An October 13th, 2011 New York Law Journal article reported that the Federal Housing Finance Agency filed 13 of their lawsuits against some of the world’s largest financial institutions in the New York federal court . The agency additionally filed four in the New York state court and one in the Connecticut court system.
Court papers also revealed that four state court suits against Ally Financial Inc., Countrywide Financial Corp., Morgan Stanley and General Electric Co., were being moved to federal court in the Southern District of New York jurisdiction.
All 13 suits were filed for the large bank’s misrepresentation of the quality of the mortgage-backed securities provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It has been reported that the agency is suing 17 banks and some of these banks have now teamed up in an effort to have their cases dismissed or removed. The suits are all still in the early stages of trial.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania filed for bankruptcy against the wishes of both the mayor and Governor Tom Corbett, as reported by The New York Times in an October 12th, 2011 news article.
Harrisburg’s City Council apparently held a meeting discussing whether or not to declare the city bankrupt and after a 4-to-3 vote, the bankruptcy papers were filed. The paperwork reports the city to be in debt for over $400 million and claims a large amount of debt was acquired after creating a trash incinerator that failed.
The Council is pushing for a Chapter 9 bankruptcy. A Chapter 9 bankruptcy would allow municipalities to restructure their debts. Harrisburg is not the only large American city weighing the pros and cons of filing for bankruptcy. Just a few months around Jefferson County of Alabama sought for bankruptcy relief. Many experts are stating that they don’t believe the bankruptcy will actually go through, the biggest two reasons being that the Governor does not support it and most cities try to avoid it at all cost.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

After filing for bankruptcy the California energy company, Solyndra, struggles to restructure itself, as reported in an October 13th, 2011 New York Times article.
In an effort to help the company with its financial struggles the bankruptcy court handling the case approved the hiring of a new officer, R. Todd Neilson. Mr. Neilson previously served as the bankruptcy trustee for both the boxer Mike Tyson and the rapper Suge Knight.
The court appointed Mr. Neilson after the company’s president, Brian Harrison, resigned from his position on October 7th. Mr. Neilson will be working with the company’s officials in an effort to help the company deal with the financial struggles they are facing from filing for bankruptcy.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Two Queens’ attorneys are facing federal charges for their possible involvement in a mortgage fraud scheme that yielded roughly $25 million over the last ten years, as reported in an October 6th, 2011 news article.
Both attorneys were indicted by the Eastern District and are now facing the grand jury. The two allegedly worked with a real estate agent, two loan officers, and a buyer’s recruiter in an effort to obtain large mortgages based on false information.
The parties of the mortgage scheme would make a large profit off the commission and loan fees from the false mortgages obtained. It is reported that over the last ten years the parties have obtain fraudulent mortgages for around 30 properties, majority of which were located in Queens.
Both attorneys are facing federal charges, as well as, discipline from the New York State bar.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayern, LLP have over 30 years of combined experience on working with our clients on their bankruptcy case. We understand how overwhelming it can be and work hard to get the best result for our clients. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Citigroup’s vice president pleaded guilty to embezzlement charges as reported by the New York Law Journal in a September 7th, 2011 news article.
The Vice President admitted to embezzling over $22 million and agreed to turn over majority of his estate which includes real estate in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and New Jersey, and numerous luxury cars. The Eastern District U.S. Attorney reported that the estate turned over has an estimated worth of $16 million and will help recoup the money stolen by the Vice President.
According to the charges brought against the Vice President since taking the position in 2003 he has used his position to transfer funds from various company accounts to a cash account then forwarding the cash on to another bank account, which he used. In addition to forfeiting his profits, the vice president faces up to 30 years in a prison for bank fraud.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times published an editorial criticizing President Barack Obama for passing over Elizabeth Warren as director of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “Consumers vs. Banks,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 24, 2011.

Elizabeth Warren is a Harvard law professor and the main person behind the creation of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.). Congress created this bureau when it approved the Dodd-Frank law to overhaul financial regulations after the credit crisis. However, Ms. Warren was not nominated because she is seen very unfavorably by Republicans in Congress for being very outspoken against the financial industry. President Obama nominated instead Richard Cordray, a former Attorney General of Ohio
who has worked closely with Ms. Warren to build up the agency.

The editorial criticizes this decision, noting that nominating Ms. Warren was a fight worth fighting for: “In deciding not to fight for Ms. Warren, the president has forfeited the opportunity to stand up to the banks and to highlight their relentless efforts to undermine reform.”

The newspaper even discusses the possibility that President Obama does not want to risk campaign contributions from banks: “It is hard not to think that Mr. Obama was worried that choosing Mr. Warren would have cost him and Democratic senators campaign contributions from the banks.”

The editorial finds Mr. Cordray qualified to become director, but expresses concerns about his nomination. Republicans want the agency to be run by a board of directors instead of one person. And the newspaper notes that it is uncertain how strongly the President will defend this nomination given what happened to Ms. Warren.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events related to the protection of consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The rising cost of higher-level education in the U.S. has forced thousands of current and would be college students to take out loans to help pay for their education. According to a “New York Times” Op-Ed article published on August, 27 2011, many schools have pushed students into private loans to help alleviate the rising cost of school. Unlike the federal student loans, these private loans have few consumer safeguards and often riddle students with bad credit and debt for years after college.

Even more shocking, these loans are not erased through a declaration of bankruptcy. These debts can follow students for their entire lives with significantly higher interest rates than Federal loans.           

Congress seems to be addressing the problem. Legislation is pending to make these loans dischargeable through bankruptcy. Since 2005, these loans were maintained through bankruptcy, but their skyrocketing cost and interest rates have forced Congress to reconsider. Knowing that their loans were protected from bankruptcy filings, private lenders often did not consider a student’s ability to repay their loan as the debtors could not escape. 

Senator Dick Durbin and Representative Steve Cohen are putting forth bills that would eliminate these protections on private loans. The removal of these protections for private lenders will give borrowers a chance to start anew after bankruptcy.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect those with student loans. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Recent concern over the mortgage crisis has send hundreds of economists scrambling to find solutions to the financial crisis, in particular the housing finance system. While many argue for the continuation of direct assistance to those struggling with their mortgages, three professors at NYU Stern have suggested an alternative approach. According to an August 30, 2011 article published in the New York Times, Professors Acharya, Richardson, and Nieuwerburgh of NYU recommend lowering subsidies to homeowners, which help pay their mortgages.

These economists argue that the current level of subsidies, roughly $800 billion per year, encourage homeowners to take out larger loans than they can afford to repay and put more strain on the financial system. Economists James Poterba and Todd Sinai also estimate that the subsidies for mortgage interest rate reduction are much more beneficial for those making over $250,000, even though they are intended to assist less wealthy homeowners.

These economists assert that lessening the mortgage subsidies will improve economic strength in the long run and free up capital for investment in other areas. The slow phasing out of these subsidies will lessen, what these economists consider to be the overconsumption of the housing market, while making rent and smaller homes more affordable to low income families. Although these policies may promote long term growth, they will likely make it more difficult for home-owning families to pay off their current mortgages.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in looking out for the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The attorney general of Nevada, Catherine Cortez Masto, is accusing Bank of America of going back on a broad loan modification agreement agreed upon in October 2008, says “The New York Times” in an August 31, 2011 publication. The settlement came at the height of investigations into the predatory loan practices of several large banks and investment firms. In the settlement, Bank of America avoided investigatory procedures from several states, under the condition that it set aside $8.4 billion to help struggling homeowners with their mortgages and lower interest rates.

Ms. Masto is seeking to cancel the deal in United States District Court, after many complaints received since early 2009. Ms. Masto accuses Bank of America of doing little to aid homeowners and raising interest rates despite the deal struck. Several of the attorney general’s accusations include; Bank of America falsely informing credit agencies of a consumer’s default, incorrectly claiming that homeowners failed to make modifications to trial loans, and placing limits on the amount of time their customer service representatives could spend with imperiled borrowers.

Bank of America spokeswoman Jumana Bauwens responded, “We disagree that there has been any material breach of the consent decree and will continue to vigorously defend this action.” Ms. Masto’s complaint seeks to impose civil penalties on Bank of America.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayern are following closely the recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Large banks in New York are eager to reach a settlement agreement with Eric T. Schneiderman, New York’s Attorney General, as reported in an August 21st, 2011 New York Times article. Mr. Schneiderman, on the other hand, is dragging his feet in discussing the matter.
Along with other state attorney generals, Mr. Schneiderman is objecting to the idea of creating a settlement agreement with the large banks that are charged with suspicion foreclosure practices. When asked why he was hesitant to the agreement, Mr. Schneiderman stated that an agreement would restrict his ability to fully investigate and charge those who were guilty of wrongdoing.
Recently top officials of the large banks have asked Shaun Donovan, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, to persuade Mr. Schneiderman into supporting a settlement. Mr. Donovan denies these allegations but states that he agrees a settlement should be reached.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A new study has found that medical debt is the biggest contributing factor to people filing for a personal bankruptcy, as reported in an August 18th, 2011 New York Times article.
The study reported that approximately 20% of people who filed for bankruptcy cited medical debt as the primary cause of their debt. This percentage has increased 13% in the last two years. Many researchers believe that the percentage is up because many people have lapsed health insurance coverage. Instead of paying the monthly premium most of the public have now turned to credit cards to pay off their doctor bills.
Additionally, the research found that medical debt is extremely stressful to the debtors because the medical industries generally use collection agencies to contact the debtor, which use harsh tactics to try to collect the owed funds.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Alabama finally struck an agreement on how to deal with one of their county’s substantial debt, reported the New York Times in a September 16th, 2011 news article. The county’s debt was so high that if a bankruptcy would have been filed it would have gone down in American history as the biggest municipal bankruptcy ever.
Jefferson County, which includes the popular city of Birmingham, was on the verge of filing a bankruptcy for their $3 billion debt. However, the County Commissioner’s voted 4-to-1 in favor of an agreement that restructured how county funds would be used in effort to reduce the massive debt.
County officials stated that the debt began to snowball after a large loan was taken out to cover the cost to repair the sewer system. However, the county began to fall behind in the sewer system payments, additionally state officials failed to assess the county until recently. County officials stated that the state legislature maintained the attitude that it was the county’s problem because it was their actions that created the problem.
The new agreement is structured to have the county’s debt paid off in roughly 40 years. Additionally all of the creditors of the county’s debt agreed to lower the interest rate on the money owed.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

With the job market still is not on stable ground many Americans have turned to freelance jobs to help pay the household bills. Unfortunately, income from freelance jobs can have a grave effect on a person getting or modifying their home mortgage, as reported in an August 26th 2011 article. For those freelancers looking to make a home purchase soon, here are some tips to help better your chances for approval.
First, be prepared to have to fill out additional paperwork. Many banks have freelancers fill out additionally paperwork in attempts to determine whether you are a person with freelance income or a person with employment instability. Have at least three years of tax return paperwork ready for their review.
Second, if possible try to pay off other debts before making the big leap into purchasing a home. Especially if you have credit card debt, it is really important to have all or almost all of that debt paid off. Additionally, if possible, financial experts recommend a freelancer trying to build up a cash savings too.
Third, go to local banks and credit unions they are more likely to take the time to fully see if you qualify for a mortgage. You will better your chances of approval by going to a smaller company than one of the top banks.
Finally, be ahead of the game. Be fully prepared by doing your research and asking yourself, “Can you really afford a mortgage payment right now?” Taking on a mortgage is a big step, and it is important for the person taking the step to fully understand the risk and advantages in taking it.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The new federal loan guarantee drops on October 1st, 2011 and it is definitely not going to help the New York City housing market, as reported by a New York Times August 26th, 2011 new article.
The new limit is being lowered from $ 729, 750 to only guaranteeing loans that are under $625,000. Of course this will not have a devastating impact on the New York market, but many experts are estimating roughly 7% of the NYC market will be affected. Majority of the impact is expected to affect those individuals looking to purchase a one bedroom or a small two bedroom apartment in Manhattan.
To prepare for the loan decrease many new buyers have put a September 30th, 2011 contract deadline in a hope to close on their home before the new law kicks in. Buyers who are unable to commit to this contract will be forced to pay a larger down payment or will have to apply for much larger loans that come with higher interest rates.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Since the start of the recession more people have been heading back to school to better their skills and gain more opportunities for employment, but with these new skills comes new debt, as reported by the New York Times on August 26th, 2011.
To pay for their new education, many people have taken out high-cost private loans over federal low-cost loans. The problem with these private loans, are they do not offer as many alternatives in the event the debtor cannot pay their loan payments. Additionally, these loans are not dischargeable by bankruptcy and can have a negative effect on a person’s credit history.
Legislation is now stepping up in an attempt to correct this situation. Bills are currently pending in both the houses of Congress that would allow private school loans to be erasable through a person’s bankruptcy. Prior to 2005, private loans used for educational purposes were allowed to be dischargeable.
The bill is being sponsored by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and Tennessee Democrat Representative Steve Cohen, who state that the bill’s purpose is to help struggling borrowers get a fresh start and stop protecting unfair private student lenders.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Recently, the Consumer Federation of America made it a requirement for banks to give their patrons the choice to “opt in” or “opt out” of being able to overdraft their debit card transactions. If they “opt it” the bank will allow their debit card to still be processed even if there is not a sufficient amount of funds to cover the transaction. Although this may sound good in theory, it is not.
As reported by the New York Times in an August 16th, 2011 article, banks will allow a person to overdraft their debit account but for a heavy fee. As of now the average overdraft fee for large banks is $35.00 per transaction and some banks will add additional fees if the original overdraft fee is not paid within a certain amount of days.
Many of the big banks have also increased the amount of overdraft transactions a person can have, which consequently increases the amount of fees the person will pay. For example, Fifth Third Bank allows a person to overdraft 10 times per day. Their fee system is also set up where each time a person overdrafts the fee increases. A patron of the Fifth Third bank who regularly overdrafts their account could pay as much as $370.00 in fees in a single day, if they hit the bank’s maximum.
It is suggested that if you typically find your account overdrawn to either switch to a credit card or change your debit account to “opt out” so that your card is declined if there are insufficient amount of funds.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased to know that efforts are being made to better protect consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A recent ruling, published in the New York Law Journal on September 9, 2011, has determined that the collection agency, Collecto, had no right to force arbitration on collection claims from AT&T and Verizon on former customers who failed to pay their bills. Judge Spatt declared that under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the demand for collection costs was improper.

The customers filed a class action against Collecto and the court found that the collection agency had not satisfied a requirement of estoppel proving that it had a right to enforce the service agreements entered upon between the customers, and Verizon and AT&T. Because no prior “corporate relationship, agency, or concerted action” existed between AT&T, Verizon, and the custumers.

The judge’s decision reinforces the consumer protections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Creditors cannot blindly hire collection agencies to harass and bully debtors into paying their fees. A previous relationship must be established between creditor and collection agency before the latter can begin to pursue debts.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased to know that efforts are being made to better protect consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Losing one’s spouse comes with additional financial woes on top of the emotional. According to a New York Times article published September 3, 2011, the recently widowed may be more prone to falling into financial pitfalls. The death of a spouse can leave many financial issues left unattended, and women often take on these concerns.

Many women, especially the older generations, left financial concerns to their husbands. As a result, they are often inexperienced with dealing with these issues. Investing, insurance, and taxes can be extremely daunting to the recently widowed. These financial concerns, coupled with sometimes predatory financial consultants have left many widows in a state of confusion and financial paralysis.

The article suggests that widows find reputable financial consultants. They may have an urge to settle financial matters but often it is best to slow down and evaluate what needs to be done. It is important widows pay bills and taxes immediately, and understand health insurance policies, but many other concerns can wait. Remaining in one’s house may not always be a good option. Even if mortgages are quickly paid off, the hidden costs of home-ownership may be too much to bear for a widow. Although it is difficult, widows may need to restrict the flow of cash to their children or other inheritors. Children may advocate for access to their inheritance which may not be financially savvy.

Above all, widows should be aware that financial concerns can pile up and become a serious headache in following years. Financial help may be the best way to avert these problems. The distress of losing one’s spouse is very hard, but squaring away financial concerns will save future anguish.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interest of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

New mortgage plans are emerging that may save borrowers money and entice some to take out these loan plans. In recent years, 15-year mortgages have become more popular. These shorter plans save money in the long run for many consumers but have their own risks. In an August 21, 2011 article in the New York Times, the various payment plans, and differences between mortgage plans are revealed. On the average in New York, the longer 30 year loan plans assume an interest rate of 4.25 while the shorter 15 year plans have an interest rate of 3.5 percent.

The lower interest rates on 15 year plans are obviously attractive, but there are inherent risks. Job security is more essential, as well as a steady flow of income. The interest rate is lower, but the monthly bills are still significantly higher than the 30 year mortgage plans available. Consumer advocates warn borrowers from jumping on the 15 year loan plans if they cannot afford them, or if their job security is not necessarily assured.

Another thing to consider are the tax breaks one can receive from home loans. The interest rates are generally higher on 30 year loans, but the tax breaks they afford may offset these higher rates. Consumer advocates recommend that borrowers consider all the factors that may affect one’s ability to repay the various loans and to think about family and financial goals.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A September 3, 2011 New York Times article reported that the U.S. government is preparing to file suit against several  financial institutions that sold around $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that later fell apart. These new lawsuits are the most recent legal action being taken against banks that are accused of poor lending practices and selling sour securities to mortgage giants.

The announcement by the Federal government prompted widespread reactions from various parties. Many consumers welcomed the news that the government would finally take action, but the announcement created concern amongst investors. Unsure how long, and how costly, these legal proceedings would be, investors expressed doubt in the institutions being sued. Spokesmen for some of the banks expressed concern that these suits will make it less likely for banks to grant loans in the future, and further hamper economic recovery.

The banks maintain that the soured securities were not their responsibility. As “sophisticated investors,” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should have been aware the securities came with risk. They claim that it was the housing market, not accusations of fraud and misrepresentation, that caused the losses in the mortgage industry. Whatever the result this lawsuit will have significant consequences for future and current mortgagees and borrowers.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayern, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interest of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Following a steady decline in stock values over the past few years, Bank of America is letting go of two top executives. According to the September 7, 2011 “New York Times,” Sallie Krawcheck and Joseph Price are both being relieved from their top management level positions.

Bank of America has struggled since the financial crisis of 2008, especially since its acquisition of Merril Lynch and Countrywide. These takeovers have left Bank of America under the weight of soured mortgages. Bank of America hopes that the restructuring of its top management will restore investor confidence and increase stock values. A major part of the move will name David Darnell and Tom Montag as co-chief operating officers. The two men will essentially split the banking giant into one branch focused on consumers – and another on businesses and institutions.

The reorganization of top management is intended to combat the recent troubles of Bank of America. Despite a $5 billion investment by Warren Buffett, the bank is in danger of collapse from sub-prime mortgages and pending legal suits regarding fraud and misrepresentation of mortgages sold to Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac. This restructure is intended, at least in part, to combat the law suits being brought upon Bank of America by the Federal Government.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely how borrowers are being injured by abusive practices from lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Cornell University is taking steps to eradicate risky pledging practices after it has been under fire for the death of a student who died at fraternity house, the Associated Press reports. “After student’s death, Cornell moves to end hazing,” Associated Press, Wednesday, August 24, 2011.”

A Cornell student, 19-year old George Desdunes, died during the hazing period of the university’s chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon. His mother filed a lawsuit against the fraternity. According to the lawsuit, in the early morning of February 25 Mr. Desdunes was kidnapped by fraternity pledges, who tied his wrists and ankles with zip ties and duct tape and forced him to drink until he passed out. He was found unconscious on the same couch with his hands and wrists still tied.

