I just posted in great detail:
Arthur Miller v. Cohen & Slamowitz: attorney’s failure to conduct meaningful review violates FDCPA
On 9/30/09, the judge ruled that they violated the FDCPA because they did not conduct proper attorney reviews prior to suing consumers.
In NOVEMBER 2009, I was told by Cohen & Slamowitz’s Ms. Spivack that attorneys are NOT assigned to active lawsuits until an answer has been filed.
Presumably, if NO answer is filed as in MOST debt collection litigation against consumers, no attorney ever gets involved and the paralegals handle everything.
While the lawsuit had been filed several months earlier, I was unable to contact any attorney.
Cohen & Slamowitz actually sent an attorney from ANOTHER firm to a hearing and he had NO idea what was going on. He assured my client that he would not appear on their behalf again.
To date, we have NOT received any answers to our questions or ANY communicati0ns from Cohen & Slamowitz outside court.
One major issue:
Will Citibank pursue Mark Cella (FDRS) to recover at least part of the loot?
Last year I notified Citi (through another collection attorney) of the FDRS fraud and I notified them of the Chase litigation against scammers engaging in similar fraud and they recovered MILLIONS and Chase forgave the debts and deleted the accounts from the credit reports.
I suppose Citi finds it more PROFITABLE to hire collection thugs like Cohen & Slamowitz to sue the defrauded consumers.
I already started on the new Citi blog and the first post is about the CRIMINAL citi executives who get paid huge bonuses funded through THEFT — according to the California attorney general.
It’s not surprising that Citi chooses to pursue the victims instead of the criminals and there’s nothing we can do about Citi. As I’m sure you know, they’re “too big to fail.”
So I’ll focus on Cohen & Slamowitz and hopefully they’ll soon join the ranks of BANKRUPT collection laywers like Wolpoff & Abramson and Mann, Bracken.
No Comments »
Filed under: Litigation against Cohen & Slamowitz tagged litigation, Miller v Cohen & Slamowitz, unfair practices