Comments RSS 
MANN BRACKEN in the headlines again with National Arbitration Forum (NAF)
Filed Under: Collections
Filed Under: Collections
I know, I know – another blog about Mann Bracken AGAIN.
I have written a handful of articles about Mann Bracken and Hanna. Out of 6000 + junk debt buyers, these are two of the worst in this country. There are so many other debt collectors to write about and I write about many other collection agencies and Mann Bracken keeps popping up. It is just a matter of time before I can pop the champagne and this slime is shut down for good. This is news – GREAT NEWS – for the consumer. BUT WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO CLOSE THESE COMPANIES? Is that possible? The ties to the government are very strong. Yes true – if you did not figure that out already.
I am shocked again by this industry and its behavior. National Arbitration Forum has been in the headlines lately. They were sued by San Francisco, being sued by a former employee (I have been in touch with her lawyer), and now this article about Accretive and the hedge fund and more.
Here is the Complaint filed by the Attorney General in Minnesota against NAF. These are amazing facts that shock even me.
http://capwiz.com/nacanet/attachments/MN_Complaint_Against_NAF.pdf
WRITE to me, COMMENT on this blog, or CALL me…..because I have personally had to deal with NAF and their corruption. This lawsuit is the beginning and time for National Arbitration Forum to be shut down.
If you know of any consumer that is fighting ANY one of the collection agencies…(and arbitration)
MANN BRACKEN
WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON
ESKANOS & ALDER
AXIANT
contact the Attorney General today.
Accretive is a family of private equity funds based in New York City that operates under the control of Cline and his associates. A number of the Accretive entities were originally organized in 1999.
Agora is a family of private equity funds based in New York City that was created by Cline and his associates through the Accretive network. The Agora entities were formed in 2007to acquire significant financial interests in the National Arbitration Forum.
Axiant is a debt collection agency in which Accretive has majority ownership and which was created by Accretive to acquire the assets of three large national debt collection law firms (Mann Bracken (based in Atlanta, Georgia), Wolpoff & Abramson (based in the District of Columbia), and Eskanos & Adler (based in California)), which eventually all merged into Mann Bracken.
Accretive, Agora, Axiant, the Forum, and Mann Bracken form a complex web of companies that compose some of the largest debt collectors and arbitrators of consumer credit card debt in the country. In 2006, the National Arbitration Forum arbitrated over 200,000 claims involving credit card and other debt issued by national banks and large corporations; in almost 60 percent of those cases, the banks, or the funds that purchased the consumer debt, were represented by Mann Bracken or Wolpoff & Abramson.
“These allegation present an incredible set of problems for consumers who are currently involved in arbitration. One suggestion I received from an attorney was to download the complete suit from the MN AG’s site. File a a stay with the NAF arbitrator based on these allegations. Make the judge involved in any confirmation hearing aware of the suit. Contact a consumer lawyer for advice and assistance. Every NAF case in the nation should be placed on hold, based on this incredible news.
We were not kidding when when named them ‘Not Always Fair’, as it appears they were not only in bed with their clients, they planned and executed a world class scam in the style of Bernie Madoff.”
New York
West Virginia
Texas
Pennsylvania
California
MINNEAPOLIS, Jul 19, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) — The National Arbitration Forum (FORUM), the largest U.S. administrator of consumer arbitrations, today announced that it will voluntarily cease to administer consumer arbitration disputes as of Friday, July 24, 2009, as part of a settlement agreement with the Minnesota Attorney General.
“The National Arbitration Forum remains committed to consumer arbitration as the best and most affordable option for consumers to resolve disputes quickly and efficiently. However, the FORUM lacks the necessary resources to defend against increasing challenges to arbitration on all fronts, including from state Attorneys General and the class action trial bar,” said Forthright CEO Mike Kelly. “Mounting legal costs, a challenging economic climate, and increased legislative uncertainty surrounding the future of arbitration have prompted the FORUM to exit the consumer arbitration arena. At this time, the costs of providing consumer arbitration services far exceed the revenue generated. Until Congress resolves the legal and legislative uncertainty the cost is simply too high for users and providers of consumer arbitration.”
