Lawyers
Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC.Information and Alerts
Alert Details
This business has 4 alerts.
Government Actions 1
Gov. Action
According to a press release dated May 16, 2014, Attorney General Roy Cooper has filed suit against a debt settlement company operating out of Chicago that took consumers' money but failed to provide them with expertise and help to reduce their debts.
"Consumers overwhelmed with debt need real help, not schemers looking to make a quick buck off of them," said Cooper. "We pushed for a strong law in North Carolina that makes it illegal to collect money upfront for debt relief work and we'll keep enforcing the law against violators."
On Thursday, Cooper filed suit against Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, PLLC (Legal Helpers) and its principals Jeffrey Hyslip, Jason Searns, Jeffrey Aleman and Thomas Macey seeking to stop their illegal debt relief scheme in North Carolina. From 2010 through April 2012, approximately 412 North Carolina consumers lost more than $1.1 million in fees to the scheme. Under a North Carolina law that Cooper helped win, it's illegal to collect advance fees for debt settlement services.
Ultimately, Cooper is asking the court to ban the defendants from offering debt settlement services in the state. The proposed court order seeks to prevent the company from taking payments or entering into contracts with any future customers in North Carolina. Cooper also wants the company to pay refunds to previous customers and civil penalties.
As alleged in the complaint filed with the court, Legal Helpers sought out financially distressed consumers with significant unsecured debt, claiming it could reduce their debt by up to sixty-five percent and have them debt-free in three to four years. Representatives also told consumers that Legal Helpers was one of the largest debt resolution firms in the nation and that they would be represented by an attorney.
Since 2010, Cooper's Consumer Protection Division has received 61 complaints about Legal Helpers.
Legal Helpers' practices are best described by the experience of one North Carolina couple outlined in the complaint. The couple was more than $103,000 in debt when they responded to a mailing from Legal Helpers. Legal Helpers led them to believe it was a law firm specializing in debt settlement and convinced the couple that its services could help them pay off their debts in five years. They signed a contract to pay $1,334.27 a month for three months and were advised not to pay their creditors directly or have any contact with them.
According to the couples' affidavit filed with the lawsuit, not one penny of $4,002.81 they paid in the first three months went to help pay off their debts. Instead, Legal Helpers kept their money as fees. The consumers eventually paid more than $6,900 to Legal Helpers with only a small fraction, $234.87, going toward reducing their debt. When a creditor sued the couple for unpaid debts, Legal Helpers did not provide them with any legal representation.
The North Carolina law that bans advance fees for debt relief also applies to foreclosure and loan modification help. Cooper's Consumer Protection Division is part of a multistate investigation looking into The Mortgage Law Group, a company related to Legal Helpers that promised to help improve the terms of consumers' mortgages and save their homes from foreclosure.
"There is no fast, easy way out of financial troubles," Cooper reminded consumers. "Don't put yourself deeper in a hole by falling for empty promises to settle your debt for pennies on the dollar."
For tips on getting out of debt or to file a complaint with Cooper's Consumer Protection Division, visit www.ncdoj.gov.
Government Actions 2
Gov. Action
June 13, 2013
MADISON - Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen and the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) have filed an enforcement action in Dane County Circuit Court against Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC, a/k/a the law firm of Macey, Aleman, Hyslip & Searns, as well as the company's principal managers and owners.
According to the complaint, Legal Helpers Debt Resolution provides debt settlement services to people nationwide, including in Wisconsin. Under Wisconsin's statute governing adjustment service companies, Wis. Stat. § 218.02, companies that negotiate with creditors on behalf of debtors must obtain a license, file certain disclosures with the Department of Financial Institutions -- Division of Banking, and limit the amount of fees they charge from debtors.
The complaint alleges that the defendants and their Chicago-based company illegally charge exorbitant upfront fees for their debt settlement services while maintaining that, as lawyers, they were not required to be licensed as an adjustment service company pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 218.02. The complaint alleges, however, that the attorneys with Legal Helpers Debt Resolution are merely a façade for the company, and the debt settlement services are fulfilled by non-lawyer, third-party companies. Consumers report they never meet an attorney, talk to an attorney and when seeking consult with an attorney about the status of their debt, are not permitted to speak with one.
According to the complaint, Legal Helpers Debt Resolution has enrolled nearly 2,000 Wisconsin consumers, charging illegal upfront fees that range from $500-$900, and monthly maintenance fees from $50.00 to more than $75.00. This has resulted in the collection of millions of dollars of illegal upfront fees from Wisconsin consumers.
The complaint asks the Court to impose forfeitures and penalties, to require restitution to consumers, and to enjoin the company from future unlawful behavior.
The case was referred to the DOJ by the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions and the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Lara A. Sutherlin.
Government Actions 3
Gov. Action
On August 9, 2012 The State of Minnesota Commissioner of Commerce issued an Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Right to Hearing against Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC.
The State of Minnesota Commissioner of Commerce states, that no person may operate as a debt settlement services provider with Minn, Stat. 332B.02-.14 without first registering with the Minnesota Department of Commerce Pursuant to Minn, Stat. 332B.03. Pursuant to the above referenced statutes.
