Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'pressler'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Announcements
    • Polls
    • PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING / Board Announcements
    • Resources
  • Credit Repair Forums
    • Credit Repair
    • Collections
    • Credit Bureaus/Reports/Scores
    • Credit Article of the Week
  • Legal Issues
    • Is There a Lawyer in the House
    • Bankruptcy Q and A
  • Debt Validation
    • While You are In It Debt Validation Q and A
    • Debt Settlement
  • Loans and Banking
    • Obtaining Credit Cards, Auto Loans and Financing
    • Mortgages
    • Student Loans
    • Banking and Finance
  • Non Credit
    • Off Topic
    • Wine

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location


Biography


Interests


Occupation

Found 4 results

  1. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 25, 2016 CONTACT: Office of Communications Tel: (202) 435-7170 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU TAKES ACTION TO HALT ILLEGAL DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES BY LAWSUIT MILL AND DEBT BUYER CFPB Bars Law Firm, Debt Buyer from Churning Out Illegal Collections Lawsuits and Imposes $2.5 Million in Penalties WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today ordered the debt collection law firm Pressler & Pressler, LLP, two principal partners, and New Century Financial Services, Inc., a debt buyer, to stop churning out unfair and deceptive debt collection lawsuits based on flimsy or nonexistent evidence. The consent orders bar the companies and individuals from illegal practices that can deceive or intimidate consumers, such as filing lawsuits without determining if debts in question are valid. The orders also require the firm and the named partners to pay $1 million, and New Century to pay $1.5 million to the Bureau’s Civil Penalty Fund. “For years, Pressler & Pressler churned out one lawsuit after another to collect debts for New Century that were not verified and might not exist,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Debt collectors that file lawsuits with no regard for their validity break the law and violate the public trust. We will continue to take action to protect borrowers from abuse." Pressler & Pressler is a New Jersey-based law firm that collects consumers’ debts for creditors through lawsuits and other means. New Century Financial Services, also based in New Jersey, buys and collects defaulted consumer debts and hands off those accounts to Pressler & Pressler for collection. To collect alleged debts on behalf of New Century and others, Pressler & Pressler filed hundreds of thousands of lawsuits against consumers. Sheldon H. Pressler and Gerard J. Felt, partners of the firm, each participated in the firm’s debt collection litigation practices. The CFPB found that to mass-produce these lawsuits, Pressler & Pressler used an automated claim-preparation system and non-attorney support staff to determine which consumers to sue. Attorneys generally spent less than a few minutes, sometimes less than 30 seconds, reviewing each case before initiating a lawsuit. This process allowed the firm to generate and file hundreds of thousands of lawsuits against consumers in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania between 2009 and 2014. The CFPB found that the respondents violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive acts or practices in the consumer financial marketplace. Specifically, the CFPB found that Pressler & Pressler, the firm’s named partners, and New Century Financial Services: Made false or empty allegations about consumer debts: The CFPB found that the firm, the named partners, and New Century filed lawsuits against consumers without sufficient basis. Neither the firm nor New Century reviewed documents supporting the validity of debts. Filed lawsuits based on unreliable or false information: Some consumers had previously challenged the validity or accuracy of the debts, but the firm or New Century did not obtain or review information to justify their claims. The firm and New Century also filed suits and collected debt knowing that some account portfolios targeted for lawsuits contained unreliable or false information. Harassed consumers with unsubstantiated court filings: The CFPB found that the firm, the named partners, and New Century filed collection suits generated mainly by automated processes that relied on summary data. The firm won the vast majority of the lawsuits by default when consumers did not defend themselves, even though neither Pressler & Pressler nor New Century had verified that the debts were actually owed. Enforcement Action Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB has the authority to take action against institutions or individuals that engage in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices. The CFPB also has authority over debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The CFPB orders require that Pressler & Pressler, the firm’s named partners, and New Century Financial Services must: Stop filing lawsuits with unsubstantiated claims: Pressler & Pressler, the named partners, and New Century cannot file lawsuits or threaten to sue to collect debts unless they obtain and review specific account-level documents and information showing the debt is accurate and enforceable. Ensure accurate court filings: The firm, the named partners, and New Century may not use affidavits as evidence to collect debts unless they accurately describe relevant facts including that the individual executing the affidavit has personal knowledge of the debt, or, if not, has reviewed documentation related to the debt. The firm must also keep an electronic record showing it is following proper procedures. Pay civil penalties: The firm and the named partners must pay a penalty of $1 million to the CFPB’s Civil Penalty Fund. New Century must pay a penalty of $1.5 million. The CFPB’s order against Pressler & Pressler and the named partners is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201604_cfpb_consent-order-pressler-pressler-llp-sheldon-h-pressler-and-gerard-j-felt.pdf The CFPB’s order against New Century Financial Services is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201604_cfpb_consent-order_new-century-financial-services-inc.pdf
