Class Action Brought Against Morgan Drexen

The Heenan Law Firm recently filed a class action on behalf of a Fromberg, Montana couple against Morgan Drexen, Inc., as reported in the Billings Gazette:

Fromberg couple sues debt settlement company

CLAIR JOHNSON Of The Gazette Staff | Posted: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 4:30 pm

A Frpmberg couple who tried to settle a credit card debt claim they got ripped off by a company they hired to help them.

Josh and Tamee Ward allege in a federal civil lawsuit the defendant, Morgan Drexen Inc., a Nevada corporation based in Anaheim, Calif., violated racketeering laws and the Credit Repair Organizations Act.

The suit, filed Dec. 22 in U.S. District Court in Billings, alleges thousands of other people nationwide were misled and defrauded like the Wards and seeks to be a class action case.

Morgan Drexen has “actively conspired’’ to avoid laws that apply to debt settlement companies and has “engaged in the unauthorized practice of law,’’ the complaint said.

Morgan Drexen uses “a deceptive and predatory scheme to enrich themselves at the expense of financially vulner-able consumers by charging exorbitant rates to ‘negotiate’ unsecured debts, the consequence of which is that creditors don’t get paid and defendants’ ‘clients’ are left with destroyed credit,’’ the complaint said.

The Wards wanted to pay their debt and that’s why they hired what they thought was a professional company to help them, said Billings lawyer John Heenan, who represents the Wards. “They think there’s a lawyer involved, but not really.’’

The Wards paid the company more than $1,700 over more than a year, and none of the money went to the creditor, Heenan said.

Morgan Drexen did not return a call seeking comment.

Morgan Drexen is headed by Walter Ledda and does business throughout the country. In 2004, the Federal Trade Commission required Ledda to pay $1.3 million to settle an enforcement action against a group of companies and individuals fronted by the “National Consumer Council,’’ a purported nonprofit debt counseling organization, the complaint and FTC records said. The council solicited customers through aggressive telemarketing and direct mail advertising that falsely promised free debt counseling.

After the FTC action, Ledda formed Morgan Drexen to continue the same scheme, the complaint said.

The agency also is investigating Morgan Drexen after receiving hundreds of consumer complaints, the suit said.

Morgan Drexen claims to provide “legal support services’’ to debt negotiation lawyers and has customers contract with a California law firm called Howard Nassiri, the complaint said. Morgan Drexen allegedly uses the law firm and so-called “associate’’ lawyers in other states to illegally practice law and debt negotiation services.

Howard Nassiri, which uses the same Anaheim address as Morgan Drexen, is not named as a defendant in the suit.

“Under this scheme consumers purportedly hire lawyers to negotiate and settle their debts when in truth the lawyers then delegate the debt management and negotiating functions to  Morgan Drexen,’’ the complaint said. The arrangement enables Morgan Drexen to avoid licensing and bonding requirements in most states, including Montana, the suit alleges.

To settle credit card debts, consumers will pay a firm to negotiate a settlement with creditors who agree to accept a lesser amount.

Debt settlement can be a valuable service, Heenan said. Montana has laws that regulate the fees to strike a balance with what companies can charge and to make sure they don’t take advantage of customers, he said.

In the Wards’ case, the couple paid Morgan Drexen  and Howard Nassiri more than $1,700 “in exchange for no tan-gible benefit whatsoever,’’ the complaint said.

The Wards have three young children and struggle financially, the complaint said. Before they married, Josh Ward had a $2,000 credit card debt. A debt buyer purchased the debt, sued Josh Ward for the face value and won a judgment.  The debt buyer tried to collect by garnishing the Wards’ bank account.

Within two weeks, in June 2008, the couple got an unsolicited call from a Morgan Drexen representative and they hired the firm. Based on the couple’s overall debt of $5,125, the Wards would save $133 on the debt by making monthly payments of $128 to Morgan Drexen for 39 months. In exchange, Morgan Drexen charged more than $2,500 in fees, which was more than 2,000 percent of the savings, the suit said.

Morgan Drexen withdrew $174.47 monthly from the Wards’ bank account. The money was supposed to be held in trust to pay the couple’s creditors, but it first went to Morgan Drexen’s fees, not the creditors, the suit said.

When the Wards spoke to the Montana “associate’’ attorney, Blaine Bradshaw in Drummond, they were advised to call the creditor’s attorney to negotiate their  debt and told to direct further questions to Morgan Drexen, the suit said. Bradshaw is not a defendant in the suit.

