Blogs
We recently launched a website for our Oregon and Washington Student Loan Law Practice. We are thrilled to be helping student loan borrowers in our community lessen their student loan burdens. As one of very few graduates in the Pacific Northwest of Joshua Cohen’s Student Loan Seminar and as a long time member of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, I am eager, willing and able to help consumers across both Oregon and Washington obtain better student loan terms. Our Student Loan Law site can be found at Oregon and Washington Student Loan Attorneys
The original post is titled New Oregon and Washington Student Loan Law Site , and it came from Portland Bankruptcy Attorney | Northwest Debt Relief .
Student loan lawyers love IBR, or income-based repayment. When it comes to federal student loans, nothing provides more flexibility than a repayment plan tailored to your ever-changing income.
Made less money last year? No worries, your federal student loan payment will go down.
An income rebound means the payments will rise, but never more than the standard 10-year repayment amount.
Even better is the fact that your unpaid balance is discharged after 25 years of payments (less if you qualify for Public Service Loan Forgiveness).
There are a number of online calculators out there, but the formula is so easy you can handle it with a piece of paper and a pen and these four steps.
Look up the poverty level guidelines for your family from the Department of Health and Human Services website. For 2014, the poverty levels for the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia are listed below.
Multiply the appropriate poverty guideline by 150%. To make it easier, here’s the number to work with:
Subtract your adjusted gross income from the number you calculated in the previous step. Your adjusted gross income is the last line on the first page of your IRS Form 1040.
Take this number and multiple it by .15, then divide by 12.
The resulting number is your monthly IBR payment. If the IBR payment amount is less than the amount you’d be required to pay under the standard 10-year repayment plan, you will qualify for income-based repayment.
This is only the starting point, however. If you’re married then you need to figure out if it makes sense to file taxes separately from your spouse and how to apportion your dependents.
If you’re in default on your federal student loans then you’ll need to get that situation resolved through either rehabilitation or consolidation before you can opt for income based repayment.
It’s a complex process, but once you take control of the situation you’ll find that your life improves significantly.
Q: “Why Do you Want All these Forms Filed Out for our Bankruptcy Consultation?” A: “Because you and I should not play Texas hold’em.” I’ve never played Texas hold’em. But I’ve seen it on TV. Maybe you have, too. Each players has their own cards–then the cards dealt in the middle face down are turned […]
The post Bankruptcy consultation shouldn’t be like “Texas Hold’em” by Robert Weed appeared first on Robert Weed.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has filed a lawsuit against the debt collection firm of Fredericak J. Hanna & Associates and its three principal owners "for operating a debt collection lawsuit mill that uses illegal tactics to intimidate consumers into paying debts they may not owe." The CFPB complaint alleges that the Hanna firm files thousands of lawsuits that are based on faulty or unsubstantiated evidence.
According to CFPD Director Richard Cordray the Hanna firm is “taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.”
The CFPB alleges that the Hanna firm “operates like a factory” by producing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits without any meaningful attorney involvement against consumers who may not actually owe the debt. One attorney at the Hanna firm signed over 130,000 lawsuits in a two-year period which the CFPB says is misleading to consumers since no attorney could actually review that many lawsuits for accuracy.
The Hanna firm also systematically uses sworn statements (“affidavits”) from its clients attesting to the validity of the debts even though it is obvious that the signers could not possibly know if the information is correct.
The Hanna firm relies on deception and faulty evidence to drag customers to court and collect millions, . . . We believe they are taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.” Richard Cordray, Director of the CFPB.
Are these types of lawsuits filed in Nebraska? Absolutely, and it is common for these lawsuits mills to attach essentially worthless affidavits to the lawsuit or to offer such sworn statements in Summary Judgment motions. These sworn statements generally are signed by an employee of the debt buyer! The statements usually state something like this: “I know from my experience in reviewing such records and from common knowledge of how Credit Cards work that those records are made and maintained by individuals who have a business duty to make entries in the records accurately at or near the time of the event that they record.”
