Showing posts with label Fraudulent Process Service. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fraudulent Process Service. Show all posts

Thursday, August 29, 2013

New York City is Not Kind to the Process Serving Industry!

NYC Process Servers - Regulations Run-Amok?


Some have argued that this is a success story.  But for the efforts and $ of NYSPPSA and NAPPS the number of out of business process servers and process serving agencies would be a lot higher.   If this is model of a successful effort by a NAPPS and NYSPPSA I would hate to see a failure. 

All kidding aside, this is a tragedy that was addressed by some smart well-meaning folks.  Unfortunately, the combination of a few large agencies that did commit sewer service and an environment where the DCA regulates anything that moves was too much to overcome.  It is likely that no amount of money would have made a difference. 
You can find copies of charges issued to process servers in NYC and settlements here.  Scary list of charges and settlements... Name a process server in NYC or an Agency they are probably on the DCA's list. 

by jeff karotkin

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Former process server gets 3 years for filing false court documents

UPDATE - Maurice Carroll sentenced to 3 years for filing false Service of Process affidavits in Las Vegas.  Though this story refers to Mr. Carroll as a former process server, the best I can tell is he was never properly licensed in the state of Nevada.


Monday, July 2, 2012

Technology is Modernizing Process Serving

This from InsideArm, an accounts recieveable managment association that caters to the consumer debt collection indsutry...

The industry’s leading process service companies are now deploying sophisticated technology and mobile devices to add substantive evidence that legal documents are properly served and that collections agencies and attorneys are providing defendants proper notice of legal proceedings. says Steve Carrigan of ABC Legal

http://www.insidearm.com/opinion/technology-is-modernizing-debt-collection-process-serving/ 

What do you think?  Is all this monitoring of process servers a good thing?   Later this month a process serving standards summit will be held in Denver to discuss the possible adoption of minimum industry standards for process servers serving consumer debt collection matters.   View the proposed standards here. http://www.processservingstandards.com/ 

by Jeff Karotkin

Monday, December 12, 2011

Process Servers Thrown Under the Buss?

This afternoon National Public Radio (NPR) did a story on so called "Debtors Prison".  The story describes how some creditors  are employing the threat of Debtors Prison to enforce consumer debt.   NPR appears to cover the issue fairly.  In response to the NPR story InsideARM (online Accounts Receivables Management resource for Collectors) pointed out that NPR used an anecdotal example to highlight a very complex issue. 

The InsideARM writer defending creditors/collectors and in the process attempted to divert blame for part of the problem by suggesting that Process Servers are part of the core problem.   Below is the quote from InsideARM story.

“Regulators and ARM industry decision makers have long known that the issue of process serving in collection suits needs to be addressed. The FTC held extensive hearings on the matter two years ago, and some states have moved to put their own rules in place to prevent such warrants from being issued.”

The link in the quote above is to a story InsideARM wrote in 2009 entitled "Key Figures Download on Process Servers and Legal Collection Issues".  

To listen to the NPR Story: 
 

Jeff H. Karotkin
Los Angeles, Ca
213 915-6235

Friday, April 1, 2011

New York Process Servers Granted Partial Restraining Order Against New Regulations

For those of you interested in or are following the developments in the city and state of New York as it relates to the Sewer Service fallout, the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) for the city of New York has published the new regulations that impose additional requirements on individual process servers and process serving agencies. 

Needless to say the New York State Professional Process Servers Association (NYSPPSA)  has mobilizing its members in an effort to minimized the impact of the proposed and adopted rules over the course of the last year.  To that end, NAPPS too has offered its support and financial assistance.  Due in part to the generous contributions NAPPS made financially (approximately $50,000.00) NYSPPSA was able to retain a law firm to file a restraining order in an effort to block or at least temporarily stop the implementation of the new regulations. 

