Debt Inversion is a proprietary legal practice of the LeNoir Law Firm designed to turn debtors into creditors by defeating debt collection actions and aggressively suing debt collectors, creditors and the three national credit reporting agencies for violations of your legal rights under federal and state debt collection laws, credit reporting laws and criminal laws. Successful debt inversion allows you to recover monetary damages greater than your debt, so that you make a profit.
The LeNoir Law Firm employs a comprehensive, three-part approach to successful debt inversion:
PART 1: ADVISE
We conduct a complete examination of each new client’s legal and financial circumstances to determine which legal services and strategies will be most beneficial. In certain cases we advise the client that the best strategy is to ignore the debt collectors and do nothing at all — at least for the time being.
If you ignore a debt collector, and the debt collector doesn’t sue you (most don’t), the debt disappears from your credit report, as if it never existed, exactly seven years from the date of your last payment.
Of course, ignoring collectors’ letters and phone calls does not prevent you from suing them for monetary damages for violations of your legal rights. See “Attack” below.
Just as importantly, we warn our clients against debt “solutions” that usually do more harm than good. These include Bankruptcy, Home Refinancing, Debt Settlement, “Credit Repair” and Credit Counseling.
In addition to wasting your scarce money, these strategies can have extremely undesirable consequences such as causing you to lose your home; extending the time period the debt owner has to sue you (the statute of limitations); or lengthening the amount of time that the debt will remain on your credit report.
For example, if you file for bankruptcy, the bankruptcy can remain on your credit report for over 15 years from the date you file. See Bankruptcy. This means that a bankruptcy filed in 2011 can remain on your credit report until 2026 or later.
PART 2: DEFEND
After analyzing the client’s financial and legal circumstances, we take care of matters that require immediate attention, such as eliminating default judgments, termination of wage garnishments, and removal of liens on real estate, financial accounts and other property.
Once the case is on track, we defend our client by forcing the attorneys for the creditor or debt collector that owns the debt (“the collection attorneys”) to produce all documents and witnesses necessary to prove the amount they claim is owed.
Producing all of the necessary paperwork and witnesses is usually impossible or not worth the effort for the collection attorneys, especially since most defaulted debts have been sold from one debt buyer to the next.
The current owner of your account has no power over the employees of the previous owner; nor does it have access to the previous owner’s business records. This means that the collection attorneys must subpoena the records and employees of all of the previous owners of the debt — something they almost never do.
Even if the collection attorneys disregard their usual business practices and serve all of the necessary subpoenas, inevitably one or more of the previous debt owners will have lost or destroyed its records of the client’s account; or employees who kept records of the client’s account for previous debt owners will no longer be employed by them; or one or more of the previous owners of the debt will ignore the subpoena.
This means we win the case because the debt collection attorney is unable to produce the documents and witnesses necessary to prove its client’s case.
In those extremely rare cases in which a collection attorney is able to produce all necessary documents and witnesses and prove in court that you owe the amount claimed, assembling everything they need takes quite a long time.
This allows you to avoid a judgment against you and/or stay in your home much longer than if you did not put up a fight.
In fact, the debt collection business relies on people not fighting back. If everyone put debt collectors to their proof as we do, they would all be forced out of business.
PART 3: ATTACK
Lawsuits for Illegal Debt Collection: All debt collectors break federal and state debt collection laws, credit reporting laws and criminal laws that have been enacted to protect unsophisticated debtors from overly aggressive debt collectors. When debt collectors violate your legal rights, federal law allows you to recover up to $1,000 or your actual damages, plus legal fees and court costs. You may be able to recover additional amounts under state laws.
Lawsuits for Illegal Credit Reporting: We sue the three national credit reporting agencies; creditors and debt collectors who provide false information to credit bureaus; and companies that misuse information provided by credit bureaus, for violations of federal credit reporting laws. You can recover up to $1,000 or your actual damages for each violation, plus punitive damages, attorney’s fees and court costs.
If you win the lawsuit (or obtain a favorable settlement) and collect monetary damages greater than your debt, if any, you make a profit. This joyful experience is known as Debt Inversion.
Debt Collection Crimes: Many violations of debt collection laws are also violations of federal and New York State criminal laws. In cases of serious misconduct, we refer the creditor or debt collector to federal or state authorities for criminal prosecution, in addition to suing them.
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company attempts foreclosure using a forged promissory note.
