I’m looking for someone fitting this description to help to publicize this problem – CNN Money is interested in doing a story – Please contact me if you know someone who would be willing to share their story and be interviewed. Plus I may be able to help…
Stay tuned, I’ll update this blog post when the story develops.
Have you ever provided your cell number to a company and it later started to call you incessantly to collect a debt of someone else. I’ve recently had that happen to me. My father was hospitalized with a stroke and I gave my cell phone number to somebody at the hospital when we were making decisions about his medical care. At no time did I authorize the hospital to have its bill collectors call me at 9:00 p.m. every night well after my father was discharged from their care.
Fortunately, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) just clarified a 2008 ruling and stated that such debt collection activity is in violation of the TCPA. (the Telephone Consumer Protection Act). The clarification resulted from a recent appellate case Nigro v. Mercantile Adjustment Bureau where someone had sued because they were called 72 times over a nine month period of time to collect on a $67 delinquent bill. Mr. Nigro had provided his cell phone number to the company when he called to shut off the service of his deceased mother in law’s account.
Mr. Nigro lost his case at trial. But the appellate court judges reached out to the FCC for clarification. The clarification stated that prior express consent to call is deemed to be granted only if the wireless number was provided by the consumer to the creditor and that such number was provided during the transaction that resulted in the debt owed. While Mr. Nigro did provide his number to the creditor, it was not during the transaction that resulted in the debt owed. This FCC clarification will have a nationwide impact.
Mortgage companies in Florida must think money really does grow on trees as they are now suing for deficiency judgments on past foreclosures of homes. July 1, 2014 was the deadline in Florida for lenders to file deficiency lawsuits for foreclosure Judgments issued between July 1, 2009 and July 1, 2013. This is the result of the foreclosure bill last summer drastically dropping the number of years for a mortgage company to sue for a deficiency from five years to only one year.
So we’ve seen a flurry of filings from a couple groups: Dyck-O’Neal, Inc. and Collins Asset Group. The approaches have differed somewhat, Dyck-O’Neal files new actions for primarily FNMA while Collins substitutes plaintiffs and simply files a motion in an existing case that is likely re-opened to do so. Until recently, actions seeking a deficiency have been limited mostly to small local banks or credit unions. The Washington Post described Fannie and Freddie filing more deficiency actions through debt collection firms such as Dyck-O’Neil in order to stop strategic defaulters and try to collect debts on behalf of taxpayers. However, Dyck-O’Neal has been sanctioned in Georgia and Texas for improper actions.
Former Florida homeowners are just learning of this now when they are being served by process servers with a summons or a motion for deficiency judgment. Just when they thought their problems were behind them noted a recent Marketplace article.
The Affordable Care Act has caused millions of people to sign up for Medicaid for the first time. Medicaid is a program of free health insurance provided to low to no income individuals. Although the care itself is free, there is a lien against estate assets for any Medicaid payments made for any individual who received benefits after he or she reaches 55 years of age. This includes a lien against their home.
In some states, a Medicaid lien will result in the loss of a homestead to the government. This is one of those unintended consequences we hear about. However, in Florida, we do not have to worry about a Medicaid recipient’s house being taken. This is because of the Florida homestead laws.
For additional questions and consultation on debt related issues, please consider contacting Arkovich Law
In a long awaited decision by the Florida Supreme Court, Estate of Michelle Evette McCall v. U.S., No. SC11-1148, the damages cap provided in the Tort Reform law from a few years back was ruled illegal as it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Florida Constitution.
Although this opinion is limited to wrongful death noneconomic damages, it is likely that some trial courts will apply this Court’s reasoning to personal injury medical malpractice cases as well.
Because of the limits for noneconomic damages, it became cost prohibitive for plaintiff’s personal injury lawyers to seek relief for someone too young or too old to work. Why should those persons be entitled to any less than someone fully employed?
Texting + driving = bad things happen. My husband, a twenty year veteran DUI officer in St. Petersburg, Florida shows me gruesome car accident photos now and again that help keep me in line. As a result, I run less red lights that still look orange to me, and I try to avoid certain behaviors while driving, including texting.
But I was surprised to learn that texting while driving is much much worse than drinking and driving. Did you know for instance that the five seconds you look at your phone to read or write a quick text, amounts to a football field of distance going 55 mph. I use the excuse that I only text at red lights or I pull over. But really, how many times do I finish typing or reading the sentence I started, while I accelerate when the light turns green. It would not take much more than a second or two for a pedestrian or bicyclist to move in front of me while I’m still looking down foot pressed against the accelerator. I am also very guilty of writing three words or less while driving. Still takes five seconds to do that. Meantime a football field has passed by.