Commissioner Mike Rothman alleges that the Respondent Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC, which will be known as "Respondent" is not registered as either a debt settlement services provider or as a debt management services provider in Minnesota. Respondent is engaged in debt settlement services in Minnesota. In particular, Respondent has taken up-front and monthly funds from Minnesota residents, representing that the funds would be used to settle claims with creditors and to pay the Respondent's fees for achieving such settlements.
Commissioner Rothman also alleges that in addition to operating as a debt settlement services provider without a license, Respondent has violated a host of Minnesota statutory provisions regulating the conduct of debt settlement providers, including the following:
A. Respondent charged fees in excess of those permitted by statute, as codified as Min. Stat. 332B.09
B. Respondent failed to provide statutorily required disclosures codified at Minn. Stat. 332B.06.
C. Respondent made misleading representations to debtors in violation of Minn. Stat. 332B.11, subd. 1
D. Respondent failed to respond to requests for information from the Department of Commerce in violation of Minn. Stat. 45.027, subd Ia.
Now, therefore, it is hereby ordered, pursuant to Minn. Stat 45.027, subd. 5a and Minn. Stat. ch. 332B, that Respondent Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC shall cease and desist from violating Minn. Stat. ch 332B, including engaging in the business of debt settlement or debt management services in the state of Minnesota, without the requisite registration pursuant to Minn. Stat. 332B.03, and from engaging in any debt settlement or debt service management services in Minnesota until this Order is otherwise vacated or modified by the Commissioner.
Government Actions 4
Gov. Action
On October 25, 2012, Indiana Attorney General Gregory F. Zoeller and Deputy Attorney General Kelsie E. Moore brought this action against The Mortgage Law Group, LLP (a/k/a The Law Firm of Macey, Aleman & Searns) ("TMLG"), and Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC, and Jeffrey J. Aleman, Thomas G. Macey, and Jason E. Searns, individually and as officers and/or managing partners of The Mortgage Law Group, LLP and Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC petitioning the Court pursuant to the Credit Services Organizations Act, Ind. Code ch. 24-5-15, the Mortgage Rescue Protection Fraud Act, Ind. Code art. 24-5.5, the Home Loan Practices Act, Ind. Code art. 24-9, and the Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, Ind. Code ch. 24-5-0.5, for injunction relief, restitution, civil penalties, investigative costs, and other relief.
Zoeller and Kelsie allege that the Defendant, The Mortgage Law Group, LLP (a/k/a The Law Firm of Macey, Aleman & Searns) ("TMLG"), is a Nevada limited liability partnership that, at all time relevant to the complaint, was engaged in business as a credit services organization and a as a foreclosure consultant with a principal business address of 233 South Wacker Drive suite 5150, Chicago, Illinois 60606. Defendant TMLG also does business as the law firm of Macey, Aleman & Searns, formally known as the law firm of Macey, Aleman, Hyslip & Searns. National Registered Agents, Inc of Nevada, in serving as registered agent for Defendant TMLG, maintains an address for service of process of 1000 East William Street, Suite 204 Carson City, Nevada 89701.
Zoeller and Kelsie also allege at all times relevant hereto, Defendant TMLG did not hold a certificate of authority to do business in the State if Indiana as a foreign corporation. The Defendant, Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, LLC, ("LHDR"), is a Nevada limited liability company that, at all times relevant to this complaint, was engaged in business as a credit services organization and as a foreclosure consultant with a principal business address 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5150, Chicago, Illinois 60606. National Registered Agents, Inc. of Nevada, in serving as registered agent for Defendant LDHR, maintains an address for service of process of 1000 East William Street, Suite 204, Carson City, Nevada 89701.
Zoeller and Kelsie allege at times relevant hereto, Defendant LHDR did not hold a certificate of authority to do business in the State of Indiana as a foreign corporation. The Defendant, Jeffrey J. Aleman ("Aleman"), is an officer and/or managing partner of both Defendant TMLG and Defendant LHDR, and at all times relevant to the complaint, was engaged in business as a credit services organization as a foreclosure consultant with an address of 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5150, Chicago, Illinois 60606.
Zoeller and Kelsie also allege The Defendant, Thomas G. Macey ("Macey"), is an officer and/or managing partner of both Defendant TMLG and Defendant LHDR, and at all times relevant to the complaint, was engaged in business as a credit services organization and as a foreclosure consultant with an address of 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5150, Chicago, Illinois 60606. The Defendant, Jason E. Searns ("Searns") is an officer and/or managing partner of both Defendant TMLG and Defendant LHDR, and at all times relevant to the complaint, was engaged in business as a credit services organization and as a foreclosure consultant with an address of 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5150 Chicago, Illinois 60606, and/or 303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 340, Denver, Colorado 80203.
The term "Defendants" as used in this complaint, means TMLG, LHDR, Aleman, Macey, and Searns. Zoeller and Kelsie allege although Defendant TMLG and Defendant LHDR are separate legal entities, they acted in accordance with one another and participated in a common scheme to defraud consumers. At all times relevant hereto, the Defendants maintained websites at www.hlhdfirm.com, www.legalhelpersdr.com, and www.legalhelpersenrollment.com. Defendants also maintained Facebook Pages and a Twitter account. These websites are currently inactive.
