Hi,
Anyone ever submitted their case for review at faircreditlawyers.com?
Did you get a response? How long did it take?
They claim representation in every state - anyone from CA ever use them?
Thanks.

Yeah, I live in CA. and I am in process now with a suit against the bureaus and a creditor, AMEX. They contacted me within a week of posting to their site. A "Screener" person asked some basic questions around my case. She then asked me to fax documentation for an Attorney to review. I subsequently received a call from the Attorney for consultation and my case was accepted. So far the process seems to be moving slow (3 months) . They seem to be doing fine but I have to stay in touch with THEM in order to stay updated. It seems like a good option because they generally operate on a retainer basis and are paid by the defendants when they settle or when they win in court. They filed in District Court in Illinois.

Perhaps someone else has gone all the way through settlement. I will keep you posted.

will2win,
Thanks for the info. I posted to the site at the end of last week - hopefully I'll hear something in the next few days.
Already have all documentation scanned into my PC, ready to print or fax a set whenever needed. Best of luck with your case

SLOW is for sure. I have a client with them and you really have to inquire about progress, you rarely hear from them.

I would have recommended them in summer to several clients, but I guess they're even busier during summer. It really sucks when you feel like you're bothering people when you send them business.

However, I've had quite a few experiences much worse, attorneys wanting $150 or $175 for a case review, attorneys leaving you waiting for a decision whether they'll take a case for several MONTHS until they tell you that you have no case (when you really DO have a case but your case isn't "profitable.")

I know of several people with Krohn & Moss now, and so far so good.

My client was quite happy with the settlements so far (bureaus are still pending) and he even settled with a collector failing to validate an old PAID collection. I was impressed.

Thanks Christine.
Do you know if: When the action is filed in the District Court of Illinois the defendent can be held liable for California Civil Code violations over there. Or do they only persue the matter with FCRA and FDCPA statutes.
If I read California Civil Code correctly a CRA is liable to the consumer for actual damages or $10,000, whichever sum is greater, in case of a failure to comply.
$1000 for FCRA violation nice, $10,000 for California Civil Code violation, nicer.

A few months ago a Cal. attorney e-mailed me and he was going to sue in Cal for those $10K, he wasn't an FCRA attorney but suing on his own behalf.

I'd like to hear what Shylock has to say about that.

My thinking: If this was for real, EVERYBODY would do this. And there's no shortage of FCRA violations and lawyers in Cal.

So, why have I NEVER heard of a 10K award???????

Been waiting to hear back from that attorney - no word so far.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure you'd have to sue in Cal.

Actually, it's up to 5K, not 10K.

Here's the statute:

1785.31. (a) Any consumer who suffers damages as a result of a
violation of this title by any person may bring an action in a court
of appropriate jurisdiction against that person to recover the
following:
(1) In the case of a negligent violation, actual damages,
including court costs, loss of wages, attorney's fees and, when
applicable, pain and suffering.
(2) In the case of a willful violation:
(A) Actual damages as set forth in paragraph (1) above:
(B) Punitive damages of not less than one hundred dollars ($100)
nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation as
the court deems proper;
(C) Any other relief that the court deems proper.
(3) In the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a
consumer credit report under false pretenses or knowingly without a
permissible purpose, an award of actual damages pursuant to paragraph
(1) or subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) shall be in an amount of
not less than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500).
(b) Injunctive relief shall be available to any consumer aggrieved
by a violation or a threatened violation of this title whether or
not the consumer seeks any other remedy under this section.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any
person who willfully violates any requirement imposed under this
title may be liable for punitive damages in the case of a class
action, in an amount that the court may allow. In determining the
amount of award in any class action, the court shall consider among
relevant factors the amount of any actual damages awarded, the
frequency of the violations, the resources of the violator and the
number of persons adversely affected.
(d) Except as provided in subdivision (e), the prevailing
plaintiffs in any action commenced under this section shall be
entitled to recover court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
(e) If a plaintiff brings an action pursuant to this section
against a debt collector, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section
1788.2, and the basis for the action is related to the collection of
a debt, whether issues relating to the debt collection are raised in
the same or another proceeding, the debt collector shall be entitled
to recover reasonable attorney's fees upon a finding by the court
that the action was not brought in good faith.
(f) If a plaintiff only seeks and obtains injunctive relief to
compel compliance with this title, court costs and attorney's fees
shall be awarded pursuant to Section 1021.5 of the Code of Civil
Procedure.
(g) Nothing in this section is intended to affect remedies
available under Section 128.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/d...1785.30-1785.35

