Consumer Fraud

December 10, 2024 By Leo Jennings III

An Athena Bitcoin cryptocurrency kiosk was the instrument criminals used to steal $39,000 from DannLaw client Karen Carew.

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the FBI, Bitcoin ATM cryptocurrency kiosks (BTMs) play an essential role in “impersonation scams” that enable cybercriminals and scam artists to steal large sums of money from unsuspecting victims. Data from the FTC reveals that fraud losses at BTMs increased tenfold from 2020 to 2023 and that the amounts stolen via the kiosks are exceptionally high. But despite the well-documented rise in BTM-fueled fraud, companies like Athena Bitcoin, Inc. which operates hundreds of terminals across the U.S., have repeatedly refused to reduce or eliminate the extreme danger they pose to vulnerable populations, especially seniors.

The consumer protection team at Dann Law now represents one of those seniors: Karen Carew, a 74-year-old resident of Belmar, New Jersey. On September 4, 2024, a criminal impersonating a Microsoft tech support telephone agent convinced her to withdraw $39,000 from her bank account and deposit it into Athena BTMs located at two area convenience stores. Her money was immediately transferred into the untraceable online account or “wallet” of the scam artist. Both he and her money then vanished.

To hold Athena and the convenience stores accountable for their role in defrauding Ms. Carew and victims of similar scams, DannLaw attorneys Henry P. Wolfe, Javier Merino, and Andrew Wolfe recently filed a class action lawsuit in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the company, its CEO Matias Golenhorn, the owners of the stores where the kiosks used to facilitate the Carew scam were located, as well as other stores in New Jersey that have permitted Athena to locate and operate kiosks on site. The complaint and supporting exhibits may be viewed and downloaded here: 2024.11.25 Carew Complaint FILED

In the complaint the attorneys note that Athena openly acknowledges its kiosks are regularly used in impersonation scams as a page on the company website titled “Avoid these Bitcoin Scams” clearly illustrates:

Scammers are looking to say and do anything to convince you of an urgent need to pay through Bitcoin, and they will often “helpfully” point out nearby ATMs where you can follow their commands.

Scam artists like Bitcoin because transactions cannot be cancelled, reversed, or otherwise refunded once made.

Athena receives numerous reports of fraud per month…

The complaint also alleges that although Athena clearly recognizes the dangers posed by its BTMs it has refused to implement effective measures that would prevent or deter the use of its terminals in impersonation scams. Why? Because doing so would reduce the considerable profit realized from every dollar inserted into its BTMs by victims of those scams.

“BTMs are specifically designed to appeal to criminals, that’s why I consider them to be the AR 15s of the financial services industry,” DannLaw founder and former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann commented. “They serve no purpose beyond enabling scam artists to wreak havoc and destruction on innocent victims and the complete and purposeful lack of safeguards enable them to inflict pain in rapid-fire fashion and disappear instantly. As Ms. Carew learned, that’s a formula for disaster.”

In addition to facilitating the impersonation scam, the complaint states that Athena refused to turn over the $39,000 Ms. Carew deposited into the BTMs after being notified of the theft even though the stolen cash was in their possession. Their refusal is based on the company’s position that all deposited into its terminals is “irreversibly” transferred as Bitcoin to the designated wallet, even if the wallet in question belongs to a criminal who has perpetrated an impersonation scam.

DannLaw contends that Athena’s position is misleading at best for two reasons: first, because Ms. Carew’s cash was still inside the company’s BTMs when they were made aware of the theft, and, second, because the hefty fee Athena charged to facilitate the crime, $10,060.04, was not transferred to the scam artist irreversibly or otherwise.

“In essence, Ms. Carew has been ripped off twice,” Dann said. “First by the criminal who robbed her and then by Athena which could, but refuses, to return her money. While their position is reprehensible, it is not surprising. Let’s face it, thieves like Athena rarely return stolen money to its rightful owners, especially if doing so would destroy their business model. It’s clear they have no intention of doing the right thing voluntarily, so we’re more than willing to use the civil justice system to both hold them accountable and educate the public about the dangers associated with Athena BTMs.”

