Florida Default Law Group Sanctioned $95,130.45 for Negligent Practice and False Representations

Random Repost Blast from the Past. Going to start off each day with a random repost from the archives…

EXAMPLE OF HOW CURRENT LAW AND SANCTIONS ARE INEFFECTIVE

Earlier this year (2008), FDLG was sanctioned with their client, “jointly and severally, to pay a monetary fine in the amount of $95,130.45”, to pay for Negligent Practice and False Representations for filing false affidavits, by Judge John K. Olson, Judge US Bankruptcy Court Southern District of Florida Ft Lauderdale Division, Case No. 08-14257-BKR-JKO Doc #58 (See Below). In that order, attorney for FDLG admitted to “less than 50” false stay relief affidavits were filed, and furthermore asserted that “at no point in State Court” would affidavits with egregious falsifications be filed because an “attorney would review the state of the case” prior to filing. Judge Olson’s opinion offers a scathing condemnation of FDLG practice of “filing any old pleading without undertaking any investigation into its accuracy.” Judge Olson continues, “FLDG parties have engage in the systemic process of churning out unrefined and unexamined form pleadings, instead of producing and filing carefully considered legal papers. This has resulted in an abuse of the system and sanctions to deter continued recklessness are warranted.” Revealed from even the briefest of investigations, FDLG continues this practice unchecked, and despite their protestations otherwise, State Court is ground zero for the filing of these false documents.

4closureFraud

FDLG Judge Olson Order of Sanctions of $95,130.45 CA 08-14257-BKR-JKO
[scribd id=31989334 key=key-2euznhli8bu6r3dycm30 mode=list]

Comments
4 Responses to “Florida Default Law Group Sanctioned $95,130.45 for Negligent Practice and False Representations”
  1. Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny says:

    The mill firms operate under a “risk analysis” model. This is the model of most US corporations.

    Recall the issue of exploding gas tanks that Ford Motor Co. had with the Mustang and Pinto. Ford assessed their risks and decided that 1) there wouldn’t be THAT many incidences of such, 2) that few incidences of such would result in lawsuits, 3) most of those suits could be settled out of court, 4) proving liability in court would be difficult for an injured party to do… I think you get the idea. The costs of redesign were higher than the legal expenses of either settling or litigating. Further the costs of settling and litigating were viewed as the cost of doing business.

    My opinion is the mill firms consider any sanctions to be merely the cost of doing business. And why not? The larger ones are making money hand over fist with the volume of business they’re doing. I haven’t researched this, but, it appears there are only 2 examples of FDLG being sanctioned in the past 19 months. In that time they may have filed 10’s of thousands of foreclosure cases. Being sanctioned twice doesn’t provide much of a deterrent.

    Sanctions will only have a deterrent effect when they are applied more frequently and more uniformly.

    The sanctions in the more recent case didn’t threaten the individual attorney. Based on that it is clear that individual attorneys still have no risk, or no skin in the game. Until individual attorneys are held accountable in monetary terms, and in terms that threaten their licenses to practice, they will have little incentive to comport themselves in accordance with rules and ethical canons.

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] Marc Ben-Ezra remains a lawyer in good standing with the Florida Bar.   Interestingly, Florida Default Law Group, now Ron Wolfe and Associates, and Smith Hiatt Diaz, now SHD Legal, have both changed their […]



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *