Irvine, CA (PRWEB) April 27, 2009
United Law Group, the major provider of legal foreclosure prevention and foreclosure litigation solutions these days announced that it filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California County of Orange Central Justice Center against Bank of America and its subsidiary Countrywide House Loans, Inc. for tortuous interference with contract, defamation (slander) and unfair business practices (pursuant to B&P Code
Irvine, CA (Vocus) October 21, 2009 –
United Law Group produced yet another constructive step on behalf of home owners when it a federal judge denied Bank of Americas motion to dismiss the case against the bank. Focused on guarding the rights of property owners, United Law Group filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California County of Orange Central Justice Center against Bank of America and its subsidiary Countrywide House Loans, Inc. for tortuous interference with contract, defamation (slander) and unfair enterprise practices (pursuant to B&P Code
Irvine, CA (Vocus) February eight, 2010
United Law Group will appeal the dismissal of their suit against Bank of America and its subsidiary Countrywide Property Loans in the 19th Circuit Court of Appeals. Previously denied their motion to dismiss the lawsuit in the Santa Ana Federal Court, Bank of America attorney argued that the bank had the proper to slander United Law Group simply because of Californias anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law. U.S. District Judge Andrew J. Guilford agreed to dismiss the case primarily based on the laws broad-sweeping language, which delivers protection to massive corporations.

The anti-SLAPP statute cited by the judge in this case has been amended 5 occasions and has more than 330 distinct legal opinions. The ruling fundamentally says that its okay for corporations to slander in the name of enterprise, mentioned United Law Group Managing Director Robert Buscho. If a man on the street stated the items that the Bank of America representatives said they would be liable. Anti-SLAPP law provides protections to massive corporations that the average individual does not have. The language employed to frighten and confuse home owners hurt those property owners and United Law Groups reputation. It appears that the banks do not want buyers to have legal representation throughout this method and will do what ever they can to ensure that happens.

The ruling came just one particular week just before New York’s lawyer general charged Bank of America Corp., its former Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis and former Chief Economic Officer Joe Value with fraud for allegedly misleading shareholders about the bank’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co.

When men and women call their bank, they trust that they are becoming told the truth, said Buscho. Distressed home owners are in a tenuous position. Granting banks the appropriate to say whatever they want without having recourse opens up a Pandoras box, specifically when it is clear from the recent fraud charges that there are challenges with ethics and honesty internally.

The original case was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California County of Orange Central Justice Center against Bank of America and its subsidiary Countrywide Property Loans, Inc. for tortuous interference with contract, defamation (slander) and unfair organization practices (pursuant to B&P Code
Newport Beach, CA (Vocus/PRWEB) February 15, 2011
Brookstone Law, Pc, has filed a mass joinder lawsuit against Bank of America, potentially the most substantial and precedent setting legal action taken against lenders as a result of the national foreclosure crisis, it was announced these days by Vito Torchia, Jr., managing lawyer of Brookstone Law Computer.

The lawsuit alleges Bank of America (BOA) and its subsidiary Countrywide Monetary Corporation (Countrywide) perpetrated a huge fraud, also constituting unfair competition upon borrowers that devastated the values of their residences, resulting in the loss of net worth, and that BOA and Countrywide intended to deprive many rights and remedies for the difficulties they caused the borrowers. The case is Wright et al v. Bank of America, N.A. et al., case no.30-2011-00449059-CU-MT-CXC filed in Orange County Superior Court and was filed February 9, 2011.

This was the ultimate high-stakes fraudulent investment scheme of the final decade, said Vito Torchia, Jr. Couched in banking and securities jargon, the deceptive gamble with customers properties was a financial fraud perpetrated on a scale never ever ahead of observed in this country,

The lawsuit accuses Countrywide founder and CEO Angelo Mozilo of realizing that Countrywide could not sustain its organization unless it utilised its size and massive industry share in California to systematically generate false and inflated home appraisals all through California. It additional claims that Countrywide employed these false house valuations to induce borrowers into ever-larger loans on increasingly risky terms and that Mozilo knew as early as 2004 that the loans had been unsustainable and would outcome in a crash that would destroy the equity invested by borrowers and their net worth.