The suit asserts four causes of action including possession of stolen property, violations of New Jersey’s RICO statute and Consumer Fraud Act, and gross negligence and seeks monetary damages for Ms. Carew and all class members

For more information, please contact Marc Dann at 330-651-3131.

March 26, 2024 By Marc Dann

DannLaw founder Marc Dann — Attorney Marc Dann

Spring is celebrated as a time for renewal. Here at DannLaw, we’re marking the beginning of the season by renewing our commitment to seeking and securing justice for consumers who have been ripped off by credit card companies, banks and retailers, homeowners abused by mortgage lenders and servicers, and victims of identity theft and other cybercrimes resulting from data breaches.

That commitment, along with our knowledge of the law, experience, expertise, and ability to develop and utilize highly effective, innovative legal strategies have made DannLaw a consumer protection powerhouse people trust to safeguard their families, their homes, and their family’s future.

Building upon that and assisting more clients than ever before are our primary goals for 2024. Here’s a look on how we plan to achieve them…

DannLaw’s Forced Arbitration Practice Group battles for consumers trapped in an unfair system

Fueled by a series of Supreme Court decisions handed down over the past 40 years, forced arbitration clauses have been adopted by tens of thousands of companies that provide a seemingly limitless array of goods and services.

This has not exactly been a positive development for consumers. Shennan Kavanagh, the director of litigation at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) explains why:

“Forced arbitration robs consumers of their basic Seventh Amendment right to access the courts. These fine print traps allow predatory lenders, fraudsters, unscrupulous banks, and other repeat offenders to escape accountability by depriving consumers of choice and forcing disputes into closed-door, biased proceedings where consumers rarely win.”

By the way, “rarely” is an understatement. According to NCLC attorney Lauren Saunders, consumers who take on companies alone lose 96% of the time.

To make matters worse, a recent study released by NCLC revealed that the vast majority of Americans have no idea what a forced arbitration clause is or does or that they unwittingly agreed to clauses buried in the fine print of contracts they clicked “yes” to online or physically signed.

That lack of knowledge can have an extremely high price tag, a fact that doesn’t hit consumers until they become embroiled in a dispute with a company and discover they have no path to justice or reasonable opportunity to recover what they are owed.

The inequities in the system cry out for reform. That is why DannLaw has joined the NCLC and other consumer advocates in calling on Congress and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to end the forced arbitration reign of terror. To date, both have refused to act.

In reaction to their inexcusable inaction, DannLaw has formed a Forced Arbitration Practice Group led by attorneys Alisa Adams and Kurt Jones who have extensive experience pursuing and winning forced arbitration claims. Alissa, Kurt, and the Group’s talented paralegals are ready, willing, and more than able to take on banks, financial services firms, and any company that is using forced arbitration to prey upon, rip off, or exploit their customers.

If you or someone you know is a victim of forced arbitration, click here to arrange a free consultation with our Forced Arbitration team.

We are also available to co-counsel with attorneys who now represent clients with forced arbitration claims. To learn more about collaborating with us or to refer a client to us, please click here.

The companies and industries that have been inducted into the DannLaw Forced Arbitration Hall of Shame are among the worst abusers of the process, but they are not alone. As we noted above, thousands of other providers of goods and services use it to exploit consumers. We are prepared to battle them all.

Consumer Class Action Cases

In addition to helping our clients win forced arbitration cases, DannLaw regularly files suit on behalf of individual and groups of consumers whose claims are not subject to the unfair process.

We are currently litigating a number of class action suits in courts across the nation, and we will continue to seek justice and just compensation via the courts when that is the appropriate course of action. Here is a brief overview of some of the most interesting and consequential cases we are currently pursuing:

Financial Services Wells Fargo

It should come as no surprise to anyone that we have once again filed class action suits against Wells Fargo. Despite having paid more than $27 billion in fines since 2000, Wells remains a serious serial abuser of its customers and other consumers. \The cases against Wells involve:

Mortgage Discrimination. We allege that during the time interest rates were low, Wells denied loans to applicants who were members of minority groups at a much higher rate than other lenders.

