Justia.com Opinion Summary: Plaintiff appealed the district court’s dismissal of his civil action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. 1692. The district court concluded that plaintiff’s claim was covered by the FDCPA but that he did not allege acts that violated the FDCPA. Accepting plaintiff’s allegations as true and construing them in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the statement on the May 2009 notice that BAC was plaintiff’s “creditor” was a false representation and was made by a “debt collector” as defined by section 1692a. Therefore, the complaint stated a claim upon which relief could be granted under the FDCPA and the judgment of the district court was vacated and remanded.
Half of largest metro areas post annual increases in foreclosure activity
Ten of the nation’s 20 largest metro areas by population documented year-over-year increases in foreclosure activity in February, led by the Florida cities of Tampa (64 percent increase) and Miami (53 percent increase).
The 10 metro areas with increases were all on the East Coast or in the Midwest, while most of the metro areas with year-over-year decreases in foreclosure activity were in the West, led by Seattle (59 percent decrease) and Phoenix (43 percent decrease).
The metro areas with the highest foreclosure rates among the 20 largest were Riverside-San Bernardino in California (one in 166 housing units), Atlanta (one in 244), Phoenix (one in 259), Miami (one in 264) and Chicago (one in 302).
Nevada, California, Arizona post top state foreclosure rates
Foreclosure activity in Nevada reached a 58-month low in February, but the state still posted the nation’s highest state foreclosure rate for the 62nd straight month. One in every 278 Nevada housing units had a foreclosure filing during the month, more than twice the national average.
California posted the nation’s second highest state foreclosure rate in February although the state’s foreclosure activity hit a 51-month low. A total of 48,422 California properties had a foreclosure filing during the month, one in every 283 housing units.
Arizona foreclosure activity increased on a monthly basis for the second month in a row boosted by a 33 percent jump in scheduled foreclosure auctions. One in every 312 Arizona housing units had a foreclosure filing during the month, the nation’s third highest state foreclosure rate.
One in every 331 Georgia housing units had a foreclosure filing in February, the nation’s fourth highest state foreclosure rate, and one in every 341 Florida housing units had a foreclosure filing during the month, the nation’s fifth highest state foreclosure rate. Florida default notices increased on a year-over-year basis for the fourth straight month in February, and overall Florida foreclosure activity was up on an annual basis for the second straight month.
Other states with foreclosure rates ranking among the top 10 were Illinois (one in 398 housing units), Michigan (one in 433), South Carolina (one in 489), Ohio (one in 543) and Wisconsin (one in 596).
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
NATURE AND SUMMARY OF THIS ACTION
1. This lawsuit seeks to have Defendants clean up the mess they created in
Guilford County’s public property records and to hold Defendants accountable for their unfair and deceptive trade practices.
COUNTY OF GUILFORD GUILFORD COUNTY, ex rel. JEFF L.
THIGPEN, GUILFORD COUNTY REGISTER OF DEEDS,
LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES, INC.;
DOCX, LLC; LPS DEFAULT SOLUTIONS,
INC.; MERSCORP HOLDINGS, INC.;
REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; WELLS
FARGO BANK, N.A.; WELLS FARGO
HOME MORTGAGE, INC.; BANK OF
AMERICA, N.A.; JPMORGAN CHASE
BANK, N.A.; CHASE HOME FINANCE
LLC; EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION;
MIDFIRST BANK; SAND CANYON
CORPORATION; CITI RESIDENTIAL
LENDING, INC.; GREEN TREE
SERVICING, LLC; AMERIQUEST
MORTGAGE COMPANY; USAA
FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK; AMERICAN
HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC.;
MOREQUITY, INC.; U.S. BANK
EQUICREDIT CORPORATION OF
FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP.; ARGENT
MORTGAGE COMPANY, LLC; THE
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON; THE
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST
COMPANY, N.A.; CAPITAL ONE, N.A.;
FIRST FRANKLIN FINANCIAL CORP.;
NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION; and
WEICHERT FINANCIAL SERVICES;
Rep. Jud McMillin, R-Brookville, speaks on a motion to fine absent Democrats at the Statehouse in Indianapolis, Thursday, Jan. 19, 2012.
A Republican member of the Indiana General Assembly withdrew his bill to create a pilot program for drug testing welfare applicants Friday after one of his Democratic colleagues amended the measure to require drug testing for lawmakers.
