Our Past Results
Attorneys Troy Doucet and Andy Gerling have been fighting the banks and mortgage companies for the past decade. Our philosophy is to fight-fight-and-fight for our clients, with an eye towards an appeal if the trial court rules against us. We've won, lost, and set good precedent for homeowners over the years. All of our experiences have taught us how to fight the banks and what it takes to get deals our clients' love. That is what we bring to the table in teaching you how to do what we do (without having to hire an attorney).
Below are a small handful of our cases in the area of consumer and mortgage litigation.
Marais v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 736 F.3d 711 (6th Cir. 2013) – This is one of the first decisions under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act creating 6th Circuit precedent regarding a borrower’s ability to maintain a claim under RESPA.
Slorp v. Lerner Sampson and Rothfuss, 587 Fed.Appx. 249 (6th Cir. 2014) – This case created 6th Circuit precedent allowing a borrower to bring a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) against a bank and the law firm representing the bank for actions taken in pursuit of a state foreclosure. Importantly, the Court expanded the interpretation of property injury and recoverable damages under 18 U.S.C § 1964(c).
Majestic Building Maintenance, Inc. v. Huntington, 864 F.3d 455 (6th Cir. 2017) – Here, the 6th Circuit affirmed the UCC principle that a bank could not disclaim its duty to act in good faith and exercise ordinary care under the Uniform Commercial Code, one of the first cases nationally on this issue.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gerst, 2014-Ohio-80 – The Ohio 5th District Court of Appeals affirmed that compliance with HUD Regulations was a condition precedent to foreclosing on a Fair Housing Administration mortgage loan.
In re Forson, 583 B.R. 704 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2018) – This case alleged a lender illegally demanded money on portions of a debt that was discharged in bankruptcy. The court held that the lender violated the bankruptcy discharge injunction under 11 U.S.C. § 524.
In re Beiter, 590 B.R. 446 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2018) – This case alleges that a lender illegally demanded money on portions of a debt that were discharged in bankruptcy. The case is one of the first nationally to allege violations of bankruptcy discharges as a class action in bankruptcy court. It is ongoing.
Washington v. Green Tree Servicing LLC, No. 1:15-CV-354, 2017 WL 1857258, at *1 (S.D. Ohio May 5, 2017), adopted, No. 1:15CV354, (S.D. Ohio June 15, 2017) – Federal trial court expanded the “reasonable diligence” standard under RESPA and the FDCPA for mortgage lenders, benefiting consumers.
Justice v. Ocwen Servicing, LLC, 2:13 CV 165 (S.D.Ohio 2014) – Summary judgment decision on claims under the FDCPA, TILA, and RESPA. The court interpreted servicers’ requirements to respond with information specifically requested by the customer.
Richard v. Caliber Home Loans, Inc., No. 2:15-CV-2647, 2017 WL 4349082 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 29, 2017) –FDCPA and TILA claims against a mortgage servicer with complete defense against seven counterclaims.
MDL In re Fed Loan Student Loan Servicing Litigation, 2:18-md-02833-CDJ (E.D. Pa.) – Doucet has been appointed to the Executive Committee of this MDL that involves up to 325,000 student loan accounts.
Rose v. Friendly Finance, 2016 WL 6436667 (S.D. Ohio 2016) – This consumer class action was filed to protect the interests of consumers who financed vehicles with a company that had an alleged illegal kickback scheme.
Hill v. Homeward Residential, Inc., 799 F.3d 544 (6th Cir. 2015) – This TCPA case alleged hundreds of robo-calls against a mortgage servicer without sufficient evidence of consent to receive the same.
PHH Mortg. v. Ramsey, 17 N.E..3d 629 (Ohio 10th Dist. 2014) – Successful defense of a verdict in favor of a foreclosed homeowner, where the court found the mortgage company breached the terms of the mortgage.
Cassidy v. Teaching Co., LLC, 2014 WL 4377843 ( S.D. Ohio 2014) – This class action alleged a seller of consumer video courses violated the FTC’s Order on false advertising discounts and Ohio’s CSPA.
In re Dibling, 514 B.R. 254 ( S.D. Ohio 2014) - Successful adversarial proceeding for bankruptcy violations.
Nour v. Shiwar, 2014 WL 3058296 ( Ohio 10th Dist. 2014) – Attorneys’ fees appeal following a successful jury trial for firm’s client regarding capital improvements for a business lease in a daycare center.
Union Sav. Bank v. Schaefer., 2013 WL 6843607 ( 10th Dist. 2013) and Flagstar bank, FSB v. Cintron, 984 N.E.2d 398 (2nd Dist. 2012) – Cases litigating TILA rescission of residential mortgage refinances.