It's 10,000 bucks according to Section 1786.50.

CALIFORNIA CODES
CIVIL CODE
SECTION 1786.50-1786.60

1786.50. (a) An investigative consumer reporting agency or user of
information that fails to comply with any requirement under this
title, except for the requirements of Section 1786.20, with respect
to an investigative consumer report is liable to the consumer who is
the subject of the report in an amount equal to the sum of all the
following:
(1) Any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of
the failure or, except in the case of class actions, ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), whichever sum is greater.
(2) In the case of any successful action to enforce any liability
under this chapter, the costs of the action together with reasonable
attorney's fees as determined by the court.
(b) If the court determines that the violation was grossly
negligent or willful, the court may, in addition, assess, and the
consumer may recover, punitive damages.
(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), an investigative consumer
reporting agency or user of information that fails to comply with any
requirement under this title with respect to an investigative
consumer report shall not be liable to a consumer who is the subject
of the report where the failure to comply results in a more favorable
investigative consumer report than if there had not been a failure
to comply.


1786.52. Nothing in this chapter shall in any way affect the right
of any consumer to maintain an action against an investigative
consumer reporting agency, a user of an investigative consumer
report, or an informant for invasion of privacy or defamation.
An action to enforce any liability created under this title may be
brought in any appropriate court of competent jurisdiction within
two years from the date of discovery.

I am also in Ca and I have two suits filed with Krohn & Moss. The attorney that I am working with is very nice and I have found that if I email her, she is able to respond to me faster then if I call. They are very professional and they do that care of business. But If you are more of a one on one person, (as I am) this might not be the place for you.

What I like is that they do not work on a contingency basis. They do not take a percentage of your winnings. They only collect for the amount of work that they have put in, and they try to collect this from the defendants as part of your settlement.

I faxed them my paperwork on Nov. 5th and received a call a few days later. They asked a few Q's and said that an attorney would be calling me back. After another week an attorney called and asked me to fax them everything that I had pertaining to the claim. After they reviewed my documents we spent an hour over the phone discussing the details, tart to finish. My original claim was against my credit union for mishandling our accounts, but she notified us that we had recourse against TU and EFX as well.

On Dec 1st they filled suit against my credit union & EFX and a separate suit TU as well. I'm told that this is going to be a long process. I'm not a patient person. But I'll learn.

Krohn & Moss is great if you don't need a baby sitter lawyer to calm your nerves everyday & reassure you that everything will be ok. What really counts is that they are getting the job done, (so far)

Oh yeah,

Other then 3 long distance phone calls & 1 long distance fax. I have not spent one dime. Can't beat that!

Johnna

I'm surprised to hear that they do NOT work on contingency. So, if you lost, you would have to pay them?

And if you get a big settlement they only get the hours they billed?

I'm aware that there have been some problems with sanctions against consumer attorneys for taking too much of a cut. Maybe that has to do with the change?

My client is on a contingency split.

Hey Christine,

I'll send you a copy of the agreement that they sent me as soon as I can. It states that they collect on an hourly bases. (at least for my cases) The hourly fee is anywhere between $175-$200 per hour. They do explain that sometimes their overall fee may be more then what is recovered from the defendent. In these circumstances they will not take any amount over 40%. If they do not recover any amount at all, then you will only be responsible for the filing/court cost.

seems fair to me.

