Wolpoff, Abramson Deny Links to Mann Bracken Misdeeds

January 25, 2010: Mann Bracken LLP was formed by the merger of three debt-collection law firms in 2007, one of which was Rockville-based Wolpoff & Abramson LLP.

But Ronald Abramson, who was one of the principals at Wolpoff & Abramson, said he and his partners had nothing to do with the failure of Mann Bracken. When the firms merged, Abramson, his father Laurence, Stuart Wolpoff and Harry Wolpoff left, even though most of their staff went to the newly merged firm, he said.

Though Ron Abramson will not discuss specific problems with Mann Bracken’s operations, he said that after the merger, Wolpoff & Abramson’s good reputation was squandered.

He said he is “highly disappointed that a firm as fantastic as Wolpoff & Abramson, as respected as Wolpoff & Abramson, as compliance-oriented as Wolpoff & Abramson, merged into an operation which failed in less than three years.”

Many of the firm’s targets over the years would take issue with that characterization.

Consumer message boards — complaintsboard.com, cardreport.com, and whocallsme.com, to name a few — have been brimming with complaints for years.

Many took Wolpoff & Abramson to court, individually or as part of a class action, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

While the firm has successfully defended many such suits in federal courts across the country, Wolpoff & Abramson has lost others. In March 2008, the firm settled a Virginia class action for $300,000, $250,000 of which was attorneys’ fees.

Abramson and the Wolpoffs are now involved in Independence Receivables Corp., a debt-buying firm. Abramson said that early on, Independence Receivables used Mann Bracken to collect debts but fired Mann Bracken “some time ago.” He would not say why.

He also declined to say how else he and his business partners spend their working hours these days, though he said they are not practicing law.

Interest disputed

Abramson’s claims of non-involvement in Mann Bracken are contradicted by a complaint filed against the National Arbitration Forum last July by the Minnesota Attorney General. That complaint charged that Mann Bracken, Axiant and the National Arbitration Forum, which handled disputes between consumers and creditors, were all connected to the same New York-based hedge fund, creating a massive conflict of interest.

The complaint charged that Ronald Abramson and Stuart Wolpoff each own a 7.58 percent stake in Axiant.

Abramson calls that claim “100 percent factually incorrect.” After the merger, he and Wolpoff did take an ownership interest in Axiant, but they sold it by summer 2008, he said.

A spokesman for the Minnesota Attorney General’s office pointed to an ownership chart he said was filed with the state in October 2008, which showed Stuart Wolpoff and Ron Abramson as part-owners of Axiant.

Indications

Ron Abramson said the Wolpoff principals did not know about the common ownership of Axiant, Mann Bracken and the National Arbitration Forum — and never would have entered into the deal had they known, said.

“Had we known in 2007 about Accretive’s ownership of the subsidiary of the National Arbitration Forum, we never in a million years would have sold Wolpoff & Abramson’s non-legal assets to Axiant, nor would we have associated ourselves in any way with them,” he said.

He said he did due diligence on the deal but did not discover the conflict because it was being aggressively concealed.

He and the Wolpoffs only found out about the ownership structure last July from the Minnesota Attorney General’s complaint, Abramson said. Nevertheless, “there were a lot of indications leading up to that that caused us to divest all our shares the year prior,” he said.

How Can Axiant Owe Mann Bracken?

Press accounts say Mann Bracken is folding because Axiant owes them $10 million.

Press accounts also say Axiant provided various services to Mann Bracken.

Wait a minute.

It could make sense that Mann Bracken owes Axiant, but not the other way around. What is/was Mann Bracken doing for Axiant so that Mann Bracken would owe Axiant money?

Maybe people should complain to the bankruptcy court about this…something is not right…

Mann Bracken: Observations and Advice

The following article is a good summary of what's happening with Mann Bracken.

More detailed information can be found here.

As far as advice: Mann Bracken may have closed its offices, but it still exists. That means it can still be sued.

Consumers might want to consider suing Mann Bracken through their registered agent, as well as filing personal lawsuits against owners such as W. Chris Bracken III.

If Mann Bracken files for bankruptcy, consumers should lodge complaints with the bankruptcy trustee. Those who have pending lawsuits or other claims against Mann Bracken should do the same.

Consumers should also file bar complaints against Mann Bracken attorneys who mistreated them.

