class action law suits against MNBA and debt collectors Part 1

[cigs645]

You will need to do your own digging as far as the names of the law firms, some of those names are on the pdf doc.
It seems law firms are going after these debt collectors and the arbritration groups they use

www.consumerlaw.org/initiatives/ model/content/ArbitrationNAF.pdf


and

Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (TLPJ), a National Public interest
LAW FIRM,
filed a lawsuit on May 17, 2004 IN Superior Court IN San Francisco
against ...


MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE & EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
CONFIRMATION OF ARBITRATION AWARD AND VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD

The practice of hidden binding arbitration clauses in unilateral
contracts are being addressed by many courts across the country. The
United States Congress have addressed their concerns in H.R. 1054
and 3607 that amend the Truth in Lending Act, as well as amendments
to the Federal Arbitration Act (S. 192), make pre-dispute mandatory
arbitration agreements in consumer credit contracts void and
unenforceable. In addition, House Resolution 5162 which amends Title
15 USC 1601 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act was violated by
MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. and SILVERMAN LAW FIRM.

1) In the case of Mercuro v. Superior Court (Countrywide Securities)
Supreme Court Case No. S105424 Court of Appeal, Second Appellate
District, Division Seven Court of Appeal Case No. B153355, I bring
to your attention the fact that bias runs rampant in the National
Arbitration Forum. NAF competes against such forums as AAA, Jams,
and other large arbitration companies and appears to be pulling out
all the moral stops to attract clients. In this case, status does
not equal quality.

I quote from Mercuro, "discovery documents produced in several other
pieces of litigation and filed in various courts as evidence
establish that NAF's behavior provides concrete illustrations of the
dynamic that underlies the repeat player bias issue identified by
this Court." Further the court records show, "In this case, TLPJ
(Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (Ed.)) is concerned about
mandatory arbitration systems that are structured in such a way as
to undermine arbitration's promise of a neutral decision maker. TLPJ
is alert to the issue of repeat player bias that this Court
described in Armendariz. TLPJ believes that the conduct of NAF
(National Arbitration Forum, Minn.Minn.(Ed.)) in particular,
exhibits the worst aspects of the repeat player phenomenon." Quote
from Mercuro, "The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
similarly, has stated that "results cannot but be influenced by the
fact that the employer, and not the employee, is a potential source
of future business for the arbitration." Gilbert F. Caselias, Policy
Statement on Mandatory Binding Arbitration of Employment."

2) In Szetela v. Discover Bank, No. G029323 (Cal. 4th App. Dist.
April 22, 2002) the court has ruled: "The arbitration agreement in a
credit cardholder agreement is unconscionable and unenforceable, to
the extent it prohibits class treatment of small individual claims,
where presented as a `take it or leave it' clause with no
opportunity for negotiation"

3) MBNA, who uses the National Arbitration Forum, has a serious
conflict of interest involved in their arbitration proceedings,
evidenced by the Collection and Recovery Solutions Registration BIOS
& Application(Exhibit 1) confirming the following facts:

a) Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P. is a Certified Arbitration Manager for
National Arbitration Forum.

b) Stuart Wolpoff, Executive Director of Wolpoff & Abramson L.L.P,
is a national lecturer on "Customer Service Within the Collection
Environment," "Management Enhancement Opportunities,"
and "Collection Techniques in Legal Collections."

c) Aaron Rose is the Vice President/Assistant General Counsel for
the National Arbitration Forum.

d) These points are confirmed by the Collection & Recovery Solutions
symposium 2002 where Aaron Rose and Stuart Wolpoff walked creditors
through the arbitration process (in the context of the credit card
industry) from a unique perspective – through the eyes of both the
National Arbitration Forum and its first Certified Arbitration
Manager, Wolpoff & Abramson. (again, see Exhibit 1)

e) Aaron Rose oversees legal and operational teams that guide
creditors on arbitration clause placement, electronic filing of
arbitration claims and the overall arbitration process as it relates
to the credit industry.

f) Aaron Rose also directs the Forum's Certified Arbitration
Management Committee.

g) Based on the Registration Application, Stuart Wolpoff is under
the direction of Aaron Rose while representing MBNA America Bank,
N.A. as a client.

4) Exhibit 2 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Director of
Development, Curtis D. Brown, Esquire solicits business from Richard
E. Shephard, Assistant General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage
maintaining that a financial advantage for the lending institution
can be gained by "adding arbitration language to your contracts,".
From this letter it is clearly the intent of the NAF to assist
client lending institutions to circumvent due process including my
constitutional right to a trial by jury, when he states " the
National Arbitration Forum's national system of arbitration lets you
minimize lawsuits, and the threat of lender liability jury
verdicts".