Adding services to customer accounts without authorization. We have filed a series of class action suits alleging that Wells made millions of dollars by adding services including credit protection, supplemental hospital insurance, life and disability Insurance and others to consumers’ accounts without authorization or permission. If you recently received a letter from Wells apologizing for this conduct, we would like to hear from you. Please click here to arrange a free consultation that will enable us to determine if you are entitled to financial compensation from the company.

Financial Services: Bank of America

We recently filed suit in North Carolina alleging that Bank of America opened unauthorized consumer accounts. If BOA opened an account in your name without your consent or permission, please click here to share your story with us. Like people who have been victimized by Wells, you may be eligible for financial compensation.

Retailers: Dollar General

Despite being exposed in media reports like this one featuring DannLaw founder Marc Dann, Dollar General continues to charge higher prices at the register than are posted on shelves. We are now pursuing cases in New York, New Jersey and Oklahoma, but believe the company is engaging in the practice in other states. If this has happened to you at Dollar General or another store click here to tell us your story

Retailers: Walmart

We are investigating reports that Walmart is treating customers who use two forms of payment unfairly when they are due a refund. If this has happened to you, please let us k now.

Data Breaches

Data breaches that enable cyberthieves to steal and misuse victims’ sensitive and confidential information is a growing problem in the U.S. That is why we are expanding our Data Privacy and Security Practice Group and working with the legal community to develop strategies that will ensure we can pursue and secure justice and just compensation for those put at risk when corporations, government agencies, and other entities fail to protect the personal data in their possession. As part of that effort, I am pleased to report that I was recently invited to serve on the prestigious Sedona Conference Data and Privacy Liability Working Group which is working to address challenging questions related to legal liability and damages.

You should be aware that health care companies and insurers have become a prime target for hackers and cyber criminals, a fact underscored by the class action suits we recently filed against Merch Health and Optimum Health.

If you have been or are ever notified that your personal data including but not limited to your driver’s license, social security, credit card and other account numbers, confidential health or medical records, or other identifying information has been hacked, stolen, or compromised, please contact our data privacy team. immediately so we can begin protecting you, your family, and your future. Do not delay, every moment your data is exposed increases the chances it will be misused.

Automobile and Motorcycle dealerships:

We regularly file class action suits against car, truck, and motorcycle dealers that add unauthorized products or services to vehicles, misrepresent the amount of the sale, and/or add hidden and opaque charges like “Documentary Fees” to sales agreements.

We have secured multiple multi-million-dollar awards for classes of auto purchasers and we will continue to actively and aggressively pursue claims on behalf of consumers who have been cheated or abused. If you are troubled or suspicious about something related to your vehcile purchase contact us today to arrange a no-cost, no-obligation consultation.

Foreclosure Defense and Mortgage Servicing Litigation Update

DannLaw began by representing borrowers and homeowners who were in or about to be in foreclosure. Today, after helping thousands of people save their homes and their financial futures, stopping foreclosures and negotiating loan modifications continue to be a primary focus of our practice—and needed as much as ever.

That is because Ohio and New Jersey lead the nation in foreclosures, due in part to a surge in attempts by debt buyers to collect “zombie mortgages”— debts that homeowners thought were forgiven or satisfied long ago but still exist.

The key to our ability to save a home is timing: the earlier we get involved, the more we can do to battle mortgage lenders and servicers who engage in unethical or illegal activities like dual tracking—promising to modify a loan while moving ahead with a foreclosure action.

If you are in or are facing the threat of foreclosure DannLaw will utilize the tested, highly effective legal strategy that has helped thousands of families just like yours.

First, our experienced foreclosure defense team will aggressively defend and foreclosure action that has been filed,

Second, we will identify, document, and pursue claims you may have against your mortgage servicer for dual tracking, misapplying payments, failing to pay taxes or insurances, and other abuses, and,

Third, the members of our talented mortgage modification team will use their expertise to work out an agreement with your mortgage company that will enable you to stay in your home.