***

January 17, 2010: Maryland regulators and courts are grappling with the chaos created by the failure of a debt-collection law firm, as consumers endeavored - often with no luck - to figure out where to send payments or make good on court-ordered settlements.

Rockville-based Mann Bracken recently closed its 24 offices across the country with little public warning, prompting consumers left in the lurch to complain to state officials that the firm's phones were disconnected and it had stopped cashing their checks.

On Thursday, a Maryland judge ordered that tens of thousands of debt-collection lawsuits involving the firm be dismissed, and state financial regulators revoked its license.

A day later, state officials still were struggling to assess the financial scope of the collapse, unable to say exactly how many lawsuits would be dismissed. Nor did they have answers for consumers on whether those cases would be refiled.

"It's a large undertaking, and it involves every district in the state," said Mark Kaufman, Maryland's deputy commissioner of financial regulation. "Those cases are all over the state. It's every county in Maryland. There are hundreds of cases in every county in this state - and that's probably conservative."

In its first comments about the shutdown, Mann Bracken principals said in a statement released by an attorney that they had "no alternative but to wind down its business operations."

They blamed the company's fate on the November bankruptcy filing of Axiant, a company that handled its support services. That firm tried to reorganize but instead is being liquidated.

"Axiant's pending liquidation has left Mann Bracken without funds to pay creditors and insolvent," the statement said. The law firm said it will seek bankruptcy protection or disband through a state receivership proceeding in the next 30 days.

Axiant is a debt-collection offshoot of Mann Bracken and was created by a group of New York private-equity funds in 2006.

According to an investigation by the Minnesota attorney general, the complex business arrangement, through a byzantine ownership structure, connected debt collectors and the law firm with a supposedly independent and neutral arbitration company called National Arbitration Forum, where creditors brought cases against consumers.

The Minnesota attorney general sued the forum in July, accusing it of consumer fraud because its business arrangement allegedly created conflicts of interest. The company agreed to stop handling consumer arbitration disputes. Four months later, Axiant filed for bankruptcy protection.

"I think there are literally hundreds of thousands of people in this country who have had arbitration awards entered against them that are so improper they should be vacated," said Paul Bland, a staff attorney at Public Justice, a public-interest law firm in Washington.

Bland said he has heard of a number of situations in which Mann Bracken appeared to choose cases to pursue in court after arbitration only when consumers didn't have an attorney or wouldn't put up a fight.

"I think there was an effort to finish collecting all they could from people who didn't know what had happened," Bland said.

Since the Minnesota case, lawsuits have been filed against the arbitration forum, Mann Bracken and other firms alleging violations of antitrust laws and racketeering statutes, Bland said.

In Georgia, the governor's Office of Consumer Affairs has been trying to investigate Mann Bracken for more than a year. Attorneys with the state are waiting for a court order to determine whether the company has to cooperate.

"We received a number of complaints from all over the country about their practices," said Anne Infinger, deputy administrator of the consumer affairs office. "They run the gamut," she added, citing cases in which consumers complained that Mann Bracken contacted neighbors.

When Georgia officials heard last week that the company might be collapsing, they called Mann Bracken. "Mann Bracken's lawyer's response to us was, 'I'll let you know when there is any public information,'" Infinger said.

Meanwhile, residents on the hook for debt payments to the company are calling, wanting to know why no one's answering the phones and what they should do.

"It's just a nightmare for consumers," Infinger said.

Consumers with lawsuits pending in court should contact the administrative clerk of the jurisdiction where their case was filed, said a spokesman for the Maryland Judiciary.

Cory L. Zajdel, a Towson consumer law attorney who has sued Mann Bracken on behalf of clients, said he fielded several calls from confused consumers who had dealt with Mann Bracken.

Zajdel already has agreed to take on the case of Davene Chadwick, a 60-year-old grocery worker from Owings Mills, who has about $1,300 left to pay on a debt agreement with Mann Bracken. Chadwick tried to reach the firm several times to ask how to proceed with payments only to find the phone number was disconnected. She said the firm charged her thousands of dollars in additional fees and interest over the years, making it harder to pay down her debt.

"I don't know what to do," she said.

Zajdel said that consumers with settlements should file a notice with the court to put on public record that they couldn't make a payment because the company no longer exists. That may give them some legal protection in the future, he said.

The companies for which Mann Bracken was collecting debts could still be entitled to the money, legal experts said. It's unclear how many will refile cases that get tossed out.

