When R I C O ARRESTS …. George v. Urban Settlement Services | Because we conclude that the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint states a facially plausible ** RICO ** claim against BOA …. we reverse and remand for further proceedings - FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

When R I C O ARRESTS …. George v. Urban Settlement Services | Because we conclude that the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint states a facially plausible ** RICO ** claim against BOA …. we reverse and remand for further proceedings

When R I C O ARRESTS …. George v. Urban Settlement Services | Because we conclude that the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint states a facially plausible ** RICO ** claim against BOA …. we reverse and remand for further proceedings

10th Circ. Revives RICO Claims Against BofA, Others

By John Kennedy

Law360, New York (August 15, 2016, 9:02 PM ET) — The Tenth Circuit reversed a Colorado federal court’s dismissal of class claims against Bank of America Corp. and others involving the federal Home Affordable Modification Program, finding Monday that homeowners sufficiently proved a possible Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act enterprise.

In a published opinion, a three-judge panel disagreed with the lower court’s finding that the homeowners did not sufficiently plead a case for their RICO claims against BofA and Urban Settlement Services or for their promissory estoppel claim against BofA. The homeowners had alleged that…

PAYWALL

Secret Inside BofA Office of CEO Stymied Needy Homeowners …

Bank of America, led by Chief Executive Officer Brian T. Moynihan, faced more than 15,000 complaints in 2010 from its role in the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program. Urban Lending, one of the vendors brought in to handle grievances from lawmakers and regulators on behalf of borrowers, also operated a mail-processing center for HAMP documents.

Paperwork Requests

Instead of helping homeowners as promised under agreements with the U.S. Treasury Department, Bank of America stalled them with repeated requests for paperwork and incorrect income calculations, according to nine former Urban Lending employees. Some borrowers were sent into foreclosure or pricier loan modifications padded with fees resulting from the delays, according to the people, all but two of whom asked to remain anonymous because they signed confidentiality agreements.

ORDER for George et al v. Urban Settlement Services et al. :: Justia …

ORDERED that Urban’s Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Class Action Complaint
[Docket No. 13] is GRANTED. ORDERED that BOA’s Motion to Dismiss the …


GEORGE vs URBAN SETTLEMENT SERVICES d/b/a URBAN …

stopforeclosurefraud.com/…/georgevsurbansettlementservices-dba-urban-lending-…

Dec 16, 2013 – GEORGE vs URBAN SETTLEMENT SERVICES d/b/a URBAN LENDING
SOLUTIONS; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. | Colorado Class Action …

_____________________________________________________________


George v. Urban Settlement Services (10th Cir. 2016)

View original: From the court   |   Our backup

<excerpt>

 

Richard George, Steven Leavitt, Sandra Leavitt, and Darrell Dalton appeal the district court’s dismissal of their putative class action against Urban Settlement Services, d/b/a Urban Lending Solutions (Urban) and Bank of America, N.A. (BOA).  The plaintiffs asserted a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, against BOA and Urban. They also brought a promissory estoppel claim against BOA. Both claims arose from the defendants’ allegedly fraudulent administration of the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). …..

 . . .

Because we conclude that the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint states a facially plausible RICO claim against BOA and Urban and a facially plausible promissory estoppel claim against BOA, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

.

I.  The district court erred in dismissing the plaintiffs’ RICO claim.
A. The plaintiffs sufficiently allege the existence of a RICO enterprise that is distinct from BOA.
B. The plaintiffs sufficiently allege Urban’s participation in the conduct of the alleged enterprise.
C.  The plaintiffs sufficiently allege that BOA and Urban engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity
© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 11555 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD.

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

Contact the author

2 Responses to “When R I C O ARRESTS …. George v. Urban Settlement Services | Because we conclude that the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint states a facially plausible ** RICO ** claim against BOA …. we reverse and remand for further proceedings”

  1. Fred R Schneider says:

    Let’s hope Colorado is finally waking up and wising up to all the abuse and fraud on behalf of Bank of America and many related companies like Urban Settlement, Safeguard Properties, Seterus, Shellpoint mortgage and many others I am probably not aware of.
    I have only tried (emphasis on tried) to work with now for nearly FIVE (5) years. I have all the undisputed proof and nearly FOUR (4) feet of correspondence from Bank of America and others, including over TWENTY (20) different so called customer relations managers who made claim they were from the office of the president and ceo and were my new “one point of contacts” and agent appointed to help me. What a joke and one could easily tell these were $10+ an hour people who had no clue about what is involved in the mortgage business of modifications and refinances.
    The stall tactics were unreal and incomprehensible and a big lawfirm even provided copies of forged, fabricated, and phony documents that fully support any and all claims. They contained the documents signed in blank by alleged MERS vice presidents and secretaries who are known “robo signers” like MIchele Sjolander.
    They even pulled off a totally wrongful foreclosure here in Colorado with these documents that a Colorado lawfirm claimed were the originals- this lawfirm was fined $650,000 for wrongful foreclosure practices and overcharging and they are one of five firms caught and the only one standing because I am pretty sure B of A is paying for them to continue with this practice. They need to appeal Rule 120 in Colorado that allows this type of behavior to continue.

  2. Fred R Schneider says:

    Thank goodness for Colorado allegedly and finally waking up against Goliath (AKA Bank of America) and all its co-conspirators like Shellpoint Mtg. Seterus, FANNIE MAE- YES OUR VERY OWN GOVERNMENT AS FANNIE AND FREDDIE HAVE BEEN OPERATING UNDER GSE (GOVERNMENT SERVICES ENTERPRISES SINCE THE YEAR 2008 WHEN THEY TOOK THEM OVER) AND OTHER KNOWING GOVERNMENT SERVICES LIKE THE INEPT AND DYSFUNCTIONAL CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
    To bad that states across our country don’t wake up and ban together to take down this huge racketeering scam that has been going on for some time now (over and over again).
    I had five (5) loans that were allegedly originated and funded by Countrywide Home Loans and I have nearly four (4) feet of incriminating correspondence to back it up-not to mention a totally wrongful foreclosure and others in process by Seterus- who is another debt collector “service transferred” by nasty old Bank of America and has many ties and history involving Bank of America.
    All this has been based upon purely forged, fabricated, and phony documents including phony “in-house” phony modifications issued on behalf of Urban Settlement Services as the “attorney in fact” with apparent “robo signer”.
    Montana did a great job of standing up to Bank of America in the “Morrow Case” which is much like mine and exactly like the 10th Circuit Court Ruling” in the George et al. Case here in Coloado. Just check out what Justice McKinnon had to day about Bank of America in the “Morrow Case”.
    Semper Fi

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

Advert

Archives