David Skorton, Cornell’s president, is doing some damage control. He is asking national fraternities and sororities to develop a recruitment and initiation system without having students getting involved in “dangerous and demeaning” acts. Mr. Skorton wants fraternities and sororities to end pledging, given the fact that hazing, although already prohibited, still exists under the guise of pledging.

Several Ivy Leagues have already restrictions on joining fraternities and sororities. For instance, the student is not allowed to join until the second semester of freshman year or sophomore year. Other schools, such as Harvard, and Princeton, do not officially recognize fraternities nor sororities.

We at Jayson Lutzky, P.C. advises you that you may be entitled to damages if a loved one was involved in a wrongful death. If you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or or visit us at www.nycaccidentlawyer.com for a free initial consultation.

Losing a spouse is an extremely gut wrenching event that completely changes a person’s life, especially their financial situation. A New York Times article published September 2nd, 2011 discussed the money challenges many widows face today.
One challenge is many widows receive a large sum of money from an insurance settlement but many spend their insurance money without thinking about long term plans. Although, paying off the home’s mortgage sounds like a great idea, it is important to not rush into making these types of decisions. The family may want to move to a smaller home or need the money for unanticipated expenses in the future. Many experts recommend a widow to seek the advice of a financial planner before making big plans with their money.
Another tip is to not quickly invest money you have received. Some individuals are quick to take advantage of a widow in their delicate state. Advancing a family member’s inheritance or backing a friend’s new investment is not the wisest move in the beginning. It is important to let your emotions settle and become adjusted to your new financial status, remember you are now only receiving one income to support the home. Overall, losing a loved one is an extremely stressful time that is wise to review all of your options so you do not add more unneeded stress.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Parents always want the best for their children they encourage them to achieve greatness. But sometimes being over involved in a child’s life can lead to a child never being able to be an independent mature adult. Of course then the next issue that a parent has to deal with is, who is going to take care of your child after you have died? A September 2nd, 2011 New York Times articles offered tips on how to leave inheritance without hindering your child.
One important tip is to restrict access to the inheritance sum. By creating a trust fund for your child it enables the child from spending everything at once. It also helps create a structure that the child learns to adapt too.
Another important tip is if you have more than one child to not make one of them the trustee of the will. This may cause tension between the siblings and result in one child pressuring the other to receive the whole sum of their inheritance at once.
Although a trust will not last forever, by having one it can help a child become more independent and teach them to rely on themselves for financial support. When deciding these types of issues it is important to consult with an attorney to better understand any legal issues or options that may come into effect.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

New college graduates can learn a thing or two from mistakes made by some famous sports athletes, but I’m not referring to mistakes made on the field. I am referring to the mistakes made affecting a person’s bank account. The New York Times offered a few helpful tips in a September 9th, 2011 article to better assist those individuals who are just starting out on their own.
The first tip is to be slow in spending your new earnings. Like new sports athletes, recent college graduates are quick to start spending their cash on things they think they need or want. It is important to focus on earning your money and establishing yourself, rather than looking in something to invest in. This is where many sport athletes make their mistakes; they are quick to invest without looking into all of the details.
The next tip is to surround oneself with people with good intentions. When seeking advice on your financial status, it is important to ask the experts. Not only experts who know what they are talking about, but the ones who are working with your best interest involved. It is also recommended to get more than one opinion on your financial status before making a substantial investment.
Whether you are making superstar money or a recent college graduate living on your own for the first, it is important to look at the big picture of your finances rather than instant gratification.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

In the last lawsuit related to the events of September 11, 2011, a federal judge dismissed the claim against the Massachusetts Port Authority, the Associated Press reports. “NY judge releases Mass. Agency from 9/11 lawsuit,” Associated Press, Wednesday, July 27, 2011.

Mark Bavis, 31, died when he was aboard United Airlines Flight 175, the second plane to strike the World Trade Center. His family filed a federal lawsuit against United Airlines, Huntleigh USA, a security firm, and the Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) almost ten years ago in Manhattan.

But on late July, federal judge Judge Alvin H. Hellerstein dismissed the claim against Massport. According to the decision, Massport was released because it was not primarily responsible for the security checkpoints for passengers.

Massport’s reaction to the decision was less about the case than about the events of 9/11. David Mackey, interim chief executive officer, said that “[t]he entire Logan Airport community will forever carry in its heart the events of 9/11. Our thoughts and prayers will always be with the victims of that tragic day.”

Mr. Bavis’s twin brother expressed disappointment with the decision. He said that Massport was “a party that could have prevented this and had a responsibility for doing so.”

The case is scheduled to go to trial in November.

We at Jayson Lutzky, P.C. advises you that you may be entitled to damages if a loved one was involved in a wrongful death. If you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or or visit us at www.nycaccidentlawyer.com for a free initial consultation.

You hear many times stories of events that cause long delays in legal actions. So it is rare to find a case in which an unexpected event actually prompted the end of the lawsuit. This is what happened in a case in which a juror fainted, the trial gets delayed, and during break the parties agreed to a $10 million settlement. “Juror Faints, Prompting $10 Million Settlement,” Associated Press, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

On July 3, 2007 Gary Pettet was struck by a commuter rail line from the Port Authority Transit Corp. (PATCO). Mr. Pettet filed a lawsuit against PATCO in a Philadelphia court seeking damages, including losing a leg after 12 surgeries. PATCO admitted that the truck driver was liable for the collision. There is video footage of the driver running a red light before the crash.

On trial, Mr. Pettet’s lawyer was explaining medical details of the damages suffered by the plaintiff’s leg, when Juror No. 1 pitched backwards and passed out. Doctors examined the juror, who was fine after the incident. The trial was delayed, and during the break the lawyers resumed settlement talks. The parties then announced a $10 million settlement. But the defense’s attorney clarified that the fainting woman was not what caused the settlement.

We at Jayson Lutzky, P.C. advises you that you may be entitled to damages if a loved one was involved in a serious injury accident case. If you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or or visit us at www.nycaccidentlawyer.com for a free initial consultation.

The White House may have plans to refinance loans owned by government-controlled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These plans may help homeowners who are having difficulty paying high-interest rate mortgages. According to “A Lifeline for Homeowners”, published in the New York Times on August 26, 2011, a refinancing plan will seek to lower interest rates on borrowers monthly payments to these companies.

Partisan opposition is likely, considering the government-backed companies and their investors will disapprove of a loss in their interest income. However, the New York Times in an August 26, 2011 article, claims, that despite the loss of interest income, the result will be a net positive as the eased refinancing rules will prevent many defaults on loans. The decrease in defaults will allow more borrowers to keep their homes in the face of tough economic times and increased interest rates. Fewer defaults, and the resulting money available to homeowners, will hopefully allow for an increase in consumer spending which will further improve the economy. 

Investors in these loans may receive less but that may be a necessary step to alleviate the financial cost for borrowers on the brink of default. These investments have already been acknowledged as financially riskier. If the White House acts soon and with conviction, thousands of homeowners facing default may receive some breathing room.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayern, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interest of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The very depressed housing market in the Miami area is showing signs of improvement, The New York Times reports. “Affluent Buyers Reviving Market for Miami Homes,” The New York Times, Tuesday, July 26, 2011.

The housing market in South Florida has been in real bad shape in recent years. In Miami-Dade County, one out of five homes with mortgages is in foreclosure. There are so many unused condominiums that more than one thought about the idea of tearing some of them down.

But it seems that things are turning for the better. Data provided by research firm DataQuick shows that during the first half of this year, home sales in the metropolitan area went up 16 percent from 2010. This has been the best spring performance since 2007. Two-thirds of these sales have been in cash. Foreigners and investors are the ones mostly buying.

Prices went down dramatically for the past years due to the mortgage crisis. But now prices are stable and in some instances even increasing. Sales during the first half of this year went up 13 percent from last year, 439 for at least $2 million.

The number of houses available went down too. As of late 2008, there were 108,000 properties for sale with no buyers. Now less than 48,000 homes are for sale.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in informing our clients about current economic conditions to help them better handle personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The recently created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is starting to oversee the terms of mortgages and looking for ways to make them better for borrowers, The New York Times reports. “Sorting Through Lending Costs,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 24, 2011.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.) is legally required by July 2012 to work on ways to facilitate mortgage disclosure. The C.F.P.B. is considering combining two forms required for borrowers: the Good Faith Estimate (G.F.E.) and the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) form. The bureau is also considering making the G.F.E. shorter and more user-friendly.

Less than two years ago the Department of Housing and Urban Development overhauled the G.F.E. in part to make lenders more accountable. The reform was targeting the problem that the lenders were not committing to the estimates, that is, that the estimates had little relationship to actual closing costs. However, the problem is that the G.F.E. is a longer, more difficult form to fill out for borrowers.

As of now, the bureau is in the process of seeking feedback for two proposed revised versions posted on June 27. The comment period ended on July 5. Feedback includes over 13,000 comments as well as a three-page-letter from the Mortgage Bankers Association, which gave not surprisingly a negative review of the proposed version. This group is expressing concern that the proposals didn’t comply with current laws as well as criticizing their mechanics and design.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased to know that efforts are being made to better protect consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The use of debit cards has become pervasive throughout everyday life for many of us. Their ease of use and safety features provides us with convenience when purchasing goods and services. However, their widespread use may become slightly less common. According an article published on August, 27 2011 in the New York Times, some banks are instituting monthly charges on debit cards tied to checking accounts for their continued use.

Retailers have traditionally paid the fees for debit card swiping but new debate over limiting these fees has convinced some banks to pass these fees onto the consumer. Banks claim they need to make up these fees from other sources and charging consumers is their plan. Wells Fargo, SunTrust, Regions Bank, and Chase are all testing various amounts to charge their customers who use debit cards for purchasing. The fees will vary, but a single charge to a debit card could trigger a monthly fee of up to $5.

Several respondents indicated their disapproval with the new fees, with some insisting these fees would lead to them change banks. Whatever occurs, these fees are clearly a sign that tensions may increase between banks and their clients.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayern are following closely the recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

When you are looking for the best deal on a mortgage, it is important to be well-advised when it comes to the Good Faith Estimate, The New York Times reports, “Sorting Through Lending Costs,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 24, 2011.

The Good Faith Estimate (G.F.E.) is important because this is the document in which the lender is going to lay out the closing costs. However, borrowers face many challenges when it comes to finding out these costs.

One problem is that C.F.E. is a complicated document that recently became even more confusing to understand. Less than two years ago the Department of Housing and Urban Development overhauled the G.F.E. in part to make lenders more accountable. The reform was targeting the problem that the lenders were not committing to the estimates, that is, that the estimates had little relationship to actual closing costs. However, the end result became a longer, more difficult to understand G.F.E.

Another issue is when the lender does not follow the proper procedure or even tries to play games with the potential borrower. For example, there are lenders that give closing costs in an email or using a form that is not the G.F.E. If the lender does not use the G.F.E., these closing costs mean nothing. But even worse, the bank may try to manipulate the estimates. It may offer interest-rate quotations that expire quickly or underestimate fees when they have legal flexibility. About this last practice, a clear red-flag is the lender offering several G.F.E. with several thousand dollars’ difference.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in giving consumers advice that can help them make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

In a country considered by many to have the harshest foreclosure laws in Europe, protesters in Spain are blocking evictions, The New York Times reports. “Foreclosure Protesters in Spain’s Cities Now Go Door to Door,” The New York Times, Saturday, July 16, 2011.

In Spain the borrower is in absolute deep trouble if he or she cannot continue payments on his or her mortgage. The person does not have the option to hand in the keys and walk away. And the debt cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Therefore, the person not only loses the home but remains fully liable for the full amount after foreclosure, including penalty, interest charges, and tens of thousands of dollars in court fees.

But people are fighting back. They are not only protesting these harsh foreclosure laws but also putting words into action by actually blocking evictions. Protesters are using the internet to help organize and now press coverage is giving them more exposure. So far 30 evictions have been blocked.

Spain has been going through a mortgage crisis comparable to that of the United States. This European country had a housing boom that suddenly stopped in 2008. The economy halted and the unemployment rate went to be one of the highest in the European Union, as much as 40 percent for young people.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about how foreclosure laws put borrowers at a great disadvantage. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Bank of America faced difficult challenges after acquiring in 2008 Countrywide Home Loans because this acquired bank was in trouble with the Federal Trade Commission for overcharging borrowers, The New York Times reports. “Countrywide to Distribute Settlement to Its Clients,” The New York Times, Thursday, July 21, 2011.

According to the Federal Trade Comission (F.T.C.), Countrywide Home Loans overcharged borrowers for default-related services, gave borrowers incorrect information about how much they owed and on their mortgages, or added fees and escrow charges without notice.

A total of more than 450,000 borrowers were affected by Countrywide’s alleged abusive practices. The F.T.C. charged Countrywide and the bank had to pay $108 million to all borrowers in a settlement

Countrywide almost collapsed but it was acquired by Bank of America in 2008. However, Bank of America had to respond for Countrywide’s mess and it was far from easy. It took almost a year to identify all the borrowers affected because Countrywide’s records were extremely disorganized. In fact, Bank of America failed a F.T.C. order to provide a list of injured borrowers. Bank of America had to hire an accounting firm to help correctly identify these borrowers and comply with the F.T.C.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely how borrowers are being injured by abusive practices from lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Countrywide Home Loans, who has agreed to pay $108 million in a settlement for allegedly charging excessive fees, will finally get to distribute the money to affected borrowers, The New York Times reports. “Countrywide to Distribute Settlement to Its Clients,” The New York Times, Thursday, July 21, 2011.

The Federal Trade Comission (F.T.C.) charged Countrywide Home Loans with imposing on borrowers excessive fees. According to the F.T.C., Countrywide overcharged for default-related services. Also the bank gave borrowers incorrect information about how much they owed and on their mortgages or added fees and escrow charges without notice.

Over 450,000 borrowers will be receiving part of this settlement, which involves one of the largest groups of recepients in a settlement case. According to Jon Leibowitz, chairman of te F.T.C., [i]t is astonishing that one single company could be responsible for overcharging more than 450,000 homeowners, which is more than 1 percent of all the mortgages in the United States.” He also noted that Countrywide’s “was a business model based on deceit and corruption, and the harm they caused to American consumers is absolutely massive and extraordinary.”

Countrywide was not only the nation’s largest mortgage lender but also the biggest loan servicer, lending $1.4 trillion in mortgages. Countrywide almost collapsed but it was acquired by Bank of America in 2008.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about abusive practices from lenders against borrowers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Humans are not the only ones affected by foreclosures. Pets get hurt too, as they are forced to go to shelters, The New York Times reports. “Foreclosure? Many Pets Are Losing Their Homes,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 17, 2011.

In Chicago people are noticing that the number of pets being left at shelters have significantly increased in the past few years. For instance, the Anti-Cruelty Society received 854 pets for fiscal year 2010, but that number jumped to nearly 1,000 for this year. Felines, Inc. saw the number of cats being left went up 25 percent since 2007.

Connecting the dots, people are seeing what is going on. The year 2007 was when the number of foreclosures and evictions accelerated. Many had to go to temporary housing where they were not allowed to bring in their pets, leaving them with no choice but to make the painful decision of leaving their loved animals to shelters.

However, there are people trying to give another option to the foreclosed who can’t keep their pets. PAWS Chicago is an organization that offers temporary housing to pets when the owners are forced to leave their homes. The person may even go visit the pet while he or she tries to turn things around. It is a nice helping hand to avoid separate the pet from the owner.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping consumers against abusive practices from lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Appaloosa Management, one of Bank of America’s most outspoken supporters, has apparently sold a significant amount of its stake in Bank of America, the New York Times reports. “Bank of America Shares Fall to Lowest Point in 2 Years,” The New York Times, Tuesday, August 9, 2011.

Appaloosa Management is the big hedge fund run by David Tepper. According to a filing this early August, Appaloosa Management sold off more than 41 percent of his stake in the firm during the second quarter. Mr. Tepper now owns about 10 million shares.

It seems that this decision reflects a recent pattern from Mr. Tepper of reducing Appaloosa’s exposure to banks in general. During the same quarter he also sold off significantly his holdings in Wells Fargo and Citigroup.

Bank of America is facing a lot of setbacks recently. Shares in Bank of America fell 20.3 at $6.51, the lowest point in more than two years, a 50 percent drop since early this year. Investors are concerned about the Bank of America’s financial health, particularly a $10 billion lawsuit from American International Group (AIG), claiming the bank sold residential mortgage-backed securities that were overvalued.

Jerry Dubrowski, a Bank of America spokesperson defended the institutions finances by saying that it had adequate capital and did not need to raise more. According to Mr. Dubrowski, Bank of America is doing better than what many people think if we take into consideration the bank’s improving capital ratios and the profits that five of its six main business lines posted in the second quarter.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Same-sex couples in New York should be well-advised when it comes to tax matters now that they are allowed to be married, according to an article by The New York Times. “Tax Advice for Gay Newlyweds,” The New York Times, Saturday, August 6, 2011.

Before discussing the different tax issues affecting gay married couples, it is important to point ot that these rules apply to same-sex married couples in New York even if they were married outside the state. Also, since federal law does not recognize gay marriages, the advice is for only New York State tax law.

When it comes to the timing of filing the income tax return, as long as the couple marries before December 31, 2011, they can file as a married couple for the 2011 state tax return. But they cannot amend previous tax returns to change from unmarried to married.

Regarding health insurance, one working spouse no longer will be taxed on the value on the other spouse’s health benefits. However, the couple should provide proof of marriage to the employer to make this change effective.

Another change involves sales tax of motor vehicles. Beginning July 24, the sale of motor vehicles between the spouses or one spouse and his or her child are exempt from sales and use taxes.

Finally, same-sex married couples will get more benefits when it comes to estates taxes. Now at the state level surviving spouses can inherit without having to pay estate taxes. Estate taxes are owed on assets over $1 million. Also, if the surviving spouse needs to calculate the size of an estate belonging to a deceased spouse, he or she can use the same deductions and valuations as if the marriage was recognized for federal purposes. This new change helps to reduce the size of the estate for state taxes.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in advising debtors so that they can be in a better position to make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

More people are becoming interested in adjustable-rate mortgages, The New York Times reports. “In Mortgages, ARM Is Back,” The New York Times, Saturday June 25, 2011.

An adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) is a loan in which the interest rate is fixed for a fixed
period of time and adjusts annually after that. And according to the loan site
HSN.com, the average ARM is 3.27 percent, about 1.34 percentage points less than the
traditional 30 year fixed mortgage.

And these lower rates are attracting borrowers. Industry newsletter Inside Mortgage
Finance reports that 12 percent of new mortgages were ARMs for the first quarter this
year, up from 9 percent in the fourth quarter of last year.

Of course, these numbers are not larger than at the time of the housing boom a few years
ago. In 2006, 45 percent of the mortgages were ARMs. But unfortunately, by the time
the interest rates went up, the market crashed and borrowers could not refinance their
mortgages.

Now most ARMs are hybrid ARMs. The rate is fixed for three or five years. This fixed
period protects borrowers from a sudden increase in interest rates.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP advises consumers that buying a home is an important decision that should not be taken lightly. There should be first a careful analysis of all the short and long term costs involved. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Both the President and Congress and working very hard to reach a deal and avoid a default or a debt downgrade. Many people are concerned, including students, who are counting on loans to hopefully make a better living. The decisions that the government could make regarding a new budget deal may have an impact on student loans, the New York Times reports, “How a Debt Downgrade May affect Consumers,” The New York Times, Monday, July 26, 2011.

In the case of private loans, the interest rates of most of them could increase if the yields on government securities go up. That is, according to Mark Kantrovitz, publisher of the FinAid and Fastweb Web sites, because these interest rates are pegged to the London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor, which is influenced by Treasury yields. But new borrowers are going to have to pay more because the activity of the securities market is backed by student loans.

Those with federal student loans should not expect big changes. Interest rates are fixed unless Congress decided to raise them. And even so, that would only apply to new loans.

Students also should be mindful also of recent proposals to cut education, such as cutting subsidized interest on loans to graduate and professional students.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping people, especially students, deal with personal debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Mike Mayo, a well-regarded banking analyst, downgraded Bank’s of America’s stock to underperform from outperform, the New York Times reports. “Bank of America Shares Fall to Lowest Point in 2 Years,” The New York Times, Tuesday, August 9, 2011.

Bank of America is facing a lot of setbacks recently. Shares in Bank of America fell 20.3 at $6.51, the lowest point in more than two years, a 50 percent drop since early this year. Investors are concerned about the Bank of America’s financial health, particularly a $10 billion lawsuit from American International Group (AIG), claiming the bank sold residential mortgage-backed securities that were overvalued.

Justifying this downgrade, Mr. Mayo expressed concerns that the bank might need another round of capital-raising. According to his research note: “The resolution of mortgage issues will take much longer and may indeed be much higher than management’s estimates, raising questions on the company’s ability to meet regulatory capital requirements in a timely manner.”

Jerry Dubrowski, a Bank of America spokesperson defended the institutions finances by saying that it had adequate capital and did not need to raise more. According to Mr. Dubrowski, Bank of America is doing better than what many people think if we take into consideration the bank’s improving capital ratios and the profits that five of its six main business lines posted in the second quarter.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Fourteen people, including four lawyers, were indicted for allegedly mortgage fraud, the New York Law Journal reports, “Four Lawyers Charged in Mortgage Fraud,” New York Law Journal, Friday, August 5, 2011.

All fourteen are being accused of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud. According to the accusations, they used straw buyers and false documents to show their net worth, income, and plans to live in the properties. In addition, Mr. Sultzer is charged with bank fraud.

Loan officers at First Class Equities would coordinate the sales between the straw buyers and homeowners. The officers would obtain the mortgages and then send its proceeds to the attorneys, who would make false statements to the lenders about how they distributed the money.

Southern District Judge Robert Patterson is overseeing this case.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in looking out for the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

According to Southern District U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, the scheme affected more than 100 mortgages on some $58 million in residential properties. First Class Equities, a mortgage broker from Long Island, and its president and owner Gerard Canino allegedly were behind this scheme.

The four real estate attorneys charged are: Neal Sultzer of Plainview, Michael Raphan of Oceanside, Jacquelyn Todaro of Westbury, and Kevin Hymowitz of Armonk. Also Michael Schlussel of Merrick, a disbarred attorney, was charged.

All fourteen are being accused of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud. According to the accusations, they used straw buyers and false documents to show their net worth, income, and plans to live in the properties. In addition, Mr. Sultzer is charged with bank fraud.

Loan officers at First Class would coordinate the sales between the straw buyers and homeowners. The officers would obtain the mortgages and then send its proceeds to the attorneys, who would make false statements to the lenders about how they distributed the money.

Southern District Judge Robert Patterson is seeing this case.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in looking out for the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times published an editorial calling for a strong and independent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “Consumers vs. Banks,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 24, 2011.

Congress created the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.) when it approved the Dodd-Frank law to overhaul financial regulations after the credit crisis.

The editorial reminds readers why this agency is so necessary by reminding people what triggered its creation. In the past years, financial lenders incurred in abusive practice by giving shady loans to borrowers. These loans were so unregulated that there was a credit bubble. When this bubble burst, millions of people lost their jobs as well as their homes.

Therefore, the newspaper observes that a government institution is needed to correct all these abusive practices from financial lenders. “The new bureau concentrates consumer protection in one agency, with the sole purpose of shielding Americans, and the financial system, from abusive and deceptive lending in mortgages, credit cards and other borrowing.”

The editorial notes that the newly created agency, that officially opened its doors in mid-July, is off to a good start. It is already running in a timely, professional manner and it has already starting to handle important issues such as simplifying mortgage disclosure requirements and handling credit card complaints.

But the newspaper also warns of many challenges ahead, including the efforts by Republicans from the House of Representatives to weaken the Bureau. The House is not interested in confirming a director, arguing that the agency would be best run by a board of directors.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in seeing that consumers are being protected as much as possible against the abusive practice from banks and lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

If a debt collector is going to communicate with the debtor’s spouse, parent (in case of a minor), guardian, executor, administrator, or someone with the authority to pay the decedent’s debts, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), as well as related case law, prohibits the creditor from several practices, the New York Law Journal explains. “Communications Involving Collection of Decedents’ Debts,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

There are certain practices that the debt collector is not allowed to do. The debt collector is not allowed to say to the third party that he or she is attempting to collect the debts. Also the creditor is prohibited from revealing the debt the collector is attempting to collect. And the debt collector cannot make a statement to the effect that the decedent owes any debt. Regarding this prohibition, the creditor cannot refer to the debt as an outstanding debt nor give details about the debt.

Debt collectors cannot call third parties at “unusual times and places.” But they can perform what is called “location communications,” or attempts to ask third parties about the name, address, and telephone number of the spouse, executor, administrator or other person.

It is key to point out that creditors are prohibited from misleading third parties about their personal obligation to pay the decedent’s debt. In fact, collectors should disclose that payment is being sought from the assets of the decedent’s debts and that the third party is not require to pay.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about against abusive practices from creditors against debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Shares in Bank of America fell 20.3 percent on early August, the New York Times reports. “Bank of America Shares Fall to Lowest Point in 2 Years,” The New York Times, Tuesday, August 9, 2011.
With this 20.3 percent drop, the shares are now priced at $6.51, the lowest point in more than two years. Shares have dropped 50 percent since early this year.
This recent blow to Bank of America is a reflection of the investors fears over this institutions’s financial health. Recently American International Group Inc. (AIG) filed a lawsuit against Bank of America Corp. for more than $10 billion dollars, claiming the bank sold residential mortgage-backed securities that were overvalued.
Jerry Dubrowski, a Bank of America spokesperson defended the institutions finances by saying that it had adequate capital and did not need to raise more. According to Mr. Dubrowski, Bank of America is doing better than what many people think if we take into consideration the bank’s impriving capital ratios and the profits that five of its six main business lines posted in the second quarter.
Also Bank of America in a statement denied AIG’s allegations and said that this plaintiff’s losses are “solely attributable to its own excesses and errors.”
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

According to the Federal Trade Comission, Countrywide Home Loans overcharged borrowers for default-related services, gave borrowers incorrect information about how much they owed and on their mortgages, or added fees and escrow charges without notice, The New York Times reports. “Country to Distribute Settlement to Its Clients,” The New York Times, Thursday, July 21, 2011.

About 350,000 borrowers had to pay excessive fees for default-related services. Countrywide had subsidiaries to do the work and marked up the cost of the service by more than 100 percent. This way Countrywide got make money from property inspections, title searches and maintenance on the homes going through foreclosure. For example, some borrowers were charged $300 to mow their lawns.

And 102,331 received incorrect information about their mortgages. Countrywide would give them incorrect information about how much they owed on their mortgages or added fees and escrow charges without notice. Many of these borrowers filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy and that incorrect information was also filed. About 43,000 were charges improper feed that Countrywide levied after bankruptcy.

In sum, a total of more than 450,000 borrowers were affected by Countrywide’s alleged abusive practices. The F.T.C. charged Countrywide and the bank had to pay $108 million to all borrowers.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about abusive practices from lenders against borrowers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Many people expected Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor and the main person behind the creation of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to be nominated the new director of this agency. But that did not happen, as President Barack Obama nominated Richard Cordray, former Attorney General of Ohio, to lead this bureau. The fact that she was not nominated made news as much as Mr. Cordray’s nomination, as reported by The New York Times. “Former Ohio Attorney General to Head New Consumer Agency,” The New York Times, Sunday July 17, 2011.

Ms. Warren was seen by many to be the top choice to be nominated as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.). But Ms. Warren was never nominated because she was seen very unfavorably by Republicans in Congress for being very outspoken against the financial industry. But liberal members of Congress as well as consumer advocate groups strongly supported her nomination.

When President Obama announced Mr. Cordray’s nomination in a written statement, he spent many more words praising Ms. Warren: “This agency was Elizabeth’s idea, and through sheer force of will, intelligence and a bottomless well of energy, she has made, and will continue to make, a profound and positive difference for our country.”

Warren’s supporters are reluctantly accepting the decision to nominate Mr. Cordray instead of Mr. Warren. Stephanie Taylor, who obtained 350,000 signatures in favor of Warren’s nomination, pointed out that “Elizabeth Warren was the best qualified to lead this bureau that she conceived – and we imagine Richard Cordray would agree. That said, Rich Cordray has been a strong ally of Elizabeth Warren’s, and we hope he will continue her legacy of continuing her legacy of holding Wall Street accountable.”

Sources say that Ms. Warren is expected to go back to Harvard to teach. She is mentioned as a possible candidate for the Senate from Massachusetts.

Congress created the C.F.P.B. when it approved the Dodd-Frank law to overhaul financial regulations after the credit crisis.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events related to the protection of consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Your credit score may have an impact on how much you pay for car insurance, The New York Times reports. “Credit Scores and Car Insurance,” The New York Times, Saturday, June 25, 2011.

According to Des Toups, senior managing editor of CarInsurance.com, several factors can influence the cost of insurance: your age, where you live, and your driving record. But your credit score is also one. There is a correlation between the consumer’s credit score and the likelihood he or she will file an insurance claim. The higher the score, the lesser the chance the person would file one.

There are other interesting facts regarding credit scores and car insurance. A credit score of over 750 pays a lot less than a driver with the same age and a lower score. Someone between 25 and 34 would with a clean driving record pays an average of $1,938 a year for car insurance. But the same person with a credit score over 750 pays $1,155, a saving of 40 percent.

However, drivers should be advised that there are a few states, such as California and Massachusetts, that forbid the practice of checking your credit scores.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping consumers handle debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

In Spain, people are looking for ways to deal with a foreclosure crisis affecting this country, The New York Times reports. “Foreclosure Protesters in Spain’s Cities Now Go Door to Door,” The New York Times, Saturday, July 16, 2011.

Many people consider Spain to have the harshest foreclosure laws in Europe. The borrower does not have the option to hand in the keys and walk away. And the debt cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Therefore, the person not only loses the home but remains fully liable for the full amount after foreclosure, including penalty, interest charges, and tens of thousands of dollars in court fees.

Last year there were about 94,000 foreclosures in Spain, nearly four times the number in 2007. Lots of borrowers are facing evictions, and there are even protesters actually blocking them.

Faced with this foreclosure crisis, people in Spain are figuring out ways to change the current situation. Housing advocates want Spain to have a system similar to the United States. However, lawmakers are presenting proposals that would not change too much the current system. For example, in Spain the bank can take a percentage of the borrower’s salary. One proposal would be to reduce this percentage. In another example, there is a foreclosure auction and only the bank itself offers to buy the property, the required amount to be paid is 50 percent of market value. A new proposal is looking to increase the percentage to 60 percent.

Spain has been going through a mortgage crisis similar to that of the United States. This European country had a housing boom that suddenly stopped in 2008. The economy halted and the unemployment rate went to be one of the highest in the European Union, as much as 40 percent for young people.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are interested in seeing foreclosure laws be changed to favor the interests of consumers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for an initial consultation.

American International Group Inc. (AIG) filed a lawsuit against Bank of America Corp. for more than $10 billion dollars, claiming the bank sold residential mortgage-backed securities that were overvalued, the New York Law Journal reports. “AIG Sues Bank of America For $10 Billion Over Mortgages,” New York Law Journal, Tuesday, August 9, 2011.

According to the suit filed in the Manhattan Supreme Court., Bank of America sold AIG $28 billion in securities backed by home mortgages between 2005 and 2007. After examining more than 260,000 of the mortgages, AIG found out that Bank ouf America’s “stated metrics” for 40 percent of the securities were false. Merrill Lynch and Countrywide Financial, which were acquired by Bank of America, are also included in the lawsuit.

Bank of America denies the allegations replying that AIG knew or should have known the risks involved. According to a spokesperson for Bank of America:,“AIG recklessly chased high yields and profits throughout the mortgage and structured finance markets. It is the very definition of an informed, seasoned investor, with loses solely attributable to its own excesses and errors.”

But an AIG spokesperson responded by saying that “[i]t is disappointing but unsurprising that Bank of America continues to attempt to blame others for its own misconduct. Investors, no matter how sophisticated, were entitles to rely on its numerous written representations about the securities it sold.”

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent events that could affect the interests of debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Students and graduates filed a class action against Thomas M. Cooley Law School alleging fraudulent inflation of post-employment graduation and salary statistics to lure prospective students, the New York Law Journal reports. “Suits Accuse New York Law School, Thomas Cooley of Job Statistics Fraud,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

According to the lawsuit, Cooley Law School claims that between 75 percent and 80 percent of its graduates are employed within nine months, while the actual number is less than 30 percent. According to the plaintiffs, “the reality of the situation is that these seemingly robust numbers include any type of employment, including jobs that have absolutely nothing to do with the legal industry, do not require a JD degree or are temporary or part-time in nature.” The lawsuit also alleges that salary information is misleading.

James Thelen, Cooley’s associate dean for legal affairs and general counsel, said that he had not yet been served. He also said that “[t]o the extent the law suit challenges our post-graduation employment and salary statistics, we stand by our reporting to the National Association for Law Placement, and any claims that prospective students or our graduates have been misled or legally harmed by our reporting are simply baseless.”

The complaint, MacDonald v. Thomas M. Cooley Law School, was filed in Michigan federal court. Kurzon Strauss is the legal representative of the plaintiffs.

Cooley is the largest law school in the country based on full-time and part-time enrollment, with four campuses in Michigan and 40,000 students. Tuition is about $34,340.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely events related to the economic situation of students and debtors in general. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

People should be very careful when they are being asked to co-sign a mortgage, advises a columnist from the New York Times. “Co-Signing on the Dotted Line,” The New York Times, Sunday, August 7, 2011.

Many people fall into the trap of what it seems to be just another step to help out a struggling debtor to complete his or her mortgage. But what the person is really doing by co-signing is becoming a co-borrower. That means that the co-signer would be responsible to pay in case the borrower is not able to do so.

In today’s economy, being a co-signer could be very risky. The most obvious risk for the co-signer, again, is having to pay the loan. But there are other complications. The mortgage appears on the co-signer’s credit report. That means that if the borrower falls behind on his or her payments, this activity would appear on the report. And because of this negative history, the co-signer would have a harder time borrowing money or buying a second home.

A more sensible alternative would be to help the borrower with the down payment. In this way, the person does not have deal with the risks of co-signing but can help the borrower to obtain the mortgage.

However, given today’s economy, it is possible that, being aware of the risks and all, the co-signer would go for it anyway. If that is case, then the co-signer should keep track of the payments.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in advising debtors so that they can be in a better position to make informed decisions. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Students and graduates filed a class action against New York Law School alleging fraudulent inflation of post-employment graduation and salary statistics to lure prospective students, the New York Law Journal reports. “Suits Accuse New York Law School, Thomas Cooley of Job Statistics Fraud,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

According to the lawsuit, the New York Law School claims that 90 to 95 percent of graduates are employed after nine months, while the actual number is 50 percent. According to the plaintiffs, “[b]y playing fast and loose with its employment data, NYLS creates an impression of bountiful employment opportunity that in reality does not exist.” The plaintiff are seeking tuition refunds and other remedies. The complaint, Gomez-Jimenez v. New York Law School, was filed in the Manhattan Supreme Court. Kurzon Strauss is the legal representative of the plaintiffs.

Dean Richard Matasar from the New York Law School reponded in a written statement that [t]hese claims are without merit and we will vigorously defend against them in court.”

New York Law School is one of the biggest law schools in the country, with almost 2,000 full-and part-time students and a tuition near $50,000.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely events related to the economic situation of students and debtors in general. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Efforts in Washington to protect consumers are finding resistance. The most recent sign of resistance is the opposition from Republicans in Congress to the nomination of Richard Cordray as director of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, The New York Times reports, “Former Ohio Attorney General to Head New Consumer Agency,” The New York Times, Sunday July 17, 2011.

Forty-four Republican Senators signed a letter in which they made clear that they would not approve the nomination of any person to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.). They instead want a board of directors to run the agency.

The financial industry and its lobbyists have been working to delay or dilute many of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. Congress created the C.F.P.B. when it approved the Dodd-Frank law to overhaul financial regulations after the credit crisis. The agency has the power to supervise that banks are complying with rules and regulations. However, the law states that the bureau can not write new rules or supervise other financial companies without a director.

This recent setback is another one of several the Obama Administration has faced in its attempt to nominate financial regulatory posts. Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor and the main person behind the agency’s creation, was seen by many to be the top choice to be nominated as director. But Ms. Warren was never nominated because she was seen very unfavorably by Republicans in Congress for being very outspoken against the financial industry. Other positions are still pending, including two leaders of two banking regulators, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and two board members for the Securities and Exchange Commission. There are about a dozen positions that remain vacant.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned that these efforts to protect the interests of consumers are finding so much resistance. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A possible government debt downgrade will not significantly affect home loans nor credit cards, The New York Times reports, “How a Debt Downgrade May affect Consumers,” The New York Times, Monday, July 26, 2011.

Many are concerned that in Washington there will not be an agreement in time to avoid a possible default and debt downgrade. If that happens, many wonder what would happen to home loans and credit cards in the case of a possible default or debt downgrade.

People are concerned with a possible impact on home loans because fixed-rate mortgages follow the 10-year Treasury note, which will get an interest rate increase in case of a downgrade. However, even though there will be an increase in interest rates, it will not be very significant. According to Cameron Findlay, chief economist at LendingTree.com, interests rates may go up half a percentage point to one point at most. He also explains that even with this increase, the pace of lending will not be affected. Finally, once the federal debt issue is resolved, mortgage rate will go back to where they are right now. The same goes to home equity lines, although the risk of inflation may make the index start to increase.

In the case of credit cards, if there is in fact an increase, it will be due to broader economic factors or a decision by lenders to make profits. But lenders must notify borrowers 45 days in advance of any increase in interest rates, and that can be applied only to new balances.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping people know more about the economy to better handle their own finances. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

President Barack Obama announced that he would nominate Richard Cordray, former Attorney General of Ohio, to lead the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, The New York Times reports. “Former Ohio Attorney General to Head New Consumer Agency,” The New York Times, Sunday July 17, 2011.

As Attorney General, Mr. Cordray aggressively investigated mortgage foreclosure practices. He already works at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

In a written statement Obama said that “Richard Cordray has spent his career advocating for middle-class families, from his tenure as Ohio’s attorney general to his most recent role as heading up the enforcement division at the C.F.P.B. and looking out for ordinary people in our financial system.”

More than the nomination, the announcement is making more news because Obama passed over Elizabeth Warren to be the director. Ms. Warren, a Harvard law professor and the main person behind the agency’s creation, was seen very unfavorably by Republicans in Congress for being very outspoken against the financial industry.

Congress created this bureau when it approved the Dodd-Frank law to overhaul financial regulations after the credit crisis. The agency has the power to supervise that banks are complying with rules and regulations. However, the law states that the bureau can not write new rules or supervise other financial companies without a director.

The nomination is expected to have strong opposition from Republicans who want the agency to be run by a board of directors instead of one person.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in seeing that consumers are being protected as much as possible against the abusive practice from banks and lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

There is a new Web site that helps people decide when to collect Social Security, The New York Times reports. “When to Collect Social Security? A New Calculator,” The New York Times, Tuesday, July 26, 2011.

For two years retired economics professor Russell Settle and his partner Jeffrey Miller worked on a new program to help people decide the optimal age to collect Social Security benefits. The end result is a program called SocialSecurityChoices.com.