See the problem with this statement? The statement is not “I am the custodian of the credit card company’s business records.” Rather, the statement is “I know a guy who maintains these records.” To admit such statements into evidence as a Business Record exception to the Hearsay rule of evidence (See Nebraska Rule of Evidence 27-803(5)), the sworn statement must be made by a record keeper of the credit card company, not the debt buyer. But those statements are hard to get, so the debt buyers use these deceiving sworn statements to fool the Courts and the uneducated defendants that they have evidence of the debt when they really do not. This is the misleading practice the CFPB is calling out as deceptive, misleading and illegal.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has filed a lawsuit against the debt collection firm of Fredericak J. Hanna & Associates and its three principal owners "for operating a debt collection lawsuit mill that uses illegal tactics to intimidate consumers into paying debts they may not owe." The CFPB complaint alleges that the Hanna firm files thousands of lawsuits that are based on faulty or unsubstantiated evidence.
According to CFPD Director Richard Cordray the Hanna firm is “taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.”
The CFPB alleges that the Hanna firm “operates like a factory” by producing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits without any meaningful attorney involvement against consumers who may not actually owe the debt. One attorney at the Hanna firm signed over 130,000 lawsuits in a two-year period which the CFPB says is misleading to consumers since no attorney could actually review that many lawsuits for accuracy.
The Hanna firm also systematically uses sworn statements (“affidavits”) from its clients attesting to the validity of the debts even though it is obvious that the signers could not possibly know if the information is correct.
The Hanna firm relies on deception and faulty evidence to drag customers to court and collect millions, . . . We believe they are taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.” Richard Cordray, Director of the CFPB.
Are these types of lawsuits filed in Nebraska? Absolutely, and it is common for these lawsuits mills to attach essentially worthless affidavits to the lawsuit or to offer such sworn statements in Summary Judgment motions. These sworn statements generally are signed by an employee of the debt buyer! The statements usually state something like this: “I know from my experience in reviewing such records and from common knowledge of how Credit Cards work that those records are made and maintained by individuals who have a business duty to make entries in the records accurately at or near the time of the event that they record.”
See the problem with this statement? The statement is not “I am the custodian of the credit card company’s business records.” Rather, the statement is “I know a guy who maintains these records.” To admit such statements into evidence as a Business Record exception to the Hearsay rule of evidence (See Nebraska Rule of Evidence 27-803(5)), the sworn statement must be made by a record keeper of the credit card company, not the debt buyer. But those statements are hard to get, so the debt buyers use these deceiving sworn statements to fool the Courts and the uneducated defendants that they have evidence of the debt when they really do not. This is the misleading practice the CFPB is calling out as deceptive, misleading and illegal.
The Consumer Protection Bureau (CFPB) slapped Ace cash express with a $5 million dollar fine and ordered $5 million in restitution and refunds to borrowers. The CFPB found that “Ace used false threats, intimidation, and harassing phone calls to bully pay day borrowers into a cycle of debt,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. Ace... Read more »
The post Ace Cash Express Stacked the Deck against Consumers, CFPB Collects the $10 Million Dollar Pot appeared first on AllmandLaw.
The Consumer Protection Bureau (CFPB) slapped Ace cash express with a $5 million dollar fine and ordered $5 million in restitution and refunds to borrowers. The CFPB found that “Ace used false threats, intimidation, and harassing phone calls to bully pay day borrowers into a cycle of debt,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. Ace... Read more »
The post Ace Cash Express Stacked the Deck against Consumers, CFPB Collects the $10 Million Dollar Pot appeared first on Allmand Law Firm PLLC.
The Consumer Protection Bureau (CFPB) slapped Ace cash express with a $5 million dollar fine and ordered $5 million in restitution and refunds to borrowers. The CFPB found that “Ace used false threats, intimidation, and harassing phone calls to bully pay day borrowers into a cycle of debt,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. Ace […]
The post Ace Cash Express Stacked the Deck against Consumers, CFPB Collects the $10 Million Dollar Pot appeared first on Allmand Law Firm PLLC.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has filed a lawsuit against the debt collection firm of Fredericak J. Hanna & Associates and its three principal owners “for operating a debt collection lawsuit mill that uses illegal tactics to intimidate consumers into paying debts they may not owe.” The CFPB complaint alleges that the Hanna firm files thousands of lawsuits that are based on faulty or unsubstantiated evidence.
According to CFPD Director Richard Cordray the Hanna firm is “taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.”
