FILED BETWEEN 04/18/11 AND 04/21/11
Breakdown by Date:
04/18/11 Monday 17
04/19/11 Tuesday 12
04/20/11 Wednesday 25
04/21/11 Thursday 10
Weekly Total 64
Breakdown by property type:
Commercial 4
Homestead 33
NonHomestead 27
Weekly Total 64
The Federal Trade Commission filed contempt charges against a promoter of credit repair and debt relief services and three of his companies, alleging that they continued their deceptive marketing practices in violation of a federal court order. The FTC charged that the defendants tried to take advantage of financially strapped consumers by falsely telling them that almost anyone can qualify for food stamps, and by encouraging them to mislead the government about their finances to qualify for the food stamp program.
The FTC charged that Sam Tarad Sky, Allrepco LLC, Credit Restoration Brokers LLC (CRB), and Debt Negotiations Associates LLC (DNA) violated the terms of a March 2010 court order that resolved charges that the defendants deceptively marketed credit repair and debt relief services, and illegally charged an up-front fee for credit repair services. The court order bars them from deceptively marketing any good or service and from violating the Credit Repair Organizations Act.
Despite the court order, the FTC alleges that Sky and his companies used two websites to promote a food stamp application guide that falsely promised it would show how "almost everybody" or "virtually everyone" can "legally apply for food stamps" or "legally get [food stamps] for free." The defendants sold the guide for either a one-time fee of $99, or as part of "Financial Solution Package" that cost consumers a monthly recurring fee of up to $139.
The FTC alleges that the defendants charged up-front fees for credit repair services, failed to make required disclosures about their debt relief services, and failed to fully report Sky's business activities, all in violation of the court order.
The civil contempt action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division on April 12, 2011. The FTC acknowledges assistance of the Florida Department of Children and Families, ACCESS Florida Program staff in this matter.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC's online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,800 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC's website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. "Like" the FTC on Facebook and "follow" us on Twitter.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a petition on April 7th 2011 in a Florida appellate court charging that the foreclosure court system in Lee County systematically denies homeowners a fair opportunity to defend their homes against foreclosure.
According to the ACLU’s petition, officials in Lee County seek to clear the foreclosure court docket as quickly as possible, at the expense of complying with basic procedural rules. Despite explicit instructions from the chief justice of the state supreme court that reducing the backlog of foreclosure cases should not “interfere with a judge’s ability to adjudicate each case fairly on its merits,” judges move through cases at lightning speed, sometimes seeing as many as 200 cases a day, according to the petition.
“Despite the extremely high stakes for homeowners, procedural violations in the ‘mass foreclosure docket’ are rampant,” said Rachel Goodman, an attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program. “Homeowners face systemic handicaps, and banks get a pass in proving their cases because the courts have effectively suspended the rules that give homeowners a chance to review the evidence against them.”
"No one should ever have to go to court with the deck already stacked against them,” said Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida. “Nowhere does it say someone is entitled only to the justice we have time for. We can’t allow the basic protections of due process to be the victim of judicial shortcuts.”
A copy of the ACLU’s petition is available online, here
A copy of the appendix for the case is available online, here
FILED BETWEEN 04/11/11 AND 04/15/11
04/11/11 Monday 20
04/12/11 Tuesday 12
04/13/11 Wednesday 14
04/14/11 Thursday 18
04/15/11 Friday 19
Breakdown of Filings
Commercial 8
Homestead 31
NonHomestead 31
Weekly Total 83
| Summary | Information | |||||
| Year | # | Month | Filed # | #Disposed | Difference | Clearance |
| 2007 | 1 | January | 481 | 138 | -343 | 28.69% |
| 2007 | 2 | February | 558 | 194 | -364 | 34.77% |
| 2007 | 3 | March | 716 | 208 | -508 | 29.05% |
| 2007 | 4 | April | 721 | 228 | -493 | 31.62% |
| 2007 | 5 | May | 866 | 193 | -673 | 22.29% |
| 2007 | 6 | June | 962 | 282 | -680 | 29.31% |
| 2007 | 7 | July | 1,160 | 324 | -836 | 27.93% |
| 2007 | 8 | August | 1,330 | 309 | -1,021 | 23.23% |
| 2007 | 9 | September | 1,308 | 322 | -986 | 24.62% |
| 2007 | 10 | October | 1,805 | 424 | -1,381 | 23.49% |
| 2007 | 11 | November | 1,760 | 540 | -1,220 | 30.68% |
| 2007 | 12 | December | 1,895 | 391 | -1,504 | 20.63% |
| 2008 | 1 | January | 2,293 | 615 | -1,678 | 26.82% |
| 2008 | 2 | February | 2,460 | 568 | -1,892 | 23.09% |
| 2008 | 3 | March | 2,346 | 682 | -1,664 | 29.07% |
| 2008 | 4 | April | 2,463 | 997 | -1,466 | 40.48% |
| 2008 | 5 | May | 2,352 | 869 | -1,483 | 36.95% |
| 2008 | 6 | June | 2,519 | 1,772 | -747 | 70.35% |
| 2008 | 7 | July | 2,300 | 987 | -1,313 | 42.91% |
| 2008 | 8 | August | 2,154 | 1,126 | -1,028 | 52.27% |
| 2008 | 9 | September | 2,447 | 1,311 | -1,136 | 53.58% |
| 2008 | 10 | October | 2,602 | 1,334 | -1,268 | 51.27% |
| 2008 | 11 | November | 1,647 | 1,186 | -461 | 72.01% |
| 2008 | 12 | December | 2,202 | 3,243 | 1,041 | 147.28% |
| 2009 | 1 | January | 2,076 | 2,321 | 245 | 111.80% |
| 2009 | 2 | February | 1,960 | 1,814 | -146 | 92.55% |
| 2009 | 3 | March | 2,199 | 2,081 | -118 | 94.63% |
| 2009 | 4 | April | 1,902 | 1,659 | -243 | 87.22% |
| 2009 | 5 | May | 1,802 | 2,026 | 224 | 112.43% |
| 2009 | 6 | June | 1,653 | 1,538 | -115 | 93.04% |
| 2009 | 7 | July | 1,903 | 2,118 | 215 | 111.30% |
| 2009 | 8 | August | 1,626 | 1,926 | 300 | 118.45% |
| 2009 | 9 | September | 1,583 | 1,828 | 245 | 115.48% |
| 2009 | 10 | October | 1,554 | 1,724 | 170 | 110.94% |
| 2009 | 11 | November | 1,406 | 2,183 | 777 | 155.26% |
| 2009 | 12 | December | 1,615 | 1,361 | -254 | 84.27% |
| 2010 | 1 | January | 1,318 | 2,007 | 689 | 152.28% |
| 2010 | 2 | February | 1,395 | 1,445 | 50 | 103.58% |
| 2010 | 3 | March | 1,138 | 2,128 | 990 | 186.99% |
| 2010 | 4 | April | 988 | 1,834 | 846 | 185.63% |
| 2010 | 5 | May | 830 | 1,677 | 847 | 202.05% |
| *Data source: Lee Clerk of Courts Public Records |
ActiveRain Corp. is not responsible for the accuracy of the site's content (which is written by members of the ActiveRain Real Estate Network) and does not endorse the views of the real estate agents, mortgage brokers, and others listed here.
Powered by the ActiveRain Real Estate Network
© 2013 ActiveRain Corp. All Rights Reserved