In  September, the Wards ended their agreement with Morgan Drexen and the California and Montana lawyers and demanded the money supposedly being held in trust. Howard Nassiri sent the couple a $593 refund check, which was  “a fraction’’ of the money the Wards paid to Morgan Drexen, the suit said.

While being represented by Morgan Drexen, the Wards had their bank accounts garnished and were forced to pay post-judgment fees because the money they thought was being used to pay off their debts was being kept instead by Morgan Drexen, the complaint said.

The suit seeks a jury trial and an unspecified actual, statutory and punitive damages and attorney fees.

Purchasing Uninsured and Underinsured Insurance Provides Critical Protection

Montana drivers are required to maintain a very low minimum liability insurance ($25,000) for injuries they cause to other motorists.  Some drivers disregard the law and maintain no insurance at all.  If a person with little or no insurance causes serious personal injury to you or a loved one, they may have little or no resources to cover expensive medical treatments and care.  We have seen a rash lately of people with serious injuries who were struck by motorists with no insurance or low policy limits who are now faced with mounting medical bills.  When purchasing or renewing your car insurance policy, tell your insurance agent you want to purchase enough uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage to make sure you and your family are protected.  (We recommend at least $100,000 of each.)

Court Grants Preliminary Approval to D.A. Davidson Settlement

The Heenan Law Firm, which brought and has served as co-lead counsel of the putative class action data breach lawsuit against D.A. Davidson, announces that the federal court has granted preliminary approval to the settlement reached between the parties.  More information about the D.A. Davidson settlement is available at www.DADSettlement.com.  A more detailed description of the settlement, as reported by the Billings Gazette, is described below.

CLAIR JOHNSON Of The Gazette Staff | Posted: Monday, August 3, 2009 7:20 pm

D.A. Davidson & Co. of Great Falls has settled a federal class-action lawsuit over clients’ information that was compromised by a computer hacker.

Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull has given preliminary approval to a proposed settlement agreement that could affect an estimated 226,000 current and former customers. About 40 percent of the customers, or 90,000 people, live in Montana. A hearing for final approval is set for Nov. 12.

The data security breach occurred about Dec. 20, 2007, when a D.A. Davidson database of confidential personal and financial information of current and former clients was hacked by someone using sophisticated techniques. The company learned of the problem on Jan. 16, 2008, and immediately contacted law enforcement and other regulators and hired a forensic security consultant to investigate.

Although D.A. Davidson was prepared notify its clients and former clients of the breach almost immediately, it delayed notice for several days at law enforcement’s request, the settlement said.

The hacker did not gain access to the company’s operating systems or account information. No trading accounts were affected, the company said.

The settlement is the result of more than a year of negotiations between the parties from two initial lawsuits and one filed in May in federal court.

Under the deal, D.A. Davidson will continue to make available at its own expense a credit monitoring program that monitors customers’ credit reports daily and alerts them of indicators of possible identity theft. So far, nearly one-fourth of the class members, or 50,000 people, have enrolled in the monitoring program.

The settlement also makes available up to $750,000 to reimburse class members who can prove losses, with a limit of $10,000 per member. For those enrolled in the credit monitoring program, the agreement makes up to $250,000 available for reimbursement of expenses not covered by the program.

Class members will need to file a claim to prove their losses or expenses, but the procedure is less stringent than would be required if the claims were litigated, the agreement said. The claim procedure also includes a streamlined dispute resolution arrangement.

Harassing Collection Contacts to Neighbors and Relatives are Illegal

John Heenan was interviewed by the Billings Gazette regarding a debt collector’s contacts with the newspaper reporter, improperly asking her to “deliver a message” to her neighbor about a debt. The full text of the story is below.

Scams du jour

This bill-collection practice is illegal, but that didn’t stop Chrysler Financial from cold-calling me on a rare June afternoon when I was home on a workday after working an early shift.

Like most telemarketers, she asked for me by name, “Is Jan Falstad there?”

Always suspicious of telemarketing calls, I asked who was calling. She gave me a name and said she was trying to “get a message” to one of my neighbors.

Incredulously, I realized that this Chrysler caller was trying to use me to help them collect a debt. When I asked her if that was her motive, she denied it and said, “We’re just trying to get him to call us back.”

I told the caller I had no business relationship with Chrysler, that I was on the federal “Do Not Call” list and that meant her call was breaking federal law.

Finally, my anger rising, I said that I had no intention of helping Chrysler collect a debt and hung up.

Calling friends and neighbors to try to embarrass someone into paying a debt is a common, but illegal, practice under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, according to Billings attorney John Heenan.

Under this federal law, creditors can contact third parties only to verify the debtor’s contact information, like address and telephone number. Usually they already have that information, Heenan said.