The CFPB alleges that the Hanna firm “operates like a factory” by producing hundreds of thousands of lawsuits without any meaningful attorney involvement against consumers who may not actually owe the debt. One attorney at the Hanna firm signed over 130,000 lawsuits in a two-year period which the CFPB says is misleading to consumers since no attorney could actually review that many lawsuits for accuracy.
The Hanna firm also systematically uses sworn statements (“affidavits”) from its clients attesting to the validity of the debts even though it is obvious that the signers could not possibly know if the information is correct.
The Hanna firm relies on deception and faulty evidence to drag customers to court and collect millions, . . . We believe they are taking advantage of consumer lack of legal expertise to intimidate them into paying debts they may not even owe. Today we are taking action to put a stop to these illegal debt collection practices.” Richard Cordray, Director of the CFPB.
Are these types of lawsuits filed in Nebraska? Absolutely, and it is common for these lawsuits mills to attach essentially worthless affidavits to the lawsuit or to offer such sworn statements in Summary Judgment motions. These sworn statements generally are signed by an employee of the debt buyer! The statements usually state something like this: “I know from my experience in reviewing such records and from common knowledge of how Credit Cards work that those records are made and maintained by individuals who have a business duty to make entries in the records accurately at or near the time of the event that they record.”
See the problem with this statement? The statement is not “I am the custodian of the credit card company’s business records.” Rather, the statement is “I know a guy who maintains these records.” To admit such statements into evidence as a Business Record exception to the Hearsay rule of evidence (See Nebraska Rule of Evidence 27-803(5)), the sworn statement must be made by a record keeper of the credit card company, not the debt buyer. But those statements are hard to get, so the debt buyers use these deceiving sworn statements to fool the Courts and the uneducated defendants that they have evidence of the debt when they really do not. This is the misleading practice the CFPB is calling out as deceptive, misleading and illegal.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (a federal agency) has filed a lawsuit in federal district court against Frederick J. Hanna & Associates and its three principal partners for operating a “collection lawsuit mill” that uses illegal tactics to intimidate consumers into paying debts they may not owe.According to the CFPB, Hanna & Associates violated federal law which prohibits deceptive practices in the consumer financial marketplace. The Agency wants compensation for victims, a civil fine and an injunction against the firm and its partners.The allegations in the complaint include:
- intimidating consumers with deceptive court filings. Hanna & Associates allegedly used automated processes to generate lawsuits with little or no involvement by attorneys. One of the firm’s lawyers, for example, “signed” more than 130,000 collection lawsuits in a two year period.
- introducing faulty or unsubstantiated evidence. Lawsuits filed by Hanna & Associates included sworn statements about a particular individual’s debts. These sworn statements were issued by officers of the banks, credit card issuers and debt buyers who had hired the Hanna firm. The CFPB argues that these officers could not possibly have had personal knowledge about the individual cases and that the Hanna firm has dismissed over 40,000 suits in Georgia alone when these sworn statements were challenged by defendants.
In a statement, Hanna & Associates denied any wrongdoing and stated that it has followed all state and federal laws.I will keep an eye on this litigation and let you know if the Hanna firm reaches a settlement with the CFPB or if the case goes to trial.While this particular litigation may not impact you directly, I hope that you pick up a few things from this case.First, just because a plaintiff (credit card company, debt buyer, etc.) makes an assertion against you in a lawsuit, you should not automatically assume that you have no defense.Perhaps you think that you do owe money to the plaintiff. However, if the debt is stale (the statute of limitations for collection may have run) or if the plaintiff has little or no documentation proving you owe money, you would have a viable defense.Second, credit card companies and other consumer debt issuers most likely do not have paper files. Their “documentation” may be an internal ledger sheet or a bogus “sworn statement” from a company official. This documentation can be challenged and may give you leverage to negotiate.As always, if you get sued do not ignore the lawsuit. If you do not respond (or call a lawyer for advice) within the set time to respond (usually 30 days) your case will go into default and all of your options to challenge the legitimacy of the lawsuit will disappear. The post Giant Collection Law Firm Sued by Government for Deceptive Practices appeared first on theBKBlog.
Updated daily, this blog will keep you informed on the latest bankruptcy news! 
Learn more about how Bankruptcy works and what you need to know.