Zoeller and Kelsie continue alleging that Defendant TMLG and Defendant LHDR both operate using the same letterhead and styled forms, including sharing the same address as an entity. Defendants advertised their services via the internet and direct mail solicitations sent to potential clients. Defendants advertised that services including, but not limited to, the following: A. Loan modifications, B. Monthly Payment Reductions, C. Consumer Credit Counseling and D. Bankruptcy Representation. Defendants' website stated, "Like a security blanket, we will take control of your debt resolution issues. We will contact your unsecured creditors to advise them that they should only communicate with our firm as your attorneys"
Zoeller and Kelsie also allege Defendants' website stated, "Our experts in this field will negotiate with your creditors and will reduce your debts." Defendants' website stated, "We not only negotiate with your creditors for debt reduction but also consolidate your payments into small monthly installments. This monthly payment will be less than your current monthly payment." Defendants required consumers to sign a contract for their foreclosure consultant services that stated, "Further, I provide the above states entity authority to negotiate terms and/or conditionally accept modified terms of the mortgage associated with the above stated loan on my behalf" Both Defendants, TMLG and LHDR, had substantially similar contracts and forms with only the primarily difference being name of each company.
Zoeller and Kelsie requests the Court enter a judgment against Defendants, enjoining Defendants from following: In the course of performing services as a credit services organization, failing to obtain a surety bond in the amount of Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) prior to doing business as a credit services organization. In the course of performing services as a credit services organization, failing to file said surety bond with the Office of the Indiana Attorney General prior to doing business as a credit services organization. In the course of performing services as a credit services organization, charging or receiving money or other valuable consideration before the complete performance of services on behalf of consumers, unless Defendants have obtained a surety bond issued by a surety company admitted to do business in Indiana or established an irrevocable letter of credit under Ind. Code 24-5-15-8.
In the course of performing services as a credit services organization, failing to provide consumers with a written statement containing each of the provisions required by Ind. Code 25-5-15-6 prior to executing a contract or receiving valuable consideration. In the course of performing services as a credit services organization, failing to provide consumers with a written statement containing each of the provisions required by Ind. Code 24-5-15-7(a) (1) and two (2) copies of the notice of cancellation form required by Ind. Code 24-5-15-7(b). In the course of performing services as a foreclosure consultant, entering into or attempting to enter into a foreclosure consultant contract with a homeowner without providing the homeowner with a written notice of the homeowner's rights under Ind. Code art b24-5-5. In the course performing services as a foreclosure consultant, demanding or receiving compensation until after Defendants have fully performed all services Defendants have contracted to perform or represented that Defendants would perform, unless Defendants comply with the security requirements under Ind. Code 24-5-15-8.
Restitution is an amount to be determined at trial. Costs pursuant to Ind. Code 24-5-0.5-4(c) (3), awarding the Office of the Attorney General its reasonable expenses incurred in the investigation and prosecution of this action in the amount of $10,000.00 per violation payable to the Office of the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Assistance Fund, established through Ind. Code art 24-10 for each of the Defendant's knowing violations of the Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, in the amount of $5,000.00 per violation, payable to the Office of the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Assistance Fund, established through Ind. Code art. 24-10. Civil penalties to Ind. Code 24-5-0.5-8 for the Defendants' intentional violations Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, in the amount of $500.00 per violation, payable to the Office of the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Assistance Fund, established through Ind. Code art. 24-10. Civil penalties pursuant to Ind. Code 23-1-49-2(d) for Defendants' violation of Ind. Code 23-1-49-1, in the amount of $10,000.00 payable to the Office of the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Assistance Fund, established through Ind. Code art. 24-10 and all other just and proper relief.
Important Information
Believed to be out of business
According to information in BBB files, it appears that this business is no longer in business.
Additional Info
Legal Helpers Debt Resolution (LHDR) has requested that clients reach out to the law firm before filing a BBB complaint. Please contact Thomas Rogus at [email protected].
BBB Business Profiles may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
BBB Business Profiles are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. BBB asks third parties who publish complaints, reviews and/or responses on this website to affirm that the information provided is accurate. However, BBB does not verify the accuracy of information provided by third parties, and does not guarantee the accuracy of any information in Business Profiles.
When considering complaint information, please take into account the company's size and volume of transactions, and understand that the nature of complaints and a firm's responses to them are often more important than the number of complaints.
BBB Business Profiles generally cover a three-year reporting period, except for customer reviews. Customer reviews posted prior to July 5, 2024, will no longer be published when they reach three years from their submission date. Customer reviews posted on/after July 5, 2024, will be published indefinitely unless otherwise voluntarily retracted by the user who submitted the content, or BBB no longer believes the review is authentic. BBB Business Profiles are subject to change at any time. If you choose to do business with this company, please let them know that you checked their record with BBB.
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business. Businesses are under no obligation to seek BBB accreditation, and some businesses are not accredited because they have not sought BBB accreditation. BBB charges a fee for BBB Accreditation. This fee supports BBB's efforts to fulfill its mission of advancing marketplace trust.