Kevin Legal Advice

As you may expect, home mortgage loan mitigation is not a one size fits all endeavor. The universe of possible solutions is vast. Always use an attorney for ALL loan modifications that will thoroughly review your circumstances and desires before recommending a course of action. Your financial circumstances, existing loan documentation and legal rights should always be reviewed and considered. An attorney will work with you to achieve a solution which fits for you and your family. While other organizations may simply submit a loan modification request, which may be ignored by the lender, an attorney will actively and aggressively negotiate the most advantageous solution for their clients.

In many cases, an attorney will contact your lender and get them to delay the foreclosure process without filing bankruptcy. Such a scenario allows an attorney the opportunity to negotiate a “win win” resolution for both sides. Foreclosure is generally a very costly option for lenders. In certain instances, a modification of the existing loan is a good solution. Depending on circumstances, a deed in lieu, also known as “cash for keys” or “walk away” may be the right solution to keep a foreclosure off your credit report. There are many possible solutions to resolve a situation where a homeowner is either behind on payments or likely to fall behind in the near future. Such possible solutions include a modification or restructuring of the terms of your current loan to lower your mortgage payments, a recapitalization and principal balance reduction, a rescission of your current loan (up to three years) or a lawsuit against the mortgage company for predatory lending violations if determined to be appropriate after a proper loan document audit. There are many other possible resolutions as well. An attorney will assist you to determine which possible option is best for you.

Currently, Aurora, Citibank, Chase, Countrywide, GMAC, Litton, Wachovia and WAMU are among the major lenders routinely offering loan modifications. Although many lenders are willing to consider loan modifications, many lenders are unable to keep pace with the current demand for loan modifications. Even in cases where the borrower is currently in default, a lender offered forbearance agreement may not be the best resolution for the borrower. An attorney may be able to stop foreclosure by negotiating a loan modification; even in cases where a previous forbearance agreement has failed. Because we process many loan modification requests, our current relationships with lenders and loan servicing companies may allow us to bypass overwhelmed loss mitigation personal and negotiate directly with asset and portfolio managers as well as the lender’s legal department.

In order to secure a loan modification, an attorney will make use of the tools provided by federal law. Such federal tools include both the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). Both state and federal laws require mortgage companies to adhere to certain guidelines when originating home loans. Some existing mortgage loans have TILA and/or RESPA violations. When such a violation is determined to have occurred, an attorney will utilize such violation as leverage to negotiate a favorable resolution for our clients. Generally, lenders will seek to avoid costly litigation and are more agreeable to reaching voluntary solutions when such violations are identified and brought to their attention by qualified law firms.

During times of real estate booms, some brokers and lenders engage in unfair or illegal practices to close loans. An example of these practices may include charging unexplainable or unreasonable fees and charges. Other examples include not fully explaining interest rate adjustments, pre-payment penalties or the implications of option ARM loans with minimum payment options. Additionally, some brokers and lenders illegally inflated or otherwise manipulated financial statements to qualify buyers who would otherwise not have qualified for their loans. Simply refinancing out of these inappropriate home mortgage loans is now generally not an option because of declining property value or debt to income ratios.

An attorney can help to identify if you have been the victim of such an issue. In such a case, we can attempt to resolve these issues fast and efficiently so the borrower doesn’t fall victim to foreclosure proceedings. Helping stop foreclosure and restoring financial stability for our clients is our main goal.

There are additional reasons to conduct a detailed review of the client’s mortgage home loan documents. If a lender fails to properly provide adequate notice of the borrower’s right to cancel, the right of rescission may be available to the borrower for up to three years. When such right is extended for three years, the borrower may be able to rescind the loan during such period. In such a circumstance, the loan is treated as if it never existed. Essentially, the borrower becomes entitled to all profits made by the lender as a result of the loan. As such, the lender or other creditor would be required to refund all interest paid, all closing fees, all broker fees, and even pay the borrower’s attorney fees. This circumstance can create a legitimate windfall to the borrower. The extended right of rescission is a powerful tool to assist borrowers who have been victims of predatory lending. An attorney can assist in determining if such a right exists and will assist its clients in exercising such right in appropriate circumstances.

Mortgage and loan servicing companies generally do not want your home and most will work diligently with a law firm to avoid foreclosure. Litigating mortgage fraud and predatory lending cases can become costly for both sides and should be avoided unless the lender will not comply or there are significant damages to the borrower. Our clients retain us to make a best effort at resolving their hardship and to fight for their rights. In most cases, the client’s goal can be realized without costly litigation by using existing relationships to find an amicable resolution to stop foreclosures.