5) Exhibit 3 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Policy Analyst,
Leif Stennes solicits business from Richard E. Shephard, Assistant
General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage maintaining "arbitration has
great advantages over litigation. There is no reason for Saxon
Mortgage, Inc. to be exposed to the costs and risks of the jury
system." From this letter it is clearly the intent of the NAF to
assist client lending institutions to circumvent due process
including my constitutional right to a trial by jury.

6) Exhibit 4 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Managing Director,


Edward C. Anderson solicits business from Richard E. Shephard,
Assistant General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage chastising him by
stating "We were disappointed to see you had invoked the Rules of
the "other guys"." From this letter it is clearly the intent of the
NAF to pursue a business relationship with client lending
institutions, which gives the sense of partiality and bias in favor
of the lending institutions.

[cigs645]

7) Exhibit 5 hereto is a fee schedule from the NAF, shows that
client lending institutions must pay the NAF a flat fee plus
percentage of each claim amount. This demonstrates a financially
obligatory relationship between NAF and the client lending
institutions, where as long as the NAF rules in favor of the client
lending institution, the NAF will continue to receive additional
arbitration cases and thus additional financial benefits. This
represents a conflict of interests, while claiming to maintain an
appearance of impartiality.

8) Exhibit 6 hereto is a "Starter Kit" from the NAF, urges client
lending institutions to "plan now [and ensure] no lawsuits, no
exorbitant legal fees, no court delays, no irrational jury verdicts"
by including "a simple clause- an arbitration clause- in every
contract", with the intent of "replacing the court system in every
jurisdiction." This pamphlet demonstrates that the intent of the NAF
is to circumvent the judicial system by avoiding lawsuits, and
potential loses due to irrational juries. Clearly, the intent of the
NAF is to assist client lending institutions to circumvent and even
prevent due process, including my constitutional right to a trial by
jury, by placing claims for arbitration with the NAF.

9) Exhibit 7 hereto is a marketing flyer entitled "All arbitration
is not the same…" indicates the differences between the NAF and the
American Arbitration Association (AAA) – for instance, in NAF
proceedings the failure of the a party to respond to a claim results
in admission of the claim whereas in other forums there is a
mandatory hearing even if the other party does not respond. This
demonstrates that the NAF does not apply rules of due process in its
proceedings, which further illustrates that the NAF is biased in
favor of its clients.



MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE & EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
CONFIRMATION OF ARBITRATION AWARD AND VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD

The practice of hidden binding arbitration clauses in unilateral
contracts are being addressed by many courts across the country. The
United States Congress have addressed their concerns in H.R. 1054
and 3607 that amend the Truth in Lending Act, as well as amendments
to the Federal Arbitration Act (S. 192), make pre-dispute mandatory
arbitration agreements in consumer credit contracts void and
unenforceable. In addition, House Resolution 5162 which amends Title
15 USC 1601 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act was violated by
MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. and SILVERMAN LAW FIRM.

1) In the case of Mercuro v. Superior Court (Countrywide Securities)
Supreme Court Case No. S105424 Court of Appeal, Second Appellate
District, Division Seven Court of Appeal Case No. B153355, I bring
to your attention the fact that bias runs rampant in the National
Arbitration Forum. NAF competes against such forums as AAA, Jams,
and other large arbitration companies and appears to be pulling out
all the moral stops to attract clients. In this case, status does
not equal quality.

I quote from Mercuro, "discovery documents produced in several other
pieces of litigation and filed in various courts as evidence
establish that NAF's behavior provides concrete illustrations of the
dynamic that underlies the repeat player bias issue identified by
this Court." Further the court records show, "In this case, TLPJ
(Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (Ed.)) is concerned about
mandatory arbitration systems that are structured in such a way as
to undermine arbitration's promise of a neutral decision maker. TLPJ
is alert to the issue of repeat player bias that this Court
described in Armendariz. TLPJ believes that the conduct of NAF
(National Arbitration Forum, Minn.Minn.(Ed.)) in particular,
exhibits the worst aspects of the repeat player phenomenon." Quote
from Mercuro, "The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
similarly, has stated that "results cannot but be influenced by the
fact that the employer, and not the employee, is a potential source
of future business for the arbitration." Gilbert F. Caselias, Policy
Statement on Mandatory Binding Arbitration of Employment."

