Foreclosure Hamlet

Supporting, Informing & Connecting People in Foreclosure

After months of deliberation, Bank of America authorized a short sale of our home in Indiana. We closed the mortgage of 7502 Prairie Lake Dr. Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 on January 6, 2010. In April 2010 my wife (Chris) and I started noticing our credit cards were being canceled, our once high credit limits reduced and other peculiar alterations being made to our credit accounts. We reviewed our credit reports through the website www.annualcreditreport.com. My wife’s credit report reflected a serious derogatory, reported by BAC/Countrywide Mortgage. I sent letters of dispute to each credit reporting agency (Trans Union, Experian, and Equifax) including our closing documents to show we did not owe the debt reported and to have the credit reporting agencies investigate them.  In the meantime on April 26, 2010 my wife and I received a derogatory letter threatening a foreclosure suit from Toae A. Kim of the Feiwell & Hannoy, P.C. Attorneys at Law group, dated April 22, 2010. I immediately called the phone number attached to the letters; I was greeted by an automated recording requesting personal information such as social security numbers and so on. I left a detailed message including the loan # and file # stating we had closed this loan on January 6, 2010. I also requested someone from their office contact me by telephone within the next 24 hours. Within minutes of leaving the message, I began researching the internet for other means to contact Feiwell & Hannoy P.C. Attorneys at Law. Feiwell and Hannoy P.C made it very difficult and not consumer friendly to make contact with them. The only contact portal I could find to Feiwell & Hannoy P.C. was through a website called Lawyers.com. I emailed a letter with my contact information demanding someone from Feiwell & Hannoy’s office give me a courtesy call within 24 hours.  Feiwell and Hannoy P.C. have never responded to our requests. On April 27, 2010 I contacted, Lynn Geiss our realtor from REMAX who represented us through the short sale of our home. I explained our problem and in turn questioned her on whether or not she knew if the closing on 1-6-2010 had been funded. Lynn said she would get with Holly Catt from the closing company (Chicago Title) to verify whether or not the funds were wire transferred and received; in the meantime she suggested I speak to an attorney and referred me to her personal attorney, Chris Jackson. After a brief conversation with Chris Jackson on 4-27-2010, she advised me to try and contact the short sale closing department of Bank of America. On 4-27-2010 I sent an email to Stephanie Rye and Andrea Wilkes within the short sale closing department of Bank of America. I attached documents supporting the fact the loan was closed several months prior. I also gave each of them my contact information and a deadline to respond. I have never heard from anyone within Bank of America’s short sale closing department. To our disbelief, a few days later my wife and I received a summons of foreclosure lawsuit (49D14 10 04 MF 018380 Filed by Feiwell and Hannoy on 4-22-2010). We were appalled and shocked by the method of injustice that was taking place. We could not get anyone to listen to us or help us.  I spent several days trying to find an ear willing to listen and stop this wrongful suit. It was as if we were invisible to Bank of America, their counter parts, and associates. In the first week of May 2010 we received a response from Experian regarding the initial dispute letter I sent April 19, 2010. The response letter was dated April 30, 2010. We were shocked to read the credit reporting agency (Experian) said they had investigated our dispute and found the credit grantor verified the information and they (Experian) will not investigate our dispute again. Keep in mind Experian spent but only a few days investigating this dispute and deemed it investigated thoroughly. Days had slipped by with no contact from anyone related to the wrongful foreclosure suit filed by Feiwell and Hannoy P.C. I discussed our dilemma with our realtor and our realtor’s attorney on numerous occasions searching for answers. They felt we should be able to resolve and correct this wrongful lawsuit ourselves.  