Legislative proposals pending in both houses of Congress threaten to eliminate pre-dispute arbitration as an effective means of alternative dispute resolution. The Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009 (S. 931/H.R. 1020) would invalidate every pre-dispute contractual arbitration agreement that is part of a consumer, financial or franchise dispute – in effect, every contract. The Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act (S. 512/H.R. 1237) would eliminate pre-dispute mandatory arbitration in all nursing home contracts. Legislation before the House to create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (H.R. 3126) addresses arbitration and would give broad regulatory authority to restrict or eliminate all consumer arbitrations.
“The National Arbitration Forum provides fair and affordable access to justice to American consumers regardless of size of their claims. Without access to arbitration, consumer disputes will now be forced into an overcrowded and underfunded legal system, where many consumers who cannot afford attorneys will have to navigate complex court procedures,” continued Kelly. “The consequence to American consumers is that there will be no meaningful alternative to costly and unpredictable litigation.”
Notably, nothing in the Minnesota Attorney General’s complaint alleges that arbitration proceedings administered by the FORUM are unfair; the fairness of arbitration is ensured by the independence of the neutral arbitrators.
National Arbitration Forum consumer arbitration claims are decided by an independent panel of more than 1,600 highly experienced and impartial legal professionals, including former judges and experienced attorneys. FORUM neutrals are bound to a code of professional ethics, and decide cases outside of any influence from the FORUM or the other parties.
About the National Arbitration Forum (FORUM)
Founded in 1986, the National Arbitration Forum (FORUM) is a world leader in arbitration and mediation services. The FORUM provides accessible civil justice through the recruitment, selection, and management of a highly experienced and distinguished panel of over 1,600 former judges and seasoned lawyers. Now optimized by Forthright, the FORUM is the faster, lower cost, and superior alternative to litigation, that ensures parties receive the same outcomes they would in court. http://www.adrforum.com
SOURCE: National Arbitration Forum
For the National Arbitration Forum
Patrick Dorton, 202-549-7670
patrickdorton@rational360.com
The NAF are crooks, pure and simple. If those guys were Cosa Nostra, they’d already be doing time, and probably a few will.
Very interesting! I was served a judgment from Mann Bracken LLP on April 29, 2009. I responded within the required 10 days and a court date is set for Tuesday, September 22, 2009. Unfortunately, I did not know about the VOD. I wonder if it is too late for me to demand Mann Bracken LLP prove ownership of the debt?
Let me back up a bit, I received a letter from Mann Bracken LLP on February 26, 2009 indicating American Express had retained their services to collect an outstanding debt. I did not respond, but informed my debt resolution representative of the letter. A settlement was offered in early April 2009 for a lump sum payment of $4000+. I offered to make payments over 24-36 months. My offer was declined.
Next, I was delivered a judgment to which I promptly responded. Following is a synopsis of the response:
I agreed a debt is owed the ‘PLAINTIFF’, which is listed as American Express Centurion Bank. I asked the case be dismissed based on 1) The services of a debt resolution company (named in response) were retained by DEFENDANT (me) in January 2008 to avoid Chapter 7 bankruptcy. 2) PLAINTIFF (American Express) was notified of enrollment via notarized POA (copy provided). 3) A harship letter was made available to PLAINTIFF, outlining circumstances resulting in enrollment (copy provided). 4) Mann Bracken LLP, representing the PLAINTIFF, has been unwilling to be flexible and work within DEFENDANT’s financial means. Negotiation attempts have been unsuccessful. Verification of these attempts can be requested from (debt resolution company contact info).
Another settlement offer came in May 2009 – $5394, divided in to 24 monthly payments of $321.13. My financial situation prevents accepting. Further, I believe this to be an extremely inflated amount.