A loan modification proposal offered by a law firm may result in a more favorable loan modification agreement than your lender will offer you directly. Many modifications offered by mortgage lenders and loan servicing companies are forbearance agreements and are not a true modification to the terms of your mortgage. These types of agreements generally do not benefit the borrower in the long term and home owners facing foreclosure should consult with a law firm and fully understand the terms and ramifications before signing any of these documents.

In cases where neither refinancing nor a loan modification is a possibility, a short sale or a deed in lieu may be among the best options to both avoid foreclosure and a deficiency judgment. An attorney can help borrowers navigate through the possible options to determine which resolution is best for your particular circumstances. A real estate short sale occurs when the lender agrees to discount the loan balance and accept the sale proceeds in full satisfaction of the outstanding debt. In such cases, the lender has the right to approve or disapprove of the proposed sale. Lenders are generally inclined to agree to a short sale if they determine such action will mitigate losses as compared to foreclosure. The advantages of a short sale to the borrower include avoiding a foreclosure reported on credit history and mitigating or eliminating a possible deficiency. A short sale is generally faster and less expensive than a foreclosure. In summary, a short sale is a negotiation with a lender resulting in a payoff less than what is currently owed.

Not all lenders are equally amenable to short sales. Many lenders have pre-determined criteria for such transactions. Distressed lenders may accept any reasonable offer. However, junior lien holders such as second mortgages, HELOC lenders, and HOA (special assessment liens), may also need to approve of any short sale. Objectors to short sales sometimes include tax lien holders (income, estate or corporate franchise tax – as opposed to real property taxes, which have priority even unrecorded) and mechanic’s lien holders. It may be possible for junior lien holders to prevent a short sale. Additionally, lien holders who are not mortgagees are generally unlikely to forgive the debts owed to them.

While a short sale appears on a borrower’s credit report differently than a foreclosure, a short sale may nonetheless have severe consequences for the borrower in the future. A short sale may appear on a borrower’s credit report as “foreclosure proceedings started.” While not a foreclosure, a short sale may prevent the borrower from obtaining a new mortgage for seven or more years. Short sales are complex matters which should be handled carefully by experienced professionals.

The loss mitigation industry is a recent advent and has become large as a result of the current economic and real estate crisis. The loan modification industry is currently inundated with marginally qualified or unethical individuals, who are essentially salespeople, who have accepted fees in exchange for half hearted efforts or no efforts at all to provide loss mitigation services, loan modification or stop foreclosure services. As such, several states are currently considering legislation which requires attorney involvement for loan modification requests.

Some companies offering loan modification services claim to be “attorney backed” or “attorney based” in their marketing. In such a case, borrowers should be aware they are not contracting with or engaging the services of a law firm. Some companies simply hire an attorney for consultation to claim an association with an attorney. In such a case, the attorney does not represent the borrower and the company is not bound by the same ethical duties required by licensed attorneys. Additionally, no attorney client privilege exists with such a company and statements made to them are discoverable. To be sure, the borrower is encouraged to request to speak personally with the attorney.

“Attorney based” loan modification companies are not law firms. As such, when you discuss the details of your mortgage with these companies, there is no attorney client privilege. Any conversation you have with a non-law firm loan modification company is discoverable by a state agency and not protected by attorney client privilege and therefore not confidential. Prosecuting agencies have become much more aggressive recently in bringing prosecutions for mortgage fraud based on overly optimistic or inflated representations regarding income or monetary reserves at the time of qualifying for the loan. Therefore, if you are concerned that statements you made on your mortgage loan application could be construed as false and you are at risk for foreclosure, please contact an attorney immediately. Do not discuss this issue with anyone other than a licensed attorney.

For more info-http://www.attorneyforloanmods.com

Over the years, I have represented countless numbers of Plaintiffs in Personal Injury cases in the St. Louis area. My experience with my clients and my handling of these cases has led me to a number of conclusions regarding the factors which are important in choosing a St. Louis Plaintiff’s Personal Injury attorney. For years I have had clients sitting in my office who have told me that they have been represented by other attorneys in the past. My question has always been “Why didn’t you go back to that attorney?” It has been my hope to learn from the mistakes of other lawyers and to get the perspective of clients who are dissatisfied with services that they have had in the past. In addition, I have tried to listen to clients who were very pleased with the services of my firm in order to determine what an attorney needs to do right. I have also had clients bring me files after firing attorneys and I have seen first-hand what can go wrong when poor service is provided.