The lawsuit’s filing coincides with a current decision in a class action suit in Maryland that invalidated a lot more than 10,000 foreclosure circumstances managed by GMAC Mortgage because affidavits in the instances had been signed by a GMAC robo-signer who, according to court documents, attested to the authenticity of foreclosure documents with no any understanding about them, as effectively as signing other false statements in the case Manson v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, 08-cv-12166, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).

According to court documents, the lawsuit claims Mozilo and other people at Countrywide pooled those mortgages and sold them for inflated worth which disregarded underwriting requirements and fraudulently inflated house values in order to take enterprise from legitimate mortgage-providers, implement a massive securities fraud that was concealed from borrowers and other mortgagees on an unprecedented scale. When Countrywide pooled the loans and sold them, the company recorded gains on the sales. In 2005, Countrywide reported $ 451.six million in pre-tax earnings from capital market sales and the next year it reported $ 553.5 million in pre-tax earnings from that activity.

Countrywide did not care about the borrowers who would endure due to the fact their plan was primarily based on insider trading that would generate income for them as lengthy as achievable and then allow them get out before the truth of their activities was exposed and losses have been locked in, said Vito Torchia, Jr. According to Torchia, the scheme resulted in the mortgage meltdown in California that was substantially worse than in any other area of the United States. Beginning in 2008, Californians property values have decreased by considerably much more than most other places in the United States as a direct outcome of the scheme.

The lawsuit alleges that, as a outcome, borrowers lost equity in their houses, their credit ratings and histories were destroyed and they incurred unnecessary fees and expenditures. At the exact same time, Countrywide was paid billions of dollars in interest payments and charges and generated billions of dollars in earnings by promoting their loans at inflated values. Countrywide then employed borrowers private data to generate much more income: the lawsuit also alleges privacy violations ranging from disclosure of the private and confidential details of far more than 2.four million customers to outsourcing and sale of hundreds of thousands of records to bolster the fraudulent loan pooling scheme, resulting in the disenfranchising of thousands of borrowers inalienable rights of privacy.

According to court documents, lead Plaintiff John Wright purchased his first house in 2004 and Countrywide offered financing with a first and second loan. Less than a year later, Countrywide contacted Mr. Wright and encouraged him to refinance into an adjustable rate loan. As a initial time home purchaser who relied on Countrywide and their reputation and experience, he accepted their direction, which resulted in a new very first loan in 2005. But right after the damaging effects of sub-prime loans became public in 2007, Mr. Wright contacted Countrywide to refinance his loan into a fixed rate loan, but this time, Countrywide said they have been also busy and that he must wait to refinance, in spite of the truth that fixed price loans had been then at about a reduce interest rate than what he was paying.

“The American men and women are no longer going to tolerate fraudulent and abusive banking strategies and we are organizing the most powerful protest and legal action Bank of America has ever noticed, John Wright stated. Piggybankblog.com, myself and my supporters are a force to be reckoned with and we intend to construct the most successful coalition that the Bank of Destroying and Abusing America has noticed although the American people hold them accountable for their actions that led to the destruction of the American dream for so many men and women like me.”

According to the filing, Countrywide eventually permitted Mr. Wright to refinance and the company suggested an appraiser who offered an appraisal that later turned out to be inflated. When Countrywide refinanced his loan into a new fixed loan it was at a larger price than that which was offered to him when he started the procedure. The lawsuit claims that this churning of his mortgages allowed Countrywide to reap several charges, income and greater interest prices at Mr. Wrights expense. Soon after permitting him to refinance, Countrywide then erected several obstacles to Mr. Wrights attempts to modify his loan due to difficulty making payments and when they did, they approved a loan modification that lowered his payments of a lot more than $ 3,300 a month by only about $ 61.

In 2007, when Mr. Wright retained a law firm to help him, Countrywide falsely claimed they had in no way received a letter from Mr. Wrights representatives, that his legal counsel was not a genuine law firm and instructed him not to use an attorney to receive support with his loan modification.

I cannot help but conclude that as a direct outcome of my experiences and Bank of America’s potentially irregular, fraudulent and simply abusive home loan modification method, we are losing our potential and appropriate to pursue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, John Wright stated. Thats why it provides me fantastic pleasure to participate in this lawsuit, which I contact “The American People vs. Bank of America.”

