Counterclaims against a Foreclosing Bank in New York

Since the mortgage foreclosure crisis has captured national headlines, it has become increasingly possible to win a foreclosure case and keep your home.  New York courts are now being forced to look carefully for fraudulent documents submitted by foreclosure attorneys.  A court’s determination that foreclosure attorneys have submitted fraudulent documents will help prove  the counterclaims that the foreclosure defense attorney asserts.

The end result may be that you keep your house and the bank ends up owing you money for your counterclaims. Eliminating debts and keeping your property while recovering damages from banks and debt collectors is the goal of our strategy of Debt Inversion.

In our opinion no one should attempt to fight a foreclosure action without an attorney experienced in defending against mortgage foreclosures.  A foreclosure defense attorney can make the difference between losing your home, and keeping your home and recovering monetary damages from the foreclosing bank.

Here are a few of the counterclaims that the LeNoir Law Firm uses against banks in foreclosure actions. Keep in mind that all cases are different and the counterclaims below may not apply to your situation.  Additional counterclaims may apply to your case that are not listed below.  Nothing below is intended as legal advice.

FIRST COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION

1. That plaintiff brought this action without legal authority or standing for the purpose of inducing defendant to pay money she does not owe to plaintiff and/or the alleged trust.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant has been damaged in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

SECOND COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION

1. That plaintiff brought this action without legal authority or standing for the purpose of inducing defendant to assign, convey and/or transfer title to her home to plaintiff and/or the alleged trust.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant has been damaged in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

THIRD COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION

1. That plaintiff intended to induce defendant to respond to this improperly commenced action based upon defendant’s misrepresentations in the affidavit of service it filed as set forth above.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant has been damaged in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION

1. That plaintiff intended to induce defendant to respond to this improperly commenced action based upon defendant’s misrepresentations in the summons that defendant was required to respond, when in fact defendant had no duty to respond because plaintiff had failed to take the necessary actions for the court to acquire jurisdiction over defendant.
2. Defendant has been forced to answer the purported complaint to prevent entry of a default judgment and does not submit to the jurisdiction of this Court, and defendant has suffered noneconomic damages including but not limited to severe emotional distress and large economic damages including attorney’s fees and costs.
3. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant has been damaged in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

FIFTH COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION

1. That plaintiff, the trust, and/or other parties that were/are under the control of or acting on behalf of the plaintiff and/or the trust fabricated documents and/or made false statements in documents including but not limited to the dates of execution of said documents for purposes of inducing defendant to pay money or surrender her home to plaintiff, the trust, or another party under the control of or acting on behalf of the plaintiff.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant has been damaged in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

FIRST COUNTERCLAIM FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

1. That upon information and belief, plaintiff and/or its attorneys, agents, servants and/or employees, and/or plaintiff’s alleged predecessor(s) interest and/or their attorneys, agents, servants and/or employees, repeatedly reported false, negative information on defendant’s credit report in violation of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act causing defendant to suffer damages.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant respectfully requests that this Court award the greater of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) or $1,000 for each violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and/or defendant’s actual damages including damages related to emotional distress and monetary losses, together with punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

SECOND COUNTERCLAIM FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT

1. That as previously set forth defendant has committed numerous frauds in the course of attempting to collect this alleged debt, some or all of which constitute crimes under federal, state or local law. Crimes committed in the course of attempting to collect a debt are violations of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
2. That as a result of the foregoing, defendant seeks damages in the amount of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) and/or statutory and other damages as are provided for in the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees and costs.

LENOIR LAW FIRM
461 Central Park West
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 document contains no legal advice and makes no representation as to the outcome of any legal matter. The information in this legal advertisement may not apply to your individual situation and should not be relied upon for any purpose.

FacebookMySpaceLinkedInBlogger PostStumbleUponRedditDeliciousGoogle BookmarksYahoo BookmarksShare
This entry was posted in 1. Foreclosure Defense, Attorney Blog, Debt Inversion, Foreclosure Fraud, Sewer Service. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.