The state found a pattern of falsifying fee affidavits in motions for default by claiming services McGavic did not perform.
McGavic also is alleged to have arbitrarily increased fees based on the amount of money claimed or where the claim was filed.
Another allegation is that McGavic purposely misidentified or confused the identity of creditors to delay payment and thereby increase the fees and interest he could charge. He was accused of repeatedly calling debtors who had exercised a right not to be contacted further and did not provide specific information about the debts when it was requested.
Boy, that sounds familiar, especially the last paragraph. Let's consider just a few of the unlawful actions Mrs. Schnauzer and I have witnessed from Ingram and NCO:
* Failure to provide written notification regarding a debt--Under the FDCPA, debt collectors are required to give written notice of an alleged debtor's rights under the law. This is called a "mini Miranda" notice in the debt-collection world. The McGavic firm apparently made it a practice to ignore this requirement. Based on our experience, the Ingram firm does the same thing. We never received a "mini Miranda" notice and were completely caught off guard when Ingram representatives started calling us on the phone. Collectors, of course, like it when their targets are caught off guard, and that probably explains why written notification often is not sent. Angie Ingram stated under oath in our lawsuit that her firm sent the notice two days before calling us. But Mrs. Schnauzer testified under oath that one of Ingram's representatives admitted in a phone conversation that the firm had not prepared or sent written notice. In my conversations with two Ingram reps, which I tape recorded, neither ever mentioned a written notification or their obligation to send one.
* Confusing the identity of creditors--This apparently was a favorite of the McGavic firm, and we experienced a similar tactic from Ingram. Ingram did not try to confuse us regarding creditors, but it did lie to us about who the firm represented. Ingram reps repeatedly told us that they had been hired by American Express, that Angie Ingram was American Express' lawyer. Discovery in our lawsuit has shown that was a blatant lie and clearly meets the legal definition of fraud. In fact, Ingram was hired by NCO, and the firm admitted it had no documents from American Express to prove I even had an AMEX card, much less that I owed a debt on one. Obviously, it's an effective tactic for a debt-collection law firm to say it has been hired by a well-known national credit-card company--as opposed to being hired by NCO, which an alleged debtor probably has never heard of. This violates federal and state laws, but debt collectors want money--whether they can prove it's actually owed or not--and they'll do most anything to get it.
* Threatening to sell our house--Ingram reps told us on multiple occasions that they could sell our house "on the courthouse steps." Never mind that the alleged debt was in my name only, and my wife and I jointly own our house. In fact, an Ingram rep told my wife they were going to sell her house, not long after admitting Mrs. S. had nothing to do with the alleged debt. I've yet to see a statute that says a jointly owned house can be sold in its entirety--on the courthouse steps, or anywhere else--to satisfy an alleged credit-card debt.
McGavic's law practice did not collapse overnight; his fall was years in the making. Williamette Week, in the Portland area, reported three years ago about numerous federal lawsuits the firm had settled. McGavic apparently treated the settlements as the cost of doing business and went about his unlawful way. The misconduct finally became so blatant that the state attorney general and state bar stepped in, shutting down the firm.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