First, I have found that the most common reason that clients fire attorneys, or don’t go back to them for future services, is that many of them don’t return phone calls. When I say “don’t return phone calls”, I literally mean that they don’t respond in any way when a client calls, writes a letter, or sends an email. Even if the attorney is in trial, or there are scheduling challenges, a client at least deserves to know that the attorney received the message and will be responding sometime soon. A failure to return phone calls can often indicate a lack of respect and, from the client’s perspective, it undermines confidence in the attorney’s ability accomplish a result for the client.

Secondly, some attorneys will handle any kind of case, regardless of their experience. I recently had a client who fired an attorney who was practicing in the Kansas City area. The client was in an accident in St. Louis City and this is generally a more favorable venue from the standpoint of being a Plaintiff. However, the attorney was unaware that St. Louis City and St. Louis County were separate entities. When he filed a lawsuit on behalf of the client, he described St. Louis City as being a municipality within the boundaries of St. Louis County. Not only did he file the case in the wrong venue and picked a venue which was unfavorable to his client, but he clearly did not have the familiarity of the local court systems. It is important to choose an attorney who is familiar with the court system and the jury verdicts in the various counties throughout the St. Louis Metropolitan area. Mistakes in understanding the various court systems and procedures for courts in the St. Louis Metropolitan area can result in a poor outcome in a Plaintiff’s Personal Injury case.

Third, it is important for the attorney to have experience in the type of matter which is being handled. For example, an attorney handling St. Louis Car Accident cases should spend a lot of his time practicing in this area. While practicing in other areas can complement the attorney’s services, a real estate attorney, for example, may not understand how an investigation should be conducted. This can result in a less than favorable result if witnesses are not contacted and later disappear, or opportunities to take pictures are squandered. In a car accident case, pictures of damaged vehicles could help resolve a dispute as to how a collision took place. In a case involving a fall, pictures of the bad steps, pothole, or heavily waxed floor could lay the groundwork for a successful result. If an inexperienced attorney doesn’t follow up on such items in a timely manner, then stairs may be repaired, potholes can be filled in, and floors may be replaced.

Fourth, some attorneys look for a quick settlement and will either abandon your case, or abandon interest in it, if it doesn’t come together quickly. In all fairness, there are cases that come in the door and look good at first glance, but sometimes, as the evidence is gathered, it becomes apparent that the case is not going to be successful. On the other hand, there are cases in which adjusters simply refuse to be reasonable and attorneys will often have reputations for abandoning cases easily. Such attorneys will often try to settle for a lowball offer in order to avoid the work which comes with taking the case to trial. It is important to get a sense as to whether the attorney will be willing to do battle on your behalf if the going gets tough.

My fifth point is a very basic one. It is important to choose an attorney who speaks with honesty and candor. You do not want to be misled and it is usually a matter of time before you get a sense that your attorney is being less than fully honest. Beyond honesty, your attorney should also speak to you with frankness and candor. As a client, you sometimes need to know the bad news as well as the good news. An experienced St. Louis Personal Injury attorney will tell you if there are circumstances in which cases like yours are hampered by certain factors. If there is light damage to the car, or a problem with your treating doctor’s credentials, then you need someone to pull you aside and tell you about things which may affect your case negatively. In front of certain juries, for example, they may be conservative and it would help to know if they are going to look negatively at long hair, tattoos, or other items. While it is uncomfortable for an attorney to talk about certain subjects, you are looking for frankness and candor. An attorney who politely points out certain prejudices of potential jurors is doing a great service to his client.

Finally, a lot of clients tell me that they didn’t re-hire their former attorney because they couldn’t relate to him. Some attorneys are pretentious and condescending. I have found that attorneys who are down to earth and secure in themselves can develop an excellent reputation with their clients. If you are in the process of looking for an attorney, I would suggest that you consider all of these factors in choosing the best person for you.

The contents of this article are intended for educational use only in order to provide readers general information and a basic understanding of the law. If you are seeking legal advice, please consult a licensed professional attorney in your state. The information in this article should not be substituted for experienced legal advice.