We finally realized we needed to try a different approach in order to get someone’s attention just to listen to us and help stop the wrongful lawsuit that was filed against us. During the month of May 2010 I sent complaint letters to as many public servants as possible including, Florida’s Governor, State Representatives, Indiana Governor, Indiana Attorney General, Federal Trade Commission, The OCC, the Attorney General’s office and others. We were unsure where we needed to go for support or help in this matter. I started placing calls to the corporate offices of Bank of America in Charlotte, North Carolina. Finally on 5/10/2010, after making several calls; I was able to speak with a David Tidwell in the Executive Customer Relations department. He was courteous and attentive while assuring me he would dig into it right away. I explained to Mr. Tidwell, how we are on the brink of financial ruins because of this mistake, not including our mental stress, fatigue, embarrassment, and the continuing loss of financial stability. Within the same day David Tidwell called me back and said I was 100% correct, and there shouldn’t have been a foreclosure suit filed, and the mortgage had been satisfied months ago. He said they would immediately remove it from our credit report and stop the law suit. Mr. Tidwell advised us to get legal counsel, but in the meantime he would ensure the mistake would be corrected. The mistake remained unresolved and the credit reporting agencies continued reporting it as a mortgage debt seriously late and in foreclosure. On 5-19-2020 I located a fax number for The Feiwell and Hannoy attorney group and sent them a request for Validation. I also composed and sent a certified letter to Brian T. Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America, On May 19, 2010 explaining in detail our dilemma. Our letter was accepted By Bank of America on 5-21-2010. On 5-24-2010 we received and signed for a certified package from Marion County Clerk W-122 City County Building 200 E. Washington St. Indianapolis, Indiana.  Enclosed in the package was an Alias Summons, filed by Feiwell and Hannoy on 5-19-2010, continuing on their path of a law Suit against us. Upon receiving the Alias Summons I put a call into Mr. Tidwell from Bank of America. After explaining the package we received, he responded by saying: this should have been cleared up and he would check into it. I told him I expected and needed him to send documentation declaring this issue resolved. Mr. Tidwell said he would send us what we needed in order to get this mistake resolved. Mr. Tidwell did not send us documentation as requested instead, the lawsuit remained intact and the credit reporting agencies still reporting false information. In the meantime we received responses back from several of the Public servants we sent letters to during May 2010. All of the responses suggested we seek legal counsel, but in the interim they would investigate our complaint further. In the first week of June 2010 we were referred and guided to Indiana Consumer Law Group/The Law Offices of Robert E. Duff.  On June-9-2010 we retained Robert Duff to represent us in our pursuit to stop the wrongful foreclosure law suit against us. Mr. Duff determined we had legitimate complaints against several parties and had us sign three separate Attorney representation and contingency fee agreements, spelling out the legal services he would provide for us. 1. Representation for violations of the FCRA by Equifax, Trans Union and Experian Credit reporting agencies. 2. Representation for violations of the FDCP by Feiwell and Hannoy P.C. Collection Agency. 3. Representation for violations of the FDCP, FCRA, by Bank of America (BAC). We bundled all of the information and documents related to the cases and sent them to Mr. Duff. As time progressed into late June 2010, we were informed through other sources than Mr. Duff that Bank of America had back dated and revised my wife’s credit report to reflect the BAC account paid, but still seriously late on payments for several months. I continued to keep Mr. Duff updated by faxing him information, such as updated credit reports, responses from letters I previously sent, and so on. After several weeks of not hearing from Mr. Duff or seeing anything being done on our case we became quite concerned. We realized Mr. Duff was not performing as we perceived. I asked Mr. Duff to respond to phone calls I was receiving from David Grossman, a Customer Advocate in the Office of the CEO and President of Bank of America. These requests went on for days and days. After finally reaching Mr. Duff, he explained he had medical issues and was unable to perform as we needed. Mr. Duff did not fulfill his duties as laid out in the Attorney representation and contingency fee agreements we signed. We felt we had no other choice, but seek new legal representation.

