Frank Barilla Fieldstone Law Selling Mass Joinder Suits: January 2013

Frank Francis Barilla Owner of Fieldstone Law

A reader and tipster (send in your tips here) sent in a copy of the retainer agreement he was given by Fieldstone Law at 1900 Quail Street, Suite 137, Newport Beach, CA 92660.

In looking over the agreement I had some observations I wanted to share.

It appears the focus of the retainer agreement is Alternate Dispute Resolution services with the lender of the tipster (send in your tips here). in this case Bank of America.

The law firm says they will talk to the client, witnesses, identify appropriate parties, review documents, consult, and communications.

After this they will discuss, write and meet about the case, perform some legal research and prepare a written opinion if required or appropriate.

Then they will review the case, request materials, gather documents, and prepare affidavits.

Finally they will plan for a four-way meeting, create a Alternate Dispute Resolution demand letter, draft offers to settle and implement a settlement offer.

Fieldstone Law Wants Me to Pay for Mass Joinder Help Mass Joinder Frank Barilla Fieldstone Law debt articles

What I found interesting was when the firm would collect their fee. It appears the client has three options.

The first is to accept the settlement offer the firm will offer the lender. Second, is to continue the representation into a mass joinder lawsuit. Third, continue to work towards an agreement with the lender.

As you can see above, if options two or three are selected the client will then have to pay $250 or $350 in addition each month.

This pages has some interesting items on it as well.

It says Fieldstone Law “will not represent Client in any lawsuit, or to intervene in any proceedings and/or stop any proceedings for any specific issue, Client may retain an attorney at Client(s) own expense.”

It also says the attorney does not have insurance in case of errors and that Fieldstone Law doesn’t even have to do the work themselves, they can farm it out to anybody they want and the client is giving authorization for them to release client funds to pay for it.

The agreement gives no guarantee of any outcome and is silent about refunds.

AND ALL THIS FOR ONLY…

Fieldstone Law provided the consumer with a form for payment for $4,500.

It appears the website for Fieldstone Law was recently transferred in April 2011 to an owner I can’t see.

Fieldstone Law was incorporated in California in June 2011

FIELDSTONE LAW PC
Entity Number: C3387216
Date Filed: 06/20/2011
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 100 W BROADWAY STE 100
Entity City, State, Zip: GLENDALE CA 91203
Agent for Service of Process: LEGALZOOM.COM, INC.
Agent Address: 100 WEST BROADWAY SUITE 100
Agent City, State, Zip: GLENDALE CA 91210

The firms states they are located at:

1900 Quail Street Suite 137
Newport Beach CA 92660
T. 888.520.1176
F. 949.313.5027
E. info@fieldstonelaw.com

ODD ITEMS

In checking out the address associated with the company I discovered it was the same address that had been used for marketing mass joinder suits under the name of K2 Law and Mitchell J Stein & Associates.

“Vince Malek
K2 Law / Mitchell J. Stein & Associates
1900 Quail Street, Suite 137
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Office (888) 938-5554 x2194
Direct (949) 313-2194
Fax (714) 845-9094
vmalek@k2Law.net” – Source

Another listing shows that address was related to Kramer & Kaslow, “Orange County Division 1900 Quail Street, Suite 137 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: (888) 938-5554 Fax: (949) 313-5027 Email:retainer@k2lawfirm.com.”

The officer of Kramer & Kaslow and Mitchell Stein were recently raided by law enforcement in California.

Another interesting tidbit is that even though Fieldstone Law says their attorney is Frank Barilla, he actually lists a different office address and telephone number.

2107 N Broadway #101
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(714) 664-0242

What’s interesting is that according to State of California records, that company is suspended.

LAW OFFICES OF FRANK BARILLA AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
Entity Number: C2721554
Date Filed: 02/18/2005
Status: SUSPENDED
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 2107 N. BROADWAY STE101
Entity City, State, Zip: SANTA ANA CA 92706
Agent for Service of Process: FRANK BARILLA
Agent Address: 2107 N. BROADWAY STE 101
Agent City, State, Zip: SANTA ANA CA 92706

Get Out of Debt Guy – Twitter, G+, Facebook

Average Rating:

Rate Our Site - Leave a Testimonial

DON'T MISS THESE RELATED ARTICLES TO READ

Google Plus Author

Frank Barilla Law & Disbarred Attorney Terry Shannon

Read Below

December 28, 2006

TERRANCE JAMES SHANNON [#94750], 53, of Dana Point was disbarred Dec. 28, 2006, and was ordered to comply with rule 955.

The State Bar Court found that Shannon committed three acts of misconduct: he failed to perform legal services competently, promptly refund unearned fees or cooperate with the bar’s investigation.

The proceedings arose from a case in which Shannon was hired to transfer ownership of a beer and wine license and to apply for a new liquor license for his client’s restaurant. The client gave Shannon $5,000 cash as a flat fee. At the time, Shannon operated a satellite office above the restaurant.

He met with the client, who provided all the information Shannon requested, but it was not complete. After that meeting, Shannon did very little, if any work, on the case. The client finally called the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and learned that no application had been filed on his behalf.

Shannon said he did not file the application because the client did not provide all the necessary information. State Bar Court Judge Richard Platel said he did not believe Shannon’s testimony that the client refused to provide complete information or that he sent the client five letters seeking that information.

