Home > Mortgages > Illinois AG: Lawyers Running Foreclosure Relief Cons

Comments 2 Comments

Exploiting a loophole in federal law, scammers are using lawyers as front men to pose as legitimate foreclosure rescue companies, according to lawsuits filed last week by Lisa Madigan, attorney general of Illinois. Madigan sued four Chicago area companies and licensed attorneys, saying they stole thousands of dollars from Illinois residents while providing little or no help in return.

“Please know these operations are run by con artists who have started to use attorneys as sham fronts,” Madigan said in a press release. “These operators are scamming families out of thousands of dollars and actually making foreclosure more likely.”

[Tool: Quickly assess your risk of identity theft for free]

The organizations under fire are taking advantage of the 2006 Mortgage Rescue Act, which allows attorneys to charge fees upfront for their work in preventing foreclosures.

What they are missing, Madigan says, is that they have to do actual work. ZeTrust, a Chicago-based company, marketed its services almost exclusively in Polish communities, according to the attorney general’s office. The company, owned by attorney Daniel Scott, allegedly took $1,000 from each victim with the promise that each person would meet with a lawyer, who would then negotiate with loan servicers to obtain a mortgage modification.

Victims didn’t even get to meet Scott himself, Madigan’s office says, and ZeTrust failed to get modifications for anyone.

[Featured Product: Need a loan?]

Similarly, the Legal Modification Network  and the Law Offices of Matthew Wildermuth allegedly charged victims between $3,000 and $5,000 in upfront fees “for a loan modification obtained by an attorney that never materialized,” according to the AG’s office.

According to another suit, Loan Litigators International and the Law Offices of Michael E. Fleck reportedly advertised on radio stations that Fleck could obtain mortgage modifications within 45 to 60 days. At least one consumer paid nearly $1,500 but lost his house anyway, according to the allegations. Madigan’s office also sued a company called Exelpol and some of its employees, alleging that one consumer was “charged nearly $1,900 with the promise of obtaining a loan modification, but discovered later the modification was denied because the business failed to submit the right paperwork.” In total the four alleged scams raked in $375,000, Madigan’s office said.

[Related article: Mortgage “Relief” Company to Repay Consumers $1.8 million]

Image: mr. tee hee, via Flickr.com

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • Roy Strohl

    Wait just a minute! Do you mean to tell me that lawyers are acting as shills for illegal foreclosure assistance fronts! I am shocked, shocked I tell you. What next…gambling at Rick’s?

    May they all be hung out to dry!

  • DO you work for NOTHING? Not everyone gets the modification – but the attorney appears in court on their behalf-if you are on trial for murder and hire a good attorney – you will be obligated to pay their fee IF you win or LOSE – THAT IS REALITY! quit whi

    DO YOU WORK FOR NOTHING? Not everyone qualifies for the loan
    modification-but the attorney appears in court on their behalf – court
    costs are involved – time and expenses are involved-if you are on trial
    for murder and you hire a good attorney – whether you won or LOSE
    you are obligated to pay the fee – THAT IS REALITY.!!! QUIT WHINING!

  • Pingback: Durham HAMP foreclosure relief available in bankruptcy | North … | Best Law Practice Info - Bankruptcy()

  • Pingback: Government Warns Mortgage Modification Scammers Still Going | How To Fix Your Credit Guide()

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other sponsored content on Credit.com are Partners with Credit.com. Credit.com receives compensation if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any financial products or cards offered.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team