In the pending mortgage foreclosure case of DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY v. DOMINIC CODIO, et al. (Kings County Supreme Court, Index No. 6839/2010), the law firm of Knuckles, Komosinski & Elliott LLP representing foreclosure plaintiff Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, brought to our office a document that their attorney Fincey John, Esq. claimed was an original promissory note that our client Dominic Codio, the homeowner, had signed when he received a mortgage loan. Mr. Codio, who was present for the inspection of the document, immediately recognized that his signature and initials at the bottom of each page had been forged and the document was a fake.
Mr. Codio has graciously allowed us to write about his case as a public service to other New York homeowners who are losing their homes to banks and mortgage trusts that submit false, forged and fraudulent documents to courts to prove ownership of mortgage loans that they do not own. To put it bluntly the banks and mortgage trusts are stealing the homes of people who owe them no money — and getting away with it.
Under New York law a bank or trust must prove ownership of the mortgage loan upon which it is trying to foreclose, which means that the bank must produce the original, properly endorsed promissory note that the homeowner signed. Without the original promissory note showing an unbroken chain of endorsements transferring ownership of a mortgage loan from the original lender to the bank or mortgage trust currently claiming to own the loan, the homeowner should prevail in a foreclosure (or quiet title) case.
One of the first things our law firm does in a foreclosure or quiet title case is to demand to see the original promissory note. The law firm representing the bank or mortgage trust usually resists showing it to us at first, but they know they will need to produce the original, properly endorsed promissory note if they want to win at trial. They also know that if they do not allow the homeowner’s law firm to inspect the original promissory note, the court will probably not allow them to introduce the promissory note as evidence at trial and they will lose the case. After a frank discussion of the consequences of not allowing us to inspect the original promissory note, the attorneys for the bank or mortgage trust have always agreed to let us inspect the document and make photocopies and/or color scans of the document for our files.
Whenever possible, we have our client present when we inspect the document because the client is the only person in the conference room who saw the original promissory note when it was signed and initialed at the bottom of each page. Clients can easily tell if their own signatures and initials have been forged and they can spot differences between the original document they signed and the document being presented.
After Mr. Codio informed us that his signature and initials had been forged, we contacted handwriting analyst Roger Rubin, a preeminent expert in his field who has been qualified as an expert witness in well over a hundred New York lawsuits and arbitrations. He has helped the US Department of Justice solve crimes using handwriting analysis, taught handwriting analysis, and amassed other impressive credentials as detailed in Roger Rubin’s attached Curriculum Vitae.
Mr. Rubin compared the signatures and initials on the document presented as the original promissory note with a variety of other samples of Mr. Codio’s signature that were obtained from official documents, from a copy of the original promissory note filed by the original lender, and from other handwriting samples that Mr. Codio provided.
As detailed in Roger Rubin’s attached report, Mr. Rubin concluded that none of the signatures or initials on the document that Deutsche Bank National Trust Company’s attorney presented to us as the original promissory note had been written by our client Dominic Codio.
We now have undisputed expert proof that all of the signatures and initials on the document presented by plaintiff’s attorney Fincey John, Esq. as the original promissory note are not those of Mr. Codio, which means that Deutsche Bank National Trust Company is trying to foreclose upon Mr. Codio’s home using a forged, fake promissory note.
Last month (4/13) during routine discovery, we were shocked to learn that plaintiff’s attorneys Knuckles, Komosinski & Elliott LLP had not hired a handwriting expert and did not intend to retain an expert, even though they were notified four months earlier (12/12) of Mr. Rubin’s expert findings that the signatures and initials on the document Fincey John, Esq. presented as the original promissory note were not those of Mr. Codio.
Although Dominic Codio has pledged his full cooperation with any handwriting expert that Knuckles, Komosinski & Elliott LLP wishes to use, so far they have not accepted his generous offer and have neglected to hire a handwriting expert to investigate the undisputed expert evidence that they are attempting to foreclose upon Mr. Codio’s home using a forged instrument. We hope they will eventually agree to investigate whether their law firm is facilitating a fraud on Mr.Codio, our firm, and the Court.
Thanks to Dominic Codio for allowing us to share his story. We hope that the time, effort and expense that he has been forced to invest in defending against this undisputedly fraudulent foreclosure attempt will not go to waste if other homeowners benefit from learning about Mr. Codio’s ordeal.
Expect to see updates as this important case develops.
LENOIR LAW FIRM, PLLC
2753 Broadway, Suite 251
New York, New York 10025
Office: 212-531-0284
Email: info@DebtInversion.com
Web: www.DebtInversion.com
Blog: www.DebtInversion.com/blog
Important information: This is legal advertising. It contains no legal advice and makes no representation as to the outcome of any legal matter. The information on this blog and website may not apply to your individual situation and should not be relied upon for any purpose.