In early August 2010 we began searching the internet and yellow pages for a Law Firm capable of meeting our legal needs; our goal was to find a law firm willing to represent us in all of our legal matters associated with the wrongful foreclosure case. We interviewed several law firms before I interviewed the Phillips and Garcia law firm. On or about August 10, 2010 I interviewed Carlin Phillips of the Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. I explained our needs for a Law firm and informed Mr. Phillips I was interviewing other Law Firms as well. Mr. Phillips explained in detail what he could and would do for us if we decided to hire the Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. Mr. Phillips explained his firm’s fee structure, while leading us to believe his firm was more than capable of handling all of our legal needs. We based our decision to hire Phillips and Garcia Law Firm on several key factors.  Below you will find several key factors associated with documents to substantiate what Phillips and Garcia Law Firm led us to believe.

 We were led to believe Phillips and Garcia law firm was financially secure enough to handle our affairs. During the interviewing process I asked Mr. Phillips about their financial stability and Mr. Phillips said they were financially sound. He said they would handle all expenses needed to bring the cases in, and we did not have to worry about upfront cost as we did with our prior attorney. As time passed we began noticing suits were not being filed in a timely fashion and the cases were not being given the attention they truly deserved. We asked Mr. Phillips and Mr. DeMello about our cases on several different occasions. We were brushed off and given incorrect information each time. We became highly suspicious after being harassed, bullied and threatened, stating we would have to pay for costs associated to the case if we did not adhere to what the defense counsel demanded. We then discovered that Phillips and Garcia Law firm was not as financially secure as Mr. Phillips led us to believe. Had we not been deceived from the onset of our attorney client relationship, our cases would hold more merit and value.

We were lured into Phillips and Garcia Law Firm based on lies. We were told Phillips and Garcia Law Firm would file suits on all aspects of our cases, specifically all three Credit Bureaus (credit reporting agencies), Feiwell & Hannoy P.C., and BofA. During our initial interviewing process Mr. Phillips told us, Phillips and Garcia Law Firm would file suit on and litigate all three credit reporting agencies (Trans Union, Experian, and Equifax) for reporting false information.  He further explained how Phillips and Garcia Law Firm were equipped to handle all of our cases under one roof, and how convenient it would be for us. Mr. Phillips explained how all of the cases tied into the initial wrongful foreclosure and the cases should be litigated separately/ together anyway. Upon Phillips and Garcia Law Firm hiring our prior attorney Robert Duff, Mr. Phillips stated how Mr. Duff’s skill set would be better qualified to handle the credits reporting agency complaints we had. After months of continuously asking Phillips and Garcia about the litigation process of the credit reporting agencies, we were told Phillips and Garcia Law Firm did not intend on filing suit on the 3 credit reporting agencies and it was beyond what they were hired to do. We based our decision to allow Phillips and Garcia Law Firm to represent us because Mr. Phillips said they could and would handle all of our cases under one roof. We were very adamant about having one Law Firm represent all of our legal affairs. Had we known Phillips and Garcia Law Firm had no intentions of following through with what Mr. Phillips agreed to in our initial interview; we would have elected to not have Phillips and Garcia Law Firm represent us.

We were led to believe Phillips and Garcia would front all expenses and time associated to all of our cases. We anticipated and were prepared to pay attorney fees associated to our cases, but Mr. Phillips explained how the Phillip and Garcia’s contingency fee structure worked. He convinced us we would be better off by working from a contingency fee structure in the long run. He pointed out that Phillips and Garcia would be able to (defer)  front all associated costs and we would not have any out of pocket expenses to endure, until the cases were either settled or a judgment made, further stating; If we don’t get you anything, we eat the expenses and the time put in. We ultimately made our decision based on Mr. Phillip’s guided mindset of not having to be financially burdened by up front attorney fees and costs, thus giving us added comfort in our legal journey ahead. As time progressed in our client attorney relationship we were told we would have to pay costs associated to the Bank of America cases. We were bullied, and threatened regarding the notion that if we did not cooperate we would be out of pocket for expenses while causing us severe financial harm.

We were told we would have the right to accept or reject a settlement depending on a disbursement sheet. Upon our initial interview with Mr. Phillips we questioned our rights to accept or reject a settlement offer. Mr. Phillips answered our concerns by stating how Phillips and Garcia Law Firm would provide an itemized breakdown (disbursement sheet), stating how this will allow us to make an educated decision on a settlement offer and we would have the final say whether we accept or reject an offer based on the disbursement sheet.  Mr. Phillips made us feel comfortable in knowing we had the right of refusal or acceptance and we virtually had the last say. We were not afforded the right to review a full disbursement sheet even after we requested it on several occasions. The itemized breakdown (disbursement sheet) Mr. Phillips said we would receive has not been sent to us as promised. The issue keeps getting avoided even after a settlement offer was discussed. A settlement offer was placed on the table for negotiation. Part of our demands stated all Attorney Fees were to be paid by Bank of America. Mr. Phillips relayed our terms incorrectly by telling the defense counsel we agreed to settle for $2500.00 more than we originally negotiated, while omitting our demands to have Bank of America pay all attorney fees. The Defense counsel assumed all attorney fees were to be paid by their own perspective parties, and wrote the settlement agreement accordingly. We assumed attorney fees were to be paid by Bank of America.  Phillips and Garcia Law Firm did not present us with an itemized breakdown (disbursement sheet). Mr. Phillips told the unsuspecting courts the case was settled. We were told we had to sign the false settlement agreement or be sued.

We were told we would be provided with all associated documents per each case on a timely basis. Within our initial interview with Mr. Phillips I shared with him one of our pet peeves with our prior attorney Mr. Duff. I explained how my wife and I were detail oriented record keepers and we expected to receive documentation within a timely manner. Mr. Phillips assured me how his code of professionalism required him to get documents to us within a timely fashion. Documents of dire importance were withheld from us on numerous occasions and for several months. After asking several times for copies of our files, we felt it necessary to demand our case related documents.  When we explained to Mr. Phillips our intentions and needs for our case related files Mr. Phillips commented on how he never had a client so detail oriented and willing to investigate their own case files before. Phillips and Garcia Law Firm held files and documents for months without sharing or looking at them. We even had to ask Mr. Joseph DeMello if he was familiar with our cases on numerous occasions. Mr. DeMello used threats and bully tactics, while not having sufficient knowledge of what he was talking about. Mr. Phillips stated several times that he did not have the time to investigate the files (discovery files) related to our case, further commenting how he had tons of caseloads surrounding his couch at home.  Mr. Phillips sounded genuinely surprised when we told him the defense files (discovery files) were mostly duplicated documents, while a small percentage of the documents in the files held significant keys to our case. We explained how we sorted through all of the unorganized documents and were able to find inconsistencies, only to be disbelieved. In all essence we assumed he only guessed what were in those files. We know beyond a shadow of doubt, if the files and documents had been opened and thoroughly investigated our case would have been settled long ago.

 We were told we would be kept up to date on all facets of our cases in a timely manner. Upon our initial interview with Mr. Phillips I discussed with him another pet peeve with our prior attorney Mr. Duff. I made it very clear we wanted to be updated and kept in the loop at least once a week, whether or not there was anything new to report or not. Mr. Phillips assured me he would keep a constant line of communication open with us. We constantly had to ask for updates, sometimes going for weeks at a time before we would get a response. On several occasions we were scheduled to have phone conferences, and to our dismay we were stood up. We would wait for days without contact from Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. We were kept in the dark regarding our cases for weeks and more at a time. When we questioned their tardiness we were made to feel as though we were not entitled to regular feedback, and even humiliated into apologizing for asking for updates. We asked Phillips and Garcia Law Firm to adhere to and respond to reasonable time constraints we placed on the defense counsel. We were told the time constraints were being honored all the way to the very end, only to find they were not. Had we known Phillips and Garcia Law Firm was not punctual in the line of communications we would have not hired them.

 We were told Phillips and Garcia would thoroughly investigate every aspect of our cases. One of the aspects Mr. Phillips offered was the ability to investigate the case load with the upmost knowledge. Mr. Phillips explained how his law firm specialized in wrongful foreclosure cases, consumer protection law, and several others.  Mr. Phillips explained how they would thoroughly investigate all avenues of our cases in order to add more merit to our cases. Phillips and Garcia Law Firm did not investigate our files. Most of the time we had to refresh them on what our cases was about. Mr. Phillips made comments on how he had never seen any past client investigate their own files as we did. Co-Counsel Joseph Demello jumped into our caseload without having any in-depth knowledge of our case what so ever. On several occasions we had to ask if he even knew anything about our case. As time passed we realized Phillips and Garcia Law Firm were not staffed with paralegals or legal investigators whatsoever. As far as we can tell Phillips and Garcia Law Firm have no staff members at all, we have never had contact with anyone other than Carlin Phillips, Joseph DeMello, Robert Duff. Had we not been deceived into thinking Phillips and Garcia Law Firm were staffed with legal experts, we would have not chosen Phillips and Garcia Law Firm to represent us.

We were told Phillips and Garcia would be in our corner and represent us accordingly. Mr. Phillips commented and explained how aggressive Phillips and Garcia Law Firm would be once they received the files from our prior attorney Mr. Duff. As time progressed during our relationship with Phillips and Garcia Law Firm, we noticed inconsistencies formulating within our cases. We asked several questions from time to time only to receive inadequate or no answers at all. We never saw any indication of offensive aggression from Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. We were always forced to adhere to what the defense counsel demanded. We questioned the roll of our attorney on numerous occasions. The roll of the aggressor was never present from Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. We were continuously bullied by Phillips and Garcia Law Firm, especially Joseph Demello. The same attorneys we hired to protect and respect us. We’ve been treated as though we were guilty of a crime and had no rights at all, when in fact we were always the innocent party. We asked to have our questions answered, (legal or otherwise) on numerous occasions, only to receive no answer, or at best incomplete arrogant answers. We still have unanswered legal questions, and we suspect we will never have them answered by Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. At this point we feel we would have been better off by not having an attorney.  We were led to believe we would be given expert legal advice in order to protect us as clients. We asked for true legal advice on numerous occasions. We now understand some of the advice we were given was incomplete and not altogether true. We were duped into thinking Phillips & Garcia Law Firm would give us true legal advice throughout the course of our Client – Attorney relationship. While in the middle of a settlement negotiation Phillips & Garcia Law Firm told us, and the defense counsel that Phillips & Garcia Law Firm and Robert Duff was withdrawing.  On August 12, 2011 Carlin Phillips told the Magistrate assigned to our case that he would not represent us and from that point forward he would only act as a conduit for information purposes. The Magistrate agreed with him and mandated Our Attorney of Record would only act as a conduit. From that point forward we had no legal counsel as mandated by the Magistrate. We were not given adequate or proper notice of withdraw. We were left unprotected and totally in the dark as to what we were to do next. Mr. Phillips went as far as to say he would testify against us if we did not sign a false settlement contract the defense counsel had generated. For weeks Phillips & Garcia Law Firm and Robert Duff had refused to give us legal advice. We recently asked Phillips & Garcia Law Firm and Robert Duff; who is the Attorney of record? We have no legal notice of withdraw from Phillips & Garcia Law Firm, or Robert Duff. Had we known the deceitfulness of Phillips & Garcia Law Firm and Robert Duff we would have steered completely clear from them. We never asked to be treated in this manner; we only asked to be protected by wards of the justice system.

 We told Phillips & Garcia Law Firm would be our primary Attorney of record. From the onset of the relationship between Phillips & Garcia Law Firm and us we assumed they were our primary attorney of record. We now find we had been deceived into thinking Phillips & Garcia Law Firm was handling all of our affairs. We now realize Phillips & Garcia Law Firm is not licensed in the state of Indiana. We were told Mr. Duff was brought in as sponsorship into the Federal court in Indiana. We were not afforded the opportunity to be represented by an Indiana licensed attorney. We were taken advantage of from the onset of our relationship with Phillips & Garcia Law Firm. Mr. Robert Duff has never stepped up to the plate to give us legal advice throughout our relationship with Phillips and Garcia Law Firm. We have asked him questions and he continues to stay silent, even though he is one of the attorneys of record. We have been taken unfair advantage of and the whole masquerade of Phillips and Garcia Law Firm has tainted our trust in the judicial system.

We were told Phillips & Garcia Law Firm could represent us no matter what State we were from. The web site of Phillips & Garcia Law Firm indicates they will represent clients no matter what state they are from. This is in itself deceitful when in fact they have no clue what the law requires from state to state.  We never had an opportunity for honest representation from an Indiana licensed attorney. Instead a conflict of interest existed between us and Attorney Robert Duff. We severed ties with Robert Duff several months ago. Phillips & Garcia Law Firm hired him back knowing very well why we severed ties with him. We were made to think Mr. Duff would represent us with good intentions, when in fact all indications related he was angry with us for letting him go. If we had known  Phillips and Garcia Law Firm was relying on our previous attorney for a sponsorship in the Indiana Federal Courts we would have not chosen Phillips and Garcia Law Firm to represent us.

We were told we had a secure case against Feiwell & Hannoy P.C. Mr. Phillips told us Feiwell & Hannoy P.C.(attorney group who initially filed a wrongful foreclosure suit on us in April 2010) was seeking to settle as per a prior email. The email dated July 12, 2011 stated; (Feiwell & Hannoy is seeking a demand to settle the second case.  Damages in the two cases cannot overlap (i.e. you are not allowed to double dip and ask for the damages twice).  Settling both cases at the same time would appear to be advantageous.  The second case is valued at $5,000.  We are seeking permission to make a demand of around $15,000 to $20,000 in that case to see what the defendant comes back with.) We gave Mr. Phillips our permission to proceed @ $30,000. We never heard anything further regarding the Feiwell & Hannoy settlement. We later learned this was a lure, only to get us to settle with Bank of America for less money. We have questioned our standings with the Feiwell & Hannoy case on numerous occasions. We received an email from Carlin Phillips dated September 27, 2011 stating this case now has limited value. And the Attorney of record Robert Duff is seeking to withdraw. This whole masquerade has caused us added stress and grief beyond imaginable belief. Mr. Phillips made empty promises not only verbally, but also in writing. We’ve asked Phillips and Garcia Law Firm to submit settlement offers on numerous occasions and he has not, he has refused to submit our offers. Now we find Phillips and Garcia Law Firm, Robert Duff, and Joseph DeMello has submitted permission to withdrawal, directly from the advice of the Magistrate, and to be effective by October 28, 2011. We’ve received letters dated Oct. 20, 2011, from the Courts/Magistrate and Phillips and Garcia P/C. stating Carlin Phillips, Joseph DeMello, and Robert Duff no longer represent us as legal counsel, and that all of our files were returned to us. We did not receive our files back from Phillips and Garcia as requested. We have since spoken with several different attorneys, and all of the attorneys have virtually said the same thing. Every attorney we have spoken with has stated they would be unwilling to look at just one paragraph of the settlement agreement without a broad view of the case. Each attorney has stated their fee structure in picking up our case from where it is. We finally spoke with an attorney who is willing to help us work through the paragraph 7 of the settlement agreement. This attorney is demanding 1/3 of the settlement before he will finalize the revision language of the paragraph 7.  Now that our counsel was permitted to withdrawal without just cause, we are again forced to ride a financial and emotional roller coaster through no fault of our own.

On or around November 3, 2011 we were told our prior attorney of record is still listed as the attorney of record.  We have requested our files back on numerous occasions, only to be ignored. We are still waiting for our hard copy files. We have been told our prior attorney of record (Robert Duff) is still holding on as the attorney of record in another case we had filed, after telling us he had withdrawn.

On or around November 10, 2011 we mailed the courts a request for an extension of time, in order to retain new legal counsel. We have since contacted numerous attorneys only to be told the same thing. No one will take our case simply because of the mess the Magistrate and our prior legal counsel has caused. The attorneys we’ve spoken with have all said they were unwilling to pick up our cases due to the extended cost of unraveling and sorting out the mess our prior attorneys and the Magistrate had caused. We are still trying to locate legal counsel willing to take on this mess.

On December 6, 2011, I sent the following email to Magistrate LaRue’s chambers via Ruth Olive.

“We have not heard from anyone for quite some time. We've requested an extension of time through the courts and we are still waiting for a response. 

It has been several weeks since we requested our files back from our prior attorney. We still do not have them. After we learned that Robert Duff was still the attorney of record on the Feiwell and Hannoy case, we sent an email to Robert Duff requesting him to submit and offer for settlement to the Feiwell and Hannoy Group. Here's his email response sent on 11-8-2011  (Mr. LeForge,

You have accused Mr. Phillips and I of professional misconduct and malpractice.  Obviously, the attorney-client relationship between us has broken down.  It would not be appropriate for me to continue to represent you in the Feiwell and Hannoy case.  It was my understanding that you were attempting to obtain substitute counsel for this case also.  Please let me know if you have obtained substitute counsel.  I intend to request leave to withdraw from the Feiwell and Hannoy case tomorrow.

Robert E. Duff)

Why Mr. Duff is still the attorney of record is beyond us, we did not directly hire him in the first place. He was hired by Phillips and Garcia. We have no idea where we are with the Feiwell and Hannoy case.

We've contacted several attorneys to represent us in our cases and we continue to get the same response. Each Attorney has stated that they do not wish to get involved in the mess our prior attorney and Magistrate LaRue has caused. We are presently speaking with the Indiana, Massachusetts, and Florida Attorney Generals offices, regarding our cases. Our complaints against our prior Attorney's misconduct are being sent to the Office of the Bar Counsel of the Board of Overseer of the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. 

We are requesting that all documents the courts have on our case be sent to us electronically and certified mail. We are also asking that Magistrate LaRue be dismissed from our case”.

 

We did not get a response back from anyone of the courts. A few days later on December 8, 2011, I sent the same letter via a fax transmission to the chambers of Magistrate LaRue. We still have had no answer from the courts as to where we stand.

