Success Stories

This client was in foreclosure since 2009. The bank would not give a principle reduction. They offered a modification previously that was a new 40 year term and did not offer any principle reduction. The client rightfully turned it down and instructed us to continue to pound away.

The bank finally relented and offered to reinstate the loan (not a new 40 year term) taking the interest rate from 10.99% to 3.83% and reducing the principle from the original amount of $275,000 to $139,000.

This equates to approximately a 60% principle reduction!

This client lived in the home for 3 years and made no mortgage payments during that time. The balance before the loan modification was over $300,000 due to unpaid interest and other fees and costs.

The only catch is that we have to release them from liability under the Truth in Lending Act and any other cause of action we have against them. For a $160,000+ principle reduction, no problem! This is further proof that you need a law firm that will sue the bank when appropriate and will actually fight, not just delay your foreclosure.

If you are facing a foreclosure in Broward, Miami-Dade, or Palm Beach county, we are ready to fight for you as well. We offer free consultations with our foreclosure lawyers in Fort Lauderdale / Plantation, Delray Beach, Coral Gables, and North Miami Beach. Call us today for your free consultations with one of our Florida foreclosure defense lawyers at (844) 344-4813.

Client came to office after having her house sold because of the bank’s failure to stop her sale while she was approved for a FINAL modification. The Client was forced to pay thousands of dollars to a third party to get her home back. She paid the money to keep the roof over her head, but it was money she simply didn’t have. We then got involved, demanded the bank reimburse her all the money she had to spend to get back her home. The bank refused. We sued them in Federal Court and eventually were able to get her back more than what she paid and have all of her attorney’s fees and costs paid for as well.

Plaintiff, Bank of New York Mellon, Trustee…for CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2006-HY13… filed a complaint against Julian Siegel on September 30, 2011. We retained the clients on October 07, 2013, after prior Defense Counsel stepped out of the case. Case proceeded through normal litigation, including Defendant’s Discovery, and several attempts at a deposition. The case was set for trial, however the trial was continued and eventually placed on inactive status.

The clients wanted to retain their property and were interested in a payoff. Opposing counsel and Plaintiff initially would not consider any offers for a short payoff and were requesting over $1,000,000.00. Plaintiff was basing their BPO’s on an exterior/drive by appraisal and outdated comps within the area. Client was not willing to pay for a full payoff since the house was damaged and he could purchase a newer/bigger/better home elsewhere for the same money.

After several rounds of negotiating, opposing counsel and the Plaintiff finally agreed to an interior inspection to help calculate a new BPO. After the inspection, Plaintiff readjusted their expectations for what they would recover at REO and agreed to a full payoff at $827,000.00. Client was thrilled and was able to come up with the funds. Client completed the wire transfer for a payoff on 2/26/16. We are currently awaiting for from Plaintiff about dismissing the action, releasing the LP and recording a satisfaction of mortgage.

Talk about a holiday gift! Another great job by the Loan Lawyers team and another house saved. This client received an immediate and permanent reduction in principle of over $241,000 representing an approximately 70% principle reduction.

The interest rate went from 9.9% to 2.375% for 5 years then 3.375% for the next 24 years. Notice that this was not a new 30 or 40 year term, but the remaining term under the loan.

The payment went from $2,097.39 to $467.32 for principle and interest. That equates to an almost 80% reduction in payments. Short of a mortgage that gets wiped out, it just doesn’t get any better than this. There’s no guarantee that anyone would get a result such as this, but to have a fighting chance, you need a law firm that knows how to fight.

If you are trying to choose a lawyer in Florida to represent you in your foreclosure proceedings, wouldn’t you want the firm with the reputation as fighters on your side? Call today for your free consultation with one of our foreclosure lawyers at one of our offices located in Broward, Miami-Dade, or Palm Beach counties.

Clients retained our services in October 2010 to assist them in the defense of their foreclosure lawsuit. After exploring multiple loss mitigation options, the homeowners wanted to sell the property in a short sale. After multiple issues we were able to over come, cancelling the sale for the seventh time seemed to pose a huge challenge as the clients only needed an additional two weeks to close. Not only were we able to overcome the sale date, but the clients were able to successfully close in the short sale transaction and Plaintiff filed their Motion to vacate the final judgment and dismiss the foreclosure lawsuit today.

Client came to us with a “standard” foreclosure action. Original Plaintiff, BAC Home Loans Servicing filed their initial complaint which included only one court for foreclosure. However, several months later, the Plaintiff sought leave to substitute the party Plaintiff to Bank of America and amend the complaint to include a reformation of mortgage count. We specifically denied the reformation relief in our Answer and Affirmative Defenses, to which Plaintiff did not file a response.

The case proceeded to trial and almost no objections were made by the Defendant. Without much fight, all the proffered exhibits were entered into evidence. Strategically, this worked in the client’s favor, as this threw opposing counsel off and the Plaintiff failed to put into evidence anything regarding the reformation. After resting, the Court granted the Defendant’s Motion for Involuntary Dismissal based on a failure to reform the legal description in the Mortgage. More specifically, the Trial Court found that the Plaintiff’s witness admitted that the legal description was incorrect and refused to reform or grant a foreclosure on the “wrong” property.

Plaintiff attempted a motion for rehearing, which was denied. Finally, Plaintiff appealed to the 4th DCA. The crux of their argument consisted of a prior agreed order amending their complaint which included the language of correct legal description. While this agreed order was never raised at trial, it still presented a unique issue on appeal – could the appellate court correct the reformation issue because the Defendant technically “agreed” to what the correct legal description is. Thankfully, we were able to distinguish this scenario and show the Appellate Court that raising this issue for the first time on appeal and not at trial was improper while also persuading the Appellate Court to agree that the agreed order does not change Plaintiff’s burden to prove the reformation count.