Most people know that they can get a bigger Social Security check if they wait until a later age to collect. But the truth is that there are lots of factors that makes this decision a very complicated one. Mr. Miller explains that “[o]ur calculator provides information that allows a person to pick any claiming strategy they want, and they can see how much it costs them relative to the optimum.” But he also warns that “[o]ur findings show that life is much more complicated than simple rules of thumb suggest.” In fact, writing the program “was far more complicated than we ever imagined,” he notes.

To use the Web site, you need to add personal information such as the year you were born, gender, life expectancy and estimated benefit amount. Once you submit your information, in a couple of hours you receive a free customized report.

But please be advised that the program has several limitations. It does not take into account if you work part-time, if you can afford to delay Social Security, how much you’ve saved, if you have a pension, if there are children eligible to collect on a parent’s record. Also the program calculates the total value of your benefits, not the monthly payments. Finally, the Web site is only available for single and married people. A program for divorced and widowed people is still in the works.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping consumers handle debt. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

As consumer credit has increased in South American countries, so does the abuses from
banks and credit card companies, The New York Times reports. “Rise of Consumer
Credit in Chile and Brazil Leads to Big Debts and Lender Abuses,” The New York
Times, Sunday, July 24, 2011.
In countries such as Chile and Brazil, there has been a widespread proliferation of credit.
Lenders are extending credit to a lot of people that did not have access in the past. But this proliferation is coming with a hefty price. Regulation is very lax, and companies are
taking advantage by incurring in abusive practices.

For instance, in Chile retail store La Polar raised interest rates and extended loan terms of
418,000 credit card holders. Executives at this store have been unilaterally renegotiating
lenders’ debts for more than six years.

And in Brazil the federal prosecutor’s office in Rio de Janeiro filed suit against three of
the biggest country’s bank for allegedly imposing more than $300 million in illegal
charges to clients from 2008 to 2010. In this country, credit card interests have been
above 220 percent, one of the highest in the world. Concerned about this proliferation of
credit, the Central Bank in Brazil will begin monitoring credit operations of as little as
1,000 reals, or about $640.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are concerned about the abusive practices from lenders in Chile and Brazil. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Despite the recent problems with reverse mortgages, they are still seen as an option,
The New York Times reports, “Reverse Mortgages Are Here to Stay,” The New York
Times, Saturday, June 25, 2011.

In a reverse mortgage, the lender pays the homeowner instead of the other way around.
Then the lender gets the money back when the homeowner dies or moves and the house
is sold. Of course, there are many factors involved, and the kinds of reverse mortgages
vary on the terms agreed by the parties. This option is available only for people over the
age of 62, who already have equity on their homes.

However, there have been many problems with reverse mortgages. There has been shady
reverse mortgage companies charging high fees and convincing borrowers to make bad
financial decisions. Also many borrowers are not being well advised that they have to
pay taxes, insurance, and maintenance, or risk foreclosure. Recently, two major banks,
Bank of America and Wells Fargo, decided not to continue offering reverse mortgages.

However, as far from perfect reverse mortgages are, they are still seen an option given
the many problems with the economy. In the future Social Security will not be a reliable
option, senior citizens will not have private pensions, and they will have spent all their
401(k) savings, if they had any. So at least with a reverse mortgage, the person gets to
stay at home and receive some money to cover his or her own expenses.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, however, warns consumers about being well advised before committing to a reverse mortgage. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

In many cases, in a debtor-creditor relationship the financial institution may contact third parties such as the spouse, parent of a minor debtor, guardian, executor, administrator, or someone with the authority to pay the decedent’s debts. However, there is a fine line between what the creditor is or is not allowed to do when it comes to contacting these third parties.

On July 27, 2011, the federal government published in the Federal Registry a final Statement of Policy clarifying what the creditor can or cannot do in these cases, the New York Law Journal reports. “Communications Involving Collection of Decedents’ Debts,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

The document, called Statement of Policy Regarding Communications in Connection with The Collection of Decedents’ Debts, covers what the Federal Trade Commission will not allow regarding these communications. This Statement of Policy is based on an interpretation of sections 805(b) and (d) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The Statement of Policy will be effective on August 29.

There are certain practices that the debt collector is not allowed to do. The debt collector is not allowed to say to the third party that he or she is attempting to collect the debts. Also the creditor is prohibited from revealing the debt the collector is attempting to collect. And the debt collector cannot make a statement to the effect that the decedent owes any debt.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about against abusive practices from creditors against debtors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

It is useful to understand in detail what is it what the recently created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau does and what it means for consumers. “Communications Involving Collection of Decedents’ Debts,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

On July 21, 2011 the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau opened after the signing of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. The bureau has the duty to protect consumers against abuses from the banking and financial industry.

The CFPB is funded through the Federal Reserve Board. However, the bureau works independently from the Federal Reserve Board. In fact, this agency is prohibited from interfering with the CFPB.

From July 21, 2011, the day the CFPB became effective, the bureau has rulemaking authority under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The bureau’s enforcement procedures will be modeled on those used by the Federal Trade Commission.

It is important to point out that the CFPB has exclusive authority to issue regulations, orders and guidance of federal consumer financial protection laws such as the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).

The CFPB will perform periodic examinations to “covered persons,” that is, persons that provide consumer financial products and services, to make sure they are complying with consumer laws. In addition, the bureau will have the authority to prevent the “covered person” from unfair, abusive practices against consumers.

In addition, the bureau will establish procedures to make sure that “covered persons” timely respond to consumer complaints as well as requests for information.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in advising consumers on how to protect themselves against abusive practices from creditors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Creditors usually get involved in many abusive practices to collect debt from consumers. Many collectors even get to the point of misleading debtors into believing that they may be facing legal action. That is why there are laws and cases that regulate the involvement of lawyers in collection efforts from creditors, the New York Law Journal reports. “Communications Involving Collection of Decedents’ Debts,” New York Law Journal, Thursday, August 11, 2011.

According to Section 807 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), if an attorney or law firm sends a letter, or when legal action or threat is implied in a collection letter, the attorney or law firm must be “meaningfully involved” in the decision to send this letter. This means that there has to be an attorney review of the particulars of an account.

Collection firms and creditors are getting involved in questionable practices regarding the use of attorney letterhead. The creditor may use a law firm’s letterhead to collect from a debtor without having the signature from the debtor nor making reference to a possible legal action. The debt collector may even include a disclaimer saying that no attorney has reviewed the particulars of the debtor’s account.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in advising consumers on how to protect themselves against abusive practices from creditors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Wells Fargo & Company, under fire for allegedly falsyfying loan documents and approving subprime mortgages with higher interest rates, agreed to pay a fine of $85 million imposed by the Federal Reserve, The New York Times reports. “Wells Fargo Agrees to Pay 85 Million Over Loans,” Thursday, July 21, 2011.

According to the Federal Reserve, from 2004 until 2008, Wells Fargo Financial, a subsidiary of Wells Fargo inflated borrowers’ incomes on loan documents to make them qualify for loans. The bank also steered borrowers toward higher-interest subprime loans. The Federal Reserve filed civil charges against Wells Fargo, but now the bank has agreed to pay this $85 million fine as part of a settlement.

According to the settlement, Wells Fargo neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing but will compensate borrowers that were pushed to these higher-interest subprime loans or had their incomes exaggerated. The Fed said that between 3,700 and 10,000 could be compensated under settlement. Every borrower would be receiving between $1,000 to $20,000.

Wells Fargo said that this fine is the largest ever imposed in a consumer-enforcement case.

Wells Fargo is the nation’s largest mortgaghe lender. Wells Fargo said that Wells Fargo Financial, the subsidiary of the bank that approved the controversial loans, closed in 2010.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping consumers against abusive practices from lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The umemployed face bigger troubles in finding a job. The New York Times reported on July 26th, 2011 that employers looking to hire are less likely to hire those who are currently unemployed.
After reviewing many of the job placement websites it was found that many hiring employers are advertising that they “strongly prefer” or would only consider “people currently employed or just recently laid off.”
This greatly disadvantages thousands of unemployed people seeking a job currently. Umemployment is at its worst since the Great Depression and employers are not looking to forgive those down on their luck.
The average employer is less likely to hire any person who has been out of work longer than 6 months, yet the average for unemployment is 9 months.
“I feel like I am being shunned by our entire society,” said Kelly Widemer, who was told she would be a “hard sell” by her job recruiter because the length of time she has been unemployed.
Some states have started to discuss the idea of implentmenting laws requiring employers to overlook the length of time people have gone unemployed. However, it may be a challenge to prove that umemployment was the only reason the job candidate did not receive the job position.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen are following closely all issues related to debt, especially issues affecting the general public. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-LAWYER or visit are website at http://bankruptcynyc.com/ for more information.

New study shows that the Hispanic population has been hit the hardest by the recession. A study conducted by the Pew Foundation and using data collected by the Census Bureau reported, that the average Hispanic households’ wealth has decreased the most during the recession then any other racial group.
According to a July 26th, 2011 New York Times article the average Hispanic household fell by 66 percent from 2005 to 2009. Asian households were the second group to take a significant hit to their assets dropping to 54 percent. African Americans wealth dropped by 53 percent and White families saw a 16 percent drop.
The study accredited White homes dropping over 16 percent to the fact that many of them had assets other than their house. It was found that majority of White homes owned stocks or bonds.
To determine a households’ wealth the study reviewed all of the home’s assets, “like a house, a car, savings and stocks, minus debts, like mortgages, car loans and credit cards.”
Hispanic and African American households are currently at their lowest point since the Census Bureau first started in 1984.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen are following closely all issues related to debt, especially consumer debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit our website at http://bankruptcynyc.com/.

Financial advisers are concerned that the talk in Washington of a federal budget crisis and possible default will make people overreact to these current problems. But at the same time, they warn investors and consumers to act very carefully. The New York Times reports. “How a Debt Downgrade May affect Consumers,” The New York Times, Monday, July 26, 2011.

If the parties involved in the cannot agree on how to deal with the federal budget, it is likely that the nation’s rating will be downgraded a notch. This may create in the short term volatility in the markets.

Due to all this uncertainty, financial advisors have been writing letters to clients repeating the same recommendation in these tough economic times that, as long as the investments are diversified, it’s best not to do anything and leave things the way they are. Aside from the uncertainty and volatility, the interest rates on several types of consumer laws will moderately increase.

Although there is uncertainty and the numbers will not be too pleasant, the credit downgrade will not cause a major crisis. However, investors and consumers should expect investments to go down.

Financial advisors are concerned that these news will create a long term psychological effect that could make the economy worse than what it really is. But, according to Milo Benningfield, a certified financial planner, “we’re still looking pretty good relative to most everyone else in the world.”

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about how people will handle the current and future challenges in the economy. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

People who have stocks and bond investments, especially retirees and pre-retirees, are getting anxious about talks in Washington of a federal budget crisis and possible default. Financial advisors are recommending a cautious approach to deal with stocks and bond investments, The New York Times reports. “How a Debt Downgrade May affect Consumers,” The New York Times, Monday, July 26, 2011.

In the case of a debt downgrade, there will be a short period of volatility in both stock and bond markets. According to Gus Sauter, chief investment officer at Vanguard, “[o]nce a plan is in place, we would expect the markets to return to normal, and for investors to focus on more fundamental issues like long-term earnings growth and the economic health of countries around the globe.”

People who are living off investments should set aside enough cash to avoid having to sell investments when things get rougher. Also, investors, especially retirees and pre-retirees, should have cash reserves, from six months to two years in cash, depending on the investor’s age and circumstances.

The current situation with the federal budget is causing uncertainty when it comes to bonds. If there are deep cuts, that could have a negative impact on the bond market. But if the cuts are not that deep, then the bond market could even swoon.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping people make informed decisions when it comes to their debt and finances. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A possible government debt downgrade will not significantly affect the money market funds, The New York Times reports, “How a Debt Downgrade May affect Consumers,” The New York Times, Monday, July 26, 2011.

Many are concerned that in Washington there will not be an agreement in time to avoid a possible default and debt downgrade. If that happens, many wonder what would happen to money market funds in the case of a possible default or debt downgrade.

If there is a government debt downgrade, the money market funds would not be required to sell the Treasuries they hold. Even in case of a default, a fund would not be to sell, as long as the fund deems the security to be safe and be able to make interest payments.

Deborah A. Cunningham, chief investment officer for money markets at Federated Investors assures investors not to be concerned. “The money market world asset flow, what comes in and goes out, has been pretty benign,” explains Ms. Cunningham. She also points out that “[t]he debt that is held in money market funds is so short in maturity that a downgrade will just not be an event that causes any kind of pricing concerns. As such, there shouldn’t be issues for investors.”

According to Ms. Cunningham, money market funds hold 40 to 45 percent of the shorter-term Treasury debt outstanding.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are interested in helping people know more about the economy to better handle their own finances. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Two major credit card companies have reached a settlement with the federal government in regards to a case filed against the companies back in October. The New York Law Journal reported in a July 21st, 2011, article that an Eastern District Judge had approved the settlement agreement reached between the federal government and Visa and Mastercard.
The U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, had brought a lawsuit against the two major credit card companies for “stifling competition by preventing merchants from encouraging their customers to use competing cards with lower fees” and restricting the best interest of the public.
The two companies had already previously reached a settlement before the lawsuit had been filed. However, the new settlement agreement requires the companies to remove certain restrictions found in their merchant contracts.
American Express was also named as a defendant in the lawsuit. However, American Express declined to join the settlement agreement and the case is still in the court.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen ,LLP, are experienced in helping their clients with any bankruptcy and financial legal issues. If you are in need of legal advice, then please call 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-LAWYER or visit our website at http://bankruptcynyc.com/ for more information.

These troubling times have led to some cities doing what many thought to be the unthinkable, asking retirees to give up some of their pension benefits. According to a July 19th, 2011 New York Times article, the Rhode Island city Central Falls is facing the strong possibility of having to declare bankruptcy, unless it finds a way to cut their cost.
Robert G. Flanders Jr., has been given the task of finding ways to cut the spending of the city and prevent bankruptcy. Mr. Flanders is asking that the city’s 141 retirees give up a portion of their pension plan in an effort to cut the city’s overall spending.
Under Mr. Flanders’ plans, all of the retirees would have between 10% to 50% of their pension plan cut. Mr. Flanders argued that if the retirees do not agree to the cut, then they could potentially have their entire pension retracted.
A pension planning meeting was held by Mr. Flanders to explain the reasoning for his plan and to have retirees state their concerns. The plan, called The Big Ask, will be voted on by the retirees in the near future. Mr. Flanders fears that the plan will not pass since the general attitude of the retiree was that the plan was unfair.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen are following closely all issues related to debt, especially issues affecting the general public. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-LAWYER or visit are website at http://bankruptcynyc.com/ for more information.

Mortgage Electronic Registry System faces more legal issues dealing with the company’s loan and foreclosure processes. According to a July 23rd, 2011 New York Times article, banking executives and state attorney generals have begun negotiating a settlement agreement to end the legal battles surrounding the company.
As of now, it is unclear how much protection will be provided to the banks in regards to future litigation. The banks are hoping for broad terms to cover them, whereas, the attorney generals are fighting for narrow terms to help protect consumers in the future.
Although the settlement terms are unclear at this time, it clear that the Mortgage Electronic Registry System will be facing heavy legal criticism. Mortgage Electronic Registry System, or better known as MERS, was originally established in the mid 1990s by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The company increased the major banks’ profits by cutting corners and robo-signing.
Since the beginning of the company MERS has been linked to thousands of foreclosure problems. The MERS company has insisted that they have cleaned up their practices, and are fighting for a waiver to all future litigation. It is unclear whether they will receive this waiver.
If you are facing any legal issues regarding a foreclosure or bankruptcy, then please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-LAWYER or visit our website at http://bankruptcynyc.com/ more information.

Lee B. Farkas, former chairman of mortgage firm Taylor, Bean & Whitaker, is being sentenced to 30 years in prison for bank fraud, The New York Times reports. “Former Chairman of Mortgage Firm Sentenced to 30 years in Bank Fraud,” The New York Times, Friday, July 1, 2011.

Mr. Farkas was accused in federal court of being the mastermind of a $2.9 billion scheme, one of the largest bank fraud schemes in history. According to prosecutors, in 2002 Taylor Bean was suffering considerable losses and the firm hid these losses by secretly overdrawing the firm’s account with Colonial Bank. Taylor and Bean sold Colonial about $1.5 billion in “worthless” and “fake” mortgages. The government then guaranteed these loans. Colonial had to file for bankruptcy in August 2009.

Prosecutors also added that Mr. Farkas diverted more than $40 million to finance a very lavish lifestyle, including a private jet, vacation homes and a collection of vintage cars.

With the help of letters from friends and supporters, Mr. Farkas’ defense lawyers tried to present him as a generous person that helped people in need. According to the defense, Mr. Farkas paid a strangers’ medical bills, frequently donated to the Salvation Army’s Christmas fundraiser, and even took a mother and child in his private jet for a cancer treatment.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely cases related to the mortgage and bank industries to help better represent the interests of our clients. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of financial advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

We all know that the job market is less than sunny for law school graduates. However, it is not clear what exactly is the job market for these students and future professionals, The New York Times reports. “Law School Economics: Ka-Ching!,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 17, 2011.

Universities such as New York University, Yale and Harvard claim that the median private-sector salary of graduates is $160,000. However, according to Richard Matasar, dean of New York Law School (NYLS), students are being explained a more realistic picture: “[W]e explicitly tell them that most graduates find work in small to medium firms at salaries between $35,000 and $75,000.”

But that’s only the salary. But how about these graduates make these salaries? It is not that clear neither. For instance, according to NYLS data, of the class of 2010 only 26 percent reported their salaries.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about the economic conditions of everyone. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of financial advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

A hacker group has been attacking websites for the City of Orlando in retaliation for the arrest of members of an antipoverty group, The New York Times reports. “Citing Homeless Law, Hackers Turn Sights on Orlando,” The New York Times, Friday, July 1, 2011.

The hacker group is Anonymous. In the past they claimed responsibility for disabling the websites of MasterCard and the Church of Scientology.

The people arrested belong to a group called Orlando Food Not Bombs. This group offers vegan and vegetarian meals twice a week to homeless people.

But the City of Orlando arrested members of this group. According to the city, they are not complying with a 2006 ordinance that requires organizations to have a permit to give food to groups of 25 people or more in downtown parks. This ordinance was passed after residents and business owners complained about the feedings. After this new rule, any group is limited to two permits per year per park. As of early July, more than 25 members of Orlando Food Not Bombs were arrested.

Because of these arrests, Anonymous hacked the websites of the city’s leading redevelopment organization, the local Fraternal Order of Police, and the mayor’s re-election campaign. “Anonymous believes that people have the right to organize, that people have the right to give to the less fortunate and that people have the right to commit acts of kindness and compassion,” the group explained in a news release and video posted on You-Tube. “However, it appears the police and your lawmakers of Orlando do not.”

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned about the current situation in Orlando. If you are struggling with debt, and/or you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Despite so many tough challenges in the economy, law schools have remained impressively profitable, The New York Times, reports. “Law School Economics: Ka-Ching!,” The New York Times, Sunday, July 17, 2011.

The situation with law schools is mind boggling. The current economy is making fewer jobs available to law graduates. However, law school enrollment is up and the schools are increasing their tuitions significantly.

One example is New York Law School. Although this law school is ranked in the bottom third of all law schools in the country, it charges as much as $47,800 in tuition and fees, more than Harvard. And in the fall of 2009 enrollment went up 30 percent. In sum, more students are graduating with a lot of debt, when the job market is much weaker than in the past.

