flag-Copy-300x201STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This case arises out of the plaintiff’s purchase of the 2005 Pontiac Bonneville from the defendants on or about July 1, 2014. At the time the purchase the vehicle had 78,811 miles.  The purchase price of the automobile was $9,995.  The finance charges over the life of the contract were $4,712. The plaintiff was obligated to make monthly payments on the first of the month beginning August 1, 2014 in the amount of $340.00.

The plaintiff continued to the payments from August until October however a dispute arose when the plaintiff wanted the defendant to pay for broken motor mounts for $222.00.  The plaintiff signed retail installment sales contract evidencing the nature and extent of the payments however he was not provided with a copy of the contract. The plaintiff also signed a buyer’s order indicating that there was a documentary service fee of $295.

The plaintiff refused to pay for the broken motor mounts demanding that the dealership pay. The plaintiff fell behind on payments and the vehicle was repossessed on or about November 9, 2014. The car was supposedly resold about six months later. Post repossession and sale were allegedly sent to the plaintiff. However the defendant dealership sent them to the wrong address. After the vehicle was sold, more than 6 months later, another letter was sent to the plaintiff providing a breakdown of the sale however it was sent to the wrong address.

The notices sent to the plaintiff demanded a gate fee of $65 for the plaintiff to access his vehicle in order to obtain his belongings. The defendant dealership completed various documents with the Division of Motor Vehicles to obtain title to the automobile. Their certification was falsified in obtaining the documentation to get the title to resell the vehicle.

The plaintiff is obtained from the DMV a record of the vehicles which were purchased and sold by the defendant dealership which also indicates the time of the purchase and the resale. (Highlighted VINS)(1-16, 81-82 OPRA DEMAND) It appears as though the defendant engaged in a pattern of practice of selling vehicles repossessed in the maintaining them for a significant period of time probably on their lot.

Continue Reading

Guaranteed Credit Approval

Consumer Fraud and False Advertising:

Guaranteed Credit Approval. Financing Guaranteed. We finance Anyone. We will Get it Done.

Guarantee Credit Approval.  Be wary and get help if you see this advertisement

You hear those advertisements all the time on the radio and TV. Credit Guaranteed. All you need is a job and pay stub. Rebuild your credit. Any deal.
There is no such thing as guaranteed credit. There is no such thing as guaranteed credit approval. Each and every transaction must be reviewed by a bank or lending source. The bank or the lending source make a decision to extend credit based on the credit score, your job and any one of numerous other items that might be applicable to the bank’s lending standards.

So when you hear the aforementioned promises or representations that there is guaranteed credit approval and all you need is a job or some type of pay stub this is quite frankly more likely than not false. Does it make sense that the bank would lend you money when you are not qualified to borrow the money. Absolutely not. Banks have lending standards. They do not lend money to anybody.

Continue Reading

“Sloppy or callous” practices by student loan servicers are still costing consumers money despite stepped-up enforcement efforts, according to a report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which recently returned more than $11 million to more than 225,000 harmed consumers.

The CFPB said it also uncovered student loan servicer violations, such as failing to enroll qualified borrowers in affordable federal loan repayment plans. It is issuing updated procedures for student loan servicing exams.

“Our examiners continue to find sloppy or callous practices among some student loan servicers and other financial institutions that violate the law and put consumers at risk,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “If their practices hurt consumers, they need to rethink and change their practices in light of the actions and observations found in this report.”

Doctor’s estate, UMC Physicians paying $3.28 million to settle claims

DALLAS — The estate of Dr. Kenneth Michael Rice and UMC Physicians (UMCP) have agreed to pay a total of $3,280,000.00 to the United States and the State of Texas to settle allegations that Dr. Rice and UMCP violated the False Claims Act, announced U.S. Attorney John Parker of the Northern District of Texas.

Specifically, the United States alleged that Dr. Rice, by and through UMCP, submitted false claims for payment to Medicaid and Medicare related to in-person evaluation and management services, as well as critical care services. The estate of Dr. Rice agreed to pay the United States and the State of Texas $2 million, collectively, to settle the allegations. UMCP agreed to pay $1,280,000 to settle the matter. Both the Estate of Dr. Rice and UMCP fully cooperated with the investigation and, by settling, did not admit any wrongdoing or liability.