Today NAPPS announced the following:
The New York State Professional Process Servers Association (NYSPPSA) was granted a partial restraining order on March 21 to allow the Association and the City of New York to continue negotiations over new regulations for professional process servers within the city limits.
For the full press release please click here.

If you are interested in reading the current version of the regulations I encourage you to visit the DCA website for a complete description of all the requirements.  The following are links to all the new reg's and the forms the DCA has posted on their website. 

New York City Licensing Law and New Rules
License Application for Agencies
License Application for Individuals
Process Serving Agency Background Information Form
Process Server Individual Background Information Form
Roster of Process Servers
Roster of Process Serving Agencies
Surety Bond Model Template
List of Bonding Companies
Excel Spreadsheet for Maintaining Electronic Records
Compliance Plan Affirmation
Process Server Individual Trust Fund Enrollment Form
Child Support Certification Form
Granting Authority to Act Affirmation

I went through them the other day and found myself wondering will the small and mid-sized agencies survive. Depending upon whether you are getting a license as an agency or an individual, there are as many as fourteen (14) forms to complete, hundreds if not thousands of dollars to be paid, bonds in the amount of 10K or 100K to obtain and countless new reporting requirements to comply with.  As if that were not enough, this version of the regulations do not even deal with the proposed GPS or electronic tracking requirement that the DCA will likely implement later this year.

In my humble opinion these regulations impose a significant challenge and/or barrier for everyone impacted but will most severely impact the solo  agencies and mid-sized agencies as well as independent process servers.  So much so, that unless NYSPPSA successfully stops or changes many of these requirements many of those folks will find themselves unable to comply and as a result will likely be forced out of business.  

As is typical in situations like this, those that created the current problem that resulted in these new regulations are not going to be the ones who suffer the consequences. 

posted by Jeff Karotkin

Friday, March 25, 2011

More Alleged Fraud In Florida


In two sworn Affidavits signed by licensed Process Server LIZ MILLS, she states that because she is concerned about her personal integrity and the integrity of her profession, and having therefore reviewed several documents that bear my name and alleged signature. 

“I have never attempted to serve anyone in Lehigh Acres, FL (Lee County) at any time.  I never signed the aforementioned document and the signature appearing on the document is unequivocally not mine.”
“I have also reviewed Returns of Service dated 1/3/09 for Jerry Berman and Heidi Berman.  I never signed the aforementioned documents in front of a Notary Public at any time.  The signatures on the Returns of Service dated 6/17/08 are unequivocally not mine.”

If both sworn statements are in fact true, one could easily conclude that what is alleged is far more than a clerical error on the part of the process serving agencies involved.  
 
To read the content of each Sworn Affidavit, click on each image.  

One can only hope that the truth will be found and if any crimes were committed that the offenders might be brought to justice.  

Posted by Jeff Karotkin

Friday, March 11, 2011

Process serving reform calls for renewed transparency, integrity and innovation

By Matt Massa - March 10, 2011

The last few months have been a distressing time for the mortgage service industry, partly due to some inexcusable and unacceptable process serving practices. While it is clear that some process servers have not lived up to the highest possible ethical standards in doing their jobs, the breakdown has been magnified as many process serving companies have washed their hands of indignities and claimed to have no responsibility for their errant, subcontracted process servers’ actions.


Yet where there is distress and disorder, there is opportunity for renewal. Substantive reform not only can correct both real and perceived problems, but also serve as an example for how service providers in diverse industries can better manage their vendor relationships.

Impact on housing economy

Allegations of sloppy and fraudulent practices have ranged from process servers lying about delivering foreclosure notices to homeowners, to legal documents used to seize homes that don’t even identify the lender claiming to hold the mortgage, to “robo-signers” approving documents without carefully reviewing them when foreclosing on homes. Such revelations dating back to late last year have led to a nationwide investigation by state attorneys general. While we don’t know the outcome of those investigations, even simple errors of omission in case detail from the bottom up could expose unhealthy processes to potential litigation, more bad press, and financial repercussions. The bottom line is that unethical practices will cost the industry in terms of reputation, revenues and continued chaos.