  2. Hello there, everyone! Firstly, I know this is a long post to begin with, but I just wanted to thank you all for all of the information I've gained from this site just upon reading. You all are a huge help to everyone on here who takes the time to read about their case and sharing your valuable knowledge and past histories is incredibly helpful. So now, I'll get to my case. It's a very little amount, Pressler & Pressler, Midland Funding, NJ - apparently all parties are quite well known, but all details are below. Upon first receiving this, I knew not even where to begin knowing it wouldn't be worth it to hire a lawyer and assuming it's probably a debt they have little to no info on. Upon reading this site and all of your valuable knowledge, I've been able to formulate the below answer. From there, I'm lost, might even be lost with the below, but any and all comments, thoughts, questions, concerns, anything at all is greatly, greatly appreciated. 1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit? Midland Funding LLC 2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? (should be listed at the top of the complaint.) Pressler & Pressler, LLP 3. How much are you being sued for? $2,108.17 4. Who is the original creditor? Credit One Bank credit card 5. How do you know you are being sued? Received Summons/Complaint 6. How were you served? Mail 7. Was the service legal as required by your state? Yes 8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued? May have spoken to on phone. May have received letters. They have my phone number listed incorrectly on the front page of the complaint (comes up for someone with the same last name who lived on the same street I did on a previous address but was not me - makes me think they lack any info?) 9. What state and county do you live in? NJ, USA 10. When is the last time you paid on this account? 8/2/2011 11. What is the SOL on the debt? 6 years in NJ 12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed? A summons/complaint has been filed against me. I have 14 days remaining to answer. 13. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?) I don’t trust unlisted number and thus most likely had no communication with them and this came upon me unknowingly. No I have not disputed the debt. 14. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? No. 15. How long do you have to respond to the suit? May 4th, 2015 16. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affidavit? Statements from the OC? Contract? They did not attach anything along with the complaint. The only pages I received were the two special civil part summons and return of service pages, and the summons/complaint page. They provided nothing, no documentation, anything attached to the complaint. RECEIVED MONDAY 3/23/2015 4:57:52 PM 13231242 XXXXXXXXXXXXX Attorney for Plaintiff File # XXXXXXXX FILED Defendant(s) Civil Action COMPLAINT (Contract) Plaintiff having a principal place of business at: 8875 AERO DR STE 200 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 says: 1. Plaintiff, MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, is the assignee and the current owner of a CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A. account, having the last four numbers XXXX, which went into default with a balance of $2,108.17. 2. The last three digits of the social security number of the person who used the account are XXX (actual complaint does have these 3 numbers). 3. The account was assigned from the original creditor, CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A. through it's legal selling entity CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A./FNBM, LLC to SHERMAN ORIGINATOR III, LLC on 04/12/2012, and then to MIDLAND FUNDING LLC on 04/19/2012. 4. Plaintiff, MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, alleges that the Defendant, XXXXXXXX, is the person who opened and used the account having the last four numbers XXXX, and has a social security number with the last three digits XXX. 5. Plaintiff is seeking from the Defendant, XXXXXXX, on the above account, the sum of $2,108.17. WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment for the sum of $2,108.17 plus costs. I certify that the matter in controversy is not the subject of any other court action or arbitration proceeding, now pending or contemplated, and that no other parties should be joined in this action. I certify that confidential personal identifiers have been redacted from documents now submitted to the court, and will be redacted from all documents submitted in the future in accordance with Rule 1:38-7( . My responses: FORM A X (6) Other – Set forth any other reasons why you believe money is not owed to the plaintiff(s). (You may attach more sheets if you need to.) Plaintiff provided no documentation to support the charges alleged in the complaint, therefore defendant denies all allegations. FORM A (State whether you agree or disagree with each paragraph of the plaintiff’s complaint. If additional room is needed, attach a separate sheet.) 1. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint as Defendant is, at this time, without information or knowledge sufficient to form an opinion as to the truth and accuracy of alleged assignments and entitlements and lacks information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of Paragraph 1. 2. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint as the Defendant lacks information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of Paragraph 2. 3. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint as the Defendant is, at this time, this request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper. 4. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint as the Defendant, at this time, lacks information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of Paragraph 4. 5. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of the Complaint as the Defendant is, at this time, without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth and accuracy of the Plaintiff's allegations or entitlements as Plaintiff has not entered into record nor has he supplied the Defendant the alleged contract which substantiates these claims. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES: Lack of Standing. Plaintiff has failed to prove ownership of the alleged account with standing to sue.
  3. In the attachment you will find my NJ answer, demand for docs, request for admission, affirmative defenses and motion to dismiss. This is a New Jersey Special Civil case. Please, if anyone would like to review my documents recently filed and can offer advice on how to proceed next, I'd greatly appreciate it!! I am not an attorney. I am acting pro se. DEBTORSBOARD NJ CREDITOR ANSWER DEMAND FOR DOC REQUEST FOR ADMISS AND MOTION TO DISMISS.doc
  4. Hi everyone, I am being sued by Pressler and Pressler for Midland in NJ. They filed for summary judgment but provided false information that I can easily prove is false from there own interrogatories. What should I do? File motion for dismissal with Prejudice maybe? Is this not perjury? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks