Class Action Certification Granted In Illinois for FDCPA Violations: Codilis & Associates

Categorized | foreclosure fraud

Class Action Certification Granted In Illinois for FDCPA Violations: Codilis & Associates

Class Action Certification Granted In Illinois for FDCPA Violations: Codilis & Associates

I have a feeling this is going to be the case in one fashion or another against the Foreclosure Mills all over the US! I am going to start a new post for each Class Action related to a Mill. Keep checking back!

April 7, 2010 by christine

A reader from Illinois sent me this information. If you’re being foreclosed upon in Illinois by Codilis & Associates, you might want to pay close attention. This is from Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, P.C.’s website.

Shea v. Codilis

99 C 0057


2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4131

March 27, 2000, Decided

DISPOSITION: [*1] Plaintiff’s motion for class certification GRANTED.

COUNSEL: For plaintiff: Daniel A. Edelman, Cathleen M Combs, James O. Latturner, Marianne J. Lee, EDELMAN, COMBS & LATTURNER, Chicago, Illinois.

For defendant: Thomas McGarry, John M. Foley, Matthew R. Henderson, HINSHAW & CULBERTSON, Chicago, Illinois.

JUDGES: David H. Coar.

OPINION BY: David H. Coar

OPINION: Plaintiffs, James and Nancy Shea, received a form letter from Defendants Codilis & Associates, P.C. notifying them that the accelerated balance of their note and mortgage was due. Plaintiffs allege that the letter violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (”FDCPA”) because it does not state the “amount of the debt” as required by 15 U.S.C. @ 1692g. Plaintiffs move to certify a class of individuals who were mailed the same collection form letter from Codilis & Associates, P.C. (that is, providing a dollar figure for the principal balance, but omitting such figures for other types of charges owed) on or after January 7, 1998, in connection with attempts to collect a residential mortgage loan on property located at the same address to which the letter was sent, if the letter was not returned by the Postal Service. [*2]

Plaintiffs seek class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3). Defendants do not oppose certification. To establish a class action, rule 23(a) requires that (1) the class be so numerous so as to render joinder of all members impracticable; (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims or defenses of the representative class are typical of those of the class; and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interest of the class. In addition, rule 23(b)(3) states that common issues of law or fact must predominate over individual issues, and the class action must be the superior method of adjudicating the controversy.

Rule 23 requirements have been satisfied in this case. Defendants are one of the largest mortgage foreclosure firms in the Chicago area, filing more than 1,000 cases annually. Considering Defendants’ use of a standardized form letter, it is reasonable to infer that there will be a large number of class members. The claims of the class center on Defendants’ alleged violation of 15 U.S.C. @ 1692g by use of these collection form letters. Moreover, Plaintiffs’ claims [*3] are based on the same factual issues and legal theories as those of applicable to the class members. The Court is also convinced that Plaintiffs, who retained counsel experienced in brining class action suits and collection abuse claims, will adequately protect the interest of the class.

Furthermore, each proposed class member received the same form letter from Defendants, and the predominant question in this case is whether the language of the form letter violates 15 U.S.C. @ 1692g. A class action is also the superior method of resolving this controversy. Because small claims are at stake, it is improbable that many of the class members would initiate litigation individually. In addition, potential class members may not be aware of the violation of their rights under the FDCPA.

Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for class certification is GRANTED. The certified class includes:

a. All persons who were mailed a form collection letter from Codilis & Associates, P.C. in the form represented by Exhibit A of Plaintiffs’ complaint, i.e. with a statement that a principal balance is $ “x,” plus other items which are not given a dollar amount;

b. On or after January 7, 1998 (one [*4] year prior to the filing of this action);

c. In connection with attempts to collect a residential mortgage loan on property located at the same address to which the letter is sent; and

d. Which letters were not returned by the Postal Service.

Christine here: If you have questions about joining in this lawsuit, you should call the law firm, which should be available from the link to their site above.






This post was written by:

- who has written 9281 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

11 Responses to “Class Action Certification Granted In Illinois for FDCPA Violations: Codilis & Associates”

  1. sheryl says:

    is there a class action against codillis? i have several letters from them

  2. Stanley Putra says:

    Help needed in Wis

  3. England says:

    I to have been fighting Condolis and Associates for 3 years and they are fore closing on my home inwhich I paid Cash for. Trouble is my ex wife took a “medical power of Attorney” and withdrew $87,000.00 in equity and left. I did not know as I was in the hospital recoving from DOA.
    I filed for a US Government Home Debt Relief Act in 2009 when they sent me a letter, as I qualify as I am disabled. Amazingly I was denied in 2010 and they blocked 10 sells on my home as well.
    5 short sell, and 5 conventional.
    WE who are getting screwed over by this evil firm need to find some attorney to files a class action law suit ASAP.
    FYI: They are on the hit list of Gov. Pat Quinns plan to save homes and stop ILLEGAL fore closers.

  4. QWESTER says:

    I wonder if this ruling applies only to letters sent by Codilis during the one year period PRIOR to the March 27, 2000 ruling or if recipients of subsequent letters would form a new class? Would an attorney respond to this question. A few months ago I contacted Edelman, Combes etal and they could not find this case on their system any longer and were not interested in discussing it.

  5. Jernal Lucas says:

    I am a renter of a property that was foreclosed on, in mid Sept I recieved a letter from Colilis & Associates PC offering me 3 different choose’s to leave or live in the said property this form letter is there RELOCATION ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT. It offered me monies to move by 10/14/2010 of $3500.00 or $2500.00 to move by 11/12/2010, or to stay and pay a set amount on a month to month Lease agreement. i choose the month to month. In Oct 2010 I spoke to the management co and send them income doc’s on are proff of income. I was told that the rent would be based on income and rents is the area. About one week later I was told that we were acpected and a time adate was set for the mangement to come out. On Oct 29th 2010 a man from the management co came to inspect the property and bring us the month to month lease. I told him I did not get paid until the 4th of Nov. He said that as long as everything was post marked by the 5th of the month as was find. On Nov 5th I went to P.O. and send via 2nd day the signed lease and the money order for the rent. On the 14th day of Nov, 2010 I recieved a check via mail along with a letter telling me that Colilis was terminating my rental. So now I can’t take the RELOCATION ASSISTANCE, BECAUSE THE LAST DATE HAD PASSED AND I now am facing eviction. I think this co does this so they do not have to pay the CASH FOR KEYS to people. I am a 63 year old woman on unemployment raising my 14 year old granddaughter. I have to go to court on the 14th of April at the Daley Center downtown Chicago. Please like me know if this Company has done this to other people., and if they have what can I do. Is there anything you can send me on them to help me fight this in court. I am not asking to live rent free, I will pay to live here, I need to stay here only until the mid of June. My granddaughter will graduate 8th grade first of June. I can’t displace her 2 months before graduation.
    Please if you can.
    Thank you,
    Jernal Lucas phone 708-778-0783

  6. concerned party says:

    I do hope this worked out for you. Unfortunately, renters end up in the worst situations because landlords aren’t required to tell you if they’ve gone into foreclosure. And the Law firm representing the bank isn’t allowed to share very much information with tenants since they aren’t named in the case. Typically, if you attend the court date, the judge will usually grant you the time you request. The law firm is just the people representing the bank. If they told you something regarding rental, it was most likely information given to them by the bank or the current property owner (usually the bank)

    Though I am not an attorney, I can say that due to the fact that the original class action was 10 years ago, it has most likely ended and would need to be re-brought up. That said, I would guess that Codilis has most likely mended the form letter that they send out to include all of the dollar amounts needed.
    If you have a different issue with a letter rcvd from them, you may want to see if there is a newer suit that meets the criteria of your experience.

    Its terrible to hear that someone would take your money and run! I would sue her for fraud! The law firms don’t actually make the decision as to whether or not you qualify for a loan mod. They just wait for the client to tell them if you are or if you are not. What did they do to block your sales?? That sounds pretty awful.

    I’d like to mention that I work for a law firm that represents banks in foreclosures. (not this one though) It seems to be important for me to let everyone know that I rent a very inexpensive and too small apartment for me and my disabled child. Those of us who just happen to work for these firms aren’t in any better shape. I have several co-workers who are currently in foreclosure. We definitely aren’t treated any differently for working there. I can’t speak for Codilis & Associates, but I can say that where I work, we will hold a file for months if our client hasn’t provided us with information that allows us to proceed in a completely legal manner. I would hope other firms do the same. I truly hope that you all can work through your foreclosure woes. The best advice i can give you is to show up at every single court date. It helps to show the judge that you still want to work out the problems. They are more lenient if they know you’re trying to get back on track. a lot of people never respond to anything, and the courts see them as uncaring of their home. Best of luck to everyone!!

  7. BB says:

    Shea v. Codilis case was settled and dismissed on May 8, 2001.

  8. David says:

    They are still sending out that type of letter not listing specific charges as of late 2011. And in IL they can choose their own process server and are not serving folks properly, likely trying to force them into default and lose their property. They are still putting forged signatures before IL courts in their paperwork and stealing homes they have no standing to foreclose upon. Hope Lisa Madigan takes them out once and for all.

  9. I am from Illinois and you can add Provest to the list and Peirce & Associates. The very worst offender is The First American TiTle Corp. Now known as “guaranteedRate”. Do not do buisiness with these people. First American also has many names.

  10. Sandra McGuire says:

    I am in the same situation. Co and Mo sent me several letters alleging that I owe 188,000 dollars for the home that I have been foreclosed on. I don’t know what for. I purchased the home for 142,000 and lived in it for a little over 11 years. Please help. The home was sold at auction back to one of the servicers.

  11. TB says:

    So Any ideas on what actions to take when I file a response to Codillis and Associates in November 2014 – In my response, I stated I did not “Officially receive” the summons. Then to find out the date was scheduled for February 2015 only to then find out that it was moved to November 20th – Luckily I contacted the civil court for an update on this matter.
    Now they are trying to “QUASH” my response because Codilis stated they properly served me?
    Yet, I am not home at the time they stated, I am usually leaving work around that time – On tuesdays and thursdays since MARCH 2014 I leave work and go directly to my ex-wife’s house to pickup my kids – But yet at 4:30 on a Tuesday I was served paperwork as the description stated – Male, white, 36 – 40 – Interesting – You know how many people fit that description in my neighborhood ?

    Thoughts because these *holes are liars and are trying to help me – Right out of a home when I have options that are being totally ignored by Wells Fargo and now by these fools – Codilis and Associates.


Leave a Reply

Advertise your business on


Please Support Me!

All Of These Are Troll Comments