After alleged abuses made national headlines, major banks like JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 45.54 -2.19%) and Bank of America (BAC: 14.26 -2.26%) briefly halted their foreclosures to review their internal processes and those used by the law firms they hire. This hold – as well as any future interruptions during the course of ongoing investigations – impacts the daily costs that lenders have in carrying the default loan (lost interest, property maintenance, depreciation or risk, etc.). Operational overhead also adds pressure to the rest of the loan pipeline, including law firms and their vendors. Obviously, stalls in the process make it difficult to maintain economic balance.

When downstream vendors, of which process servers are just one example, cause a negative impact on upstream bottom line, it leads to a general breakdown in trust. The gut reaction is to replace vendors. In cases where a single vendor was used, the instinct is to replace it with several vendors to increase competitive innovation. Unfortunately, this typically requires more time for oversight and leads to greater inefficiency in performance (including learning curves), inconsistent communications and missed assumptions (toward potentially unexpressed expectations), and potentially more errors. Additional management time plus a greater number of vendors and processes naturally lead to increased total costs of sales for each case, therefore driving project overhead up and profit down for all parties involved.

Furthermore, the perception of malfeasance is contagious. When a mutual vendor, or even a client, is caught with their hand in the cookie jar, it is assumed to be a widespread issue. Similarly, when an industry colleague is accused of something, it is feared that all similar companies are engaging in the same behavior – adversely affecting the reputation of an entire industry.


Ensuring quality vendor relationships

Process serving companies – the majority of which are not guilty of malfeasance or responsible for this latest crisis – are wise to first volunteer transparency to help rebuild industry trust. But restoring integrity also must involve putting quantitative processes in place to ensure the RIGHT process serving professionals are hired. In addition, the remedy needs to include implementation of tangible systems to build confidence that those individuals are doing what they are supposed to do, even when no one is directly observing them on the job. Applicable systems and procedures include diligent screening of prospective process servers; implementing industry-standard quality control measures and processes; and ensuring that process servers possess sufficient knowledge about their profession and the proper licensing, as well as uphold personal, company and industry standards.

A quantitative approach to screening for people of character and integrity. If a company does not really, truly know who is handling its files, now is the time to find out. Our industry needs to ensure that only people of integrity who also greatly respect their trade are in the profession of serving documents. The way to do this is by adopting character-based processes for selecting candidates. It is imperative, for example, to ask potential employees and their references about dependability, honesty, thoroughness, discretion, creativity, flexibility and attentiveness. In addition, we must verify candidates’ track records for success, performance and loyalty, even through criminal or other background checks as appropriate.

Greater emphasis on preparing process servers for success. Ensuring success on the job starts with clearly establishing and communicating the standards, ethics and compliant conduct that define the profession. Next, it is vital to ensure, capture and leverage professional knowledge and experience through enhanced training. This involves proper use of technology, but also adherence to process serving laws, civil procedure codes, court-specific interpretations and requirements, shared best practices and standard operating procedures, as well as client-specific expectations.

To achieve unequivocal excellence and efficiency, without competitive bias, it is imperative that our industry adopt a universal certification/approval program for independent, professional process servers. The better trained and educated servers are, and the more standardized the material and knowledge, the less likely servers will stray from the standards of practice. Pay-for-perfection compensation systems also are a proven tool for helping workers stay invested in their work.

Implementing integrated, industry-standard quality control. At the bare minimum, process servers are supposed to make sure that the processes they follow are legitimate and executed in a manner according to set laws and regulations. But without proper checks and balances and quality control, the opportunities for cutting corners are magnified. Important to an overall strategy of restoring integrity to our industry is the use of technology that can help deter potential abuses. Readily available and proven tools include GPS, systematic flagging of multiple jobs at different addresses, suspicious time stamping protocols, and time tracking against distance projections. Process serving companies also should give 24-hour, unrestrained access to client files and real-time updates, as well as proactively invite client audits. Such tools and practices help to build much needed transparency into the process.