Be a good example for your kids. 48% of young people say they see adults regularly texting while driving. That’s no different than getting drunk off your &^% and getting behind the wheel. In fact it’s eight times worse according to statistics.
On behalf of our Florida clients with BP oil spill claims we are pleased about a recent victory, but the fight is still underway. The well known BP oil spill settlement agreement reached in mid-2012 shortly before trial resulted in a settlement claims procedures and formulas that were intended to simplify matters of evidentiary proof — has now resulted in two different appeals with two different results. Although the recent January 10, 2014 appellate decision ruled against BP, they have not yet given up Bloomberg reports.
Two different three judge panels from the same appellate court have now ruled upon BP’s objections to the settlement claims payout process. One panel ruled for BP last month and directed the local trial level judge to modify the procedures to address certain concerns. The second panel, as recently as January 10, 2014 ruled that the settlement agreement was valid and would proceed.
But make no mistake, this January 10, 2014 decision is a huge victory for the plaintiffs seeking economic damages to their businesses as a result of the oil spill. Especially in the Tampa Bay region, where it is difficult to show a direct causal link when oil didn’t slosh up on our doorsteps. But speaking to many of my clients, they are convinced that the tourists stopped coming, and this impact trickled down to all aspects of the economy. Many went out of business entirely because their margins weren’t enough to handle the losses.
Just as our Tampa Bay, Florida BP oil spill claims are heading toward the finish line, the rules are changing. We believe the new narrower guidelines will likely have a larger impact on our Florida based claims due to the increased distance from the oil spill than states such as Louisiana. Like many of our Florida counterparts, our law firm began filing claims early in the year. Because of the volume of claims received in the Spring of 2013, the estimated payout time increased from what was 60-90 days to 6-9 months. Now lossess will be re-evaluated under the new rules as a result of last week’s hearing.
We just started receiving payout notices on our first round of claims. Now I expect there to be a further delay due to a ruling in BP’s favor on an appeal of the claims administrator’s interpretation of certain key words such as “revenue” and “earnings”. It is expected to narrow the definition to exclude what is broadly called “illegitimate” claims. The problem is what determines an “illegitimate” claim versus one that the client appears to have had signiticant business losses during the relevant time period but cannot prove the exact cause of the loss.
Last week a New York Times article explained that a federal appellate court entered an injunction to delay existing and new claims and may even award refunds to BP for previous claims paid out that cannot show a causal link to the oil spill. The ruling directs the lower court to tailor make a narrow injuction to address these changes. For those who have recently received checks, you might want to consider holding onto the money until some more information is revealed about any clawback effect of the refund language.
The new foreclosure bill that went into effect in Florida July 1, 2013 will be a trap for the unwary once the mortgage companies get their cases together and start to file foreclosure lawsuits under the new law. Thy’ve started trickling in, but not enough yet to gain any real publicity on the new procedures.
I’m speaking mostly of the new order to cause procedures. Basically, homeowners who send in their own responses without meeting specific criteria of presenting verified defenses will be caught off guard by the Judge granting final judgment at the first hearing within 60 days of service. And a sale date scheduled 30 days later. For a Florida populace used to months or years going by with no activity, having a sale date in 90 days or less will be a shock.
And once a final judgment is entered at the first hearing, it is very difficult if not impossible to try to get that set aside.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s position is that they will not agree to a principal reduction in a mortgage modification. So our Florida foreclosure defense and bankruptcy clients are out of luck when their home is worth a lot less than the balance owed. This is their position even after a homeowner has filed bankrutpcy and is no longer personally liable for the underlying debt.
However, a new Director may be appointed to head the FHA soon. And if that happens, principal reductions may soon follow. The nominee, Mel Watts, is presently a member of the House of Representatives. While it is not certain that he would permit principal writedowns, it is something that at least is under consideration. HUD Secretary, Shaun Donovan is asking that bankers support Mr. Watts as FHA Director and to begin the process of winding down Fannie and Freddie. Fannie and Freddie have been responsible for more the 90% of the home mortgage market since the mortgage meltdown.
The current FHA director, Edward DeMarco, is against permitting principal writedowns for GSEs for any loan modifications.
Reboot Your Life: Tampa Student Loan and Bankruptcy Attorney Blog