2) In Szetela v. Discover Bank, No. G029323 (Cal. 4th App. Dist.
April 22, 2002) the court has ruled: "The arbitration agreement in a
credit cardholder agreement is unconscionable and unenforceable, to
the extent it prohibits class treatment of small individual claims,
where presented as a `take it or leave it' clause with no
opportunity for negotiation"

3) MBNA, who uses the National Arbitration Forum, has a serious
conflict of interest involved in their arbitration proceedings,
evidenced by the Collection and Recovery Solutions Registration BIOS
& Application(Exhibit 1) confirming the following facts:

a) Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P. is a Certified Arbitration Manager for
National Arbitration Forum.

b) Stuart Wolpoff, Executive Director of Wolpoff & Abramson L.L.P,
is a national lecturer on "Customer Service Within the Collection
Environment," "Management Enhancement Opportunities,"
and "Collection Techniques in Legal Collections."

c) Aaron Rose is the Vice President/Assistant General Counsel for
the National Arbitration Forum.

d) These points are confirmed by the Collection & Recovery Solutions
symposium 2002 where Aaron Rose and Stuart Wolpoff walked creditors
through the arbitration process (in the context of the credit card
industry) from a unique perspective – through the eyes of both the
National Arbitration Forum and its first Certified Arbitration
Manager, Wolpoff & Abramson. (again, see Exhibit 1)

e) Aaron Rose oversees legal and operational teams that guide
creditors on arbitration clause placement, electronic filing of
arbitration claims and the overall arbitration process as it relates
to the credit industry.

f) Aaron Rose also directs the Forum's Certified Arbitration
Management Committee.

g) Based on the Registration Application, Stuart Wolpoff is under
the direction of Aaron Rose while representing MBNA America Bank,
N.A. as a client.

4) Exhibit 2 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Director of
Development, Curtis D. Brown, Esquire solicits business from Richard
E. Shephard, Assistant General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage
maintaining that a financial advantage for the lending institution
can be gained by "adding arbitration language to your contracts,".
From this letter it is clearly the intent of the NAF to assist
client lending institutions to circumvent due process including my
constitutional right to a trial by jury, when he states " the
National Arbitration Forum's national system of arbitration lets you
minimize lawsuits, and the threat of lender liability jury
verdicts".

5) Exhibit 3 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Policy Analyst,
Leif Stennes solicits business from Richard E. Shephard, Assistant
General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage maintaining "arbitration has
great advantages over litigation. There is no reason for Saxon
Mortgage, Inc. to be exposed to the costs and risks of the jury
system." From this letter it is clearly the intent of the NAF to
assist client lending institutions to circumvent due process
including my constitutional right to a trial by jury.

6) Exhibit 4 hereto is a letter signed by NAF's, Managing Director,


Edward C. Anderson solicits business from Richard E. Shephard,
Assistant General Counsel for Saxon Mortgage chastising him by
stating "We were disappointed to see you had invoked the Rules of
the "other guys"." From this letter it is clearly the intent of the
NAF to pursue a business relationship with client lending
institutions, which gives the sense of partiality and bias in favor
of the lending institutions.[/quote]

[freeindeed]

Thanks for posting this. It is about time these debt collectors and biased arbitration companies get what is coming to them. I have heard much regarding the small arbitration companies being frauds when they are trying to help the little guy overcome this gigantic fraud perpetrated by forums such as NAF. MBNA and Wolpoff & Abramson are the scum of the earth. All these bottom feeders want to do stick it to the consumer by keeping them from requiring proof of claim in a court action. Thank God we have some that are taking action to get rid of this scum. It is my understanding that a class action suit against MBNA and Wolpoff is being filed this coming week.

[truth4all]

Article 7 - Unlawful Practice of Law (6125-6133)

§6129. Buying Claim as Misdemeanor

Every attorney who, either directly or indirectly, buys or is interested in buying any evidence of debt or thing in action, with intent to bring suit thereon, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Any violation of the provisions of this section is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both. (Origin: Pen. Code §161. Amended by Stats. 1976, ch. 1125.)

All those attorneyes wh signed those "affidavits" and attested to the valditiy of the "alleged debt under penalty of perjury and submitted those affidavits to NAF should be VERY worried right now.
this attorneys purchasing that "thing in motion with the intent to sue" should also be very worried right now.
They are looking at jail time and losing a bar license !
The "custodians, agents, managers, Senior Vice Presidents etc, " for the banks signing under penalty of perjury for those "ficticious plaintiffs" , attorneys and third part debt collectors purchasing "media and affidavits" are next to see jail time.
I can't wait to see the first Senior Vice President for MBNA get named in the Federal Law Suit !

[cigs645]

the ONLY arguments they bring forth are:

1. Did you receive the money?
2. Did you agree to pay it back?

courts have upheld the federal reserve bank act so so many times.