Law schools are earning so much money that they are even forced to give as much as 30 percent of their revenue to fund other university programs.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are concerned that a growing number of graduates will be burdened with a lot of student debt in an uncertain economy. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of financial advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The president and CEO of HSBC Bank USA did not attend the sanction hearing regarding a foreclosure case, the New York Law Journal reports. “Judge Weighs Sanction Over Faulty Bank Documents,” New York Law Journal, Monday, July 18, 2011, reporting on HSBC v. Taher, 9320-2009.

Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Arthur M. Schack judge had ordered Irene Dorner, president and CEO of HSBC Bank USA, to attend a sanction hearing regarding a foreclosure case. Justice Schack also ordered Frank Cassara, legal representative of HSBC Bank, to attend this hearing.

But only Mr. Cassara attended the sanction hearing. When Justice Schack confronted Mr. Cassara about why Ms. Dorner violated his court order to appear, Mr. Cassara explained that she was complying by appearing through counsel. Justice Schack replied “That’s your opinion.”

In this case Ellen Taher, borrower and the defendant of this case, defaulted on the mortgage payments for her residence. Ms. Taher had executed a consolidation of two mortgages, extension and modification agreement with the lender, Delta Funding Corporation. But Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), transferred the mortgage and note from Delta Funding Corporation to HSBC in February 2009.

The judge decided in this case that HSBC lacked standing because MERS never proved that it had the promissory note. But also HSBC is under fire for mishandling foreclosure applications, including robosigning, or the practice of signing numerous foreclosure affidavits without following the proper procedures, even falsifying.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely how foreclosure cases are being handled and decided to better represent the interests of out clients. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of financial advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

Many corporations and business people owe more than $65 billion in fines, and only a very small percentage is being paid, The New York Times reports. “Debt Collections Elude Uncle Sam,” The New York Times, Monday, July 4, 2011.

For instance, in 2009 a court ruled that National Century Financial Enterprises, a health care finance company in Ohio, had to pay $2.38 billion to defrauded investors. But the company had paid only $3.1 million in fines and many of the people involved are in prison.

A recent study helps to illustrate the problem of the failure to collect these fines. According to the study, the courts scatter responsibility for the collection of these judgments across the 94 United States Attorneys’ offices. But these offices have been unsuccessful. The payment rate is only 4 percent. Agencies do not make a lot of effort to go after the money because the money is not available.

The article proposes privatizing the enforcement of these judgments, explaining that banks and hedge funds make a lot of money buying bankruptcy claims and other claims at a discount and then going after debtors. One justification is the current massive deficit.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent news related to the law and the economy to better represent the interests of our clients. If you are struggling with debt, and/or you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us at 1-800-660-5299 or 1-800-660-LAWYER or visit us at www.bankruptcynyc.com for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times reported in a July 2nd, 2011 article that President Barack Obama nominated Thomas J. Curry to lead the Office of Comptroller of the Currency. The job entails overseeing hundreds of national banks, both small and large.
It is expected that the Republican Party will grill Mr. Curry on his commitment to “maintaining the agency’s independence from the administration.”
The Office of Comptroller of the Currency has lacked a permanent leader for nearly a year. But Democrats believe Mr. Curry will do a lot of good for the office. “Tom has been a strong effective director at the F.D.I.C. for the past seven years, and his experience should serve him well as the next comptroller of the currency,” declared South Dakota Democrat Senator Tim Johnson.
From his years running a state-banking agency, it is clear that Mr. Curry believes that the financial laws placed on banks should be used to protect consumers more. Republicans will most likely question Mr. Curry significantly on this central topic at his confirmation hearing.
There are still numerous other vacancies in senior regulatory and economic positions, some due to Obama not yet nominating a person and others because the Senate Republicans have not allowed a vote to take place on his selections.
The Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to financial matters. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

As of July 21st, 2011, consumers will be entitled to have a better understanding to how the creditors view them, as reported in a July 9th, 2011 New York Times article.
Consumers who are denied or do not receive the best interest rate on a loan by a creditor are now allowed to view the credit report the creditor used to make their decision. This will allow the consumer to double check and make sure there are no errors on the credit report that was used by the creditor.
The rule was put into place as part of the broader financial regulatory overhaul. Under these new guidelines, if a creditor denies the consumer a loan or the best interest they must send a notice that includes; the factors that hurt the consumer’s credit score, the name on the credit score, the date of the credit score, as well as a few other details that the creditor reviewed in making their final decision.
Although this will allow the consumer some insight on how the creditor made their decision, it is still important for consumers to check regularly on their credit score for errors or suspicion activity.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Unemployment numbers are still up and housing prices are still down, which has led to Obama’s administration having to go back to the drawing boards.
The New York Times report in a July 8th, 2011 article, that Obama’s administration has implemented that all loans that are presently insured by the federal government will allow unemployed homeowners a grace period from making their mortgage payments.
Qualifying homeowners could receive up to a twelve-month grace period on their mortgage loans while they search for employment. The downside is, currently, only the federal government insures roughly 17% of mortgage loans.
The federal government is hoping that other mortgage companies will follow their example and offer a grace period on payments for those clients that are still seeking employment.
However, the government has expressed that mortgages owned by large corporations like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae will not be receiving a grace period. These two companies currently control approximately half of all of the mortgage loans.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to debt, including legal issues with foreclosure. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

The new foreclosure policies placed on the 14 major banks have led to a significant decrease in the number of properties foreclosed on, reported The Wall Street Journal on May 28th, 2011.
These new polices were placed into effect to prevent the banks from continuing the use of “robo-signing.” A method that sped up the foreclosure process by inappropriately signing high quantities of foreclosure files without checking for accuracy.
Since the “robo-signing” scandal broke last September government agencies and the banks have been trying to correct the situation. Recently, the court system has placed a higher level of standard for the banks to meet before they allowed beginning the foreclosure process against a delinquent borrower.
As a result of the new standard the number of monthly foreclosures has dropped. The number of foreclosures in April was 31% lower than from March’s and 15% lower than April of 2010. Roughly, 187,400 properties were foreclosed this past April, which is the lowest it has been since 2008. Nationally the foreclosure rate is down 32% since last September.
The foreclosure process now has long delays, causing the average number of days a loan remains delinquent to increased. Although these standards are in favor of the borrowers they lead to high expenses for the banks, which could result in fewer loans being granted or fees to increase to help cover these cost.
If you are facing a foreclosure or have any questions or concerns regarding a property dispute, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

Customers for M&T Bank will be able to view their credit score the way a lender does, according to a New York Times article published on June 18th, 2011.
For a $2.99 monthly fee the bank’s customer will be able to view their account and his or her credit score online. The credit score will be provided from Equifax, one of the three national credit score bureaus.
M&T Bank stated that their reason for creating this new feature was because of the heightened sense of awareness people have shown towards their credit score.
More people are concerned about the possibility of having their credit score ruined because of identity theft or credit score mistakes. This new heightened sense of concern is most likely related to all of the recent security breaches and hacker attacks that have been reported in the media.
The bank further stated that the $2.99 fee was to pay Equifax for the credit score report. The bank explained that, contrary to popular belief, the bank is unable to view a customer’s credit scores for free.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

An anonymous letter sent from a current employee sparked an investigation against Goldman Sachs, reported The New York Times in a May 26th, 2011, article.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is currently conducting an investigation to see if Goldman Sachs company was systematically rejecting borrowers in an attempt to lower their loan payments through government programs.
The letter that tipped off the FRB to conduct this investigation claimed that the employee had first hand witnessed loans that qualified for the government modification but were denied by Goldman Sachs for unknown reasons.
If the investigation leads to the finding of violations committed by Goldman Sachs, then the company will face the possibility of having to pay heavy fines. This investigation is just one of many recent violation claims made against the company.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding a financial or bankruptcy dispute please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

The housing market has many people wondering, “how low can it go?” The New York Times reported in a June 1st, 2011, article that experts are split on whether or not the housing market has actually reached its rock bottom.
Many experts agree that the housing market will at some point start to get better but they differ on when that day might come. James F. Smith, chief economist for the investment firm Parsec Financial and a rare housing bull, believes that the housing market will start to increase but over a long process. Specifically “predicting a 25% climb from here by mid-decade.”
Housing prices had a steady increase in the early 2000s, reaching its peak in 2006. But the peak was short lived and fell dramatically in 2007. The market has not been able to make a full recovery since.
Mr. Smith explained that there is a need for housing but does not know when people will actually start buying. Many economists still believe that there could be large market drops to still come. Stating that there are still a lot of contributing forces that are driving the prices down; like the fact that during the housing boom builders built an excessive amount of unneeded homes, people’s fear of purchasing, and the current number of home going into foreclosures.
Overall the experts believe that once the public’s confidence begins to increase they will start to buy and that will pull the housing market out of its slump. Until that day it is clearly a guessing game on whether the market will still drop.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are experienced in foreclosures and other financial dispute cases. If you have any questions or concerns regarding a property issue please contact our law offices for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times reported in a May 30th, 2011, article that the number of homeowners in America is dropping.
Even with the economy slowly beginning to turn around since last year. The American public is not looking to buy their own home. Many Americans are simple are unable to because of unemployment, previous foreclosures, or are trapped in a current mortgage that is more than what the actual home is worth and others are scared to make the commitment of purchasing.
These factors and fears have started to change the way Americans view owning a home. Currently the housing market is in good shape for those looking to buy. Interest rates are at an all time low and the prices are overall extremely affordable. Even with this factors a significant percentage of the public are choosing to rent rather than buy.
Recent construction company statistics support this finding. Since the beginning of this year construction companies have seen a 21% increase in the request of building multiunit buildings, whereas single-family units are down 22%.
People just prefer to invest elsewhere like, Susan Lindsey of San Diego. Lindsey says that she was originally eager for the housing market to crash so she could get a place at a reasonably priced. But now with the prices down roughly a third, she prefers to rent and use her money on other investments like gold.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are experienced in foreclosure and bankruptcy law. If you have any questions or concerns regarding a legal dispute, please contact our law offices for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times reported on Sunday, November 28th, 2010, that government is starting to increase scrutiny on banks during foreclosure proceedings.
When a bank attempts to start the foreclosure process against their borrower the courts are now requiring they show proof that the bank is in control of the loan and that it has the right borrower and property. The government implemented this new standard in an effort to decrease the mishaps that were occurring from banks “robo-signing” foreclosures.
Mortgage lending banks have started to petition the courts in effort to get a relief against the standard when they cannot meet it. In two different Atlanta cases Donald F. Walton, the United States Trustee for the Atlanta region, has stepped in to request that the courts do not grant the relief motion for the banks.
Mr. Walton argues that the banks should not be allowed to begin a foreclosure unless they meet the standard, specifically proving that they are currently in charge of the borrower’s loan.
Other trustees across the country have started to intervene as well to prevent the banks from getting the relief they request. The overall goal is to create a more stabilized and structured foreclosure system.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding a foreclosure or bankruptcy issue please contract the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

Looks like banks are getting barely a slap on the wrist with new guidelines set by the Justice Department, as reported in a New York Times article on July 8th, 2011.
Under the Justice Department’s new rules, a bank can now avoid being labeled as guilty or not guilty, rather the bank can swear they will not behave in that manner again and have the charges dropped completely. Seems fair right? Many do not see it that way.
“If you do not punish crimes, there’s really no reason they won’t happen again,” said Mary Ramirez, a professor at Washburn University School of Law. A lot of economists, including Ms. Ramirez, criticize the leniency these new guidelines impose, claiming that the rules open the floodgates for more fraud and white collar-crimes to occur.
The Justice Department defends their new guidelines on the grounds that they would rather have the banks pay penalties and restitution, than see the banks have to cut jobs, pension plans or other benefits to cover the cost of legal fees needed to defend against a charge.
Looks like the brass-knuckle era of holding companies accountable for their wrong full actions is coming to an end, because the legal department is to afraid to rock the boat.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP,( http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely all issues related to debt, especially issues regarding the laws of bankruptcy. If you are having problems with debt and you are ins need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 also visit our office for a free initial consultation.

Everyone knows that the sooner you pay off your mortgage the less interest you will have to pay, in turn you save money. Many mortgage companies, especially banks, have now started to encourage their customers more to use their biweekly payoff program. But is it really worth it to enroll in such a program? A July 3rd, 2011 New York Times article discusses the program and whether it is in the best interest of a consumer.
When setting up a payment plan it is important to calculate a few factors such as, the cost of the mortgage, the amount that one can reasonable afford to pay, and how long it will take to pay off the total mortgage. Depending on these factors it may or may not be in the best interest to do a biweekly payment plan.
If you do determine it is in your best interest to do a biweekly payment plan, then it is important to check the cost of enrolling in such program. Some banks do not charge, whereas, others could charge up to $365 just to enroll and a monthly service fee.
Many financial specialists believe that a person can obtain their own payment plan. For example, if you have an online account that allows you to pay your mortgage online, then you could set it up so that your payments are automatically taken out and save on the service fees.
Overall it is in the best interest to pay off one’s mortgage at the fastest rate possible but a person must also be realistic at their financial status.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to debt, including legal issues with foreclosure. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

The New York Law Journal reported on Friday, April 22nd, 2011, that the attorneys dealing with a divorce case between Steven Simkin and Laura Blank would be heading back to court in September or October to renegotiate the divorce settlement.
The original divorce settlement included Mr. Simkin paying Ms. Blank half of a $5.4 million investment. Mr. Simkin’s investment was made worthless through Bernard L. Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, making the divorce settlement inaccurate.
The Appellate Division, First Department, agreed to reopen the divorce case since the settlement was founded on a material mutual mistake regarding the net worth of the investment.
If you are interested in filing for a divorce or have any legal questions regarding the divorce procedure, please feel free to contact the law office of Jayson Lutzky P.C.

Since 2008 the headlines have been filled with articles discussing, analyzing, and questioning the Ponzi scheme committed by Bernard Madoff. Even with all of the news coverage, no one has been able to truly answer how an ordinary man was able to commit such an elaborate crime for such a long period of time.
Diana B. Henriques was the first reporter to be allowed to have an on-the-record interview with Madoff after his arrest and has been covering the story since it first broke in 2008. The New York Times reported on May 13th, 2011, that Henriques’ new book “The Wizard of Lies” was the closest the general public would come to fully understanding how Madoff was able to pull of such a swindle.
The book begins in December 2008 when Madoff finally confesses to his family about the crimes he has committed. The book explains the details of the scam through a realistic approach. Not focusing on the black and white facts but telling the story through a humanistic approach.
Henriques delivers a detailed book painting Madoff not as a master criminal but a man who lacks the ability to tell the truth. The New York Times stated that next to the FBI and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Henriques “probably knows more than anyone.”
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are dedicated bankruptcy attorneys. If you have any questions or concerns regarding a bankruptcy issue, please contact our offices for a free initial consultation.

The Court found in favor of a couple who had claimed to have been victims of a mortgage scam, The New York Law Journal published on May 23rd, 2011.
The couple had decided to refinance their home’s mortgage in 2007 to avoid a foreclosure. They contacted and agreed to refinance through the Triumph Mortgage Corp, via Fin Funding Corp. and its principal John Langley.
The deed of the home was to be placed in a third party’s name and the couple was to pay monthly rent which was to be used to pay off their mortgage. Furthermore, the couple was given the option to repurchase the home once they were able to. The company and the couple closed on this mortgage in July 2007.
In January 2008 the couple learned that none of their rent had gone towards their mortgage. As a result the couple was evicted and foreclosure proceedings followed. The property was then sold in January 2009.
The original agreement had also led the couple to believe that the third party, Lewshawn Jerman, would only share ownership of the property and this would be reflected in the deed. However, the couple later learned that Mr. Jerman was the only name on the deed after closing.
The Court found in favor of the couple for a total of $479,586 for damages, legal fees, interest and other costs.
If you are facing a foreclosure and have questions or concerns please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP. for a free initial consultation.

Many people have heard the legal term “subpoena” but do not fully understand what it is and how it works. To simply put it, the court system uses subpoenas to help obtain information needed to complete a trial case.
There are two types of subpoenas; subpoenas ad testificandum and subpoenas duces tecum.
A subpoena ad testicandum makes a certain person’s appearance required on a certain court date to give testimony to the court on the case subject matter.
A subpoena duces tecum requires a certain piece of evidence, such as a document, to be turned over to the courts for review.
Once a court has issued a subpoena it must be “served” to the correct party. Only a designated court officer may issue a subpoena to the party.
Failure to comply with a subpoena may lead to the subpoenaed party being found guilty in the contempt of court; this than could lead to the person having to pay a fine or even having a criminal charge brought against them.
If you have been summoned through a subpoena and are in need of legal advice or representation please feel free to contact the law office of Jayson Lutzky P.C. for a free consultation.

Will the banks finally have to answer? That was the question asked in the New York Times article published May 18th, 2011. And the question many unhappy Americans are still waiting on an answer for.
With the recent robo-signing scandal, exposed last year, many people are wondering why these banks did not get a harsher punishment for their actions. The same banks that were using this robo-signing system, which caused many borrowers’ properties to be foreclosed on without the proper procedure, were also giving large mortgage loans to unworthy borrowers.
Not following the proper foreclosure procedure and giving large loans to borrowers with a poor credit history… what did the banks thing would happen? Yet many people feel like attorney general did not make the bank pay for their wrongdoing but merely gave them a slap on the wrist.
A more extensive investigation is needed to see just how many laws were broken by the banks during this robo-signing era and what standard the banks were using when giving out large mortgage loans to their borrowers.
Like many others the New York Times says that it is time for our Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, as well as others to stop ignoring and down playing the wrong doings and start making the banks take full responsibility for their actions.
If you are considering filing for bankruptcy or have any questions or concerns please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

The Salvation Army sued the Bank of New York Mellon for $22 million accusing that this institution has mismanaged the charity’s assets, the New York Times reports. “Salvation Army Accuses Bank of Mismanaging its Assets,” The New York Times, Saturday, April 2, 2011.

According to the lawsuit filed by the southern division of the Salvation Army, the BNY Mellon invested the nonprofit group’s assets in mortgage-backed securities as well as other risky investments. “As a result of BNY Mellon’s misconduct, the Salvation Army has incurred losses and is left holding unproductive, toxic assets with extended maturity dates, the values of which have substantially declined,” the Salvation Army argues in this suit. “The Salvation Army cannot now devote those assets to its many charitable projects.”

A spokesperson from The BNY Mellon defended this organization’s actions as appropriate, pointed out that the bank has a very rigorous process, and said that the Salvation Army’s claims are without merit.

The Salvation Army is one of the largest charities in the country, with assets of over $8.8 billion in 2009, the latest year for which this information is available.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely controversies related to claims from consumers against banks for alleged negligence or abuse. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

“In this court’s judgment, no legally married couple should be entitled to fewer bankruptcy rights than any other legally married couple,” declared Judge Thomas B. Donovan in his written opinion on June 13th, 2011. Judge Donovan was presiding over the bankruptcy case of Gene Douglas Balas and Carlos A. Morales, a legally married same-sex couple.
As reported by the New York Times in a June 15th, 2011, article, the couple filed a joint bankruptcy, but faced legal troubles when the bankruptcy trustee filed a motion to have the case dismissed under the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Under DOMA, a state may decide not to uphold a same-sex marriage. DOMA further declares that the federal government does not recognize a same-sex marriage. If the state did not recognize the marriage of Balas and Morales, then the couple would not be entitled to file a joint bankruptcy and would have to file separately.
After receiving notice of the trustee’s motion to dismiss, Balas and Morales filed a petitioned to the United States Bankruptcy Court of Central District of California requesting their permission to file jointly.
Judge Donovan reviewed the case and found in favor of the couple, allowing the bankruptcy to continue.
Furthermore, 20 out of 24 Central California Bankruptcy judges signed the opinion establishing the new precedent that would be followed in these types of cases.
One of the signing judges, Judge Sheri Bluebond, explained that the other four judges might have not signed because of procedural or logistical reasons. Judge Bluebond additional stressed that the judges signed the opinion to establish a precedent to follow for future cases.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are following closely all issues related to debt, especially issues regarding the laws of bankruptcy. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us or visit our office for a free initial consultation

Good news for troubled debtors with federal benefits. Under a new rule effective May 1, 2011, financial institutions must follow certain procedures if they wish a court to order the garnishment of bank accounts of debtors with deposited federal benefits, the New York Law Journal reports. “New Rule on Garnishment, Venue Provisions, Statute of Limitations,” New York Law Journal Thursday, April 14, 2011.

