Published on:

By

dropout cartoon  In our Florida student loan law practice, we see everyday the nightmarish situations our former students have gotten themselves into.  One this week has me researching the differences between national versus regional accreditation.  I’ve been a lawyer for 20 plus years and I hadn’t even known what this meant.  My basic thought was accredited is good right?  And no accreditation is bad.  Should be simple, just make sure you go to an accredited school.  Wrong.

Actually, there are different types of accreditation which are commonly referred to as national versus regional.  Again, you’d think national would be good right?  But, no, regional is far better.  For a client, a “national” accreditation means a much higher default rate (twice as many defaults in repayment of student loans) b/c the B.S. or B.A degree they studied hard for is not really worth what they thought it was.  See a September 8, 2015 Center for American Progress Analysis RELEASE noting troubling high student loan default rates among colleges accredited by national accreditors.   Default rates are important:  they are another way of telling us that the education received has not warranted the student loans sought to be repaid for that education.  If a student is unable to obtain employment in their field due to the inadequacy of their education, they are much more likely to not be able to repay their student loans.

Now, over 100k in student loans later, my client is faced with having to get a “replacement” B.S. degree if they hope to ever move up in their employment just because he chose a school, International Academy of Design and Technology, (“IADT”) that he thought was accredited, but was actually “nationally” accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools.  Our client was turned down a job specifically because of the type of accreditation behind his degree.  Even though he was one of the lucky ones to have graduated (for-profit schools have a high dropout rate), it has done him no good whatsoever.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

bankruptcy keyboard.jpgSometimes our Florida foreclosure defense clients wait too long to challenge a foreclosure. This is the primary reason why we attorneys always post advice and blog incessantly about not letting a mortgage company get a default judgment or challenging a default if one occurs.

However, a client can also wait too long on the back end to challenge a final judgment. In Branch Bank & Trust Co. v. Michael’s Enterprises of Virginia, Inc., 519 B.F. 916 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2014), a homeowner waited until a week after the sale and sought a temporary injunction which was denied. The sale proceeded and several months later the debtor refused to vacate the property and filed bankruptcy.

In the bankruptcy, the debtor attempted to collaterally attack the judgment already entered. Claims cannot be re-litigated, they can only be appealed. The Court awarded sanctions against the debtor, its shareholder and its legal counsel for $10,000. The debtor in this case attempted to argue that the foreclosure sale was a fraudulent transfer because it was for less than 70% of the market value. This argument failed to impress the U.S. Supreme Court in BFP v. Resolution Trust Corp., 511 U.S. 531 (1994) which was followed by the bankruptcy court.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Green Tree to Pay $48 Million in Borrower Restitution and $15 Million Fine for Servicing Failures. See this announcement from the CFPB and the Federal Trade Commission.

Locally in Tampa Bay, Florida this is resulting in Greentree seeking continuances for all trials – including one this morning on behalf of one of our clients – to make sure that they are in compliance with this order. Perfect timing, because our client just submitted her loan modification paperwork in an effort to keep her home after her divorce.

I thought it would be useful to post what exactly are some of the mortgage servicing requirements by the new RESPA rules:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

do not call.jpgIn Florida, the right to revoke calls to a consumer’s cell phone is alive and well. Debt collectors who continue to call these cell phones after being told not to are exposing their companies to damages of up to $1,500 per call. That adds up quick.

So don’t just ignore or block the calls. Take a call. See who it is. Write down who it is, and tell them not to call your cell phone again. Write that down along with the date and time of the call. Then keep a log of calls or take screen shots of continued calls. You don’t have to answer them all. Just the fact they are continuing to call is good enough. The good creditors will follow the law and stop calling. Problem fixed. For the ones that keep calling and ignore your directive not to call their cell phone, we’d like the opportunity to go after them.

Here’s some current law on the right to revoke consent to call (I recommend telling them not to call and writing down the date and time and who you spoke to — even if you didn’t give them permission to call in the first place).

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The absolute deadline for filing BP oil spill claims is June 8. Now that we see BP paying on these claims again, we don’t want anyone to miss this deadline. Remember the trickle down effect applies to most businesses in the affected counties. We help those located around Tampa Bay. Arkovich Law

Published on:

By

debtfreetoday.jpgBankruptcy filings are down substantially in 2014 to only 910,090 which is the lowest number since 2007. Yet at the same time, people are still losing their homes especially in Florida, wages are flat or down and the cost of living continues to rise other than gas which isn’t too bad).