"J"

That is EXTREMELY fair - couldn't really get any better. Looking forward to read the agreement.

I think looking for a lawyer is just like looking for a mortgage. There are a LOT of questions people should ask, but attorneys are even more intimidating than brokers, and you have a lot fewer choices. Most people consider themselves lucky to find an attorney who takes their case.

This is the first time I've seen a discussion of fees. I hope some of the other readers will let us know what they pay.

Christine,

I'll email or fax you a copy of the aggreement sometime tomorrow. I'm currently over my head right now with painting the inside of my house, wrapping presents, taking midnight trips to walmart and next I'm going to hurt my husband (for playing video games while I do all of this) I can even find my scanner & my fax machine is down because of painting.

Thanks,

Johnna

Johnna, no rush! And let him live!

Well, I guess you get what you pay for. These clowns loss my case!, or at least is having it thrown out. Well, it appears my attorney was strongarmed into withdrawing. Here is some basic facts, I am considering filing again with a CA. attorney in a CA court so I will not get too specific in this post...

My case was against AMEX for their credit reporting (closed account, reporting past due amount, reporting "Open status" etc. ) Krohn and Moss filed the suit against AMEX and all three bureus. Apparently, these guys know the Judge pretty well and the CRA attorneys in Illinois - He told me of the "hearing" in front of the Judge and how the judge was "encouraging them (all parties) to work out a settlement. Then I received a message from my attorney saying that one of the Bureaus was making an offer! I could not reach him immediately but I received a call again the next day saying the case was dead, they had withdrew the offer. He explained that the Judge felt my case was frivioulous because of my original dispute with CRA "X" (He implied that I was initially denying the account was mine). Then he said that AMEX had presented the original contract with my signature. So because I was suing them for incorrect credit reporting, CRA "X" and AMEX made the argument that I must be trying to "beat the system". First of all, I provided Krohn and Moss ALL DOCUMENTATION on my case including the disputes to the CRAS. They also knew that I signed the AMEX application even though I did not have a copy of it. I actually faxed them a blank copy of one and informed them that this was the doc I signed. Needless to say, I was appauled and after I verified my records, wrote a rebuttal letter to Krohn and Moss. I blasted their incompentency of letting such a ridiculous argument prevail when THEY had ALL of the SAME information the defendants had! By the way, the original CRA dispute was more of a general dispute because at the time I was not sure if in fact this was the same account as my AMEX card. Why was I skeptical? The reported acct showed a totally different acct number, a different "open date" and a different balance than my AMEX card. Therefore my dispute to the CRA's stated that "I am not responsible for THIS account" This being the acct manifested on the credit report. I never said I do not have a AMEX account. It is also important to note that the original disputes ALSO disputed the credit reporting by writing "I have no knowledge of this account number". When I rec'd the CRA updates, I had proof that the reporting was in fact intended for me. The balance was corrected also. After monitoring my reports using the score monitoring services, I decided to dispute with AMEX because of their inaccurate reporting which lowered my scores significantly. Of course, AMEX did not send me original documentation or statements, nor did they correct the incorrect reporting. Anyway, what really pissed me off was NOT that the defendants made a compelling argument, but that he was seemingly consenting defeat. Bottom line, he had not read enough and he was not prepared. After speaking to him for some time, I asked why he was caught off guard when he had ALL the same information as the defendants. He could only reply, "we sometimes still get them to settle because most of the time THEY don't check everything" What a whimp answer. We all know AMEX is good with their records and I thought a good attorney "challenges" the strength and validity of your case before accepting it or at least somewhere before the defendants can compell a judge to dismiss. The irony of all of this is that apparently one of the CRA's came up with this angle late in the process and originally I asked K & M to bring suit against AMEX. He "automatically" added the CRA's as defendants. My point is AMEX's reporting is in violation of FCRA 623 in and of itself. Is it right that the CRA add information that negates AMEX's violations? The K & M attorney say no one can sue a furnisher for violation of 623 without bringing suit against the reporting CRA's as well. I don't know if this is true, but either way, AMEX is still damaging my credit scores and violating the law. Finally, I asked him to take my rebuttal to the judge or let me submit it via affidavit or under oath and he replied "I have lost my credibility" so I cannot help you further. Which brings me to my last point, the legal closure doc he sent me is a motion to withdraw as counsel vs a dismissal. He gives a reason "Plaintiff has engaged in conduct that has rendered it unreasonably difficult for K & M to carry out the representation effectively". Are you kidding me. I am going to write the partners of this firm to get an explanation. I almost think this could be some sort of "deal" he brokered perhaps in exchange for another case. Whatever the case, in my opinion, these guys are not honest or just flat out losers. I guess I could have just pulled a bad attorney from the firm, but I doubt it.

