Success Stories

It just doesn’t get much better than this. (Don’t flame me about a free house being better please). This foreclosure client had a total amount due of approximately $241,000 on her mortgage. She was put into foreclosure in 2009. Our foreclosure lawyers have been working on her file since the beginning of 2010. The bank finally relented and the principle balance on her mortgage was reduced to $50,000! That is almost an 80% reduction in the client principle.

The new mortgage payment on this property is $228.12! Not too shabby and kudos to our litigation team and modification teams. Results like this can never be guaranteed and every case has different facts, but if you want to have a chance of getting a modification like this, you need to fins a foreclosure defense lawyer who knows how to litigate a case.

At Loan Lawyers, we have decades of combined legal experience and we are ready to fight the bank for you. You need to to take the first step and call us. We offer free consultations with our foreclosure and modification lawyers in Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach counties. Put our foreclosure defense and loan modification experience to work for you.

A client contacted Loan Lawyers because they had been sued by a credit card company for nearly twenty thousand dollars. Our client claimed that a small part of that amount (less than 5) was due to an error as our client was previously a victim of identity theft, and so there were a handful of incorrect charges upon the account. We began to investigate our client’s position and sent out extensive discovery against the debt collector.

In addition, during discovery and analyzing of all of the matters pertaining to our client’s case, we concluded that the debt collector attempting to collect the debt had made errors in one of the disclosure letters it had sent to our client prior to filing the lawsuit. By not including the correct language necessary under the FDCPA (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) they had broken the law. We immediately sued them under the FDCPA and took the case on a contingency fee basis so it didn’t cost our client any money out of pocket.

When we received the discovery in our client’s credit card case it corroborated our position that some of the charges were incorrect due to the previous identity theft. We immediately used this evidence as leverage against the debt collector and persuaded them that we would dismiss our FDCPA case against them if they agreed to drop their entire case against our client. They agreed, and due to our hard work we were successful in wiping out a $20,000 credit card debt for our client.

Our client was ecstatic. If this client went to a different law firm the chances are they would have had the client file bankruptcy. Since Loan Lawyers employs a multi-faceted approach to debt elimination we were able to get our clients debt wiped out and save him the cost and process of having to file for bankruptcy.

Client came to us heartbroken. She has struggled and saved for her family, and saw that at the rate she was going, she would never be able to make her ever-increasing loan payments. Our client took matters into her own hands and filed for a modification with her Lender. Despite her best efforts, and despite her still fighting to modify her loan, providing every document, and every paper, the Lender still filed for a foreclosure against her. This single mother from another country was assured by the Lender not to worry, as they knew she was trying to modify her loan. All of the assurances aside, the Lender pressed harder in the foreclosure case and received a default against the client. We fought hard and fought without fear; the default was vacated, and her case dismissed.

Our foreclosure attorneys beat Bank of America in this morning’s foreclosure trial. Here’s the scoop. We propounded discovery requests to the bank, including Requests for Production, Requests for Admissions, and Interrogatories in January 2013. As is usual, we did not get any response. I just love how the banks rush to take someone’s house, but they refuse to follow the rules. Anyway, I digress. When a party fails to answer Requests for Admissions, the requests are deemed admitted pursuant to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. So, in this morning’s foreclosure trial, the bank plead a lost note count in their complaint. One of the requests that we asked the bank to admit or deny was that they never really lost the note. The fact that they failed to answer the request means that they admit the note was not lost. Therefore, the bank wold be prohibited from introducing testimony that the note was lost.

So, the bank showed up this morning and filed a Motion for Relief from Technical Admissions asking the court to forgive their mistake and allow the case to proceed without the admissions. Frankly, these motions are generally granted because the law favors hearing cases in the merits, not on technical admissions. After the court heard the bank, the judge asked for my response. I took the court through the whole time line. I explained that our foreclosure attorneys sent the discovery requests in January of this year without any response. When we received the trial order, we asked the bank to provide copies of all trial exhibits pursuant to the trial order. That was about 5 weeks ago. They never gave them to us. So, last week, our foreclosure lawyers emailed them and reminded them that they never responded to discovery nor have they given us copies of the evidence. They finally sent the evidence at the end of the day last Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving. The bank then comes to court today with the Motion for Relief from Technical Admissions and answers to interrogatories.