Using innovation to create a modern process serving environment. It’s time to reinvent the yardstick. Measuring process server success strictly on speed of service and completeness is outdated and irrelevant. Instead, law firms and their servicers should look for vendors dedicated to change and progression, as well as strive to bring diverse vendors together to help innovate and streamline processes. These forward-thinking companies are committed to creating lean environments including process improvement and innovation, continuously building better and more economic ways of getting the job done on target. Routinely matching – and sometimes surpassing – time and completeness goals is a byproduct of lean and efficient process execution. However, the real value of these progressive vendors is found in the little innovations – often aberrations – that improve the daily life of a case. These small enhancements ultimately provide economic efficiencies on total case costs, giving lift to firm/servicer profitability.

Our industry has surely suffered in the short term due to some callous mistakes by process serving agents who fall short of the high standards of professionalism and ethics that most of us in the industry continue to uphold. Now we must move forward by making tangible changes in how we hire, educate and train professionals who perform this critical function. We need a more enlightened climate of collaboration, transparency and integrity, as well as a renewed commitment to innovation. Those companies that resist the transition will be left behind and may risk keeping our entire industry under a cloud of suspicion filled with the sins of the past.

Matt Massa is the national operations director of Firefly Legal, a leading associate legal services company that specializes in process serving, traces and searches, face-to-face services, and court filing. With offices nationwide, the company partners with its clients to find solutions that are guided by collaboration, innovation and integrity.
 
Posted By Jeff Karotkin

Monday, February 7, 2011

Consumers Union Recommends Increased Oversight of the Service of Process

Consumers Union Report was issued last month (January 2011) that deals with alleged debt collection abuses. Process Servers and the service of process are mentioned in the report.

The report addresses many alleged abuses committed by the collection industry. Admittedly Process Servers are not the primary focus of the report, but once again the New York sewer service incidents are being called out as the reason for increased oversight of the process serving profession. However, one of the key recommendations by Consumers Union is to “increase oversight of the service of process” at a state and federal level.


I believe that even though it may feel like the right thing to do for those in power, more laws and regulations like those currently being imposed in NY are not necessary or useful. These new laws will only serve to drive many small and solo process servers out of business or force them to become part of larger companies in order to survive.


If the profession has any hope of stopping the kind of knee-jerk reaction like we are seeing NY, the profession should continue to watch the Federal Trade Commission’s activities
and recommendations and the activities of the newly formed agency Consumer Financial Protection Bureau who may have the authority to write new laws under the FDCPA to rein in alleged abuses.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

New York Attorney General Shuts Down Another Process Serving Company

In July of this year New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo filed a complaint against SERVES YOU RIGHT, INC and DAVID WARSHALL. The complaint alleged that the defendants engaged in fraudulently business practices, making false representations on affidavits of service throughout Long Island and New York City.

Seven days later, a Consent Order and Judgment was entered in this case permanently enjoining the defendants from being involved in or being employed by any process serving companies or process serving activities. SERVES YOU RIGHT, INC was required to immediately cease operations within 60 days of the Order. DAVID WARSHALL was also ordered to pay a fine to the NY AG's office in the amount of $50,000.00 within ten (10) days of the order.

The complaint can be found at this link. The Consent Order and Judgment can be found at this link.

This action is part of an ongoing investigation by Attorney General Cuomo into unlawful debt collection practices. Since commencing the statewide initiative in May 2009, Cuomo has shut down more than a dozen debt collection and affiliated process serving companies and required others to reform their deceptive practices.