Remember, time is of the essence. Every minute you wait brings you one step closer to losing your home, do don’t delay, click here to contact DannLaw’s Foreclosure Defense team today.

Thanks for taking the time to read our Spring 2024 update and, as always, DannLaw is here to help you.

Marc

January 19, 2024 By Marc Dann

Complicated and impenetrable arbitration agreements like this one from Wells Fargo cost consumers millions each year. DannLaw’s Consumer Arbitration Team helps attorneys and families fight back.

In a recent article posted on Columbia Law School’s Blue Sky Blog, Jeff Sovern argues that businesses should not be able to use the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to harm consumers. We agree. This flaw in the law costs American families tens of millions of dollars each year. That’s why DannLaw has been fighting for real reform of the FAA including urging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to issue a new rule that would block the use of arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts. Unfortunately, until the CFPB or Congress acts, consumers will continue to be victimized by greedy corporations.

But that doesn’t mean consumers are defenseless. That’s because the experienced, dedicated attorneys and staff at DannLaw’s Consumer Arbitration Practice Group are here to help. We work with consumers and attorneys across the nation to file, pursue, and win arbitration cases against the biggest players in the consumer financial game.

Whether you’re an attorney battling on behalf of clients or a consumer who has been ripped off by a mortgage lender, credit card company, or retailer, contact the consumer arbitration experts at DannLaw. We’re ready to help you fight and win. To learn more complete our contact form or call 330-294-3226.

We’ve posted Mr. Sovern’s CLS Blue Sky blog post below. To read a version with footnotes click here.

Consumer protection laws face a fundamental enforcement issue: Because consumer claims are typically for small amounts, and litigation is expensive, it rarely makes economic sense for consumers to litigate their claims individually. Partly to deal with this problem, lawmakers created class actions so the cost of litigation could be shared among many claims. But businesses have used the Federal Arbitration Act against consumers, inserting into agreements arbitration clauses that block consumer class actions. The U. S. Supreme Court has ruled these clauses are valid.[1] As a result, few consumers assert claims subject to these contracts unless a substantial amount of money is at issue.

This leads to two unfortunate outcomes. First, in many situations, merchants employing arbitration clauses need not fear that they will face private enforcement of consumer protection laws and so are insufficiently deterred from engaging in misconduct that might otherwise lead to liability. Second, consumers lack an effective means to secure compensation unless they suffer huge losses. The problem is worsened by the fact that consumers cannot understand arbitration clauses and so surrender their rights to litigate in court without realizing that they are doing so.

In a new book chapter, I argue that Congress should amend the FAA to exclude consumer claims from the FAA’s coverage until a dispute has arisen. Otherwise, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) should use its rule-making power to limit the use of arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts.

Arbitration and Claim Suppression

Multiple studies show that few consumers commence arbitration claims unless substantial sums are at issue. [2]Arbitration clauses’ claim-suppression effect was illustrated colorfully by one advocacy group when it observed that in many years more American consumers are struck by lightning than win a monetary award in arbitration.[3]

Consumer products and services companies are keenly aware that arbitration clauses insulate them from liability. One lawyer defending against class actions described arbitration clauses as a “silver bullet” for defeating consumer cases,[4] while another acknowledged that a “claim that is $162 – an individual claim – is not one that any rational litigant would litigate.”[5] In Judge Richard Posner’s words: “The realistic alternative to a class action is not 17 million individual suits, but zero individual suits, as only a lunatic or a fanatic sues for $30.”[6]

Arbitration and Consent

Arbitration derives its legitimacy from consent. As the Supreme Court has noted, “[a]rbitration under the [FAA] is a matter of consent . . . .”[7] But whether consumers genuinely agree to arbitration is debatable.

Research demonstrates that consumers cannot understand arbitration clauses or their impact. Thus, an empirical study of consumer understanding of an arbitration clause in a credit card contract found that less than 9 percent of the respondents realized both that the contract included an arbitration clause and that it blocked them from suing in court.[8] Despite that contract’s class action waiver, four times as many respondents thought they could still participate in a class action as recognized that by agreeing to the contract they would surrender their right to join a class action. Even when respondents were told to assume they had agreed to a contract barring them from joining in a class action, less than a third realized they were foreclosed from doing so. Just one respondent in 16 realized both that (1) the contract they had been shown would prevent them from joining a class action, and (2) as a general matter, class action waivers block participation in class actions. When consumers can neither recognize that they are waiving the right to participate in a class action nor that such a waiver would be given effect, it is difficult to justify the claim that they have consented.

