nelnet in 2003 (settled) and many of my readers and clients have serious problems with student loans, I had a look at Carl Herman’s article:
Whistle-blower sues banksters: Fraud on student loans. Vampire banks feed on near-children
Banksters took a hit through disclosure of court documents of a former Nelnet employee’s lawsuit for $280 million for fraud to college students through student loan disinformation. JP Morgan, Citigroup and Nelnet are the defendants in the lawsuit. ...
Carl links to Did JPMorgan And Citi Screw Taxpayers By Cheating On Student Loans? (JPM, C, NNI)
Previously sealed court documents show that JPMorgan (JPM) and Citigroup
(C) are being sued for conspiring with education finance company Nelnet (NNI) to allegedly receive federal student loan subsidies by making false claims and illegally recruiting more borrowers.The civil action suit was filed in May 2008 at U.S. District court in Omaha, Nebraska and was posted recently on Wikileaks, just before it was officially unsealed by the court.
The 285 page suit (below) says Nelnet illegally induced students to apply for federal student loans, paying telemarketers to aggressively push the government product, and used false advertising to get more applications, like promising that students would save thousands of dollars in interest payments by consilidating their loans with Nelnet. They then presented false claims to the Department of Education to receive federal funding.
According to the suit, JPMorgan and Citi alledgely “ratified and/or authorized the wrongful acts of Nelnet and have benefitted from such conduct.”
Without specifying a total amount, the suit asks for triple the U.S. claim payments and other damages, plus civil penalties. It asks for $5,500 to $11,000 for each claim Nelnet presented to the Department of Education between 2004 and 2007 (the number is unclear).
The government could have intervened in the suit, but declined, according to court filings.
Like the sub-prime mortgage debacle, banks and their brokers had an interest in attracting as many borrowers as possible, even risky ones. And Nelnet has gotten into trouble for such practices before.
...
The entire article and even the comments are well worth reading.
It’s no surprise to me that the government REFUSES to participate in this suit, but it DOES surprise me how many people STILL feel that we have a moral obligation to pay our debts.
I believe that the ONLY way to STOP the fraud and exploitation without violence is to STOP paying the bankers. The courts are corrupt, the judges are corrupt, the politicians are corrupt ...
At least half the American population is (near) judgment-proof and has NOTHING to lose by defaulting on debts for money that was created out of thin air. Once WE can create money as the banks do, we can pay our debts with the money WE created.
VOTE WITH YOUR MONEY!
Monday, November 23, 2009
Experian and Trans Union prevail in credit scoring suit by Fair Isaac
Fair Issac states that it will appeal the jury verdict.
TransUnion, Experian Defeat FICO Trademark Lawsuit (Update2)
By Andrew M. Harris
Nov. 20 (Bloomberg)—TransUnion LLC and Experian Plc defeated a lawsuit brought by Fair Isaac Corp. claiming that their credit-scoring system infringed FICO trademarks.
Fair Isaac will appeal the federal jury verdict, the Minneapolis-based company said today in a statement. Fair Isaac sued the companies and Equifax Inc. in 2006, alleging they sought to monopolize the credit-scoring market and confused consumers with their VantageScore model.
“We remain confident in the validity of our claims,” FICO Chief Executive Officer Mark Greene said in the statement. Equifax settled the case last year on undisclosed terms.
U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery in Minneapolis earlier this year dismissed Fair Isaac’s breach of contract and false advertising claims against Experian and TransUnion, while sending the trademark claims to trial. FICO is appealing that ruling, too, Greene said.
Chicago-based TransUnion said today the jury decision, which followed a three-week trial in Minneapolis, invalidated a FICO trademark.
“The court’s decision is a victory for the kind of choice, clarity and consistency that both consumers and lenders deserve when it comes to credit scoring,” Jeff Hellinga, president of TransUnion’s U.S. information-services division, said in a statement.
‘Industry Standard’
Developed by Experian, TransUnion and Atlanta-based Equifax—the three primary U.S. credit reporting companies—VantageScore was created to synthesize a single numeric credit score drawing on experience from each company’s data.
Fair Isaac, in its press statement, described its scoring method as “the industry standard” for lenders making credit decisions.
The defendants’ numeric scoring range overlapped with its 300 to 850 scale, FICO had said.
The jury’s verdict rejected that claim, according to a statement issued by Dublin-based Experian. VantageScore’s range of 501 to 990 “is used by four of the top five U.S. financial institutions and eight of the top 10 credit card issuers,” it said.
