CFPB Announces Action Against Monster Loans, Lend Tech Loans, and Associated Student Loan Debt-Relief Companies

January 9, 2020, the Bureau filed suit against several companies and individuals involved in offering student loan debt-relief services for allegedly obtaining consumer reports illegally, charging unlawful advance fees, and engaging in deceptive conduct. The Bureau’s action is against a mortgage lender called Chou Team Realty, LLC, which does business as Monster Loans (Monster Loans); an allegedly sham mortgage brokerage called Lend Tech Loans, Inc.; and several student loan debt-relief companies, including Docu Prep Center, Inc., which does business as DocuPrep Center and Certified Document Center; Certified Doc Prep Services, LP; Assure Direct Services, Inc.; Direct Document Solutions, Inc.; Secure Preparation Services, Inc.; and Docs Done Right, Inc. The Bureau is also taking action against several individuals, including Bilal Abdelfattah, who is also known as Belal Abdelfattah and Bill Abdel; Thomas “Tom” Chou; Sean Cowell; Robert Hoose; Eduardo “Ed” Martinez; Jawad Nesheiwat; Frank Anthony Sebreros; and David Sklar.

As described in the complaint, the Bureau alleges that between 2015 and 2017, Monster Loans violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by obtaining consumer-report information for millions of consumers with student loan debt from a major credit bureau on the pretense that the company planned to use the information to offer mortgage loans to consumers when, in fact, Monster Loans provided the reports to the student loan debt-relief companies to use in marketing their services. The Bureau also alleges that, between 2017 and at least early 2019, Lend Tech Loans similarly violated the FCRA by obtaining consumer report information for millions of consumers for use in marketing student loan debt-relief services.

The Bureau further alleges that, while offering and providing student loan debt-relief services, certain defendants violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (CFPA) and the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) by making deceptive representations about the companies’ services. Specifically, the Bureau alleges that certain defendants misrepresented to consumers that they would have their interest rates reduced, have their credit scores improved, and that the U.S. Department of Education would become their servicer. The Bureau also alleges that certain defendants unlawfully charged and collected at least $15 million in fees before consumers received any adjustment to their student loans and made any payments toward their adjusted loans.

The Bureau filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Jan. 9, 2020. The Bureau’s complaint seeks an injunction against the defendants, as well as damages, redress to consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and the imposition of civil money penalties. The complaint also names several defendants in order to obtain relief and seeks disgorgement of those relief defendants’ ill-gotten gains.

The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have violated the law.

The complaint is available at: https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_chou-team-realty-monster-loans_complaint_2020-01.pdf.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

December 8, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part VI Two Things Debtors Should Know About the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), Including a Primer on Chapter 11 Confirmation Introduction This series focuses on four bankruptcy-related bills that were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019.1 One bill, the Small...
Members
September 29, 2019
By Katherine B. Brewer, Esq. (Westerville, OH) One of the first things we focus on in law school (other than the Rule Against Perpetuities, which always brings back fond memories), is that our clients come first. We learn the complexities of the law, memorize rule statements, and read thousands of pages of case law in order to learn how best...
Members
August 25, 2019
By Cameron Kelly & Michael Carroll, Law Students, The University of Texas School of Law I. Starting the Journey Instead of starting class by cold-calling people, Professor Westbrook chose to suspend my terror briefly. While I was thankful for the reprieve from what would inevitably be a disappointing cold call, I was more thankful for what he had to say....
June 28, 2020
By Anthony J. Gomez, CPA, former extern to the Honorable John P. Gustafson, Northern District of Ohio at Toledo Click here for Part 1 Click here for Part 2 IV. The Hanging Paragraph’s effect on Interest Rates When the hanging paragraph is applicable, creditors are entitled to the full value of their secured claims as . . . It looks...
Members
branson1
March 26, 2023
The Justice Department, in partnership with the Department of Education, recently announced new guidelines that loosen the strict application of the “undue hardship” exceptionwhen defending a student loan dischargeability action. This new guidance is a game changer. In the past the Department of Justice narrowly applied the undue hardship exception when defending discharge of student loans to the extent that...
Members
August 23, 2020
NCLC’s Executive Director Rich Dubois and NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson are calling on Congress and federal regulators to take action to prevent an impending foreclosure crisis in communities of color, in an opinion editorial published yesterday in The Hill. The op-ed highlights how the cumulative impact of decades of housing policy discrimination on African American homeownership, coupled with...
gendron-1
September 17, 2023
“Perhaps the most obvious problem with this instructional language is that it refers to outdated services.”
Members
March 29, 2020
By Ken Siomos, Staff Attorney for Marsha L. Combs-Skinner (Newman, IL) A small part of the recently passed “Cares Act” is the ability of Chapter 13 debtors experiencing a “material financial hardship” as a result of the covid-19 pandemic to modify their plan to 84 months.i Many Chapter 13 Trustee’s are likely anticipating a series of Chapter 13 Plan defaults...
November 10, 2019
By C. Kenneth Still, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Retired (1968-2015) January 2, 1968, my first day as Trustee for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Southern and Winchester Divisions. I really didn’t know what I was doing or why I wanted the appointment. But there I was, duly appointed and ready to go but where...
Members
DeCarlo01
October 2, 2022
So, what happens to post-petition appreciation of assets during a Chapter 13? Does the Debtor get to keep the money? Or does the Chapter 13 Trustee get it for the benefit of creditors? That was the question for the Court in In re Klein, 2022 WL 3902822 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2022). The question in Klein is a bit different than...
Members