A CFPB telephone survey found that a majority of its respondents believed they could join a class action despite having agreed to a contract that included a class action waiver.[9] Similarly, only one consumer in 14 understood that an arbitration clause would block them from proceeding in court. And a more recent study also found consumers do not understand arbitration clauses.[10]

At the end of the day, if consent – the source of arbitration’s legitimacy – means no more than signing a contract that consumers cannot understand, it is hard to see arbitration as legitimate.

Efforts to Carve Out Consumer Claims From the FAA

Members of Congress have repeatedly but unsuccessfully introduced bills to amend the FAA to eliminate consumer disputes from its coverage. In the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, Congress authorized the CFPB to regulate arbitration.[11] The CFPB issued a rule which would have barred the use of class action waivers in arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts.[12] But Congress invoked the Congressional Review Act (“CRA”)[13] to block the CFPB’s rule from going into effect.

The CFPB should issue a different arbitration rule. The Congressional Review Act bars administrative agencies from issuing “a new rule that is substantially the same” as the rule Congress struck down.[14] That bars the bureau from producing a rule banning class action waivers. Nevertheless, that still leaves the bureau options. Indeed, consumer protection advocacy groups recently petitioned the bureau to promulgate a new rule blocking the use of arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts. The petition differs from the CFPB’s blocked rule because the regulation it calls for would not be limited to class action waivers and because the proposed regulation would be based on lack of consumer comprehension of arbitration clauses rather than the claim-suppression effect of class action waivers.

Conclusion

Arbitration clauses have become common in consumer contracts as a device to block the filing of consumer class actions against businesses catering to consumers. Consequently, it no longer makes economic sense to assert many consumer claims, and therefore companies are insufficiently deterred from violating some consumer protection laws. Using arbitration clauses to preclude class actions lacks legitimacy because consumers do not knowingly consent to arbitration. Congress should amend the FAA to exclude consumer claims from its coverage, or, failing that, the CFPB should use its authority under the Dodd-Frank Act to protect consumers against the use of arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts.

September 25, 2023 By Marc Dann

If you received a postcard regarding the Madyda v. BMV case, it is because you are one of the people who paid a fee to have your driver’s licensed laminated by a deputy registrar between 2018 and 2020, even though the deputy registrars were not performing the service.

That makes you a member of the class of plaintiffs in the lawsuit DannLaw has filed against the BMV and the state of Ohio. If you would like to remain in the class and receive a portion of any funds or other compensation we recover on behalf of the plaintiffs you do not need to do anything. If you prefer to bring your own claim against the BMV, the postcard contains instructions for opting out.

Again, you do not need to do anything if you want to continue to be a member of the class. DannLaw will provide regular updates as the case proceeds.

Here is a detailed description of the case:

DannLaw files class action suit against Ohio Bureau of Motor vehicles to recover $3 million in bogus fees charged by deputy registrars

March 28, 2019 By Marc Dann (Edit)

Since July 2, 2018, the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) has allowed the state’s 200 deputy registrars to charge people obtaining or renewing driver’s licenses or state-issued I.D.s a $1.50 lamination fee even though the registrars were no longer producing—or laminating—the cards on site. As a result, an estimated two million Ohioans have been charged $3 million for a service that was not performed.

Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, told the Columbus Dispatch the registrars should not be pocketing the fee. “Clearly, the registrars should not be charging for something they are not providing … that’s not fair. Many of us don’t think about a buck fifty, it’s not a big deal. But it is a big deal when you think about being charged extra fees for no reason. We want to spend our money on what we expected.”