VantageScore Solutions LLC, which held the intellectual- property rights to the method used by the credit-scoring companies, also was named as a defendant in the suit.
“This decision is a victory for consumers who will continue to benefit from choice and competition in the credit scoring marketplace,” Barrett Burns, the Stamford, Connecticut- based company’s CEO, said in a statement.
The case is Fair Isaac Corp. v. Equifax, 06-CV-4112, U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota (Minneapolis).
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew M. Harris in Chicago at .
The OUTRAGEOUS lie:
““This decision is a victory for consumers who will continue to benefit from choice and competition in the credit scoring marketplace,” Barrett Burns, the Stamford, Connecticut- based company’s CEO, said in a statement.”
The ONLY victory for consumer is the PROHIBITION of ALL credit scores.
We THE PEOPLE have to be treated at HUMAN BEINGS again.
I recently requested the address for disputes with Fair Isaac at its myFICO forum. The posts to the PROOF of their “BUG” were promptly EDITED and DELETED again. This is still about the FICTITIOUS late payments added by FICO scores.
Here is the censored thread:
What is the address for disputes regarding false data on myFICO reports?
The link they deleted is to my documentation of the “bug” adding late payments NOT reported by Equifax and seriously lowering the FICO scores:
5/4/07 - FICO scores add FICTITIOUS Equifax late payments long after charge-off
For 2.5 years this SERIOUS “bug” has been publicly exposed and documented. Over 8,000 people read this thread. Fair Isaac has been fully aware of this “bug” as I personally corresponded with its Barry Paperno. Incredibly, Fair Isaac did NOT fix this “bug.”
The reason I’m putting “bug” in quotes is because Fair Isaac DELIBERATELY lowers the FICO scores of people with charge-offs.
Fair Isaac also DELIBERATELY rated the Capital One and Target revolving accounts reported without the credit limits. The lower the scores, the higher the profits for the creditors. And I suspect that people like Barry Paperno and the thugs in charge of FICO scores are the kind of perverts who get off on causing misery and driving people to kill themselves.
The perverts in charge of America enjoy the destruction of freedom and prosperity.
As FICO scores are required for just about all mortgages, they contributed greatly to the credit crisis. And NOBODY is doing anything to stop them. I’m STILL the only person on the planet who gives a damn?
It’s truly incredible that tax payers funded this bizarre litigation over credit scores while NOTHING is done to prohibit all scoring.
We are HUMAN BEINGS and deserve to be treated as such.
2003 Suit (appealed, Experian filed credit reports on PACER) • Fair Isaac - credit scoring fraudware • Corruption • (0) Comments • Permalink
Thursday, July 02, 2009
FTC advisory opinion in favor of collectors is absolute proof of its corruption
The FTC just issued an advisory letter that left the ACA “delighted” and completely preempts the FDCPA validation requirement.
http://www.acainternational.org/files.aspx?p=/images/14382/p064803-ftc-advisory-opinion.pdf
...
After reviewing the language of the FDCPA and the Rule, and considering the goals of the statute and the regulation, the Commission concludes that a debt collector does not violate Section 805(c) of the FDCPA if the consumer directly disputes information after sending a written “cease communication” to the collector, and the collector complies with the Rule by means of a communication that has no purpose other than complying with the Rule by stating (1) the results of the investigation or (2) the collector’s belief that the communication is frivolous or irrelevant.
...
I don’t have a problem with a collector being allowed to contact a consumer despite the cease and desist to VALIDATE the account after receiving the dispute. However, the FTC clearly ENCOURAGES collectors to simply state that they find the dispute frivolous WITHOUT validating!
Of course “somebody” should send a letter to the FTC to ask WHY collectors all of sudden don’t have to validate disputed accounts anymore. Too bad that I’m the only person who cares and I just can’t afford to waste my time on documenting the corruption of the regulators without getting paid.
Last year I tried to start a membership organization like the ACA for consumers, but NOBODY wanted to pay a few bucks to finance these types of activities and lobby for consumer rights. It is understandable that many people with collections don’t have a lot of extra money, but don’t tell me you don’t have $20. So, good luck to you all! You get what you paid for.
Here are some of my and my clients’ FTC complaints:
Legal • Regulators - legislators • Corruption • (0) Comments • Permalink