“At that point it becomes per se harassment or deception,” he said. “They’re contacting you to embarrass him and to co-opt you into the debt-collection process, which invades your own right to privacy.”

But Amber Gowen, spokeswoman for Chrysler Financial at headquarters in Farmington Hills, Mich., said her company sometimes has to ask for help to try to reach a debtor.

“It is our policy that when we do talk to a third-party, we are extremely careful not to violate anyone’s privacy or divulge information that we are precluded by law from sharing with others,” she said. “This action is legal and permissible and a common practice in the industry.”
http://www.billingsgazette.com/business/article_e4d11b52-68f7-11de-81e1-001cc4c002e0.html

Heenan Law Firm Recovers $311,000 for Victim of Debt Collection Harassment: One of Largest Debt Collection Verdicts Ever

A federal jury this week awarded the victim of debt collection harassment $311,000 in compensatory and punitive damages against a North Dakota debt collection law firm (Johnson, Rodenburg & Lauinger) who had sued him beyond the statute of limitations. The award is one of the highest ever in a debt collection harassment trial. John Heenan is proud to have helped his client achieve such a successful result.

FROM THE NEWSPAPER REPORT (http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2009/04/18/news/local/27-man.txt)

Man sues collector’s lawyers, wins lawsuit

By CLAIR JOHNSON
Of The Gazette Staff

A Laurel man with a disabling brain injury and no money told debt collector lawyers that the time limit for seeking payment had expired and that a suit had been dismissed before. But a North Dakota law firm sued him anyway, trying to collect a credit card debt on behalf of the creditor.

This time Timothy McCollough got mad. He hired a lawyer, got the suit dismissed and then sued the North Dakota law firm for violating debt collection laws.

$311,000 in damages

A federal jury agreed with McCollough and on Thursday awarded him $311,000 in damages after a three-day trial before U.S. Magistrate Judge Carolyn Ostby.

Billings attorney John Heenan, who represented McCollough, said the verdict sends a message: “Debt collector lawyers need to follow the rules in Montana.” McCollough stood up for the thousands of people getting sued by debt collection lawyers and who don’t know how to defend themselves, he said.

Attorney Fred Simpson of Missoula, representing Johnson, Rodenburg and Lauinger, the debt collector law firm, declined comment.

Unlawful litigation

McCollough sued the firm in 2007, alleging that it violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and related state law by engaging in abusive, unfair and unlawful debt collection litigation. The firm tried to seize on McCullough’s disabilities through the misuse and manipulation of the court system, the complaint said. The firm has about 50 employees in Fargo and Bismarck; it has no lawyers in Montana but has several licensed to practice in the state.

Ostby ruled in November that the firm had violated the federal law by demanding attorney fees not allowed by Montana law; by filing and continuing a lawsuit barred by the statute of limitations in Montana; and by serving on McCollough requests for information that were “an abusive, unfair and unconscionable means to attempt to collect a time-barred debt.”

The jury further found that the firm’s actions violated the Montana Unfair Trade Practices Act, were malicious prosecution and an abuse of process.

The jury awarded McCollough $250,000 for emotional distress, the statutory maximum of $1,000 for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and $60,000 in punitive damages.

The punitive award was the maximum allowed under Montana law, which caps damages at 3 percent of a company’s net worth, or about $2 million in this case, Heenan said.

Ostby will determine attorney fees to be paid to Heenan. Heenan also said he will seek to have the judge triple the $250,000 damage award as allowed by Montana consumer protection laws.

McCullough’s lawsuit stemmed from a credit card debt he owed to Chase Manhattan Bank from the 1990s.

McCullough suffered a head injury in 1990 when he was hit with an iron bar. The injury left him disabled and eventually he began receiving Social Security benefits, which are exempt from collections.

Nevertheless, McCullough testified, he worked with other credit card companies to pay his debts. Chase was the only company that wouldn’t work with him, he said.

The debt was sold to a collection company, CACV of Colorado, which sued him in Yellowstone County in 2005. McCullough responded himself, saying the five-year statute of limitations had expired, he had no money and had been harassed by Chase. The case was dismissed.

Two years later, the North Dakota firm, on behalf of CACV, sued McCullough for $9,800, which included about $6,000 in interest and attorney fees.

Getting served a second time angered and frustrated McCollough.

“I was being shoved around,” he said. “I don’t like bullies. I never have. I got mad. I’m still mad.”