While we can probably expect another foreclosure attempt down the road, for the time being the client defeated the Plaintiff at trial, successfully defended their appeal and presently is not in foreclosure.

I was in trial last week against Wells Fargo for a foreclosure case. There were 90 foreclosure cases set for trial last week. The bank made the standard offer to everyone that if you agree to the foreclosure, they will allow the homeowner to stay in the house for another 90 days. Believe it or not, I was the only lawyer who turned the deal down and actually went to bat for my client. Why don’t more lawyers go trial on these cases?

I thought the trial went well. Wells Fargo put their witness on the stand and she did not hold up under cross-examination. I had her eating right out of my hand. We had several defenses in this case. First that the Notice of Acceleration was defective. I always fight hard to keep these out of evidence. The witness admitted that she has no knowledge about the department that sends those letters out. In my head I was dancing for joy because without this knowledge, the letter should not come in to evidence. Much to my surprise the court allowed it into evidence. He also allowed the records from the prior servicer into evidence after the witness testified that she had no knowledge of the record keeping practices of the prior servicer and that she was not their record custodian. The judge admitted it was a problem but allowed it into evidence anyway. I was definitely surprised by that ruling.

We also argued that the mortgage was defective because it was missing the paragraph that said that the mortgage was securing a debt. The bank actually had a count to reform their mortgage in their complaint but they failed to introduce any evidence of this whatsoever. The court acknowledged the fact that they failed to meet that burden. I want to find more trials for reformation of mortgage because the homeowners should be able to win most of them. Often the bank that is trying to foreclose is not the originating lender. In order to reform the mortgage, the court must find that the two original parties made a mutual mistake. Some servicer that is second or third down the line will not have personal knowledge of what the original lender intended.

Ultimately the court did not rule on the trial. The judge wanted time to review everything to make his decision. Meanwhile, I have a bunch more trials coming up in the next two months.

If you are in foreclosure and have a foreclosure trial coming up, get a trial lawyer on your side now before its too late. There are some great defenses to beat the bank, but you need to find a lawyer that knows how to try a case. Our foreclosure lawyers offer free consultations in Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach counties.

Clients, husband and wife, came to our firm with just 3 weeks left before having to leave their home with their children. With having had their home already sold to the Bank, having the title of their home also now in the Bank’s name, and a Motion for Writ of Possession with no-where to go, the clients were hopeless. Our RESPA team immediately began to investigate and found that clients were involved in a loan modification, which after having taking over their loan a new servicer chose to ignore. With each passing month clients found the amount on their monthly statements swelling to larger than the month before it. Needless to say their modification in fact was not honored by the new servicer and the new servicer elected to sell the clients’ home at foreclosure auction. We discovered a litany of violations, and immediately sent a Notice of Error pursuant to RESPA’s §1024.35, to both the new servicer and the counsel representing them in the foreclosure action filed against clients. Within 3 days the Bank, cancelled the writ of possession hearing, filed a motion to vacate the sale, and final judgment, dismiss the foreclosure case, and revert the title to the clients’ names. Additionally, the clients are now being reviewed for modification at the same terms they were once approved prior to the fiasco, which almost left them homeless had G-D not brought them to Loan Lawyers to find and fight for their rights under the law.

Had a great trial yesterday against Citibank with a great result for our client in foreclosure. I had my 7 year old son with me, so maybe he was my good luck charm. While preparing for trial, I was not thinking that I had a great chance.

On of the necessary elements to obtain a foreclosure judgment is the bank needs to prove that the properly accelerated the mortgage by sending a letter to the borrower that contains all of the necessary elements. In this case, I realized during my cross examination of the witness that they made a huge blunder and send the notice to Unit #4 but my client lives in Unit #15. They were unable to prove that the notice was sent to the right address. Second, their letter stated that the outstanding late fees were $205.60. When I pressed the witness, she was unable to substantial this amount. She was only able to come up with $123.00 in late fees. She did not know where the additional amount in the letter came from. So, they had two major problems with their acceleration letter. First, they could not prove that it was sent to the correct address and second, they could not prove that the amount of the default as stated in the letter was accurate. Sounds pretty good right? Well it gets better.

The bank attorney showed the witness the proposed final judgment of foreclosure which stated the outstanding principle balance was $307,000 (roughly). The witness testified that she verified those numbers and they were accurate. During my cross examination, I confronted the witness with the payment history that was printed out last month that showed the principle balance was actually $268,000 (roughly). The bank was at a loss on how to explain this. It got ugly for the bank at this point. The bank attorney objected to my questioning because she alleged that I was badgering the witness. The judge disagreed and said that I was asking appropriate questions in the foreclosure trial.

The judge then turned to the bank and said (I am paraphrasing): “Your case has just gone down in flames. I am not telling you what to do, but you may want to consider dismissing this case because your proof is a disaster.” The bank asked for a recess and 30 minutes later they came back and dismissed their case rather than risk getting an adverse judgment.

I think the best part of this was the fact I overheard that one of the bank attorney laughing as I started questioning the witness. She was no longer laughing once she figured out where my questions were leading.

The moral of the story is that if you are facing foreclosure in Florida, you need a lawyer that knows how to fight and who knows how to win a trial. At Loan Lawyers, our lawyers are trained to fight the banks and have the experience and knowledge to get it done right. We offer free consultations for foreclosure defense in Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach. Don’t let the banksters roll over you, know your rights and fight back!