Coordinators

Other Contributors

About Us

www.clpblog.org

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« ACORN Names State Attorneys Generals Doing the Most to Battle the Foreclosure Crisis | Main | May 2008 Safety Recalls »

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Comments

John Sheakley

I am a named plaintiff in "The People of the State of California, acting by and through San Francisco City Attorney Dennis J. Herrera vs. NAF, FIA Card Services, and Columbia Credit Services."

Two real estate agents falsely represented a timeshare contract. MBNA would not cancel or place the transaction into dispute. MBNA acknowledged receipt of my letters and faxes before the 60-day deadline to place the transaction into dispute and then denied that my letters and faxes were received within 60 days. The NAF would not reply to my request to know my arbitration case code number, i.e., was it the same case code number for cases the selected arbitrator decided 99.8% in favor of the credit agencies? The NAF would not reply to my request for the date, time, and location for the arbitration (never has been provided). MBNA’s attorney, Wolpoff & Abramson did not acknowledge my acceptance of the NAF’s option for a Document Hearing where I reside. Wolpoff & Abramson did not acknowledge an invitation for mediation and MBNA said it is too late for mediation. With no notice of the date, time, or location for the arbitration, the NAF awarded MBNA’s attorney the disputed amount plus $4,200.10 in attorney’s fees. Wolpoff & Abramson provided a copy of MBNA's apology to the NAF for not responding to the NAF's request for additional information before the NAF's judgment. Wolpoff & Abramson mailed correspondence to my new address and then claims that they served (still no proof of service) time-sensitive legal documents to my old address.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

April 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30