What are these new attorney-client matching services? Who are the players? What do they cost? What is the risk to me? What is the return for me? What is the buzz on them? Are they ethical as marketing for law firms? Will they save me money and are they for me? Will they get me clients I would not have otherwise?
In part one of this article we will look in depth at a relatively new wrinkle in marketing for law firms known as “attorney-client matching services”. Part one focuses on the facts about these firms. Part two gives you my conclusions and recommendations as a result of my research. First a little background is in order. The legal services market segment is expected to reach $82.5 billion in 2008 according to Euromonitor International a market intelligence firm. In recent history consumers have been finding attorneys through word-of mouth or through the yellow pages. Often the word-of mouth advice does not deliver people to the best possible solution for their particular needs and the yellow pages is certainly not a great place to select a lawyer I am sure you would agree. Additionally, according to the Pew Internet & American Life over four million consumers and small businesses currently search for legal services via the Internet every month with these numbers expected to rise to over seven million by 2007. I think you can see this is a huge market getting larger. It is imperative that attorneys understand this marketplace if for no other reason your potential clients and clients are moving to the Internet and yellow page advertising is a dying marketing for law firms vehicle. Understanding attorney-client matching services is one new way to tap into this Internet marketplace.
What I will not be talking about here is attorney-listing services. Please don’t get confused between attorney-listing services and attorney-client matching services. The two majors in the attorney-listing services arena are Lawyers dot com or FindLaw dot com that are used by many in marketing for law firms. With attorney marketing one might want to get a minimal listing on one or both of these two major sites. Both do drive a large amount of traffic to their sites for sure (in the millions of visitors per year). If you do get a listing then track your results carefully and see if being in the middle of a pack of listed attorneys actually does produce clients for you. Please don’t spend more on them than the basic listing that will run about $150 or so per month, at least until you can document results with the basic listing. Also, don’t buy your website through either of them, even if after testing you find good results, for many reasons that can be found under the Internet marketing tab on my website. One last note here, you probably don’t want to test most of the lesser attorney-listing competitors like LawInfo dot com, LawCore dot com or AttorneyFind dot com is my take, however if you do be sure to track your results. The rest of this article is about attorney-client matching services.
Attorney Marketing Via Five Attorney-Client Matching Players
In the attorney-client matching field there are five competitors for the attorney marketing dollar offering online attorney-client matching services. The first and originator is LegalMatch dot com and its newer competitor being CasePost dot com as well as a third competitor LegalFish dot com. The two big players that offer almost everything in attorney marketing, Lawyers dot com and FindLaw dot com; have also recently begun to offer a version of attorney-client matching services. Lets begin with LegalMatch that was established in 1999 and is based in San Francisco. LegalMatch uses a double blind matching system. By double blind they mean the consumer does not see identifying information about who the lawyers are and the lawyer does not see identifying information about who the consumers are although all the cards are put on the table for both to see before any contact is made between them. Through an allocation model LegalMatch makes the decision about which lawyers get the consumer’s information. Consumers can opt into “priority service” for a fee to talk with a LegalMatch staff attorney about their case and work with that attorney in selecting the attorney for their case. LegalMatch does have partnerships with the Utah State Bar Association, ATLA and NACDL. Membership fees for this marketing for law firms vehicle run from $2,500 to $25,000 per year (they will finance the membership fee if desired) depending on practice area and geographic location of the attorney. For example, a PI attorney in Los Angeles would likely be charged more than a family law attorney in Los Angeles, while the family lawyer in Peoria is likely to pay less than the family law attorney in Los Angeles. Their guarantee consists of extending your membership at no fee until your revenues have exceeded the fee you paid them. The details of the guarantee are available on their website.
Are There Legal Marketing Ethics Issues with Attorney-Client Matching?
A relevant digression here, since this model is not a lawyer referral program, a pre-paid legal service plan, a joint or cooperative advertising or a directory listing service it is not subject to ethics rules around much of marketing for law firms it has been asserted. Recently the Professional Ethics Committee of the Texas State Bar was looking into these practices and that committee received a seven-page letter (May 26, 2006) from the FTC that was agreed to by a unanimous vote of the FTC commission members that this attorney marketing practice is indeed ethical.
Already the states of North Carolina and South Carolina found the practice ethical. The Rhode Island Supreme Court specifically named in an ethics opinion that online matching services are ethical. Finally, the Utah State Bar (a mandatory bar) has retained LegalMatch as their lawyer referral service clearly indicating their thinking about LegalMatch’s ethical nature it seems to me. Naturally you do need to check with your state bar to be sure this is an ethical practice in your state. Now back to the options in the marketplace.