 Needless to say we are very confused and bewildered. We have questioned Mr. Duff’s involvement on numerous occasions via letters and emails and he keeps stating he is seeking to withdraw. In early Dec. 2011 my wife received a letter from Robert Duff, stating how he had made an error in requesting permission from the courts to withdraw his appearance, and stating the courts had denied his request for withdraw; he further stated he would again move to withdraw his appearance by Dec. 15, 2011. The letter closed by stating my wife was responsible for costs and attorney fees that came out of nowhere. We did not have a fee agreement with Mr. Duff.  On or around December 27, 2011 we received a letter from the Courts  stating our letter we sent previously on Dec. 6/8, 2011 would be filed and docketed while the practice was improper and should no longer be employed by the plaintiffs nor defendants. On or around the latter part of Dec. 2011 we requested via the courts a Telephonic Status conference to be held regarding our case # 1:11- CV-00526-RLY-DKL.  On or around Jan. 3, 2012 my wife received a letter from the courts regarding an Order Setting Hearing on Motion to Withdraw Appearance set for Jan. 10, 2011.  On Jan. 10, 2011 via a telephonic Status Conference Magistrate LaRue granted Robert Duff permission to withdraw after Robert Duff explained his reasons and Mr. Duff literally placed the blame on Carlin Phillips, Mr. Duff further stated he was owed monies from us. My wife tried to explain to the Magistrate we did not hire Mr. Duff and he was to be paid by Mr. Phillips. The Magistrate spoke up and said that someone had to pay for the filing of the case and other associated fees. As far as we know the Magistrate shouldn’t have known the particulars of the fee agreement we had with Phillips and Garcia P.C. The Magistrate overstepped her boundaries once again. My wife once again asked the Magistrate and Mr. Duff about our original case files, and asked to have our files returned to us in order to allow us an opportunity to seek other legal counsel with our original files. The Magistrate asked Mr. Duff when he could have the files to us, and Mr. Duff stated he could get them to us within a few days. The Magistrate allowed my wife up to the second week in March 2012 to secure new counsel. My wife was left wondering whether she could legally ask questions about the case do to not having legal representation. She elected not to ask important questions about the status of the case because she was unsure and nervous regarding the details during the Telephonic status call.    Some of the questions we had were due to the numerous uncontested extensions granted to the Defendants (Feiwell and Hannoy P.C.) by the courts, even though Robert Duff never made us privy to any of the request for the extensions throughout this case. The complaint was filed on April 19, 2011, and we found out the last extension request was granted up to and including November 10, 2011. The telephonic status conference took place on Jan. 10, 2012. Two months had lapsed before we became aware of the deadline abuse. Mr. Duff did nothing to hold the defense counsel accountable for not adhering to the extension of time given by Magistrate LaRue. We also found that Feiwell and Hanny submitted their answers to our initial complaint on December 29th 2011. The November 10, 2011 deadline for the defense to answer the complaint was exceeded by well over a month. The Magistrate made no reference to the apparent lapse in time per the extension she granted during the Jan. 10, 2012 call. Now we are left with no legal counsel to ask why.

While researching and interviewing attorneys for new counsel, we were told our prior counsel Phillips and Garcia P.C. and Robert Duff had missed a deadline to file a complaint. We now understand my wife’s name was the only name that appeared on the complaint filed against Feiwell and Hannoy and the Statutes of limitations were exceeded for me to be allowed to file a complaint against Feiwell and Hannoy.

This whole case has been botched from the very start by misconduct and misrepresentation. We put our trust and confidence into the legal system and were never afforded the opportunity to be heard and respected as the innocent parties. This malpractice has affected our lives in ways that are unimaginable. We’ve constantly, day after day been forced to endure an emotional roller coaster ride, our financial stability has been shaken to the point of no return, our emotional stability has been totally wrecked, our physical and mental stability has been misused and weakened, and our marriage has been tested in ways that are unacceptable. A day does not go by without a conversation about this travesty; it has virtually taken over our lives. We have lost social acquaintances because of this. These are but a few of the reactions from the unorthodox and unethical actions the legal system has forced us to endure.

We know this may sound as if we are fabricating and exaggerating a story, but we can assure you we have been truthful and can substantiate every detail associated to our complaint. Should you have any questions, please contact us at either email: daveleforge@aol.com , phone# 513-604-4108 or home address 203 Lady Palm Dr. Naples, Fl. 34104

David and Luda Christine LeForge

Views: 946

Reply to This

Blog Posts

Still in the fight

Posted by Dan Lambrecht on September 26, 2014 at 9:02am 0 Comments

Help in NJ

Posted by John Mason on September 18, 2014 at 12:27am 0 Comments

Bank of America fraud.

Posted by John Mason on September 3, 2014 at 10:51pm 10 Comments

Judges & Banks

Posted by Striker on August 31, 2014 at 10:01pm 4 Comments

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Hamlet Stats





Visits
since 12/21/2009

Music

Loading…

© 2014   Created by Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service