LPS Law Suits Multiplying

It looks like foreclosure mill law firms in Arizona better start to beware.  Lawsuits against LPS have revealed what looks to be unlawful, undisclosed fee sharing (kickbacks) in bankruptcy court, and the unauthorized practice of law by LPS and foreclosure mill non-lawyer employees.

Interesting allegations regarding the LPS agreements arose in class action lawsuits in other jurisdictions, as reported by Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism here:

The smoking gun in both cases is that the plaintiffs have gotten hold of the agreements both between the network law firms and LPS, and LPS and the servicers. Some of the language in the agreements is damning on its face. For instance:

42. One of the standard definitions in the DSA [Default Services Agreement, a contract between LPSand the servicers] defines the term“Fidelity Network” (LPS Default is formerly known as Fidelity National Foreclosure & Bankruptcy Solutions).

43. That definition states that the servicer is required to select attorneys involved in the “Fidelity Network” at the servicer’s discretion, who are retained and managed by LPS Default to handle foreclosures “or otherwise provide services in accordance with the DSA”…..

46……“Fidelity has entered into an agreement (the “agreement”) with the servicer whereby Fidelity (LPS) has agreed to perform various legal services (emphasis supplied) for the servicer that include mortgage foreclosures, bankruptcies and other loan default services (the “services”).

This language is contrary to the way LPS has claimed the relationship between the servicers and the network firms work. It has asserted that the servicers pick the law firms and exercise control over them and LPS merely serves as an information hub. The language of the agreements and the other information presented in these filings present a starkly different picture, that of the servicers effectively delegating much of the work of overseeing the law firms to LPS and LPS in turn engaging in activities that look an awful like practicing law, with the law firms looking more like LPS’s arms and legs rather than independent parties.

This chipping away at the role of LPS is a hopeful sign. Many systematic abuses, such as the prevalent application of junk fee and fee pyramiding, appears to be hard coded in LPS’s software. The more lawyers and investigators keep pulling on this thread, the more abuses they are likely to expose.

Advertisements

One thought on “LPS Law Suits Multiplying

  1. ud going to trial for a whole day maybe two. BNY got stopped in its tracks due to ch7 bk discharge as unsecured (must confirm with schedules. judge says to BNY if discharge, then “nothing”) and judge wants to look at chain of title; especially Assignment notarization impropriety (per CA Civ 2924)(and Gov Code 8306). BNY atty brought as exhibits at least 5 pages certifying the trustee’s sale with giant LPS logo in upper LH corner of docs. Judge did not even take interest in the BNY expert title witness. I think he is a little irked that BNY only asked for 1/2 hr for trial. Leticia Quintana is the officer on both TDUS and Assignment. Including notary journal entries, I have 4 different versions of that signature. On TDUS her signature matches the notaries. Judge is interested. Anyway, looking up cases involving LPS and found my way back to your site. Best of everything to us all. C

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s