“There was an amendment offered today that required drug testing for legislators as well and it passed, which led me to have to then withdraw the bill,” said Rep. Jud McMillin (R-Brookville), sponsor of the original welfare drug testing bill.
The Supreme Court ruled drug testing for political candidates unconstitutional in 1997, striking down a Georgia law. McMillin said he withdrew his bill so he could reintroduce it on Monday with a lawmaker drug testing provision that would pass constitutional muster.
“I’ve only withdrawn it temporarily,” he told HuffPost, stressing he carefully crafted his original bill so that it could survive a legal challenge. Last year a federal judge, citing the Constitution’s ban on unreasonable search and seizure, struck down a Florida law that required blanket drug testing of everyone who applied for welfare.
McMillin’s bill would overcome constitutional problems, he said, by setting up a tiered screening scheme in which people can opt-out of random testing. Those who decline random tests would only be screened if they arouse “reasonable suspicion,” either by their demeanor, by being convicted of a crime, or by missing appointments required by the welfare office.
In the past year Republican lawmakers have pursued welfare drug testing in more than 30 states and in Congress, and some bills have even targeted people who claim unemployment insurance and food stamps, despite scanty evidence the poor and jobless are disproportionately on drugs. Democrats in several states have countered with bills to require drug testing elected officials. Indiana state Rep. Ryan Dvorak (D-South Bend) introduced just such an amendment on Friday.
“After it passed, Rep. McMillin got pretty upset and pulled his bill,” Dvorak said. “If anything, I think it points out some of the hypocrisy. … If we’re going to impose standards on drug testing, then it should apply to everybody who receives government money.”
Dvorak said McMillin was mistaken to think testing the legislature would be unconstitutional, since the stricken Georgia law targeted candidates and not people already holding office.
McMillin, for his part, said he’s coming back with a new bill on Monday, lawmaker testing included. He said he has no problem submitting to a test himself.
“I would think legislators that are here who are responsible for the people who voted them in, they should be more than happy to consent,” he said. “Give me the cup right now and I will be happy to take the test.”
Written by Pursuit Wire|03/12/2012|0 Comments
You remember that one court ruling that forced the FBI to shut down every GPS receiver they currently were using to track their suspects? well, one of the problems was that the FBI was unable to find the transmitters. But the same Supreme Court ruling that bars police from installing GPS technology to track suspects without first getting authorization for a judge is creating more “financial” problems for the FBI.
The agency has been forced deactivate its GPS tracking devices in some investigations, FBI director Robert Mueller said Wednesday.
Mueller told a congressional panel that the bureau has turned off a substantial number of GPS units and is using surveillance by agents instead.
“Putting a physical surveillance team out with six, eight, 12 persons is tremendously time intensive,” Mueller told a House Appropriations subcommittee. The court ruling “will inhibit our ability to use this in a number of surveillances where it has been tremendously beneficial.”
The Supreme Court voted unanimously in favor of the measure in January
California Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris during a visit last year to the East L.A. Community Corp. in Boyle Hights on a tour highlighting her work cracking down on unfair mortgage practices. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times)
By Alejandro Lazo
February 27, 2012, 2:55 p.m.
Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris in a letter asked the regulator of the government-controlled mortgage titans to halt foreclosures in California until the agency has completed a “thorough, transparent analysis of whether principal reduction is in the best interests of struggling homeowners as well as taxpayers.”
It is not the first time that Harris has tangled with the giants — last year she sued the two mortgage giants after they refused to answer subpoenas regarding their mortgage and foreclosure practices. That case remains pending.
Harris has also called on Edward DeMarco, the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency that regulates Fannie and Freddie, to step down, accusing him of not doing enough for borrowers.
Harris’ request for a foreclosure pause comes on the heels of a multistate mortgage settlement that will require the nation’s largest mortgage servicers to reduce principal for certain borrowers. California has secured $12 billion in principal reduction and short sales from those banks, but Fannie and Freddie are not part of that deal.
Harris’ office sees the two giants as key to getting the housing market back on track, estimating that more than 60% of outstanding loans in the Golden State are controlled by them. But DeMarco has resisted principal reductions, which is the writing-down of mortgages of borrowers, arguing that the results of those reductions are not worth the costs.
The FHFA has overseen Fannie and Freddie since the two mortgage giants were placed under government control in 2008 as the financial crisis picked up steam. Calls to the agency were not returned.