Will2Win

Sorry to hear you're having problems.
Will you have to pay the court cost for filing and for serving the defendants?

Hey will2win,

Please keep us posted any events that follow. I would really like what the partners have to say. Keep up the good work!

Will2win:

"Is it right that the CRA add information that negates AMEX's violations?"

Not sure what you mean by that.

"The K & M attorney say no one can sue a furnisher for violation of 623 without bringing suit against the reporting CRA's as well."

That's probably because you HAVE to have disputed with the CRAs to be able to sue under 623. If you sue the CRAs, the creditors can't claim that there was no dispute - my guess.

"I don't know if this is true, but either way, AMEX is still damaging my credit scores and violating the law."

What ARE they reporting that's incorrect?

And some comments on your disputes, this is a very important issue. I usually recommend the "not my account" dispute for the first disputes because it's often best to get the account DELETED. Of course that's trying to beat the system. The creditors try to get the scores down as low as possible so they can charge the most interest (to the industry), and the consumers try to get it as high as possible.

If at all possible, those disputes should be done online - given the limited choices and no written record.

However, you can't go and file suit if you don't like the results. I actually had a talk with K & M over the dispute I did for a client that read "not my account" when we were fighting DUPLICATE reporting of a PAID charge-off reported with the balance. It makes sense to me to dispute both as "not my account" - you would think that the creditor would NOTICE that they are reporting duplicate accounts when they get those TWO disputes. But they verified both, one with the balance even though it was PAID, not delinquent.

Fortunately, we had several disputes, and then I also had a long talk with the creditor's reporting person who told me that my client should sue, as TU reported ALL their accounts as duplicates. He refused to fix it and had the most BIZARRE story over a late charge that they had forgotten to include with the amount that my client paid IN FULL to their collecter (several thousand). He thought that reporting this late fee as "past due" was legit. They settled, and I don't think the guy will tell another consumer or their rep to sue.

I have found that attorneys will not usually take cases on contingency when you have those "not my account" disputes and they ARE your accounts. You HAVE to do the followup dispute with specific items that ARE wrong.

I have a client who wants to get his bk deleted and he read some weird stuff on the web (I won't post it - only works maybe once in 10,000). Although he could get really good scores just by having the accounts reported as discharged instead of delinquent, he sent out the strangest disputes, NOT wanting any mention of the bk.

He won't be able to sue for violations (already Equifax "missed" several of the disputes, and I expect more violations once we get the results), the CRAs will present those disputes to the court, and that's the end of that. It's so obvious what he's trying to do.

While the government expressly DISCOURAGES the assistance of credit consultants, the judges DO require much more knowledge than consumers have.

It's really important to find re-aging, incorrect balances, dates and notations that DO effect the scores or manual credit review.

You need to be VERY careful when you PAY for an attorney, you can easily rack up 5K in legal fees PRIOR to discovery and any hearing.

You also have to expect that judges don't have a clue about credit scores and this is a very dynamic business. The bureaus and creditors constantly adjust their strategies, just as consumers and their attorneys.

Anyway, post some more details.