Attorney Marc Dann, founder of the Cleveland-based consumer protection law firm DannLaw agrees with Ms. Turcer. And, if the messages that have been pouring into the firm’s Facebook page are any indication, so do people who paid the bogus fee. “We posted an item on our Facebook page asking anyone who has renewed their license or state I.D. since last July to contact us,” the former Ohio attorney general said. “The response was overwhelming. Those who paid the fee were outraged. They want their money back and they want the state to stop ripping people off.”

Today the legal team at DannLaw took the first step toward recovering the unwarranted fees by filing a class action suit against the BMV in the Ohio Court of Claims. The suit asks the Court to award anyone who paid the lamination fee $1.50 plus interest. The complaint may be read/downloaded here:Madyda Alexander 2019 03 19 Complaint – Lamination Fee INITIAL DRAFT (002)

“While the dollar amount on a per-person basis may be small, there’s nothing trivial about the BMV allowing the registrars to pocket $3 million for doing nothing,” Atty. Dann said. “If everyone shrugs their shoulders and says ‘it’s only a buck fifty’ does that mean it’s ok for the state to grab five dollars or ten dollars from its citizens? Where do you draw the line? At its core, this case isn’t about the $1.50, it’s about holding government officials accountable for their actions. That’s the best way to ensure that something like this doesn’t happen again.”

According to Atty. Joe Romano of Bay Village, Ohio who is serving as co-counsel on the case the overcharges stem from the fact that in order to comply with federal regulations the BMV itself rather than the registrars began producing and mailing the licenses and I.D. cards last July. “Apparently, and this is something we hope to learn more about as the case progresses, neither the deputy registrars nor the staff at the BMV noticed that people were still being charged the $1.50 lamination fee even though the registrars weren’t laminating a darn thing,” he said.

July 17, 2023 By Leo Jennings III

The following is an abridged version of a story by Hayley Fowler that was published by Law 360…

Law360 (July 14, 2023, 4:11 PM EDT) — Bank of America NA has been hit with a proposed class action alleging it opened credit cards without customers’ knowledge to meet sales goals, just days after the bank agreed to a nine-figure settlement with federal regulators over alleged transgressions involving its credit card rewards and overdraft policies.

DAnnLaw filed the suit in North Carolina federal court on behalf of Ohio resident Nadine Ballard and a proposed class of consumers who said they unknowingly had credit card accounts opened in their names between 2012 and 2022, which allegedly resulted in penalties for unpaid fees and impacted their credit scores. In the suit DannLaw and Ms. Ballard said the accounts were opened by employees desperate to reach “unrealistic sales quotas” as part of a money-grabbing scheme by the Charlotte-based bank.

“BoA allowed this fraud to fester for over a decade, profiting off of the harm it directly caused to the consumers who trusted BoA,” the lawsuit states. The complaint in the case, maybe viewed and downloaded here: Bank of America credit card scam complaint.

Ballard’s complaint comes on the heels of a collective $150 million in fines levied against Bank of America on Tuesday by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

About $30 million of those penalties was attributed to the bank’s alleged failure to provide credit card sign-up reward bonuses as advertised and opening unauthorized credit card accounts to meet sales targets, which have since been eliminated.

Bank of America did not admit any wrongdoing in agreeing to pay the fines, and the CFPB said only a “small percentage” of the bank’s new credit card accounts opened between 2012 and 2020 were found to be unauthorized.

Still, Ballard said Thursday that the bank’s alleged “fee generating scheme” has impacted “many thousands of members.”

“Until the CFPB took decisive action against BoA, BoA had every incentive to continue this illegal conduct because it is a fee-generating machine that produced extraordinary profits for the bank at the expense of its consumers,” she said.

According to the complaint, Ballard discovered in March that the bank had previously opened an allegedly unauthorized account in her name. Since then, Ballard said she has “spent substantial time to correct her credit report as well as to lodge complaints with the appropriate government agencies, including the CFPB.”

Ballard blamed Bank of America’s “intense sales pressure” for the allegedly unauthorized accounts, which she said often required employees to pull consumer reports to determine a customer’s eligibility.

Bank of America allegedly knew about the scheme and took steps to hide it, she said, saying the bank was fully “aware its quotas are unrealistic for employees during normal working hours.”