Bailing Out The Bailout?

WASHINGTON (January 14, 2010) – The government will face a complex and delicate task when it moves to unwind the federal financial bailout that officially ends in October, and the rescue will leave a deep impact the economy long afterward, a report from a government watchdog panel says.

The $700 billion taxpayer bailout will leave a legacy in financial markets, which may now be convinced the government will rescue financial institutions considered too big to fail, according to a new report by the Congressional Oversight Panel.

That expectation gives big banks and other institutions an advantage in raising capital that smaller ones don't enjoy and encourages a "moral hazard" for the big banks to take risks again, the report released Thursday said.

It said that as a result of the so-called Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, the Treasury Department now holds hundreds of billions of dollars of assets — about $258 billion as of Dec. 31 — that it must eventually sell. That will require a delicate balance between maximizing the return to taxpayers and maintaining financial stability.

"There are ... unavoidable political considerations that will affect these decisions, and that political context in the current environment can shift quickly and unpredictably," the report says.

There is also the question of how the banks, other financial firms and automakers that received bailout aid intend to make the taxpayers whole, according to the panel.

"In fact, TARP will live on for years," panel chairwoman Elizabeth Warren said in a call with reporters Wednesday, noting that Treasury will still have authority to dispense some funds and will be managing the hundreds of billions in assets. "Treasury must learn from the mistakes it made over the past year," she said.

In response to the report, Treasury spokeswoman Meg Reilly said the department "has demonstrated a cautious, transparent and disciplined approach in winding down the emergency programs, which is already yielding positive returns for taxpayers and the health of the economy."

Treasury estimates that TARP programs aimed at stabilizing the banking system will earn a profit thanks to dividends, interest, early repayments and the sale of the government's stakes in the institutions receiving aid, Reilly said in a statement.

"Taxpayers have already received over $16 billion in profits from all TARP programs and that profit could be considerably higher as Treasury sells additional (stakes) in the weeks ahead," she added.

The panel, one of three oversight mechanisms Congress mandated for the bailout that it enacted at the height of the financial crisis in October 2008, makes periodic assessments of how the government is managing the rescue program.

Banks once threatened by the undertow of a Wall Street collapse are now posting profits and proposing generous bonuses for their executives.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced last month that the politically unpopular bailout program, originally slated to expire at the end of last year, would be extended until Oct. 3. The Obama administration says the fund is still needed to prevent further turmoil in the banking system.

The extension set up a struggle between Democrats who favor using some of the leftover TARP money to help generate jobs, and Republicans who say it should be used to shrink soaring budget deficits.

The administration projects that the losses to the government from the bailout will be around $116 billion — compared with an estimate of $340 billion in August. Most of the losses are expected to come from the rescue of General Motors and the bailout of insurance conglomerate American International Group Inc.

"Our stewardship has shown measurable progress," the Treasury spokeswoman's statement said.

President Barack Obama plans to announce Thursday a new fee on the country's biggest financial firms to recoup as much as $120 billion in TARP funds.

The panel's report noted that Treasury has put forward three principles to guide its decisions of when to sell the assets: maintaining the stability of the financial system, preserving the integrity of individual financial institutions, and maximizing return for taxpayers.

"These principles may sometimes be at odds with one another," it said. The most profitable time to sell an asset may not be the moment that best maintains financial stability or buttresses an institution.

Besides Warren, the panel also includes Paul Atkins, a former member of the Securities and Exchange Commission; Richard Neiman, superintendent of banks at the New York State Banking Department; Damon Silvers, associate counsel of the AFL-CIO; and corporate tax lawyer J. Mark McWatters.

American Express, GC Services and West Asset Management

American Express used to be a respected name, now they hang out with bottom feeders.

Someone had an account sent to GC Services in January of 2009. They sent DV letter and GC never replied. GC kept sending invoices, the person kept paying American Express.

Then this document showed up, looking, for all the world, like it is from American Express. But, it isn't. The customer service PO Box for American Express is PO Box 981540, El Paso TX 79998-1540.

The Omaha, NE PO Box on this letter belongs to West Asset Management.

The confirmation was in a call, from (804) 952-9979. The message said "call American Express" but the number belongs to West Asset Management.

Best advice to them-write to American Express, pointing out the fraud, and write a DV letter to this address.

Going After Mann Bracken…

Happy 2010.

Mann Bracken's website is down.

