Calif. Bar Official: "The Number Of Attorneys Using Their Law Licenses To Essentially Take Money From Unwary But Trusting Consumers Is Astounding!"

From a recent press release from The State Bar of California:

• The State Bar of California, alarmed by the number of lawyers preying on vulnerable homeowners, [last week] identified 16 attorneys who are under investigation for misconduct related to loan modification. “In my 21 years in attorney discipline, I have not seen a crisis of this magnitude. It is truly unprecedented,” said Interim Chief Trial Counsel Russell Weiner, who is waiving investigation confidentiality in favor of public protection. The waiver, allowed by law, is used only occasionally, but Weiner said the seriousness of the problem demanded a strong reaction by the bar in order to protect consumers. This is the first time the names of more than a few lawyers being investigated have been made public.

• “The number of attorneys using their law licenses to essentially take money from unwary but trusting consumers is astounding,” Weiner added. “There are literally thousands of victims who have lost money they could not afford to lose. Under the circumstances, the need for public information and protection is paramount.”(1)

For more, including the list of the 16 attorneys and their law firms currently the target of a State Bar probe into homeowner complaints about loan modification services, see State Bar takes action to aid homeowners in foreclosure crisis.

For more on the efforts of The State Bar of California in fighting loan modification foreclosure rescue scams engaged in by its members and others, see:

• Punishing Attorneys Offering Bogus Loan Modification Help To Financially Strapped Homeowners A Priority For Incoming State Bar President,
• ETHICS ALERT: Legal Services to Distressed Homeowners and Foreclosure Consultants on Loan Modifications.

(1) The State Bar suggests that consumers be wary of attorneys offering loan modification services under any of the following circumstances:

• Advertisements of the office do not expressly identify by name the attorney who is responsible for the business;
• Office staff will not readily identify by name the attorney responsible for oversight of the business;
• The attorney in charge of the office is too busy or not willing to meet personally with prospective clients;
• The firm advises a consumer to stop paying the existing mortgage;
• The business, through its advertisements or claims of its representatives, makes claims that sound too good to be true, such as claims of a 90 or 100 percent rate of success in obtaining loan modifications, or claims that a reduction in the mortgage principal is likely to be achieved;
• The business demands payment of a large fee, even before obtaining a prospective client’s basic income and expense information, and information about the existing mortgage and present home value;
• The attorney responsible for the business is not licensed to practice law in the state where the consumer resides.