Federal law already protects debtors from garnishment federal benefits such as Social Security, SSI benefits, and VA benefits. However, financial institutions may be able to get the court to order the garnishment of a bank account, even if this account carries deposited federal benefits. Although the debtor will eventually be able to get the federal benefits that have been temporarily garnished, he or she has to show the court that these funds are exempted. And by the time all this is cleared out, the debtor has been already hurt by this temporary lack of access to benefits that are exempted by law in the first place.

Under the new law, once the garnishment order is received, the creditor or debt collector must review the account history for the last 60 days, what is known as the ‘lookback period.’ The burden is now on the financial institution to check if there are federal benefits deposited during this lookback period. If there are, then the financial institution must ensure that the debtor has access to what is called the ‘protected amount.’

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased with this new rule that helps to ensure that federal benefits already exempted from garnishment remain that way. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

$23,000 in debt would concern the average person. However, it appears college students are not average. The New York Times reported in a June 18th, 2011, article that the average college student is graduating college with more than $23,000 in student loans and over $4,000 of credit card debt. That fact is not the surprising, what is shocking is that these students are claiming they feel “empowered” by their debt.
Empowered? Really $23,000 in debt is empowering? But that is what a study published in the journal of Social Science Research found after surveying 3,079 students, majority of the students were in their early twenties.
Rachel E. Dwyer, an assistant professor of sociology at Ohio State and the study’s lead author, stated that many of these students look at their debt as an investment into their future career. She explained that a lot of the credit card debt resulted from student’s buying textbooks, school supplies, or that perfect interview outfit.
The study also concluded that the use of a credit card gave the students a sense of power or control over their decisions.
On the other hand, the students aged 28 to 34 had a different view on their student debt. Many of these individuals showed signs of high stress and anxiety over the money they owed.
During a student’s college years they do not understand the full effect that debt can have on a person’s life. Too much debt can result in a person delaying the start of a family, affecting the ability to purchase your first home, or having to turn down a desired job for one with a larger salary. Yes, in today’s world some educational loans are needed but students should think twice before swiping that credit card or using the left over loan money on something other than needed school expenses. It might be empowering in the beginning but it will be more empowering once you start making an income and do not have to give a large portion away.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are concerned about the problems student are having with eductional debt. If you are experiencing problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us or visit us for an initial free consultation.

Unemployment is currently the biggest contributor to property foreclosures, reported The New York Times in a June 10th, 2011, article.
Since President Obama took office he has been trying to stabilize the number of foreclosures. In 2009, Obama started the Home Affordable Modification Program as a primary foreclosure prevention tool. The program was designed to offer incentives to the banks to modify mortgages and mortgage payments by reducing monthly payments for those eligible homeowners.
When the program first started they had the goal of helping three-to-four million people. But, as of now, it has fallen extremely behind in reaching these goal numbers. Since the organization first started in 2009 they have only helped 670,000 borrowers.
Other prevention and assistance programs have been an effort to help borrowers with risky mortgages, homeowners who are jobless, and homeowners whose income has been lowered.
However, these programs have started to face their own problems as well. For example, in early 2010 the Treasury Department started providing borrowers with a three month grace period on their mortgage payments if they could show that they were recently unemployed. The issue with this theory is that the average time a person remains unemployed is presently nine months, which is triple the amount of time of the grace period.
These problems have started to be addressed by government agencies. Recently, the Department of Housing and Urban Development has received $1 billion in funding. This funding is to be used to create governmental loans to help support those unemployed homeowners for up-to-two years. Unfortunately, at this time, only five states are accepting loan applications because it appears the other states have run into delays. The agency is working to correct this matter but is unaware as to how long the delays will last.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are following closely all issues related to foreclosures, especially how foreclosures are affecting consumer’s debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us or visit our office for a free initial consultation.

Customers for M&T Bank will be able to view their credit score the way a lender does, according to a New York Times article published on June 18th, 2011.
For a $2.99 monthly fee the bank’s customer will be able to view their account and his or her credit score online. The credit score will be provided from Equifax, one of the three national credit score bureaus.
M&T Bank stated that their reason for creating this new feature was because of the heightened sense of awareness people have shown towards their credit score.
More people are concerned about the possibility of having their credit score ruined because of identity theft or credit score mistakes. This new heightened sense of concern is most likely related to all of the recent security breaches and hacker attacks that have been reported in the media.
The bank further stated that the $2.99 fee was to pay Equifax for the credit score report. The bank explained that, contrary to popular belief, the bank is unable to view a customer’s credit scores for free.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, (http://bankruptcynyc.com/) are following closely to all issues related to debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us at 1-800-660-LAWYER or 1-800-660-5299 or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Elizabeth Warren, the special advisor on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, faced heavy accusations at her May 24th, 2011, Congressional hearing regarding her possible misleading testimony that she gave at a hearing in March, as reported in a New York Times article published May 25th, 2011.
Ms. Warren defended herself at the hearing against the allegations that she lied and gave misleading facts regarding the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Representative Patrick T. McHenry, a North Carolina Republican and chairman of the subcommittee of the House, oversaw the hearing. Mr. McHenry accused Ms. Warren several times of misleading Congress on how involved she was in settlements talk between state and federal government officials and mortgage servicing companies.
Many commentaries compared Mr. McHenry’s tone and statements to the overall level of frustration many Republican officials feel towards the consumer agency.
After an hour of questioning, which at one point led to Ms. Warren being asked only yes or no questions, Ms. Warren objected to the chairman’s request for a hearing recess. Ms. Warren stated she had only agreed to an hour hearing and that she did not have additional time. This statement led to Mr. McHenry’s extreme outburst and further accused Ms. Warren of lying to Congress and “playing games.”
During the altercation Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland, a senior Democrat, attempted to resolve the dispute. “Mr. Chairman,” Cummings said, “I’m trying to be cordial here- you just accused the lady of lying. You need to clear this up with your staff.”
However, Mr. McHenry did not apologize for any of his statements. Instead he repeated his negative views of Ms. Warren in a statement released after the hearing and again on the CNBC morning show.
Ms. Warren has continually repeated that she has been nothing but forthcoming on the information requested by the committee. Claiming that she had only advised both state and federal agencies on how to address mortgage service lawsuits and followed guidelines created by the consumer agency.
Many politicians are curious as to how this hearing could affect Ms. Warren’s future political career.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are following closely to all issues related to debt, especially mortgage debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, then please call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Goldman Sachs’ luck doesn’t appear to be changing any time soon. As reported by The New York Times on June 3rd, 2011, the Manhattan District Attorney has issued a subpoena against the Wall Street investment bank.
Currently, the Manhattan district attorney is conducting an investigation on the role Goldman Sachs potentially played in the financial crisis. Some have claimed that Goldman Sachs knowingly sold bundles of bad mortgages to their clients just before the mortgage market collapsed.
The subpoena was issued after a Senate report on the company was released from the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. According to an inside source the subpoena only requested documents and information that was discussed in this 650-page report. Additionally, the source told The New York Times that the company was not surprised by the subpoena.
As of now the investigation has not led to any charges filed against the company or their employees. However, due to the negative press Goldman Sachs’ stocks have started to drop.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely how recent financial issues may impact consumers, especially those struggling with mortgage debt. If you are having problems with debt and are in need of legal advice, then please feel free to call or visit our office for a free consultation.

A mortgage company recently settled a claim for violating the Fair Housing Act. The company was accused of discriminating against women who were on maternity leave, reported The New York Times on June 1st, 2011.
The company settled the case with one accuser outside of court for $15,000. In light of this claim the company as also set aside roughly $750,000 to compensate any other women that may have been affected by this discrimination.
The original accuser was a woman who had originally been approved by the company for the mortgage while she was pregnant. However, the mortgage approval for the mortgage was revoked once the company had learned she was on maternity leave.
Previously, The New York Times had reported that lenders had started to take a harder look at their potential borrower’s earning, but the Department of Housing and Urban Development believes the company went to far by singling out pregnant women.
The Fair Housing Act was established to prevent people from discriminating against others based on race, gender, and social statuses.
If you believe you have been discriminated under the Fair Housing Act, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen LLP, for a free initial consultation.

Foreclosed homes have become a cash deal market, reported The New York Times on May 12th, 2011.
Borrowers, who are in over their heads and owe more on the property than its actually worth, generally neglect the home’s maintenance and upkeep. This lack of care results into a lot of repair work needed on the house. Normally the borrowers have defaulted to the point where the property’s utilities have been shut off and the overall appearance has begun to diminish.
Foreclosed home have started to become an investors market. Majority of the people purchasing these foreclosed homes are people looking to invest in them, not live in them. Many of these properties are in such dismay that the investors are the only ones placing an offer on the property. Allowing the investors to get properties at extremely discounted prices.
The investors have also opt to do all-cash deals for these properties. This is because many lenders will not support a loan for a property in such a poor condition. A potential buyer cannot receive funding from a lender if the home does not appear to be in “good physical shape.”
Many foreclosed homes do not meet this “good physical shape” standard since the properties frequently sit for months without power and water. The poor physical shape makes it incredibly hard to get a loan, which has led to 35% of all property sales being cash deals currently. This is the highest cash deal percentages ever in the housing market.
For those who can get a loan The New York Times recommended looking into getting a 203(k) loan.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding a property issue, then please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

The court ruled against a man’s claim for quieting the title of a property he was in control of, reported The New York Law Journal in a May 26th, 2011 article.
The man, Jeffers, attempted to quiet the title of a property he was using for the location of his moving and storage company in New York.
Jeffers original came into possession of the property in 1997 when he entered into a leasing agreement with Charlie Matthew Storey. Jeffers argued that the during the negotiations with Storey, Storey implied that once he came in to possession of the property’s title he would then transfer the title to Jeffers. Unfortunately, Storey died before such action was performed.
The court denied Jeffers’ action to quiet title of the property using two different reasons to justify their decision.
The court first reasoned that Jeffers did not “suffer an irreparable injury without injunctive relief.” The court came to this conclusion on the grounds that the property in question was for commercial use not a residential use therefore; any injuries sustained would be from a commercial profit. The court found that this was not a true hardship suffered by Jeffers.
The court’s second reason was that the court found that Jeffers failed to meet the statutory time requirement needed for an adverse possession claim. Jeffers did not have sole possession of the property for the time period required by law.
The court found that Jeffers failed to show the merits in his favor thus denied his action to quiet the title.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are experienced in property disputes. If you have any questions or concerns regarding a property issue, then please contact our offices for a free initial consultation.

It appears that debt collectors are starting to pay off the money owed by the debtor. Or at least their legal settlements are. As reported in the New York Law Journal on June 15th, 2011, many borrowers are starting to sue harassing creditors for not following the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
A New York Eastern Judge awarded judgment in favor of Rozier, debtor, against the credit agency Financial Recovery Systems Inc. (FRSI). The judge determined that
FRSI violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act after they sent a letter to Rozier containing vague language.
The judge applied the objective “least sophisticated consumer” standard and determined that the language was unclear to the actual amount of money owed by Rozier. In addition, the letter contained a sentence stating, “interest, late charges, or other charges may or may not be applicable.” The judge ruled that this was too vague because it did not inform the debtor whether the charges would be applied and how much these charges would be.
Debt collectors must follow all of the guidelines established under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Failure to do so results in heavy fines and money settlements in the favor of the debtor.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are following closely all issues related to consumers’ debt. If you are being harassed by debt collection agencies, then call or visit us for a free initial consultation. Just because you owe debt does not mean you have to deal with harassment.

The national index for home prices appears to be showing that the housing market is getting worse. But many critics do not believe the indexes are completely accurate, as reported in The New York Times on May 27th, 2011.
At the end of May the Federal Housing Finance Agency reported that the national index of home prices dropped 2.5% during the first quarter. Making it the quickest decline for a quarter since 2008. Many assume that the drop was caused by the homebuyer tax credit ending, which gave up to $7,500 to first time homebuyers to put towards a down payment.
Since 2007 the national index number has been dropping every quarter but many critics argue that these numbers may not truly reflect the housing market. Index numbers are based on the sale of the same home sold over an extended period of time. This number however, does not take into account the quality and general upkeep of that property. The property may still be worth its original price or more but because it has not been properly maintained the price drops.
In addition, when determining the index number refinancing appraisals are also factored into home sale numbers. These refinancing appraisals may be contributing to the index number being inaccurate because the only properties that can be refinanced are ones that are worth more than the money owed on them.
Overall, the housing market is still not completely stable but many are optimistic that it will soon have a turn around.
If you have questions or concerns regarding a financial matter, then please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

Cramming, or adding unauthorized charges on consumers’ phone bill, is an illegal practice that have existed for years, and yet it is more common than what people know, as explained in an article by the AARP. “Well, I’ll Be Crammed,” AARP, May/June 2010.

After the mandated breakup of Ma Bell in 1984, third-party billing was intended to reduce the number of phone bills. However, the problem is that people are getting third-parties charges of all kinds, from ring tones to charitable contributions to online-gambling debts.

Companies such as Enhanced Services Billing, Inc. (ESBI) have been for years acting as clearinghouses, charging consumers bills for phone companies. However, they have been making these unauthorized charges so frequently that its parent company, BSG, has been sued twice, and in 2008 it had to pay $1.9 million in a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

What can be done against cramming? You can ask your phone company to block all third-party charges, or what is known as a ‘third-party block.’ You can also file a complaint with the FTC.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP. are interested in protecting consumers against abusive practices from servicers. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

The U.S. government is suing Deutsche Bank for allegedly committing fraud for illegally benefiting from a program that insured mortgages, the New York Law Journal reports, “U.S. Charges Mortgage Fraud by Bank,” New York Law Journal, Wednesday, May 4, 2011.

Southern District U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara filed this civil complaint against Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT for over $1 billion under the False Claims Act. According to the lawsuit, the bank had a pattern of lying about the quality of the loans to benefit from the Federal Housing Administration’s mortgage program.

According to the complaint, Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT resold 39,000 mortgages they endorsed under the FHA program to investors. However, the defendants did not adequately followed quality control procedures nor checked for the income eligibility and creditworthiness of borrowers. Over 12,500 of MortgageITs loans have defaulted, the federal government notes in the lawsuit. And, according to the prosecutors, there could be an additional 7,500 mortgages that have defaulted and that have yet to result in the government payment claims.

A spokesperson from Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT said in a statement that the complaint was unreasonable and unfair and that they will intend to defend themselves vigorously against it.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely how homeowners are being hurt by reckless practices from lenders. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

“For the last three years, federal agencies have backed new mortgages as large as $729,750 in desirable neighborhoods in high-cost states like California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts.” Stated an article from The New York Times on May 10th, 2011. But the federal government is starting to close up shop for those looking to mortgage a high priced home.
Nine out of ten new mortgages started last year were backed the federal government. However, both the Democrats and Republicans now agree that this isn’t where the taxpayers’ money should go. Soon private mortgage companies will replace the federal government’s support. Many reasonably fear that this will lead to the requirement of a higher down payment that many can’t afford right now.
Residents of these high priced homes argue that they are being penalized for living in a high priced area. Furthermore, they are afraid this could lead to more foreclosures, since they can’t make such high payments. Whereas others like Michael S. Barr, a former Assistant Treasury Secretary and now professor at the University of Michigan Law School believe that living in an expensive home is not an entitlement.
Both the economy and housing market are currently in shambles. So, where should our tax dollars go in these tough times? Guess that just depends where you want to live.
If you are facing a foreclosure or have any legal questions regarding your property, please contact the law offices of Jayson Lutzky, P.C., for a free initial consultation.

Having bad neighbors can make anyone want to move, but it can also prevent you from being able too. The condition of properties neighboring yours can have a substantial affect in increasing or decreasing your property’s value, as discussed in a May 7th, 2011, Yahoo online article.
Here are the top seven neighbors that can greatly decrease your property’s value.

1. Power Plants- properties within a two-mile radius can see their property decrease in value roughly 4% to 7%.
2. Landfills- depending on the size of the landfill, a property within two miles can see their property decrease up to 15%.
3. Sex Offenders- a sex offender just 1/10 of a mile from your property can have a decrease on your property’s value.
4. Delinquent Bills- neighbors that don’t pay their home owner association fees, generally do not care about the upkeep appearance of their home. Their lack of maintenance can have a negative impact on the overall look of your property.
5. Foreclosures- a recent study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology showed that a home’s property value could decrease roughly 27% if they were within 250ft of a foreclosed home.
6. Landscaping- unpolished yards or property’s that look more like junkyards than lawns can also have an impact. A Virginia Tech University study showed an increase in a property’s value when their neighbor’s yard was well kept.
7. Closed Schools- The National Association of Realtors said that one of the biggest contributing factors that people look at is the location and quality of the neighboring school system. Neighborhoods that have poor quality school systems or long commutes are harder to sell.

If a neighboring property falls into one of these categories there are some things you try to do to prevent them. If you live in a neighborhood that has a homeowner’s association you can have them request your neighbor change their ways or you could personal send a letter addressing the problem.
However, if your neighborhood does not have a homeowner’s association or your neighbor does not correct the problem after receiving letters, than look at your communities’ rules, regulations, and ordinances on property upkeep. You may be able to file a legal grievance against your neighbor if they are not following the letter of the law.
If you have any legal questions or concerns dealing with a property issue please contact the law offices of Jayson Lutzky, P.C. for a free initial consultation.

One way to take better care of your finances is to keep all your documents electronically filed. Going paperless have several advantages, but it is a decision that should be done carefully, as explained in an article by Money magazine. “Going Paperless the Right Way,” Money, May 2011.

Saving your financial documents electronically is better than having them on paper for several reasons. The most well-known justification is to save trees. But also you can find statements sooner, search transactions more easily, as well as lower the risk of having your mail stolen and risking your identity.

But going paperless should be done the right way. First, you should create an electronic cabinet. This is important because financial institutions may delete statements after a year. Therefore, you should download documents and create folders for proof of deductible expenses, major purchases, such as insurance and warranties, bills, as well as purchase slips and end-of-year statement on investment accounts.

Another important tip is to set up a review system. You can sign up for e-mail alerts notifying when a bill or statement is available. These alerts are helpful to avoid ignoring the statements and missing important information or changes.

Finally, you should take measures to protect your information. Avoid having your data being lost by a computer crash by backing it up onto a CD or external hard drive. Privacy is another concern that should be addressed by having an up-to-date antivirus software, using an effective password, as well as saving your files with encryption.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP welcome how technology is improving the lives of everyone, especially consumers, but at the same time is aware of the challenges caused by these changes. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Property foreclosures are increasing and so is the level of concern and confusion. Which is why large mortgage companies like Bank of America have had to resort to opening more help centers The New York Times reported on May 5th, 2011.
The Bank of America started the process of increasing the help available to their borrowers after issues with the foreclosure process surfaced last fall. These issues included the materials being lost, employees only glancing at the foreclosure paperwork, and robo-signing documents. Bank of America is attempting to address these issues by opening 40 new help centers and doubling the amount of employees that work with borrowers facing foreclosure.
Although some critics do not feel this will help lower the foreclosure rate, it is a step in the right path to lower the rate of wrongful foreclosures and help assist confessed borrowers.
If you are facing a property foreclosure or believe that you have been falsely foreclosed upon, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free consultation.

The New York Times reports that state Attorneys General are proposing a very helpful plan that would protect struggling homeowners in a trial modification. “A Plan to Make it Harder for Banks to Foreclose on Homeowners,” The New York Times, Saturday, March 5, 2011. According to the plan, if the borrower has made three payments in a trial modification, he or she would be given a permanent modification and the bank would be prohibited from starting foreclosure proceedings.

This proposal gives the government and its recently created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau more power to protect the homeowner against unfair foreclosure proceedings. This new bureau is overseen by Elizabeth Warren, a former Harvard professor who has been very critical of the financial services industry.

So far the banks have declined to comment on the new proposal, but most in the past have been critical of the new bureau. According to these banks, the new powers of this bureau would only slow foreclosure procedures and make harder to borrow in the future.

Reactions from individuals and groups defending the interests of borrower have been diverse. There are some who feel cautiously optimistic, while others believe that the banks will find a way to circumvent this and any new restriction.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP welcome this new proposal that would help and protect the struggling borrower who is trying to keep his or her home. If you are experiencing problems regarding your mortgage and you are in need of legal advice, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

MERS Shareholders

MERS stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems and is a system owned by major banks and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that serves as an agent for institutions that own mortgages. A bank may list MERS as the mortgage holder in order to avoid filing new paperwork or paying fees each time a mortgage is sold or assigned.

However, according to an article from the New York Times, there have been many problems with this system. “MERS? It May Have Swallowed Your Home Mortgage,” The New York Times, Sunday March 6, 2011. MERS has only a full-time staff of fewer than 50 people but claims to hold 60 million loans. However, many records of transactions for mortgages in this system have often been flawed or missing. In fact, R.K. Arnold, who had been with the company since its founding, resigned this year.

The article raises important questions regarding the role of MERS. For one thing, MERS claims to hold 60 million loans but has never invested a dollar in a single loan. Also, since banks have made cuts and have been responsible for so many foreclosure mistakes, it is very hard to know who owns what or who owns what to whom.

Although MERS has not been accused of legal wrongdoing, its role has been under fire in several courts. The Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that MERS could no longer file foreclosure proceedings because it does not actually make or service any loans. A local court in Utah allowed a homeowner to eliminate the mortgage and become debt-free because it did not recognize MERS has legal standing. And a federal bankruptcy judge on Long Island ruled that MERS could no longer act as agent for the owners of mortgage notes.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely MERS and how it might affect homeowners. If you have been in some way affected by MERS and you need of legal advice, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

After the banks received bailout money many of them received harsh criticism for what some called “being stingy.” Wells Fargo was one of the banks that received a lot of negative comments for not providing loans. But Wells Fargo attempted to set the record straight in a New York Times article published May 25th, 2011.
Wells Fargo explained that they are the top lender for small businesses and really emphasis helping the smallest of businesses, like the ones that make under $100,000 annually.
Although they try to help all small businesses, Wells Fargo found it was hard to cater to everyone. A lot of small businesses seeking another loan from the bank already have a lot of debt to begin with. And Wells Fargo further explained that it is hard to loan a business already in debt when their sales have dropped over the years. The bank could not justify granting another loan to a business when they had no real means to pay the current ones off.
Wells Fargo also emphasized that they loaned out roughly $14.9 billion to small business last year. And in the first quarter of 2011 they have already loaned out $3.7 billion to small businesses across the country. The bank also noted that they have started to see a shift in the small business market that is starting to allow the businesses to pay off their debt.
If you are having trouble managing your debt and are considering filing for bankruptcy or have any questions regarding bankruptcy, please call the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

The New York Times reports that state Attorneys General are proposing a very helpful plan that would protect struggling homeowners in a trial modification. “A Plan to Make it Harder for Banks to Foreclose on Homeowners”, The New York Times, Saturday, March 5, 2011. According to the plan, if the borrower has made three payments in a trial modification, he or she would be given a permanent modification and the bank would be prohibited from starting foreclosure proceedings.

This proposal gives the government and its recently created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau more power to protect the homeowner against unfair foreclosure proceedings. This new bureau is overseen by Elizabeth Warren, a former Harvard professor who has been very critical of the financial services industry.

So far the banks have declined to comment on the new proposal, but most in the past have been critical of the new bureau. According to these banks, the new powers of this bureau would only slow foreclosure procedures and make harder to borrow in the future.

Reactions from individuals and groups defending the interests of borrower have been diverse. There are some who feel cautiously optimistic, while others believe that the banks will find a way to circumvent this and any new restriction.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP welcome this new proposal that would help and protect the struggling borrower who is trying to keep his or her home. If you are experiencing problems regarding your mortgage and you are in need of legal advice, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

MERS stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems and is a system owned by major banks and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that serves as an agent for institutions that own mortgages. A bank may list MERS as the mortgage holder in order to avoid filing new paperwork or paying fees each time a mortgage is sold or assigned.

However, according to an article from the New York Times, there have been many problems with this system. “MERS? It May Have Swallowed Your Home Mortgage,” The New York Times, Sunday March 6, 2011. MERS has only a full-time staff of fewer than 50 people but claims to hold 60 million loans. However, many records of transactions for mortgages in this system have often been flawed or missing. In fact, R.K. Arnold, who had been with the company since its founding, resigned this year.

The article raises important questions regarding the role of MERS. For one thing, MERS claims to hold 60 million loans but has never invested a dollar in a single loan. Also, since banks have made cuts and have been responsible for so many foreclosure mistakes, it is very hard to know who owns what or who owns what to whom.

Although MERS has not been accused of legal wrongdoing, its role has been under fire in several courts. The Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that MERS could no longer file foreclosure proceedings because it does not actually make or service any loans. A local court in Utah allowed a homeowner to eliminate the mortgage and become debt-free because it did not recognize MERS has legal standing. And a federal bankruptcy judge on Long Island ruled that MERS could no longer act as agent for the owners of mortgage notes.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely MERS and how it might affect homeowners. If you have been in some way affected by MERS and you need of legal advice, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

The New York Times reports that Attorneys General of the 50 states, federal regulators, and the banks may be near an agreement to overhaul the way foreclosures as well as loan modifications are handled for millions of Americans. “Foreclose Deal Near, State Officials Say”, The New York Times, Tuesday, March 8, 2011.

So far it was known that the Attorneys General of the 50 states and federal regulators have been asking banks to overhaul the way they handle mortgages, especially foreclosures. But this is the first time there have been talks of a possible agreement within the next couple of months. Tom Miller, the Attorney general of Iowa, said that he was “hoping we can wrap it up in a couple of months. . . “That’s a hope, but we’re going to move as fast as we can”.

The agreement includes a financial settlement of over $20 billion, a sharp expansion of the modification efforts for the more than four million borrowers that may be losing their homes. The current program to modify mortgages, the Home Affordable Modification Program, has been under fire for helping far fewer homeowners than promised.

The agreement also includes a settlement proposal that would change how borrowers in default are treated. There has been a lot of criticism for the way banks have been handling foreclosures. The most problematic has been an illegal practice known as robo-signing. Prior to any foreclosure, the bank has to sign an affidavit that verifies the debt.

This document must be signed in front of a notary, and the bank should carefully make sure that all the information is correct. However, banks were automatically signing many affidavits without the presence of a notary (he or she signed months later) and without checking the accuracy of the information.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are pleased that this possible agreement would give struggling homeowners more protection against illegal and unfair practices from banks. If you are currently having problems with your mortgage and the way you are being treated, and you are in need of legal advice, please give us a call or visit our offices for a free initial consultation.

Debt collectors have been breaking the law by picking courts they are not supposed to use for their lawsuits against their debtors, the New York Law Journal reports. “New Rule on Garnishment, Venue Provisions, Statute of Limitations,” the New York Law Journal, Thursday, April 14, 2011.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), any debt collector suing a creditor must do so on the judicial district where the debtor resides, or where the debtor currently resides. And if they fail to do so, they can be sued for the actual damages sustained by the debtor, and additional damages up to $1,000, plus his or her costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.

But in Hess v. Cohen & Slamowitz, LLP, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Second District went a step further. In this case, the debt collector sued the debtor in the same county where he lives. However, the debtor lives in a different city from where the lawsuit was filed. In this case, the court ruled that the debt collector acted illegally when it sues the debtor in the same county where he or she lives but not in the same city. The judge explained that the debtor has to either live or work in the same city where the lawsuit is filed.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following with interest how the law develops to better protect the interests of debtors against abusive practices from debt collectors. If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

American Express has joined the prepaid cards’ market and already redefined the rules. As reported in a New York Times article published June 18th, 2011, American Express has launched their prepaid card service that is free to use and has no hidden fees.
“The prepaid market is synonymous with fees,” declared Dan Schulman, president of American Express’ enterprise growth group, “If we were going to enter the market, we wanted to be consumer champions.”
With all of the security breaches and hacker attacks consumers are worried about their money safety and are turning to prepaid cards to better protect themselves.
The American Express prepaid card can be ordered online and is free of charge to obtain. The card offers no hidden fees. Money can be transferred from a person’s bank account directly to the card. The company is even in the process of setting up a system that automatically moves money over from your account.
However, there is one downside to the cards. The company makes their profits by charging retailers heavy fees for allowing their customers to use the cards. Because of this retailers do not largely accept American Express service cards.
Using prepaid cards are recommended for those who are dealing with debt. The card does not allow a person to spend more than they have access to on the card. This can be a good tool to have for someone trying to live on a budget.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding a financial or bankruptcy dispute, then please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

It is a part of the American dream to own your own home but if that home is not in your budget it can quickly turn into a nightmare. That’s why more first time homebuyers have started using the resources offered by agencies like GreenPath Debt Solutions, before making the commitment to buy, reported The New York Times in a May 22nd, 2011 article.
These organizations focus on educating buyers before they take on a large mortgage. Through classes and other resources they look to inform homebuyers on how to best manage a home loan, pay off a mortgage, and budget correctly to avoid a foreclosure. Some lenders have even made it a requirement for their potential borrowers to take these educational classes before receiving a loan.
A mix of funding supports these agencies, the two biggest funding contributors are the lending companies and the government. This allows the agencies to offer these classes and resources to the consumers for practically nothing. Most of the agencies charge the consumers a fee of $25 to $50 to take the classes. The fee goes towards pulling an accurate credit report for the consumer and for any materials needed to teach the class. The classes are open to any consumer who wishes to seek counseling and many have flexible scheduling.
If you are facing a possible foreclosure or have any questions or concerns regarding a property issue, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP. for a free initial consultation

After graduating college a person is on cloud nine. They can now proudly say “I am a college graduate.” They can also start paying back the thousands of dollars they owe on student loans.
In 2009, the average debit amount for a student who had completed a four-year degree was $24,000. Regardless of the amount owed, people need to be smart about paying back their student loans.
Here are seven helpful tips as discussed in a Yahoo news article published on May 17th, 2011.
1. Automatic Repay: Setting up your bank account to have your monthly payments taken our automatically will greatly help you. Many people miss their first few payments or become delinquent on their loans. By allowing your payments to be taken out automatically every month you reduce your chances significantly to not have to pay late charges.
2. 10 years: Ten years is a good goal to set to have all of your student loans completely paid off. If your income does not allow this goal, then you can stretch your loans payment out to 20 or 30 years. Just keep in mind the longer you stretch your payments out the more you will pay in interest. If you stretch your loan payments out to far than you could be paying more in interest than the actual loan.
3. Organization is key: many students take out multiple student loans, keep track of all of them through the National Student Loan Date System which can be found on the website at http://www.nslds.ed.gov/nslds_SA/. Make sure you are paying all of the loans, not just the ones you remember.
4. Highest interest first: The loans with the highest interest should be your first priority. It is okay to speed up the repayment process. If you have extra money put it towards the repayment of your high interest loans.
5. Consider IBR: If you are having trouble making the loan payments then consider setting up your payments through the Income-Based Repayment plan. The organization can be found at http://www.ibrinfo.org/ and can set your payments to better fit your income amount.
6. Keep up to date: It is a look idea to check on your loans occasionally to make sure everything is accurate with your payments. There are two websites that focus on college debt issues, http://www.projectonstudentdebt.org/ and http://www.studentloanborrowerassistance.org/.
7. Federal Student Aid Ombudsman: If you find yourself in a dispute over one of the loans than contact the Federal Student Aid Ombudsman to help you resolve any issues. They can be contacted at fsaombudsmanoffice@ed.gov or on their website at http://www.ombudsman.ed.gov/.
If you are suffering with debt or have questions regarding filing for bankruptcy please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labyen, LLP, for a free consultation.

Angry messages, insulting words, racial slurs, and physical threats these are just some of the things debt collectors have dealt with from the people they have to call on a daily basis.
Generally, debt collectors have a bad reputation and stigma. People assume that debt collectors are the scum of the Earth, with some evidence supporting these views. Recently, a Texan man received a large money settlement from a lawsuit against a creditor after the debt collector left a nasty message on his voicemail, which included calling the man a racial slur.
But in a June 12th, 2011, New York Times article debt collectors discuss the daily harassment and insults they face while trying to do their job and the frustration they have for not having laws to protect them.
The harassment has become so extreme that many debt collectors are now traveling to Washington D.C. and state capitals across the country in an attempt to raise awareness of the daily abuse they face.
Debt collectors are arguing that their services are important and should be treated with respect. Many are pushing for laws to be passed to prevent borrowers from taking their frustration out on the caller.
Harassment is not the only issue that debt collectors are dealing with The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which establishes how a debt collector can contact a defaulted borrower, has not been updated since 1977. The Act does not address contacting a borrower through their personal cell phone or email account.
Mark Neeb, the Federal Trade Commission’s incoming president, argues that debt collectors cannot do their job effectively because they are limited in contacting the debtor. With many consumers no longer using a landline contacting a borrower is becoming extremely difficult. Mr. Neebs argues that debt collectors cannot help consumers with their financial problems if they cannot find them. Mr. Neebs is fighting for the Act to be revised and include guidelines for contacting a borrower by cell phone, voicemail, and email.
The issue with Mr. Neeb’s request is the possibility of a third-party over hearing or seeing the message, which is against the law.
In the past year, the ACA International has cracked down on those debt collectors that do not follow the rules by placing heavy fines on the violators. This has lead to some agencies reforming their tactics.
Linda Russell, the owner of a collection agency based in Wyoming called Collection Center, explained that she is teaching her employees not to swear or yell but rather work with the consumers to solve their issues to get more done.
Overall the debt collectors want to be treated with the same respect they are supposed to treat the borrowers they are contacting.
We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP, are following closely all issues related to debt, especially consumer debt. If you are having problems with debt or are currently being harassed by a creditor, then please call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

What is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is an entity that has the authority to protect consumers by issuing and enforcing rules related to their purchasing decisions. This bureau, a new division of the Federal Reserve System, was recently created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which was approved by Congress and was signed into law the summer of last year. A recent article by the New York Law Journal explains more about this recently created bureau. “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Demon or Savior?”, New York Law Journal, Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

According to many analysts, the financial crisis was caused in part by the fact that federal banking regulators did not adequately protect consumers. The current consumer laws, as well as their enforcement, failed to protect debtors from many unfair and abusive practices.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will supervise any person that provides a financial service, except insurance. This supervision includes many companies that are not necessarily banks, such as money transmitters, prepaid card issuers, check cashers, payday lenders, and other finance companies.

How will the bureau carry out this supervision? First, it will define abusive practices from the person providing the financial service. The bureau will also establish rules related to how financial and consumer products are disclosed. In addition, the financial service provider would have to give consumers information about their products and will be required to comply with registration requirements.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are pleased that more efforts are being taken to protect consumer from unfair and abusive practices. If you are having problems with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

After many negative news about the economy, there is a sign that not all hope is lost.  Recent figures show that people are using their credit cards more, the New York Times reports.  “Recovery Seen In Rising Use of Credit Cards,” The New York Times, Saturday, May 14, 2011.

Visa, Master Card and American Express all reported increases in card spending during the most recent quarter, from January to March.  Visa had $199 billion in credit purchase, a 9 percent increase from a year ago.  MasterCard showed $115 billion, a 5 percent rise from last year.  And American Express reported $96 billion, an increase of 13 percent from a year ago.

These news are been received with cautious optimism.  “The dust is slowly coming off credit cards,” notes Gregory Daco, senior economist with IHS Global Insight. “It is a general return of consumers to credit card usage, but it is a cautious one.  Income is lower and slowly making a comeback right now.”

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent news about consumer and credit card debt to stay up-to-date and better represent our bankruptcy clients.  If you are struggling debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

A person’s credit score can help or prevent one from getting a loan, buying a car, buying a house, as well as many other things. That is why it is extremely important for a person to make sure that their credit report is accurate. However, many credit bureaus do not spend a large amount of time making sure every detail of every person’s credit report is correct.
If you find yourself having problems with your credit report here are six helpful tips from a The New York Times article published on May 21st, 2011.
1) Get Your Report: You can get a copy of your credit report on Annualcreditreport.com. Consumers are allowed one free annual report from each of the three credit bureaus. It is important to obtain a copy and to look it over in detail. Make sure you check all three bureau for any mistakes, one wrong credit score can hurt you.
2) Create a Paper Trail: When filing a dispute it is better to write a letter and send it by certified mail than to file a claim online. This will provide stronger evidence if the issue is not resolved.
3) Provide additional forms: Provide the company with supporting documentation like cancelled checks, letters explaining the issues or errors. Also send a copy of all documents to both the creditors and bureau. The bureaus are supposed to notify the creditors of disputes but generally do not.
4) Know the Details: Keep track of each time you contact the bureau. Know the date you contacted them, what address or telephone number you used, and whom you spoke to.
5) Notify everyone: Even if you know the creditor made the error it is important to alert all three of the bureaus about the dispute. The law does not allow a person to sue the creditors or the bureaus unless they have previously notified both parties.
6) Know your rights: Once your issue has been reviewed by the bureau they have 30 days to notify you, in writing, of their results and a free copy of the report if changes were made. Additionally if there are changes you can have a copy sent to any person who has received a false copy over the last two years if related to employment.
If you still have problems or concerns with your credit report after filing a claim with the bureaus and creditors, then call the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

In one bankruptcy case, the U.S Trustee motion asked the judge to dismiss a joint petition by a same-sex couple because their filing was against the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). However, the bankruptcy judge denied this motion. “Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss Petition by Same-Sex Couple Rejected,” New York Law Journal, Friday, May 13, 2011, reporting on In re Somers and Caggiano.

Theresa L. Somers and Rosemary Caggiano, a couple legally married in Vermont, filed a Chapter 7 joint petition in the Southern District of New York. But the U.S. Trustee asked the bankruptcy judge to dismiss the petition because the DOMA does not recognize same-sex unions as married couples.

But the bankruptcy judge disagreed. According to the decision, although the DOMA does not recognize same-sex married couples, a joint petition by a same-sex couple does not make any difference on whether the bankruptcy will have a negative impact on the creditors.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased that same-sex married couples will be allowed to file joint petitions for bankruptcy. If you have legal questions about family issues, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

David J. Stern, a Florida lawyer who made millions of dollars handling thousands of foreclosures and who has been under investigation by the Florida Attorney General, will be closing his foreclosure practice at the end of the month. The announcement closing the foreclosure practice comes from a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is featured in an article by the New York Times. “A Lawyer Under Investigation Shuts Down His Foreclosure Practice”, The New York Times, Tuesday, March 8, 2011.

According to the article, in 2009 Mr. Stern made $260 million handling 70,000 foreclosures. Mr. Stern has enjoyed a fancy lifestyle, including mansions, sports cars, and a yatch called Misunderstood.