CasePost, based in Southern California, was established in 2002 is a second player in this area of marketing for law firms. They operate in a similar fashion as LegalMatch in matching clients with lawyers; however, the directory of attorneys is shown to the consumer immediately. The consumer can decide whether they want to remain anonymous or give their contact information to the attorneys. The consumer is limited to four attorney responses. Thus the consumer determines what attorneys will get their information. In May of 2006 CasePost has made a major expansion as a result of their partnership with HandelOnTheLaw dot com that is powered by a successful nationally syndicated radio show on over 120 stations with attorney Bill Handel. This show has been running since 1985. They also have a strategic relationship with LegalZoom dot com that began in 2006 that has increased their reach. Like LegalMatch the membership fees for this attorney marketing vehicle are from $2,500 to $25,000 per year (financing is available if desired) depending on practice area and location. Their guarantee to a member is based on a minimum amount of referrals over the year.
LegalFish is a third player in this arena. It entered the marketplace in 2003 and is based in Chicago. It is a bit different than the other two in a few ways. Like the other players the consumer can input their information and post their cases to the site as well give their identifying information or not. In a number of cases LegalFish will contact the posting consumer themselves by telephone or email to delve deeper into the needs of the consumer so they are not totally automated. There is an allocation model used by LegalFish in referring the cases to their members. Another difference is LegalFish charges a monthly fee for this marketing for law firms vehicle ranging from $180 to $750 to members that are non-contingency based practices. For contingency based practices the fee ranges from $1600 to $5000+ monthly only if the client retains the attorney. If LegalFish does not deliver a referral to a member that retains that attorney they don’t charge a fee to that attorney for the month (a form of a guarantee). Creating something of a “shared risk” system. Naturally, with this type of shared risk system, long-term success for both parties is based on LegalFish’s ability to generate new client opportunities and create demand for legal services, and their member attorneys’ ability to convert those referrals to paying clients. Both parties have to “pull their weight”. Finally, LegalFish reports they are particularly committed to serving the solo and small firm market with ten employees or less.
The next player in this marketing for law firms arena is Lawyers dot com (mentioned earlier in this article about their directory listing or attorney-listing service) with their new Attorney Match Service. If you go to their homepage what stands out on that homepage is their “Find A Lawyer Quick Search”. This is their free to the consumer attorney-listing service (this is why you might want to test a listing with them and track results). To get to the Attorney Match Service you have to know to click on “Contact Lawyers” navigation tab or notice it up there at the very top of the home page. Clicking on that takes you to a page where you input your zip code and the practice area you are seeking, however, it also tells you how many lawyers there are listed that “are interested in receiving your request”. You are required to fill in the identifying information with other case information. Once you do that you see the attorneys listed and pick the ones you want to send your request to and wait for their replies. The fee for the attorney member is $495 per year, however, you must have a biographical level listing on the site to be on the Attorney Match Service and that is $150 and up per month depending on the size of your firm. There is no guarantee for this service.
The final player in this marketing for law firms arena is Thompson’s Findlaw (mentioned earlier as an attorney-listing service) with their new attorney-matching website http://www.LegalConnection.com. The FindLaw system is similar to the Lawyers dot com system with three steps of #1 Select your legal need; #2 Tell us about your case; and #3 Choose the attorney that’s right for you. It is different from Lawyers dot com’s system since they have broken it out of their attorney-listing services completely with its own dedicated website. Their fees generally run from $500 to $1000 per month depending on your practice area and geographic location. They do not have a guarantee. They do report that they do set targets for each geographic area as well as practice combination and then will manage their marketing to get positive results for attorneys.
Well, now we have all the players in this particular niche of marketing for law firms with a lot of information. I think it would be imperative for me to mention one more item. Both Legal Match and CasePost have negative information on the Internet and it needs to be considered. If you go to Google and search just the term LegalMatch and then do the same with CasePost you will be able to find details about the negative information. One location that covers the negative information on LegalMatch with relevant links is at Wikipedia dot org (go to the site and look up LegalMatch) although that is disputed as not being sufficiently neutral in tone, which is one of Wikipedia’s requirements. If you want to see a string of negative information on CasePost go to: http://counsel.net/chatboards/marketing/topic111/6.23.04.11.34.29.html . I am not sure one needs to be overly concerned about this information since it is mostly in the past and you need to consider it.
See Part II of this article for my conclusions and recommendations as a result of my research. I can tell you now that this approach does have some merit but there are definite cautions as well so do read Part II.