Monday, July 12, 2010

FTC Final Report of Debt Collection Industry

FTC Issues Report on Reforming Debt Collection Litigation and Arbitration; Recommends Steps to Protect Consumers and Repair a Broken System


Process Servers are called Out as Part of the Broken System.   The Report Recommends Four Steps to Help Insure Proper Notice.   The Recommendations though well meaning, will only serving to make the act of service of process more cumbersome and expensive.  
They will not stop those that chose to break the law regardless of the rules and regulations.   

A new Federal Trade Commission report concludes that the system for resolving consumer debt collection disputes is broken, and recommends significant litigation and arbitration reforms to improve efficiency and fairness to consumers.

The report, “Repairing A Broken System: Protecting Consumers in Debt Collection Litigation and Arbitration,” reflects information gathered at roundtable discussions the FTC held throughout the country in 2009, as well as public comments and the FTC’s experience in debt collection matters. The roundtables followed a February 2009 report that identified some concerns with debt collection litigation and arbitration, but concluded that more information was needed about certain debt collection litigation and arbitration practices before further recommendations could be made.

The Commission therefore recommends state and local governments consider making a variety of reforms to service of process, pleading, and court rules and practices to increase the ability of consumers to defend or otherwise participate in debt collection litigation.

The FTC’s 2009 report found that debt collection litigation raised concerns about collectors failing to properly notify consumers of suits they have filed, collectors filing suits based on insufficient evidence of indebtedness, courts frequently granting default judgments against consumers who do not appear or defend themselves, collectors seeking to recover on debts beyond the statute of limitations, and banks freezing funds in bank accounts that are exempt from garnishment by law. In its new report, the Commission’s principal recommendations to address these concerns in litigation are:

States should consider adopting measures to make it more likely that consumers will defend themselves in litigation, decreasing the prevalence of default judgments.

Service of process may be inadequate or improper for many reasons. For example, process may fail to reach the consumer if it is delivered to an old or otherwise incorrect address or it is delivered to the wrong person, such as someone with a similar name. Some process servers may simply not serve the consumer but falsely assert that they have done so.


States should require collectors to include more information about the alleged debt in their complaints.

The FTC committed to closely monitor debt collection arbitration and evaluate whether creditors and arbitration forums provide consumers with meaningful choice and a fair process. The Commission also said that, as appropriate, it will report its views on new debt collection arbitration models to policymakers, industry, consumer groups, and the general public.

The FTC believes that reforms such as those discussed in the report should be made to ensure that the debt collection litigation and arbitration systems adequately protect consumers without unduly burdening the debt collection system, which helps to keep credit prices low and helps to ensure that consumer credit remains widely available.
The Commission vote to issue the report was 5-0. Commissioner Julie Brill issued a concurring statement in which she urged Congress to enact a temporary ban on the mandatory arbitration of consumer debt collection disputes. “Such a ban should remain in place until the arbitration process can be shown to be fair, transparent, and as affordable as traditional litigation, and until consumers have a meaningful opportunity to opt out of pre-dispute arbitration without losing access to the credit services they seek,” she said.

Many consumer advocates and judges who adjudicate debt collection cases stated that inadequate or improper service occurs frequently. One local official reported that her agency’s comprehensive investigation of process servers in New York City revealed that “many are not performing service. They are filling out false affidavits of service. They are not going to the addresses. They are not sufficiently checking the addresses.” A Chicago judge explained similarly that one of his colleagues had conducted a “spot audit” of one process server and found that he “claimed to be in areas thirty miles apart in the Chicago-land area within minutes . . . . And we [asked,] ‘Is he Superman?’”

Nevertheless, the very high rate at which consumers do not appear and the service of process problems documented in some jurisdictions give the Commission a sufficient basis to conclude that efforts to improve service of process in debt collection litigation would benefit consumers in many locations.

An electronic version of the report text is available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2010/07/debtcollectionreport.pdf









Friday, April 23, 2010

Collectors and Process Servers Impacted by New Regulations in New York

The New York City Council adopted and published a new set of rules governing Debt Collectors that became effective April 24, 2010.