I argued to the court that the interrogatory responses were not responses at all, but they objected to every question and did not provide any real answers. I asked the court to consider the motive in filing the motion. Either they actually wanted to follow the rules and ensure my client receives due process of law or they are trying not to get caught with their pants down. I suggested to the judge that it was the latter. If the bank really was making an effort, albeit late, to comply with the rules, they would have answered the interrogatories, not given ridiculous objections, and they would have responded to the Request for Production. If all they did was answer the Request for Admissions, then its clear that they did not respond to discovery in good faith. The court agreed with me and denied Bank of America’s Motion for Relief from Technical Admissions. The case was over at that point and Bank of America dismissed its foreclosure against my client.

Ok, so what’s the moral of the story? Foreclosure defense attorneys need to propound and pursue discovery. We get clients all of the time who are represented by other foreclosure lawyers and come in with trial dates set. When we review the case, we frequently learn that the attorney failed to send discovery request. Tsk tsk. At Loan Lawyers, you will get aggressive representation at a fair price. We can never promise to win a case and every case has different facts, so results may differ, but we promise to work hard and treat your house as if it were our own.

If you are facing a foreclosure trial, please find a real trial attorney with a proven track record of beating the banks. At Loan Lawyers, we will give you a free consultation with a foreclosure attorney in Broward, Miami-Dade, or Palm Beach. Call us now to schedule your free consultation.

Client retained us in June 2013 to assist them in their foreclosure matter. Clients were unsuccessful in getting a modification on multiple occasions. Husband lost his job, which created an enormous negative ripple effect in their personal matters. They desperately wanted to remain in their home after having created so many memories in there, however the bank would not offer them a second chance after the husband was able to gain employment. We were successful in getting this young couple a modification with a principal reduction in the amount of $21,718.66. Plaintiff immediately vacated the final judgment against them and dismissed the action. Clients were extremely excited and laughed and cried tears of joy and relief when they came in to sign their permanent modification documents.

Plaintiff, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, first filed a complaint against our client R. U. on January 28, 2013. In this complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that they were a holder of the Note and a default date of June 1, 2012. This complaint was voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiff on June 26, 2013, based upon a “completed loan modification.” The clients never received nor applied for a modification, so it appears that the voluntary dismissal was in error. Despite that, Nationstar Mortgage LLC filed a second complaint on October 31, 2013, claiming again to be the holder and now alleging a June 1, 2013 default date. The case proceeded through normal litigation and eventually proceeded to trial on March 7, 2016.

The primary issue at trial was Plaintiff’s failure to prove standing and the “negotiability” of the note. The original lender was “Amnet Mortgage Inc., dba American Mortgage Network of Florida”. The first indorsement was from “American Mortgage Network, Inc., dba American Mortgage Network of Florida” to Residential Funding Company. Plaintiff failed to provide any evidence of a connection between “Amnet Mortgage Inc.” and “American Mortgage Network Inc.” and how “American Mortgage Network Inc” was authorized to create the indorsement to Residential Funding Company. Although arguments were made about both corporations operating under the same dba, the Judge agreed that they were two separate entities and no evidence was presented as to how the note passed from the original lender to “American Mortgage Network Inc”. The Judge found that the note lacked negotiability, and since the Plaintiff was traveling as a holder of the Note, they failed to prove standing. Defendant’s Motion for Involuntary Dismissal was granted. Another win for Loan Lawyers and our happy client!

The Loan Lawyers trial team won another foreclosure trial in Broward County, this time against Citibank. This one was especially sweet because this bank decided to hire real trial attorneys from a big powerful law firm to beat us. The point is that these lawyers are not used to losing trials, much less foreclosure trials. Well, the Loan Lawyers foreclosure defense team did it again and won.