So why are the bankruptcy filings down? Well in some areas, the economy is picking up. Interest rates to carry debt remain low. But overall, I think some of this has to do with the fact that people cannot even afford to file. Many folks in the Tampa Bay area come to us to file when they receive a tax refund – but this year, many people had their tax refund intercepted due to defaulted federal student loans.

There is a way to file bankruptcy on the creditor’s dime that no one really talks much about: talking to an attorney about pursuing debt collection violations. Not all bankruptcy attorneys do this, so you need to talk with someone who actually sues for creditor violations plus files bankruptcy.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently fined DriveTime Automotive Group, Inc. $8 million for harming customers for making harassing debt collection calls and providing inaccurate credit information to credit reporting agencies. Such a large fine underscores the importance of the consumer protection laws such as the FDCPA, the FCCPA for Florida consumers and the TCPA for cell phone calls.

These consumer statutes basically allow private attorneys to sue creditors on behalf of their clients and obtain both statutory damages and attorney’s fees. Without that, no one would be able to financially afford to challenge creditor violations.

So what were the most common violations by DriveTime that the CFPB found?

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

cell phone stop 2.pngRevocation of Consent

One of the pressing issues in pending litigation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) is whether a consumer can revoke consent to receive calls on a cell phone. The TCPA requires prior express consent before a consumer can be contacted on a cell phone using an automatic dialer or prerecorded message, but the statute is silent on the right to revoke. So that raises two threshold questions: can prior express consent be revoked and, if so, what constitutes valid revocation?

There is a split in authority on whether consent can be revoked under the TCPA, but a number of courts are ruling that the conclusion that consent is revocable. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit was the first federal appellate court to address this issue. In Gager v. Dell Fin. Servs., LLC, 727 F.3d 265, 270-72 (3d Cir. 2013), the court held that a consumer has a right to revoke consent notwithstanding the absence of a statutory provision specifically authorizing revocation. Applying the common law concept of consent, the court reasoned that a right to revoke is not inconsistent with prior FCC decisions. Several courts have followed the Third Circuit’s lead, including the Eleventh Circuit (which governs the State of Florida) in Osorio v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B., 746 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. Mar. 28, 2014).

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

judgment.jpgIn the past year, Floridians have been hit with ten thousand or more deficiency lawsuits by Dyck-O’Neal, a collector hired by Fannie and Freddie to go after unfortunate homeowners. Many defaults have been obtained against homeowners which should not have occurred due to lack of personal and/or subject matter jurisdiction. Many folks did not even know these additional lawsuits have been filed against them. A recent New York Times article recently addressed this focusing on the ability of Dyck-O’Neal to go after deficiencies even in cases in which the underlying foreclosure action was suspect.

Some defenses raised by defense counsel in these cases are now hitting the appellate courts. In one such case decided May 1, 2015, Reid v. Compass Bank, 1D14-930 (Fla. 1st DCA May 1, 2015), the First DCA affirms the rule that a plaintiff in a foreclosure case cannot file a new lawsuit to seek a deficiency if the foreclosure court reserved jurisdiction for the purpose of entering future orders relating to the foreclosure.

“Notwithstanding the fact that First Federal Savings supports the argument that a party is not entitled to pursue an action at law on a promissory note where that party includes a prayer for a deficiency judgment in its foreclosure complaint and the trial court reserves jurisdiction to enter a deficiency judgment, we have determined that affirmance is warranted in this case based upon the circumstances presented.”

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

bp.bmpI have great news to report on our BP claims! We now have five claims being paid out in the last month alone! These of course have been pending all through the appeals process so it’s been a long wait.

The absolute deadline for filing a new claim is June 8, 2015. it’s not too late and we, like many firms, are accepting new claims for this last month. If we’ve spoken with you in the past but you hadn’t gotten all the paperwork to us to file a claim, it’s not too late, but you need to call us immediately.

Rick Premiums Greatly Enhance Awards:

Continue reading →
Contact Information
1520 W Cleveland St
Tampa, FL 33606
Phone: (813) 258-2808
Fax: (813) 258-5911
The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This website is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of an attorney / client relationship.

We are a Debt Relief Agency under the United States Bankruptcy Code. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Arkovich Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design