These new rules were promulgated by the same body that took on Sewer Service in New York that resulted in arguably the strictest regulations on private process servers in the United States.

Normally I would not write about rules effecting the collectors in New York, but these rules among other things place strict requirements on the collectors to maintain records of the activities of the process servers they contract with.

The following are the relevant sections of the new rules in New York City that will have an impact of process servers that work for debt collectors covered by these rules:

(3) A record of all cases filed in court to collect a debt. Such record shall include, for each case filed, the name of the consumer, the identity of the originating creditor, the amount claimed to be due, the civil court index number and the court and county where the case is filed, the date the case was filed, the name of the process server who served process on the consumer, the date, location and method of service of process, the affidavit of service that was filed and the disposition for each case filed. Such record shall be filed in a manner that is searchable or retrievable by the name, address and zip code of the consumer and the creditors who originated the debts that the debt collection agency is seeking to collect.

(4) The original copy of each contract with a process server for the service of process, and copies of all documents involving traverse hearings relating to cases filed by or on behalf of the debt collection agency. Such records should be filed in a manner that is searchable by the name of the process server.

The entire rules can be found at the following link: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dca/downloads/pdf/debt_collection_agency_law_rules.pdf



Saturday, February 27, 2010

New York City Council Seeks to Crack Down on Process Servers Who Lie

Yesterday's New York Times published an article on the topic of Sewer Service. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/nyregion/27sewer.html


For those that have been following this developing story, you know this is the second effort in recent months by the NYC Council to regulate process servers in NYC. The first effort was unsuccessful primarily because the last session of the council ran out of time to pass the Bill.

This time around in a new session the sponsor has come back with an even stronger effort to further regulate private process servers who operate in the city and who forward process into the city even though they might reside outside the city or even outside the state. The Bill if passed in its current for would require process serving agencies to maintain a $100,000.00 bond and process servers to maintain a $10,000.00 bond.

The Bill also requires process servers to have a GPS device or other so called real-time tracking so that the process server can prove that they were where they claimed to have been at the time of the attempt or service event.

Essentially this means that the process server’s affidavit is no longer good enough! It means that there is no presumption that what the process server is attesting to is factual.

I am told that in order to get a Bond in the amount of $100,000.00, the process serving agency must be credit worthy in at least that amount. I suspect that will eliminate many agencies from being able to comply should this Bill pass.

This bill is a severe over reaction to a problem that came to light when ONE rogue agency was found to have committed sewer service. This bill is an attack on all in the profession and it must be fought and defeated.

The New York Professional Process Servers Association needs your support fighting this measure.

Please consider donating to the effort to fight this measure. You can do so by going to http://www.nysppsa.org/Legislative%20Fund%20form.pdf

The bill can be found here .

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Process Server Pleads Guilty to Fraud, Faces 1-Year Prison Term

The owner of a Long Island process serving business that put thousands of New Yorkers at risk of default by failing to notify them that they had been sued pleaded guilty Friday to felony fraud, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced Friday.

William Singler, the president of Lynbrook, N.Y.-based American Legal Process, will receive a jail term of one year for the Class E felony of first-degree scheme to defraud. [Read the criminal complaint (pdf).]

When Singler was arrested in April, his attorney, Corey Winograd of Winograd & Winograd in Manhattan, told the New York Law Journal that his client acknowledged that some of his process servers had not done their job, but claimed his client had not been aware of what was happening.

"He trusted those process servers," Winograd said last spring. "We now know today that some process servers breached that trust."


But in an appearance Friday before Acting Supreme Court Justice Alan L. Honorof of Nassau County, Singler admitted he had signed phony affidavits of service, swearing that court papers had been served on defendants in debt collection suits even though he knew many of his employees had broken the law.

Winograd, in an interview after the plea, said his client is
"taking responsibility for what occurred at his company and the actions of the many process servers who worked for American Legal Process, and he's looking forward to putting this episode behind him and moving on with his life."