Originally Posted by freeindeed

Thanks for posting this. It is about time these debt collectors and biased arbitration companies get what is coming to them. I have heard much regarding the small arbitration companies being frauds when they are trying to help the little guy overcome this gigantic fraud perpetrated by forums such as NAF. MBNA and Wolpoff & Abramson are the scum of the earth. All these bottom feeders want to do stick it to the consumer by keeping them from requiring proof of claim in a court action. Thank God we have some that are taking action to get rid of this scum. It is my understanding that a class action suit against MBNA and Wolpoff is being filed this coming week.

[truth4all]

Originally Posted by cigs645

the ONLY arguments they bring forth are:

1. Did you receive the money?
2. Did you agree to pay it back?

courts have upheld the federal reserve bank act so so many times.

1. Did you receive the money?
That is not my claim your honor.

2. Did you agree to pay it back?
Again that is not my claim your honor.


Who is talking about the Federal Reserve Act?
This is plain and simple rules of Civil Prodcedure.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Don't try fighting these predators with old cites or snippets of court cases.

They do this for a living. Day in, day out. They learn what works and what doesn't first-hand and they share their experiences.

A lot of people around here come bearing all kinds of little things they find on the Internet and post it as if it is an absolute.

What works is fact as in clear and convincing evidence that the debtor isn't the person they've sued or isn't the person who got something and did not pay for it. The common assumption with the typical dodges seems to be that Judges aren't able to discern a person's credibility. That's simply folly. If you don't seem or act credible, you're toast. The goofy legal maneuvers aren't any new, great secret.

When you're an innocent target of one of these yahoos, you need to slap them silly so they'll realize you're not the average roll-over-and-play-dead consumer who is just trying to get out of paying it.

When you actually did acquire things using credit cards and loans, trying to wiggle out with goofy legal maneuvers only makes you look stupid.

[cigs645]

They do which is why it doesn't hurt to find law firms that do this for a living to fight them. The law game is just a game to these people, a wear down game.try fighting them with practical solutions as in what these class action law suits are doing, if they are doing them or finding someone who has been succefull with them.

try contacting these law firms and finding out if in fact they have active cases being filed now or if they know if any other law firms that do. On some of those docs I posted (pdf) are the names and tel #'s of those law firms.

whatever you do not not pay anyone anythting up front

Originally Posted by Judge Roy Bean

Don't try fighting these predators with old cites or snippets of court cases.

They do this for a living. Day in, day out. They learn what works and what doesn't first-hand and they share their experiences.

A lot of people around here come bearing all kinds of little things they find on the Internet and post it as if it is an absolute.

What works is fact as in clear and convincing evidence that the debtor isn't the person they've sued or isn't the person who got something and did not pay for it. The common assumption with the typical dodges seems to be that Judges aren't able to discern a person's credibility. That's simply folly. If you don't seem or act credible, you're toast. The goofy legal maneuvers aren't any new, great secret.

When you're an innocent target of one of these yahoos, you need to slap them silly so they'll realize you're not the average roll-over-and-play-dead consumer who is just trying to get out of paying it.

When you actually did acquire things using credit cards and loans, trying to wiggle out with goofy legal maneuvers only makes you look stupid.

[willgolf4food]

How do I join in ofn this class action W & A are the worst. I had hired an attorney to help with debt relieve and he got the Arbitration cases dismissed(had to MNBA Accounts). then a year latter I get served again on the same account(larger one) and they are trying to serve on the other one. My attorney has cost me too much I am disabled and getting a small goverment retirement and that is all my income. In order to handle the latest arbritration he wants another 500 to 1000 on top of the 4000 I have paid and I still owe him about 2000 more and I can't get any more money. I am sure he is going to drop me and he will probally sue me. Since I live in Texas I guess the house can't be touched. I loose a lot of sleep over this. I was getting disability payments so was making the cc payments then started paying the min for a while and the interest rates went up 2 to 3 times and I couldn't afford even the min any more so here I am. No disabailty and money either and another arbritration about to be awarded.

What are they going to do when they get the award?

Or do I want to know. Someone said they can't touch my goverment pension(garnish). I don't have any other income.

[masterduke]

If they get a summary judgement then 28 days later they will steal any bank accounts you may have. So only keep the "overdraft protection" amount in that account (they can't touch that) so you can still use the bank account. If you have no other assets and if Texas has homestead protection laws in place (Michigan where I live does not) I wouldn't worry about it. Your disablity would be safe from garnishment I would think. Check your law library for confirmation that is not subject to garnishment.