Oftentimes customers only found out about the accounts when Bank of America asked them to update their account information, new debit or credit cards arrived in the mail, or missing deposits showed up in the allegedly unauthorized account, Ballard said.

As a result, customers were allegedly forced to pay monthly service fees, suffered damages to their credit reports and had to pay for identity theft protection, the lawsuit states.

“As a result of opening new accounts, BoA was able to inflate the key metrics regarding new account holder information in its [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission] filings, and — equally troubling — was able to accrue associated fees from those accounts opened without consumer consent,” DannLaw claims in the suit.

Thursday’s complaint asserts claims for unjust enrichment and violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and North Carolina’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Ballard is seeking class certification, treble damages, restitution, attorney fees and pre- and post-judgment interest.

“The brazen way that Bank of America encouraged and allowed fraud to be committed against perhaps millions of its customers is one of the greatest travesties in the history of American business,” Marc Dann told Law 360. “…we look forward to holding the bank and its officers and board members accountable.”

In addition to DannLaw, Ms. Ballard and the proposed class are represented by Scott C. Harris of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman PLLC, Israel David and Blake Hunter Yagman of Israel David LLC, James M. Evangelista of Evangelista Worley LLC, Jennifer Czeisler of JKC Law LLC, and Marc E. Dann and Brian D. Flick of Dann Law Firm.

All current filings in the lawsuit are available here: https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/49576297/Ballard_v_Bank_of_America,_NA_et_al

May 9, 2023 By Leo Jennings III

Hello and Happy Spring. I’m reaching out today to provide our clients and friends with updates about several pending cases, new investigations and an exciting new addition to the DannLaw legal team.

First I would like to introduce and welcome Jeff Crossman to DannLaw. Jeff, who recently joined DannLaw after serving in the Ohio House and running for Ohio Attorney General, will be litigating complex class action, mortgage servicing, and corporate/business cases.

Picture of Jeff Crossman Jeff brings more than two decades of legal experience to Dann Law. During his career, he has represented a variety of clients in complex matters, successfully resolving disputes for both individuals and businesses ranging from small startups to national corporations. Jeff has served as an associate with a prominent national law firm, as in-house legal counsel for multiple national companies, and recently served two terms as a member of the Ohio House of Representatives where he gained invaluable experience in public policy, government, and changes made to the legal system. The sum of Jeff’s experience has given him a unique perspective and a deep understanding of the legal landscape, which he leverages to achieve the best outcomes for his clients.

Jeff believes that every client deserves high-quality legal representation personalized to fit the client’s needs, and he is committed to achieving the best possible outcomes for each and every one of his clients.

Education

B.A. University of Mount Union
M.A., University of Akron
J.D., Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, magna cum laude

Bar Admissions

State of Ohio
Federal District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Pending: Federal District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mortgage Servicing Litigation

Our Mortgage Servicing Litigation team, which includes Dan Solar, Michael Smith, Saher Chaudrey, Javier Merino, Brian Flick, Kim White, and Karen Ortiz, continue to bring groundbreaking cases on behalf of homeowners involved in disputes with their mortgage servicers:

Delays and mistakes made by servicers assisting homeowners who took advantage of Covid Related Mortgage Payment Forbearance provided by the CARES Act and the American Recovery Act. As a result of these errors, many borrowers exited forbearance with higher interest rates than they should have and some are facing unnecessary and unwarranted foreclosure actions.
Homeowners put at risk because servicers mishandled tax, insurance, and other escrow payments..
Problems that have occurred when mortgage servicing is transferred from one company to another. This problem is especially prevalent when borrowers and services are engaged in loss mitigation activities.
Accounting problems following the successful completion of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy.
Violations of Ohio’s Residential Mortgage Loan Act. Dannlaw has obtained numerous consumer/borrower favorable court decisions involving servicers who failed to abide by changes in the Ohio Law that protects borrowers.

