X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now
Ripoff Report | Loan Modification Review - Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #384624

Complaint Review: Loan Modification Firm - Fort Lauderdale Florida

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Rochester Minnesota
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • Loan Modification Firm 330 N Andrews Avenue # 1300 Fort Lauderdale, Florida U.S.A.

Loan Modification Firm - maxflaxman - mike lopez Fort Lauderdale Florida

*Consumer Suggestion: This doesn't make much sense

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: Our BBB Response

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Click here now..

I paid 1200 dollars because my property was going into foreclosure this company assured me they could stop the foreclosure and get a loan modification as they work with HOMEQ the mortgage company all the time. January 2007 they started and July 2007 they foreclosed on my home and these people wrote me a letter two days later saying the company would not modify my loan. I filed with the better business bureau in Fort Lauderdale and they refused to answer the request.

Karen
Rochester, Minnesota
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/24/2008 08:15 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/loan-modification-firm/fort-lauderdale-florida-33301/loan-modification-firm-maxflaxman-mike-lopez-fort-lauderdale-florida-384624. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author
1Consumer
1Employee/Owner

#2 Consumer Suggestion

This doesn't make much sense

AUTHOR: Tim - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 29, 2008

d**n! Why in the name of God would a bankruptcy attorney not incorporate a mortgage into a Chapter 13 plan?

If the rebuttal is accurate, then I'm either missing most of the story, or the bankruptcy attorney was totally inept.

Given the glaring obviousness of the mortgage/Chapter 13 issue, I would have to assume that the problem does not lie with any attorney that is licensed to practice bankruptcy, and there is something to this story that we're not getting.

Usually, the point of filing a Chapter 13 versus a Chapter 7 is to retain property with equity that exceeds the allowed exemptions. So I would sure like to know why the mortgage wasn't included in the Chapter 13 plan.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 REBUTTAL Individual responds

Our BBB Response

AUTHOR: Lmf Sr Partner - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 26, 2008

RE: Karen


Karen retained the firm in mid May and failed to provide the necessary documents until July 8, 2008. Sale date was set for July 15th. Client filed complaint with lender regarding Power of Attorney and Disclosure restricting our access to speak with her lender until after July 16th.

Client was denied for a loan modification because she removed the property in note from a chapter 13 bankruptcy and was 19 months past due as of our last correspondence with the lender.

Client was advised by a principal of our firm that her bankruptcy attorney should not of removed the property as it lifted the automatic stay created by filing the petition for bankruptcy.

Our initial cost retainer of the initial $1250 is non refundable as outlined in the signed and notarized consulting agreement. Client took almost 60 days to provide the necessary documents for us to submit a loan modification. She is still eligible for redemption under MN state guidelines and was notified by our firm that she was denied for a loan modification in writing. Had client provided documentation necessary for loan modification in a timely fashion it would of allowed for our firm to exercise other options to prevent Karen's loss of her property. We deeply regret Karen's loss of her property. However she was notified on May 20 as to what documents would be required for us to submit a loan modification on her behalf. She failed to provide said documents until July 8.

Michael Flaxman
Sr Partner
1-866-881-7405

PS: our number has never been disc nor our website

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Featured Reports

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.