Billings attorney James Patten testified that he reviewed cases in which the North Dakota firm sued. The firm gets default judgments in 90 percent of its cases, which are judgments in its favor when a defendant doesn’t respond, he said. Only about 10 percent of the defendants get lawyers or represent themselves.

Johnson, Rodenburg and Lauinger filed about 2,700 lawsuits against Montana residents during an 18-month period ending about mid-2008.

“I think it’s a factory,” Patten said. “They are mass producing complaints and mass producing default judgments, most of which don’t have the documents to back them up.”

The firm maintained that it had done nothing wrong. But Lisa Lauinger, a partner in the firm, testified that the McCullough case has prompted the firm to change its procedures and that it now requires more documentation from clients before filing suit.

Foreclosure Defense AP Article- “Produce the Note”

The AP issued an interesting article today: Homeowners’ Rallying Cry- Produce the Note.  The article discusses the increasing defense to foreclosure actions by affected homeowners- “produce the note.”  Through the mortgage lenders’ practice of “bundling” and “securitizing” multiple mortgage notes, selling and re-selling those “bundles”, as well as their sometimes sloppy document retention policies, these lenders are oftentimes put in the untenable position of being unable to produce the documents necessary to succeed on a foreclosure action.

Bud Hibbs’ New Book Empowers Consumers

Bud Hibbs, the longtime and accomplished Texas consumer advocate, has generously made his new book, “The American Credit System: Guilty until Proven Innocent,” available free online at his website: www.budhibbs.com.  The book teaches consumers how to deal with debt collectors and clean up their credit reports.  This is a very beneficial resource to those looking for help with debt collectors.  Bud’s website contains a wealth of information about virtually every major debt buyer and collector in the country.

Insurance Company Claim Tactics Exposed in New AAJ Report

The American Association for Justice has just released its original research report on insurance company tactics. Entitled “Tricks of the Trade: How Insurance Companies Deny, Delay, Confuse and Refuse”, the report details how insurance companies reward claims adjusters for denying claims and reap profits by denying as many claims as possible. The report is available here: http://www.justice.org/resources/InsuranceTactics.pdf

Fortunately, in Montana, insurance companies have statutory duties to act fairly and in good faith towards insureds and non-insureds. If you believe your claim has been improperly denied, or an insurance adjuster is handling your claim unfairly, give us a call or submit your claim confidentially online through the Heenan Law Firm website.

Hire an Attorney to Stop Debt Collector Harassment

What is the most effective way to stop abuse and harassment by debt collectors? Hire an attorney.

Unfortunately, debt collectors can resort to tactics which are abusive and unlawful. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires debt collectors to Under this federal law, it is illegal for a debt collector to:

• Communicate with your employer, relatives or friends about your debt unless the court has given the collector permission to do so.
• Contact you at work if the collector knows that your employer prohibits personal calls.
• Contact you at inconvenient times or places.
• Falsely represent the character, amount or legal status of a debt
• Threaten to take actions that are illegal or not intended.
• Use obscene or profane language.

Once you are represented by an attorney, all communications from the debt collector to you must stop. Hiring an attorney can therefore be one of the most effective ways to stop debt collector abuse.

Importance of hiring a Montana injury attorney

People often wonder whether it is necessary to hire an attorney after they’ve been injured in an accident.  Oftentimes it is not.  For instance, when the injuries are relatively minor, it may not make economic sense for you to hire an attorney.  However, if your injuries are serious, or if you are not recovering from your injuries, you should always seek the input of an attorney before attempting to settle your claim.  Why?  Insurance adjusters offer lower claims to unrepresented people. 

Its nothing malicious, its just a good attorney is able to put together a claim in such a way as to maximize the value of the case.  What does this mean?  An attorney gathers the relevant information, researches the applicable law, including the results of similar cases, and puts the information together in a compelling format.  The Heenan Law Firm handles personal injury cases on a contingency fee, meaning you pay a portion of the ultimate recovery. 

It almost always makes economic sense to hire an experienced injury attorney.  Think about it this way- would you rather have 100% of $1,000 handling the case yourself, or receive 2/3 of a $100,000 settlement? 

Unfortunately, I have seen too many times where people try to handle their own claim before seeing an attorney, only to find out they have done something to put their claim in jeopardy, or reduce their potential recovery.  Almost every personal injury attorney will review your case at no charge.  At the Heenan Law Firm, we honestly tell people whether they can recover more by hiring us or handling the case themselves.  In those instances where we don’t take the case, we still take the time to provide people with the tools they need to achieve the best results, at no charge to them.

If you are wondering if you should accept the insurance company’s offer and give up your rights, give us a call first.  We’ll honestly let you know your rights and options.