Then, following Countrywide changed its name and became a subsidiary of BOA, and even though BOA was conscious Mr. Wright was represented by a law firm, the Bank started a series of harassing phone calls to Mr. Wright searching for payments for the loan. Court documents show BOA subsequently engaged in delaying techniques which includes claiming essential documents have been missing or never received even though they had been sent repeatedly to BOA by Mr. Wright. BOA then assured Mr. Wright that he had nothing at all to be concerned about and apologized to him, blaming their personal incompetence for the lost documents.

Court documents show Mr. Wright then received a letter from BOA that denied the loan modification and demanded a lump sum payment. Mr. Wright called BOA and was told to disregard that letter and that he was q
Calabasas, Calif. (Vocus) October 2, 2007
Countrywide Monetary Corporation (NYSE: CFC), these days announced that David Sambol, President and Chief Operating Officer, has been appointed to its board of directors.

“Mr. Sambol will make a tremendous contribution to our board,” mentioned Harley Snyder, president of HSC, Inc. and Countrywide’s lead director. “Dave’s confirmed leadership talent, extensive understanding of the Organization and unparalleled expertise in all elements of the mortgage industry will be invaluable to the Board.”

A 22-year veteran of Countrywide, Mr. Sambol was appointed President and Chief Operating Officer in 2006. In addition to overseeing all operations of the Company, Mr. Sambol’s responsibilities currently consist of leadership of corporate operational and assistance units. Mr. Sambol also serves as a member of management’s Executive Committee.

“Dave has been a driving force behind Countrywide’s lengthy-term growth over the years,” mentioned Angelo R. Mozilo, Countrywide Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. “He has demonstrated the several qualities needed of a planet-class leader throughout challenging market situations and he has proven his capacity to execute methods that position us for future growth and continued industry leadership.”

Mr. Sambol has been instrumental in developing the Company’s principal mortgage originations and servicing operation. He also established Countrywide Capital Markets, and served as its President and Chief Executive Officer. Below his path, CCM became one particular of the nation’s leading fixed-income securities firms.

Earlier in his tenure at Countrywide, Mr. Sambol served as Executive Managing Director of Business Segment Operations, and has led all revenue creating functions of the Business. He has also had oversight duty for Countrywide Bank, Countrywide Insurance Group, and Countrywide’s Worldwide Operations. Mr. Sambol started his profession with the Company as a director of internal audit. Prior to joining Countrywide, Mr. Sambol served as a Certified Public Accountant with the accounting firm of Ernst & Whinney.

About Countrywide:
Founded in 1969, Countrywide Economic Corporation is a diversified economic solutions provider and a member of the S&P 500, Forbes 2000 and Fortune 500. By means of its household of firms, Countrywide originates, purchases, securitizes, sells, and services residential and industrial loans offers loan closing solutions such as credit reports, appraisals and flood determinations provides banking solutions which incorporate depository and house loan products conducts fixed income securities underwriting and trading activities gives house, life and casualty insurance coverage and manages a captive mortgage reinsurance organization. For far more data about the Business, go to Countrywide’s web site at http://www.countrywide.com.

This Press Release includes forward-hunting statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, regarding management’s beliefs, estimates, projections, and assumptions with respect to, amongst other issues, the Company’s future operations, organization plans and methods, as effectively as market and market situations, all of which are topic to alter. Actual outcomes and operations for any future period might vary materially from those projected herein and from past results discussed herein. Variables which could trigger actual results to differ materially from historical outcomes or these anticipated consist of, but are not restricted to: elevated price of debt lowered access to corporate debt markets unforeseen money or capital requirements a reduction in secondary mortgage industry investor demand enhanced credit losses due to downward trends in the economy and in the genuine estate market increases in the delinquency rates of borrowers competitive and basic economic circumstances in every single of our company segments such as slower or adverse home price appreciation changes in general company, economic, market place and political circumstances in the United States and abroad from those expected reduction in government help of homeownership the level and volatility of interest prices modifications in interest price paths adjustments in debt ratings modifications in normally accepted accounting principles or in the legal, regulatory and legislative environments in which Countrywide operates the judgments and assumptions created by management concerning accounting estimates and related matters the potential of management to properly implement the Company’s methods and other dangers noted in documents filed by the Business with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time. Words like “think,” “count on,” “anticipate,” “promise,” “strategy,” and other expressions or words of related meanings, as effectively as future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “would,” “need to,” “could,” or “may” are normally intended to determine forward-seeking statements. The Firm undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-hunting statements or any other details contained herein.

###