I will ask for verification of ownership at the hearing. If I am denied and forced to settle, I plan to offer 35% of the amount listed on the original summons (all additional fees, court costs, etc to be waived) with payments spread over 24 months beginning in Jan 2010. I will keep you posted.
I have filed complaints against American Express Centurion Bank with the FDIC and against Mann Bracken LLP with the FTC and Texas Attorney General.
Wish me luck! And I will definitely post updates
Cyndie
Lubbock, Texas
Cyndie,
Thanks for your comment. We are disgusted to read how you are dealing with Mann Bracken in court. There are a few issues here that you are dealing with all at one time.
You ask “I wonder if it is too late…” The time to ask for validation is in your answer to the complaint to the court at that time. You may be able to do an amended answer even since the 10 days have passed. However, your hearing is scheduled tomorrow and that most likely is for the judge to rule on the case.
You have acknowledged the account per se with Amex and assumed that you have to pay Mann Bracken and working with your own debt resolution company. It would be difficult to turn around quickly and deny everything since your hearing is this week.
Normally, you do not have to pay Mann Bracken any money unless they can validate the debt and even if they have documentation – that needs to be questioned. But since this is a lawsuit, it may be too late (in court).
If you can get a lawyer to help you with this today that could help. See http://www.budhibbs.com for lawyers in Texas.
Sorry that we do not have a positive comment for you.
~Next Level Credit~
I can not stress enough how QUICKLY people need to act when served with a lawsuit !!!
Even if it is just a Motion for Extension/Expansion of Time, papers need to be filed with the court, such as answer, denial, affirmative defense, counter and cross-complaints.
Time is against the consumer – by design. The vested interests put all the forces they can against the consumer…..time, rights, burdens. However, the Appeals Courts run the show and will take the time to meticulously apply legal reasoning, intent, and prior caselaw to set the guidelines for the lower courts – however THEY TOO must be asked for clarifications of law and rulings, and timely !!!
Apathy, passivity, and naievity are the monetary vacumn cleaners biggest weapons…winning by default is what they are good at, and NO CONSUMER SHOULD LET THAT HAPPEN. File, file, file, document, document, document, and ask, ask ASK !!!..in WRITING.
The time value of money is this…if it is going to cost them more than they are going to get out of something, they won’t pursue it in most cases. Consumers who don’t pay have a reason, they don’t feel they owe the money claimed, or they can’t afford to pay.
In reality, consumers have suffered retrievable damages in most cases where the bullies can be gone after..in some cases these offset or even surpass the amount claimed. Going before a judge establishes IF you owe, how MUCH you owe, if you are entitled to offsets, and if you are found to owe something…IF ASKED, the Court SHOULD let you set up a repayment plan according to your financial condition and ability..maybe even $5 or $10 a month. On a several thousand dollar judgment, the bullies may win the war but they lose the battle if they were going after cold hard quick cash from you. BUT YOU HAVE TO PUT A LOT OF THINGS IN WRITING if you want a good outcome. They make TONS off those who are passive and don’t do anything !!! Consumers MUST be pro-active and make noise on their own behalf.
Just think, if the Collection agencies were not driven by GREED and collected on 97% of arbitration hearings they may still be raking in millions. I had to deal with Eskanos and Adler in 2001 then Mann Bracken in 2008. I defeated both in court as they did not have barely any information about my account let alone a paper trail to prove what I owed.
I in turn had every scrap of paper they sent and transcripts of the demeaning and abusive phone calls. I proved both times that the debts were outside the statute of limitations, with one already being paid in full.
Please consumers, educate yourselves to the collection process and empower yourselves with the knowledge that the courts are not out to GET YOU, my local civil court was of great help, they can not answer legal questions but can guide you through process.
Re: Mann Bracken
They filed a judgment on my husband for an AMEX debt, we paid the bill in full, they now refuse to release the judgement. I have the zero balance letter from AMEX but the court says that I must have documentation from Mann Bracken to release judgment. Mann Bracken says they no longer have AMEX accounts so will not talk to me. I have reported to FTC and CA Bar. What can I do?