As a result of Singler's fraud, many defendants had costly judgments entered against them, according to a statement by Cuomo.

Cuomo said Singler's crime
"impacted lives and caused financial hardship for thousands of New Yorkers,"
many of whom had their bank accounts frozen, their wages garnished and liens put on their homes.

Still pending is a civil action in Erie County against Singler and American Legal Process.

Filed in April, the suit, Cuomo v. Zmod Process Corp., dba American Legal Process, 4228-09, contends that between January 2007 and October 2008, Singler and American Legal Process
"persistently and repeatedly failed to serve New Yorkers in the manner prescribed by law, and have filed, or caused to be filed, thousands of false affidavits of service representing that service was proper."


During this time, there were 13,040 instances in which 55 servers reported they had attempted to deliver papers to a defendant before receiving the documents, according to the felony complaint against Singler.

And on 3,512 occasions, employees of American Legal Process claimed they tried to serve documents, but in fact they would have to have served different defendants in separate locations at the same time, Cuomo said.

Employees also claimed to have made process-serving attempts that would have required them to drive more than 10,000 miles in a single day.

In addition to the civil and criminal actions against Singler, Cuomo brought suit in July against dozens of law firms and two debt collectors seeking to vacate 100,000 defaults throughout New York.

Filed in Erie County Supreme Court on behalf of Chief Administrative Judge Ann Pfau, the suit seeks to vacate all default judgments where the only evidence that a defendant received service notifying him of being sued was based on an affidavit from American Legal Process, Pfau v. Foster & Garbus (pdf), 2009-8236.

The parties are working to resolve the case, according to a spokesman for the Unified Court System.

Under CPLR §308, servers must try to deliver papers three times before being allowed to mail a copy of the suit or "nail" a copy to a defendant's door.

Singler is due to be sentenced on March 24.

Meanwhile, in a separate federal case filed at the end of December, a group of civil rights advocates accused a network of debt collectors, including the law firm of Mel S. Harris and Associates, of civil racketeering, deceptive business practices, and violating federal debt collection law.

Sykes v. Harris and Associates, LLC, 09-civ-8486, was filed on behalf of a class of defaulting lawsuit defendants by the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, MFY Legal Services Inc. and the law firm of Emery Celi Brinckerhoff & Abady. The suit claims the defendants used fraudulent debt collection practices to obtain tens of thousands of default judgments against New York residents.

The defendants in the case could not be reached for comment.


Republished with License 01-20-2010 - ALM - Noeleen G.Walder

Saturday, January 16, 2010

William Singler Owner of American Legal Process Guilty of Fraud

Singler plead guilty 1-15-10 in Nassau County Supreme Court to one count of first degree scheme to defraud, a class E felony. He is expected to be sentenced on March 24.

Singler admitted that he knew some of his employees didn't properly serve court papers the company was hired to deliver.


Singler broke the law and then lied to cover it up,” said Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. “It is not a victimless crime, but one that impacted lives and caused financial hardship for thousands of New Yorkers. Many had their bank accounts frozen, their wages garnished, and liens put on their homes, all because they were denied their day in court.”

It is being reported that he may get one year in jail. If true, I for one am outraged that someone that is responsible for such a terrible crime committed against thousands of people would only get a year in jail.

He single handedly tarnished the image of professional process servers around the world. I believe that the private process serving community needs to speak up and demand that he and all those that helped perpetrate the alledged crimes be held to account for their actions.  That includes the collection law firms that are alleged to have looked the other way when ALP claimed to have had such a high successful service rate.

Anyone in the collection food chain knows the type of results that ALP claimed to be achieving was impossible.

Full story http://bit.ly/5KSarS

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Class Action Lawsuit Alleges "Sewer Service" by Collectors & Process Servers

A New York Times article dated 12-31-09 chronicles the story of a New York family that learned of a judgment against them only after the Marshall's office attempted to enforce the judgment.