This case centered around whether our client ever was in default. The bank was pulling a forced place insurance scam on the clients. At trial, they could not substantiate that the forced place insurance was proper and that it was properly billed to our client. I was able to establish that my client was making the principle and interest payments as required.

The court ultimately agreed with me and ruled in our client’s favor. This was another great win for us. I tip my hat to my team who helped put this foreclosure case together.

If you are behind on your mortgage, whether you have been served with foreclosure papers or not, do yourself a favor and get a lawyer who knows what they are doing. The reality is that many lawyers botch these cases and put their clients in bad spots. You need to find a lawyer that goes to trial and has a track record of success. Respectfully, I believe that Loan Lawyers fits that description perfectly. I blog frequently about results we obtain for clients. Now, the facts of every cases are different and there’s no guarantee of any particular result, but how many other foreclosure defense websites post trial victories.

Our foreclosure defense lawyers offer free consultations in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties. Call us now to schedule your free consultation.

There has been a lot said recently about a Plaintiff who has a “blank indorsement” on the Note. Banks tend to hang their hat on the idea that with a blank indorsement, a judgment of foreclosure is virtually guaranteed. However, when it comes to proving who can enforce the Note, a blank indorsement isn’t the end all be all of proving standing.

I recently attended a trial on behalf of our clients where standing was one of the main issues for the Judge to consider. In this case, the original lender was “Amnet Mortgage Inc., dba American Mortgage Network of Florida”. The Note contained a blank indorsement, but one of the critical questions the court needs to find when looking at indorsements is how was the note negotiated – meaning how did the note transfer from one entity to the next. In this case, the next indorsement on the Note was from “American Mortgage Network, Inc. dba American Mortgage Network of Florida”. There are two separate corporation – Amnet Mortgage Inc. compared to American Mortgage Network Inc. Granted, they both appeared to be doing business as the same entity, but at the end of the day, one corporation created the note, but a different corporation was attempting to indorse/transfer it away.

In order for the plaintiff (in this case Nationstar Mortgage) to prove they could enforce the Note, they not only needed to prove they had the Note with a blank indorsement, but that the Note itself was transferred properly from the original lender. Since the only entity that could transfer the Note was Amnet Mortgage Inc., and American Mortgage Network tried to transfer the Note, the chain was broken. Without this critical link, it wouldn’t matter that Nationstar held a Note with a blank indorsement. The blank indorsement was invalid because the transfer of the Note from the original lender was incomplete or broken. This defect proved fatal for the Plaintiff and the Judge granted my motion for involuntary dismissal, resulting in another win for Loan Lawyers and their client!

Contact Loan Lawyers today to discuss the particulars of your loan and let us help find ways to keep you in your home.

This is amongst the best mortgage modifications I’ve ever seen. This foreclosure client has not made a payment to the bank in almost five years. Our foreclosure attorneys have been fighting the bank in court since 2009. Nationstar Mortgage finally relented. The original mortgage was for $310,500. The balance on the mortgage prior to the modification was $435,828.20 after 5 years of no payments, interest, attorneys fess, etc…

The new principle balance after this modification is $113,849.20. That is not a typo, the new principle balance is about 1/3 of the original loan amount. The principle and interest payment went from $1,267.59 to $353.05. Remember, this is after living in the house without making a mortgage payment for 5 years. Our foreclosure attorneys and loan modification paralegals earned their keep on this one.

Short of having a mortgage wiped away completely, it does not get any better than this. To say this client is happy would be an understatement. The facts of every case are different and past results don’t guarantee any future outcome.

If you are facing foreclosure, don’t go at it alone. Loan Lawyers is here to help you, but you have to take the first step. You need to call us to schedule a free consultation with one of our foreclosure attorneys. We see clients in Plantation/Fort Lauderdale, North Miami Beach, Delray Beach, and Coral Gables. Call us now to schedule your free consultation with one of our foreclosure attorneys in Broward, Miami-Dade, or Palm Beach.