The Florida Attorney General’s office is investigating whether many law firms have been illegally falsifying documents to speed up foreclosures, and Mr. Stern is at the center of this investigation. After the announcement of the investigation, Mr. Stern’s law firm lost its biggest clients, including Citibank and Fannie Mae. The executives resigned and most employees were laid off.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP would like to advise borrowers to make sure that all the procedures regarding their mortgage are done in accordance with the law. If you suspect any legal wrongdoing from a bank and you are in need of legal advice, please give us a call or visit our offices for a free initial consultation.

With the price of food and gas steadily rising Americans have been spending less money on their health even if they are insured, reported The New York Times in a May 13th, 2011, article.
Although Americans are spending less time and money at their doctor’s office, the health insurance companies are still making yearly large profits. Health insurance companies have claimed that they have been raising premiums cost only because they believe that the economy is starting to bounce back and more people will start to spend more money on their health.
In contrast many doctors have reported that people have been putting off needed medical work in effort to keep their premium payments down. People like Shannon Hardin from California who has put of a needed dental crown for a year because she says she can’t afford to use her insurance.
Doctors have also reported that people are asking more questions on why they need to have certain things done like; blood work, colonscopies, and mammograms. All three things which if done annually can detect life threatening diseases in their early stages. Many people are also asking for the generic brand of medicines in an effort to lower the amount on their co-pays.
Critics of the health insurance companies argue that the companies are increasing the premiums because of the health care bill that comes into affect in 2014. But reports show that the insurance companies have made enough in profits to already cover the new laws early provisions.
Hopefully when the new bill goes in to a complete affect the premium payments will be lower or stabilized, allowing people to stop cutting corners on their health.
If you are surviving from medical debt and are in need of a bankruptcy, or if you have any questions regarding bankruptcy, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

A settlement has been approved in a federal case against JP Morgan Chase & Company, sued for overcharging homeowners in the military, The New York Times reports, “JPMorgan in Talks to Settle S.E.C. Inquiry Into Securities,” The New York Times, Saturday, May 7, 2011.

Since 1942, people in the military are protected under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.  This law protects deployed military personnel from financial distress.  However, according to the lawsuit, JP Morgan improperly mishandled the mortgage accounts of 6,000 military personnel.  Mistakes included even the foreclosure of homes.

The federal judge from the United States District Court in Columbia, SC approved a settlement of $56 million.  That includes $27 million in cash as well as other benefits, including a reduction of interest rates to 4 percent for one year.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent news about how financial institutions have been acting against the interests of homeowners.  If you are struggling with mortgage debt or any other type of debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Before purchasing a piece of property a person should always check the property’s deed and mortgage history. This information can be easily found online at http://www.nyc.gov/html/dof/html/jump/acris.shtml. Here is a step-by-step guide in finding this information.

Step-by-Step:
1) Click on the website listed above. It should take you a website called ACRIS
2) Next, click on the orange link that says, “ Begin Using Acris.” This will open another page.
3) In the new page click on the second option, “Find Addresses and Parcels”
4) A list of questions should appear. Fill out the Borough/County, Street Number, Street Name, and if it is an apartment or condo the Unit number.
5) After completing this you may fill in the next section of questions if you know the information. If you do not than click the button that says, “Find BBL” and they will fill the information in for you. BBL stands for, Borough Block Lot
6) Once the BBL is filled in (it should be in gray). Then click the button that says, Document Search by BBL
7) If you would like to narrow your search to a certain year you may fill out date range question. This is optional. Once done click the Search button.
A list of all of the past deeds and records will than appear on the screen. To view any of them click the IMG button on the left side of your screen.

If you have any further legal questions regarding a deed or a property issue please contact the law office of Jayson Lutzky, P.C. for a free initial consultation.

The U.S. government is suing Deutsche Bank for allegedly committing fraud for illegally benefiting from a program that insured mortgages, the New York Law Journal reports, “U.S. Charges Mortgage Fraud by Bank,” New York Law Journal, Wednesday, May 4, 2011.

Southern District U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara filed this civil complaint against Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT for over $1 billion under the False Claims Act.  According to the lawsuit, the bank had a pattern of lying about the quality of the loans to benefit from the Federal Housing Administration’s mortgage program.

According to the complaint, Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT resold 39,000 mortgages they endorsed under the FHA program to investors.  However, the defendants did not adequately followed quality control procedures nor checked for the income eligibility and creditworthiness of borrowers.  Over 12,500 of MortgageITs loans have defaulted, the federal government notes in the lawsuit.  And, according to the prosecutors, there could be an additional 7,500 mortgages that have defaulted and that have yet to result in the government payment claims.

A spokesperson from Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT said in a statement that the complaint was unreasonable and unfair and that they will intend to defend themselves vigorously against it.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely how homeowners are being hurt by reckless practices from lenders.  If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

It happens all the time.  Somebody buys a product, only to find out later that the product is defective.  Although it is almost never an easy battle, it is useful to be aware of the options you may have as a consumer who wishes to complain, as explained in an article featured in The New York Times.  “Buyer, Be Aware the Law Is on Your Side,” The New York Times, Saturday, May 7, 2011.

Most people would deal directly with the retailer.  Obtaining a refund or replacement works sometimes, but other times it becomes a futile battle.  Getting a remedy can be a complicated process, depending on many factors: the means do it (in person, in writing, online); the individual policy of the retailer; the warning the business posted, and the list goes on.

One option is to file a complaint online with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).  Their website address is www.ftc.gov.  Unfortunately, the FTC does not respond to one particular complaint.  However, the FTC may start an investigation if it receives a certain number of complaints against a particular retailer.

There are other names that can help you navigate the turbulent waters of consumer discontent.  The FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection offers information on the consumer issues it addresses at www.ftc.gov/bcp/about.shtm.  The Federal Citizen Information Center is useful to find out the areas other federal agencies cover.  And the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Agency will be helping debtors with credit card and mortgage issues.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are pleased to offer advice on issues affecting the rights of consumers.  If you are struggling with debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

Queens has been hit hard with property foreclosures. Luckily there are free legal services that provide legal assist to those fighting a foreclosure but cannot afford legal services.
But these free legal services could be coming to an end soon do to the state’s budgets cuts reported the New York Times on May 13th, 2011.
Over the last three years foreclosure-prevention programs in New York City have helped over 3,000 homeowners facing a foreclosure. The programs have been funded through the federal stimulus fund since 2009 but the fund’s account will be empty by the end of the year. Many of these programs have been forced to already stop taking new clients and cases.
Democrats in the State Assembly attempted but were unsuccessful in adding $4 million to the state’s budget for foreclosure-related programs.
New York has enforced foreclosure-prevention laws in an effort to help the trouble lenders find legal counsel but without the financing to support the free legal programs these lenders find themselves without relief.
If you are facing a foreclosure and have questions or concerns regarding the matter, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP. for a free initial consultation.

A person is innocent until proven guilty, unless the claim has to do with your credit report.
The credit industry has a lot of power and control over people, as discussed in a New York Times editorial on May 25th, 2011. A bad credit score can affect a person’s ability to get a loan, credit card, and even some jobs.
With all of this importance one would think the credit bureaus would spend longer than two minutes to review a consumer’s credit report for errors. But that is exactly the average time a credit bureau reviews a consumer credit report for errors-two minutes.
Errors on a credit report can take years to correct. And experts estimate the average percentage for errors to be as low as 3% and as high as 25%. Just a 1% error on credit reports who leave roughly two million consumers with invalid credit report scores.
A new agency, called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has been created in an effort to help consumers with their disputes against the credit bureaus.
This new group has a big job on their hands. Many consumers are ignored or given the run around, when they file a claim through the customer service department of the credit bureaus.
Hopefully this new group will rewrite the rules to help consumers correct these issues and hold the credit bureaus responsible for their mistakes.
If you are dealing with a credit report error or problem, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, for a free initial consultation.

Celebrities, politicians, and other influential people get special treatment for just about everything, including their credit reports, reported the New York Times on May 15th, 2011.
Many of these high profile people do not even realize that they are on the V.I.P. list for most credit rating bureaus. While other people have to go through a long process and argue over errors and mistakes that they have found. The V.I.P. list will most likely never even know there was a mistake to begin with, because it is handled right away.
When asked about these V.I.P lists, credit bureaus like, TransUnion replied that all of their consumers “have the ability to speak to a live representative.”
Just tell that to Catherine Taylor of Benton Ark., who was denied employment and credit after the bureau mixed up her information with another person who has the same name and birthday and happens to be a felon. Or Judy Johnson of Bossier City, La., who has repeatedly had to argue with the credit bureaus to correct mistakes made on her credit report.
Recently, Ms. Johnson brought a suit against one of the bureaus for not correcting these problems. The case was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.
Although individuals can sue these bureaus for their errors, they can only file a suit after the individual has filed a dispute through the bureaus customer service department and gone through the proper channels.
New rules and regulations have been enforced in an effort to prevent consumers from having to deal with these errors. Unfortunately many critics do not believe they will help because there is not a strong incentive for the companies to follow them.
If you are dealing with an unfair credit bureau or have any legal questions or concerns about your credit, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

Looks like Goldman Sachs’ is cashing in on their short-lived mortgage unit, as reported in a New York Times article on June 6th, 2011.
Ocwen Financial Corporation and Goldman Sachs’ have been in negotiations over Litton Loan Servicing, Goldman’s mortgaging service unit.
Goldman Sachs’ has owned the Litton unit since 2007 and attempted to get into mortgage servicing. Unfortunately, Goldman was unable to find enough stable investments to become a top company for mortgages.
It is rumored that Ocwen, a Florida based company, will be purchasing the mortgage company for less than $450 million.
Recently, Litton has been under scrutiny from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The FRB is currently conducting an investigation on accusations made by an employee, that the company has been denying qualified borrowers lower loan payments through the use of governmental programs. If the accusations are found to be true, then the company could face steep fines.
However, Goldman Sachs’ is not the only bank to sell off their mortgage unit. Many others have started to negotiate selling their mortgage-servicing unit to other companies.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP, are experienced in financial and property disputes. If you have any questions or are in need of legal assistance, then please contact our law office for a free initial consultation.

Citigroup has joined the recently growing list of large companies that have fallen victim to hackers. But the public has been chastising Citigroup instead of giving sympathy, as reported in a June 10th, 2011 New York Times article “Citi Data Theft Points Up a Nagging Problem.”
Citigroup’s failure to inform their clients until a month later about their security breach has outraged many of their users as well as lawmakers. Representative James R. Langevin, a Rhode Island Democrat, said he was “shocked and disappointed” towards the bank’s actions. Langevin explained that if the bank had been more forthcoming about the problem people would not have reacted in a negative way.
“They knew the customers’ data was potentially exposed in May and only now are they telling them about the threat,” said Langevin.
Citigroup did not begin notifying their customers until June 9th, 2011, about the security breach. But the bank claims that vital information like clients’ social security numbers, expiration dates, and the three-digit code found on the back of most credit cards were not exposed.
Further, the company released this statement on the breach, “Citi has implemented enhanced procedures to prevent a recurrence of this type of event.”
Security breaches have increased in the last six years with roughly 288 publicly disclosed. Many lawmakers have started to push to increase the national standard data security and data breach notification.
But even if new laws and guidelines are passed, people still need to safeguard their information. Regularly checking your credit card report statements and transactions can help a consumer catch a hacker early on.
The Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen ,LLP, are experienced in helping their clients with any bankruptcy and financial legal issues. If you are in need of legal advice, then please call or visit our office for a free initial consultation.

Spending in America is going up and so is the number of credit card swipes, explained a New York Times article on May 13th, 2011.
Americans are starting to slowly spend more using their credit. Recently the use of credit went up 2.9 percent in March, which most economists like Gregory Daco, the senior economist for IHS Global Insight, say that the increase is a step in the right direction. However, Mr. Daco also pointed out that the increase could stop or slow down due to the rise of gas prices and other uncertainties.
When the recession first started the use of credit cards began to decline. Economists suggest that it was because of the job market’s uncertainty, which led to people deciding to pay their credit off instead of increasing it.
With the recession stabilizing and the market slowly during around, economists think that the increase of use of credit cards is a good sign.
If you have any legal questions regarding credit card debt or bankruptcy please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

Budget cuts in the courts has resulted in an overall slower court system. The New York Times reported on May 16th, 2011, that $170 million have been cut from the court’s funding. New York is not the only state to feel these cuts in their judicial system. States like Georgia, Maine, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Oregon have also seen a 10% or more reduction in funding.
This funding cut has had a great impact on the running on New York’s judicial system. Roughly 350 court employees have been laid off, the court’s operation hours have been reduced which has resulted in longer delays to complete a case and causing the already backup court system to become even more overburden.
Many court officials fear that these delays will create even more problems. One of the biggest fears is being able to uphold the 24 hour rule when a person is arrested. A person is to appear in front of the courts within 24 hours of their arrest, this requirement may be hard for the overburdened courts to meet, which could result in many people being released. Others fear that since the long delays are likely to occur from these changes people entitled to child support or supposal support will have to wait longer to receive payments.
Overall the court system is attempting to do its best in adapting to these budget cuts, but it looks like these cuts are more likely than not permanent.
Jayson Lutzky has been a practicing attorney in the New York area for over 28 years. If you have any legal questions or concerns please contact us for a free initial consultation.

In this economy everyone is trying to find ways to save money. People who try and save on every area of their lives are generally less successful than people who focus on a few key areas. An article by the New York Times published on December 4th, 2010, breaks down three ways to help improve your saving ability.
1. Automation: Setting up your bank accounts to pay monthly bills automatically can reduce late fees. Furthermore, plan on big expenses that are likely to occur in advance and start putting a small amount automatically away to help save.
2. Attitude: Constantly having the mindset that you cannot purchase something because you are “frugal” can have a negative impact on your behavior and emotions. Remind yourself that you are allowed to indulge yourself a little every now and then, instead of having one splurge.
3. Focus: Do not devote your entire life on the different ways you can save in every area. Find the two biggest areas where expenses occur and find ways to budget their cost. A person focusing on the big picture of their budget and miss the small details that are sometimes easier to change to save money.
If you are thinking about filing for bankruptcy or have any questions or concerns regarding the issue, please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky& Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

Spending in America is going up and so is the number of credit card swipes, explained a New York Times article on May 13th, 2011.
Americans are starting to slowly spend more using their credit. Recently the use of credit went up 2.9 percent in March, which most economists like Gregory Daco, the senior economist for IHS Global Insight, say that the increase is a step in the right direction. However, Mr. Daco also pointed out that the increase could stop or slow down due to the rise of gas prices and other uncertainties.
When the recession first started the use of credit cards began to decline. Economists suggest that it was because of the job market’s uncertainty, which led to people deciding to pay their credit off instead of increasing it.
With the recession stabilizing and the market slowly during around, economists think that the increase of use of credit cards is a good sign.
If you have any legal questions regarding credit card debt or bankruptcy please contact the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP., for a free initial consultation.

JP Morgan Chase & Company, under investigation for its handling of mortgage-linked securities by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is negotiating a settlement with this agency, the New York Times reports, “JPMorgan in Talks to Settle S.E.C. Inquiry Into Securities,” The New York Times, Saturday, May 7, 2011.

JP Morgan made public this information in a quarterly final report filed with the (SEC).  However, JP Morgan did not give details on which collateralized debt obligations were the subject of these negotiations.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky & Labayen, LLP are following closely recent news about how financial institutions have been acting against the interests of homeowners.  If you are struggling with mortgage debt or any other type of debt, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

According to a recent report by the Federal Reserve, in recent years there has been a shift in financial sector, consumer, and government debt. The report, published by the New York Times, shows that financial sector and consumer borrowing, instead of increasing, now is falling, while government borrowing, instead of borrowing at a slower rate than any other sector, now is doing it so at a faster rate. “A Shift in the Balance of Debt Obligations”, The New York Times, Saturday, March 19, 2011.

For the past 20 years the financial sector debt grew faster than any other sector. One explanation for the increase is the fact that the financial sector put many mortgages into a securitization. However, the homeowner’s problems with mortgage debt affected not only lenders but also many securities. In the past two years, financial sector borrowing went down 9 percent, for a total reduction of $2.9 trillion.

For three consecutive years household debt decreased. One explanation is that many debts have been written off. Also consumers are choosing to borrow less.

On the other hand, government debt has increased by $3 trillion. The government intervention in the financial sector crisis contributed considerably for this increase.

Total outstanding debt in 2010 for the federal government is $9.4 trillion, $13.4 for household debt, and $14.2 for the financial sector.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen are following closely all issues related to debt, especially consumer debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please call us or visit us for a free initial consultation.

A new study released by the Institute for Higher Education found that many people with student loan debt are having problems paying them back, The New York Times reports, “Loan Study On Students Goes Beyond Default Rates”, Wednesday, March 16, 2011.

The numbers are impressive. For every borrower that defaults on a loan, two more are fall behind in their payments. Two out of five students became delinquent in the first five years after they started repaying the loans. Only 37 percent of borrowers who started repaying the loans in 2005 were able to make payments on time. On the other hand, default rates went up to 7 percent for the 2008 fiscal year, the most recent year for which data is available, from 5.2 in the 2006 fiscal year.

According to Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of Findaid.com and Fastweb.com, total student debt is about $896 billion, more than the country’s credit card debt. And student debt is increasing. An annual report from the Project on Student Debt found out that students who graduated in 2009 had an average loan debt of $24,000, up 6 percent from 2008.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen are concerned about the problems young people are having with debt. If you are experiencing problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please call us or visit us for an initial free consultation.

A group of Senators from both parties introduced a bill that would delay a new federal regulation to reduce the swipe fees that banks charge businesses for debit card transactions, the New York Times reports. “9 Senators Seek to Delay Debit Card Fee Changes”, The New York Times, Wednesday, March 16, 2011. The bill calls for a two-year delay and a study to analyze the new regulation.

A Senate bill which became law last year directs the Federal Reserve Bank to set limits on these fees. The Federal Reserve proposed to lower the fees to 12 cents a transaction from the average of 44 cents a transaction.

However, banks, credit unions, and credit card companies have been heavily lobbying against the new regulation. These groups argue that under the new set of rules they would not be able to cover the costs of transactions as well as the accounting for fraud.

On the other hand, consumer groups and retailers support this new law and oppose any move to delay it. Arguments include that a delay would keep anticompetitive practices and that high debit fees are already being passed to consumers through higher costs of goods and services.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely how recent legislation may impact consumers, especially those struggling with debt. If you are having problems with debt and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free consultation.

Richard F. Syron, the former chief executive of Freddie Mac, may be facing a civil action as part of a government investigation against this mortgage group and its sister company, Fannie Mae, for their disclosure practices, the New York Times reports. “Ex-Chief of Freddie May Face Civil Action”, Wednesday, March 16, 2011.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (S.E.C.) sent Mr. Syron a Wells notice, a letter this agency sends to a person or group when it is considering an enforcement action against them. Other executives have received this notice, including Daniel H. Mudd, former chief executive of Fannie Mae.

The S.E.C. is exploring whether these two government-run companies have been properly disclosing risks or whether they misrepresented the risks as too rosy. The agency is investigating whether Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae “underreported ownership of subprime loans and mortgages that required few documents from borrowers”.

Mr. Syron’s lawyer, Mark D. Hopson, responded in a statement that “Mr. Syron, as C.E.O., oversaw a very rigorous and fulsome disclosure process and that the company’s disclosures were in fact wholly accurate and complete”. He also said that “[a]ny proposed charges against our client are completely without merit”.

We at the Law Offices of Lutzky and Labayen, LLP are following closely how the government is investigating mortgage companies and how any possible civil action may impact borrowers. If you are a homeowner struggling with your mortgage, and you are in need of legal advice, please feel free to call us or visit us for a free consultation.