In October 2009, a New York consumer rights law firm filed lawsuit alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act in the United States District Court of New York in the Southern District case number 09-CIV-8486 (DC). The complaint was filed against a variety of defendants representing the entire collections chain starting with debt buyers, the law firms they retained and the process serving agency they contracted with.


This case stems from the alleged massive fraud that the NY Attorney General's office is currently investigating. The AG's office filed its own lawsuit earlier this year. The AG's office is attempting to have approximately 100,000 judgments thrown-out because they allege the process serving agency responsible for serving the complaints committed "Sewer Service".


If you want to be blown away by what allegedly took place you need to read the AG's complaint against the process serving agency and approximately 35 collection law firms. In one instance it is alleged that a process traveled over 1000 miles in one day serving complaints all over NY State, many at the exact same time they claimed to have served other defendants.


On December 28, 2009, the complaint filed in the federal court was amended by the plaintiffs making it a Class Action lawsuit. The plaintiff firm claims it could represent over 100,000 victims of judgments won since 2006.


Needless to say this saga continues to cast a negative light upon Debt Buyers, Consumer Collection law firms and Process Servers nationwide. One can only hope that those that are responsible for the alleged fraud in New York are brought to justice.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Final FTC Roundtable Discsussion to be held 12-4


The final Federal Trade Commission Roundtable Discussion is being held later this week in Washington D.C. The event is open to the public and can also be viewed live via webcast.

Once again the roundtable includes a session focused on the Service of Process. The process serving profession is fortunate to have Larry Yellon on the panel representing NAPPS. The session dealing with the service of process is on the agenda first thing the morning of 12-4-09.  The published topics related to the service of process are as follows:



For detailed information about the session, the speaker bios, the full agenda and instructions on how to view the session live via webcast please visit the follow FTC webpage.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

FTC Posts Draft Agenda for the 3rd Roundtable Session




The third session of the Federal Trade Commission's Roundtable discussions on “Protecting Consumers in Debt Collection Litigation” is set for December 4th in Washington D.C.


The following is the Agenda:


9:00 Introductory Remarks


9:15 Initiating Suits: Service of Process and Consumer Participation

  •  Why aren’t more consumers defending against collection suits?


  •  To what extent are consumers failing to participate in collection suits because they were not served with process? What are the other reasons for failure to participate?


  •  What can courts and others do to increase consumer participation in debt collection suits?


  •  What actions should lawmakers, the courts, the FTC, the industry, or others take to address service of process and consumer participation issues?
    There are other topics on the agenda but I thought I would highlight the section that specifically relates to the service of process. The full agenda can be found here.

     
    I understand that NAPPS will have a representative on the panel.



Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Fraudulent Service of Process being addressed in New York City

New York City Councilman Garodnick Announces Reform
of Fraudulent Process Service.





Garodnick Announces Reform of Fraudulent Process Service


In the aftermath of Attorney General Andrew Cuomo suing 35 law firms for illegally failing to notify New Yorkers that they were being sued over old debts, Council Member Garodnick announced legislation to protect consumers from fraudulent process service.

Each year, debt collectors suing in New York City Civil Court collect $800 million in judgments. In 80 to 90 percent of those cases, New Yorkers never realize that they have been sued — frequently because the process servers hired by the debt collection law firm never deliver their court papers. The result is a default judgment, which can be used to freeze a bank account and garnish wages, and which ruins a person’s credit.

Council Member Garodnick’s bill would rein in process servers by requiring that they, and the agencies they work for, provide the City a surety bond, or insurance, in order to be licensed to do business in New York City.

“Everyone is responsible for repaying their debts—nothing here changes that,” Council Member Garodnick said. “But our neighbors deserve a chance to defend themselves in court from debt claims, which are often frivolous. It doesn’t help anyone for our neighbors to be put into financial purgatory over debts they never actually incurred.”