Even though it seems they are closing, they are legally still in business. If they have harassed you or owe you money, this is the time to go after them.

Their registered agent (where you would serve a lawsuit):

Mann Bracken
c/o CT Corporation System
1201 Peachtree St SE
Atlanta GA 30361

Their main office is:
Mann Bracken
702 King Farm Boulevard
Rockville, MD 20850

and W. Chris Bracken III has relocated his law office to his house:
3516 Paces Ferry Circle
Smyrna, GA 30080

If there are enough pending lawsuits (and judgments!) against them, no one will touch them. Serves them right!

Associate attorneys such as Matthew Linkie, Scott Kramer, and Chris Diwan may not have much liability, but no law firm in their right mind should consider hiring them. The status of Connell Loftus, sometimes described as an owner, is not known.

Widow Claims Collection Agency Hounded Husband to Death!

SEPTEMBER 24, 2009: TAMPA, Fla. – A widow claims that debt collectors hounded her husband to death with as many as nine caustic calls per day, causing stress that contributed to his fatal heart attack. She's suing the Florida couple's mortgage company in a unique wrongful death case.

Dianne McLeod wants Green Tree Servicing to pay damages for what she said are illegal collection practices that led to her husband's heart failure on Dec. 4, 2005. Her 57-year-old husband, Stanley, was already in poor health from a heart attack years earlier that also had left him on disability.

An executive at Green Tree Servicing called the claim "outrageous and meritless."

Lawsuits against debt collectors alleging illegal practices are common. But McLeod's Tampa attorney, William Howard, believes it's the first time one has ever been sued for wrongful death. John Nemo, a spokesman for the Association of Credit and Collection Professionals, said he's not aware of it happening before, either.

"I think people in the legal community are watching to see how it unfolds, because it's a pretty unique case," Nemo said.

Stanley McLeod had a heart attack while working at Sears in 1997, Howard said, and was never able to work full-time again. The family eventually fell behind on payments on their manufactured home in Keystone Heights near Gainesville.

Dianne McLeod said the collection calls from Green Tree Servicing, sometimes as many as nine per day, intensified in August 2005 and wore on her husband's health.

"His breathing got really labored, his face was red, he was sweating, you could tell he was getting ill" after the calls would come, she said in an interview.

Some of the calls were recorded on the family's answering machine, and Howard said he is eager to play them for a jury.

In one recorded message, an angry male caller says: "Stanley McLeod, you need to call Green Tree and get your act together and make a payment on your mortgage. Quit playing games." Then, presumably referring to the emergency aircraft that flew McLeod to the hospital after his heart attack, the caller said: "Why don't you have that helicopter pick you up and bring that payment to the office."

Other recorded calls gave him a deadline to pay a certain amount and threatened foreclosure. Some implored McLeod to call back so the company could try to work out payment arrangements with him.

Howard said the number and harassing tone of the calls broke Florida law. He said the company also illegally called a neighbor and McLeod's brother and grandson regarding the debt.

Howard sued Green Tree on the family's behalf in 2005, then added the wrongful death count in 2006 after Stanley McLeod died.

The case has been winding its way through courts since. Earlier this month, the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Florida again ruled against Green Tree in the company's efforts to force the case into arbitration. Howard said he will ask a judge to set the case for trial soon. He hasn't decided yet how much he will seek.

"What happened to Stanley McLeod happened to a lot of people," said Howard, who has about 500 pending cases that claim undue harassment by debt collectors. "To be held hostage in your own home is a terrible thing. It's a helpless feeling."

Howard works for the law firm of Morgan & Morgan, which has offices around the state, heading a division that sues debt collectors for unfair collection practices.

Brian Corey, senior vice present and general counsel for Green Tree Servicing, said the company is preparing to take the case to trial.

"We deny that collection calls, whether the content, number or timing, led to Mr. McLeod's death, and we look forward to defending this matter in a court proceeding instead of in the media," Corey said.

Joe Little, professor emeritus at the University of Florida law school, said Howard will have to convince a jury that harassment by the mortgage company was egregious enough to warrant punishment, and that the stress of the calls hastened McLeod's death.

Howard isn't likely to have an easy time connecting those elements for jurors, Little said, especially if McLeod was already in poor health when the calls began.

Nemo said the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act generally outlines the do's and don'ts of how collectors can operate. Most states also have statutes that augment the federal law, he said.