Foreclosure Defense

As foreclosure protections sunset our Foreclosure Defense team led by Whitney Kaster with support from Amanda Severt, Karen Ortiz and Roberto Rivera are litgating cases and developing thoughtful and innovative loss mitigation and legal strategies that will enable our clients to stay in their homes. If you are or may be about to enter foreclosure, please contact form or call us at 216-373-0539. We are here to help.

Class Action Lawsuits

The members of our class action practice group, Brian Flick, Javier Merino, Andy Wolf, Jeff Crossman, Saher Chaudrey,Kim White and Liza Marigliano are pleased and proud to report that they have worked with co-counsel to obtain preliminary approval of several class action cases across the United States in the past several months. There are active claim deadlines in the following cases. If you believe you are a member of the class in one or some of these actions, we encourage you to visit the case settlement websites to review the terms of settlement and if appropriate files a claim: .

Nationstar

In the Class Action case against Nationstar Mortgage and payment processor ACI we successfully negotiated a $9 million settlement that is set for final approval on May 31, 2023 in the Federal District Court in North Carolina. You still have time to submit claims if Nationstar pulled money from your bank account without permission in April of 2021. Visit this website to make a claim https://achloanpaymentlitigation.com/.

Michigan Ave. Immediate Care

Michigan Avenue Immediate Care has agreed to a $900,000 settlement fund for people whose personal information was exposed to the dark web as the result of a data breach. If you were a patient of the of that Chicago medical practice file a claim here: https://www.maicincident.com/

Parker Hannifin

We’ve reached a favorable $1.75 Million settlement for present and past employees of Parker Hannifin who were impacted by a data breach. If you ever worked at Parker Hannifin please follow this link to learn more and file a claim www.phdatasettlement.com.

We are also investigating and litigating several other significant class action cases including:

Pricing Fraud by Dollar General. DannLaw has filed cases against Dollar General in Ohio, New York and New Jersey based on allegations that prices listed for items on shelves are lower than prices charged at the register. If you live anywhere in the United States and believe you have been overcharged by Dollar General or any other retailer, please contact our office by completing and submitting our contact form or calling 216-373-0539.

Salmonella Poisoning in Jif Peanut Butter

The FDA, along with CDC and state and local partners are investigating a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Senftenberg infections linked to certain Jif brand peanut butter products produced at the J.M. Smucker Company facility in Lexington, Kentucky. If you believe you have been impacted by the outbreak please complete and submit our contact form or call us at 216-373-0539.

Traffic Camera Violations in the City of Girard

Tickets were wrongly issued to drivers along Rt 80 in Girard Ohio

Impact Cases

Federal Government’s failure to compensate victims of “Snap Skimming” DannLaw recently filed a case in Ohio against the United States Department of Agriculture regarding the agency’s failure to reimburse Ohioans whose SNAP benefits have been “skimmed” by unknown third parties beginning in January of 2022.

Skimming occurs when criminals use a device placed over a point-of-sale card reader to steal information from payment cards like SNAP EBT and cash assistance cards. That means SNAP or cash assistance benefits may have been stolen with the cardholder’s knowledge.

If you believe you have been a victim of SNAP theft, please please complete and submit our contact form or call us at 216-373-0539.

Racial Discrimination in Mortgage Lending by Wells Fargo We have assumed a leadership role in investigating allegations that Wells denied borrowers of color mortgage financing at a rate almost double that of white borrowers..

Ohio PUA Unemployment Benefits

In Bowling v. Dewine we continue to pursue $900 million in fully federally-funded COVID-19 supplemental unemployment insurance benefits the DeWine administration callously denied Ohioans who were left jobless as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic.

Data Breach Cases

We are also bringing Class Actions for Data Breaches against the following Companies:

Last Pass/GoTo Technologies

Carrington Mortgage and Alvaria, Inc.

Snap Finance–Brian Flick has been appointed co-lead counsel

Key Bank/KeyBank Mortgage/Fulton Bank/Overby-Seawell

Samsung

Bet MGM (Where Javier Merino is taking a Lead Role)

Lakeview Loan Servicing

If you or someone you know has been impacted by these data breaches please complete and submit our contact form or call us at 216-373-0539.