The client complained to the bar and filed a small claims action against Shannon in an effort to recover his fee. Shannon obtained four continuances of trial, twice in order to complete the ABC application. He did not appear twice and the judge ordered payment to the client of the $5,000 fee plus $52 in costs. Shannon paid the fee but not the costs.

Platel also found that Shannon tried to obtain an advantage in the disciplinary proceeding by offering deliberately false testimony in which he claimed the client signed a release and settlement agreement. The client testified that the signature on the agreement was a forgery.

Platel said the evidence Shannon offered in mitigation was not meaningful, and said instead that he has three prior disciplines — a 1993 private reproval and suspensions with probation in 2005 and 2006. The misconduct in the two recent disciplines included failure to perform legal services competently, return client files, communicate with clients or refund unearned fees and engaging

The judge said Shannon had “been engaged in some type of professional misconduct since 1997 through 2005.” Had all his misconduct “been prosecuted in one State Bar Court proceeding and (Shannon) did not have any prior record of discipline,” Platel added, “disbarment would be called for.”

February 24, 2006

TERRENCE JAMES SHANNON [#94750], 52, of Dana Point was suspended for two years, stayed, placed on three years of probation with a two-year actual suspension, and he was ordered to take the MPRE, comply with rule 955 and make restitution. The order took effect Feb. 24, 2006.

A State Bar Court hearing judge found that Shannon committed 16 acts of misconduct in four client matters, including committing an act of moral turpitude, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in another jurisdiction and failing to respond to reasonable client inquiries, forward client files, refund unearned fees promptly or cooperate with the bar’s investigation. Shannon appealed, but the review department increased the recommended discipline.

One client was forced to sue Shannon to recover unearned fees and then had to wait more than a year after obtaining a judgment against Shannon. Another had a $30,000 judgment entered against her and a lien placed on her property. Two others had to hire new lawyers to recover their funds. The court found that Shannon made numerous misrepresentations to both clients and to bar investigators.

Shannon did some work in a marital dissolution matter, but when he did not respond to numerous phone calls, the client hired a new lawyer. The client won a $5,000 judgment in small claims court, and when Shannon appealed, he presented a retainer agreement and a billing statement the client said he’d never seen. The court ordered a reduced judgment that Shannon paid only after intervention by the sheriff.

In another matter, he represented the defendant in a slip and fall case in Nevada in which an arbitrator awarded $30,000 to the plaintiff. Shannon sought a trial and asked a Nevada attorney to associate with him so he could appear in court there. It was the other lawyer’s understanding that he would simply assist, but that Shannon would handle the case. The client also believed Shannon was responsible for the case.

When little work was done, a discovery commissioner recommended a $30,000 judgment against Shannon’s client. Final judgment was entered in that amount and the Nevada lawyer became alarmed and said action should be taken immediately to set aside the judgment. Shannon took no action.

At the same time, the client was trying to refinance a loan on a building she owned in Nevada and learned a lien was placed on it. When she finally reached Shannon, he denied he was ever her lawyer. He never took any action to protect the client’s interests and she complained to the State Bar.

A Las Vegas couple, incorrectly believing that Shannon was licensed to practice in Nevada, hired him to prepare a living trust. When the husband passed away, the wife called Shannon a dozen times to try to obtain the trust documents from him. He promised more than once to send the documents, but never did. A new lawyer unsuccessfully sought to get the documents and a refund of the couple’s $1,200 fee.

Another client hired Shannon to handle a foreclosure matter involving a property in Seal Beach. After two years, the client signed a power of attorney giving his son the power to act on his behalf with respect to real estate and other transactions. The son hired an attorney who attempted to contact Shannon to determine what work had been done. She asked for all documents pertaining to the property, an accounting and a refund of the fee the original client paid, but Shannon never responded.

Frank Barilla Law

So-called specialized law firms are sending invitations to homeowners for "mass joinder" lawsuits against their mortgage lender, touting it as a way to stop foreclosure and get good loan modifications. The invites are often a scam, says the Federal Trade Commission.

The law firms generally don't deliver, reports the FTC, which also says that many of the firms fail to use qualified attorneys or even pursue cases, and often leave their clients in worse financial shape than before. The firms charge fees in advance that can range from a couple thousand dollars to more than $10,000.

You can guard yourself against all sorts of mortgage scams. Here are some ways to protect yourself:

Never deal with anyone who charges for help. You can get free assistance from a government-approved counselor by calling 888-995-4673.
Beware of anyone who wants you to sign papers immediately. Never sign over the deed to your home.
Never make your mortgage payment to anyone other than your mortgage company without the lender's approval.

If you choose to take legal action against your lender, the FTC recommends that you: Get the name of the lawyers who will represent you and check them out with your state bar association. Are they licensed in your state? Have they been subject to any disciplinary actions? Also ask relatives, friends, and others you trust for the name of an attorney with a proven record of getting help for homeowners facing foreclosure. Ask to speak with the attorney directly. For more tips from the FTC click here.

For information on what would make you a good candidate for refinancing, and whether to cut your monthly payments or accelerate your home's payoff, see Refinance your mortgage (again)?

Previously: Beware of mortgage rescue scams masquerading as new federal programs

FTC Consumer Alert: Mass Joinder Lawsuits [FTC]

Monday, January 7, 2013