logo

Debtconsolidationcare.com - the USA consumer forum

Forums
  • Latest topic

The Lombardo, Davis & Goldman Firm

Date: Mon, 09/20/2010 - 07:20

Submitted by anonymous
on Mon, 09/20/2010 - 07:20

Posts: 202330 Credits: [Donate]

Total Replies: 12


I received a call from Lombardo on 9/10 and again on 9/13. On 9/10 I sent a cease and desist for them not to reach me by phone at the office and despite that they called on 9/13. (I also FAXED a copy of the letter so their office would have had it well before the close of business on Friday) I've been threatened with legal action, the "firm" is misrepresenting themselves as a law office and now I received a letter through the USPS from them claiming to be the collection agency in charge of recovering the debt.

Thus far, there are three violations of the FDCPA.

The original creditor, Sandpoint, gave me a loan of $200. With finance charges the total was $260. I've paid $120 so far towards the loan so for principal I should only be responsible for another $80. I offered to pay that and Sandpoint never acknowledged the offer and instead nearly a month later Lombardo is collecting on the debt. The outstanding debt was now up to $500 from $200.

In a certified letter I sent on Saturday in response to the letter I received from Lombardo, I requested the following:

a) Demonstrate that they either purchased the debt or were assigned the debt by the original creditor

b) Prove to me that they are licensed collection agency. In Illinois, you must be licensed in the state. In the state licensee list they are not listed. They are also not incorporated in the state they are supposedly based out of . (New York) If they are licensed, they were to then provide me with the license number.

c) Inform me how they came to the amount they are collecting. Legally, a payday lender can only charge $15.50 per every $100 borrowed in Illinois. $60 in finance charges for a $200 loan is excessive. So now that the debt is $500 something isn't quite adding up.

d) Provide me with documentation (as in a contract) that I would have signed for the original debt.


you asked for a lot of thinks that they are not required to send you. They only have to send you a copy of a contract...they are not required to send you license information or that they purchased the debt.,

You are not understanding IL interest...

State Legal Status
Lending of payday loan is considered legal in the State of Illinois.

Loan Specifications


  • Maximun Amount of Loan - Less than $1000 or 25% monthly gross income
  • Term of Loan - 13-45 days
  • Maximum Rate of Finance and Fees- $15.50 per $100
  • Finance Charge on $100 loan for a 14 day period - $15.50
  • APR for $100 loan for a 14 day period - 403%

It is $15.50 for a 14 day period....not for as long as you have the loan.


lrhall41

Submitted by SOAPLADY on Mon, 09/20/2010 - 07:51

( Posts: 17315 | Credits: )


Wait, so they don't even have to prove that they were assigned by the creditor or purchased the debt showing they have any right to collect?

I need to know how they came up with that trumped up figure of $500 - that is absolutely ridiculous.

Also, the interest / fees were calculated based on paying the loan back in 14 days. So no, I'm actually interpreting IL law correctly. The company wasn't lending within IL law. Over two weeks time they were going to charge DOUBLE the allowable interest. The loan went longer, with roll overs which are not allowed, and more interest was incurred. Again, over a 14 day period the amount of interest incurred is $15.50 per $100, however this company was charging $60 per $100 every two weeks.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Mon, 09/20/2010 - 08:10

( Posts: | Credits: )


I have, and I have also read case precedent after researching topics listed in this forum to where people have requested this information and used this against the collectors.

Yeah, it's a lot of information but if debt collection was a simple as making a fancy logo and sending out 30 letters a day, every day for a month and claiming to be responsible for collecting against a defaulted account with XYZ than everyone would be doing it.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Mon, 09/20/2010 - 08:27

( Posts: | Credits: )


I've discovered that the Lombardo and Goldman of Lombardo, Davis & Goldman are not real. While some have alleged their identities I've seen some homework done on these folks and the results were rather surprising:

First, a disclaimer - I am not here to slander anyone. However, if the comments made here in the blog below are accurate (and hey, it's the Internet) then I'd be concerned about dealing with this company directly:


http://phoneowner.info/Number.aspx/8884627852


From my posts there:


I gathered the following information by going to the New York State Unified Court System. In the state of New York attorneys do not have bar numbers, they have registration numbers. The numbers referenced are from the bios of the attorneys I pulled after performing a search on the site using information supplied from the previous comments above, assuming they were providing valid information in an attempt to prove the legitimacy of the collector. To double check my work, you are welcome to go to the following site:

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/attorney/AttorneySearch


Esther Goldman's registration number is 1578517. According to the Unified Court System, she got it in 1934, 76 years ago. She's deceased now, though, and I cannot imagine how hold she would have been in October 2009 representing someone regarding a case.

Then there is a Michael Lombardo that is currently registered - 1707942. He is a teacher at the University of New York - Buffalo but his registered practice is DUKE, HOLZMAN, PHOTIADIS & GRESENS, LLP. While it is possible that this particular Lombardo is affiliated with LDG Firm, there is no specific proof that he is.

http://www.dhpglaw.com/attorneys/attorneys.asp?id=17

http://www.buffalo.edu/directory/find-people- ... erpage=&start=0

In the attorney's bio there is mention of lectures done at the University and that he works on creditor's rights, primarily when bankruptcy is involved.


Update:

I have an e-mail now from Mr. Michael J. Lombardo with DUKE, HOLZMAN, PHOTIADIS & GRESENS, LLP that indicates he is not affiliated with The Lombardo, Davis & Goldman Firm, which is dated September 22nd 2010.

For the record, Michael J. Lombardo works for the firm Duke, Holzman, etc - not Lombardo, Davis, Goldman. Mr. Lombardo *is* an instructor at the University of Buffalo. For arguments' sake he teaches at the Jacob's building - Accounting and Law.

http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/building?id=jacobs

From Michael J. Lombardo's bio on the Duke, Holzman site:

Lecturer - State University of New York at Buffalo (8/81-Present)

Responsible for developing, teaching and grading undergraduate students a course in Legal Environment and Business Law.

Member-Western New York Real Estate Investors Group

Member-Real Estate Contract Revision Committee (Erie County Bar Association)


The remaining Michael Lombardos have also been verified to not be affiliated with the The Lombardo, Davis & Goldman Firm - a name clearly established to suggest to others that they are a legal firm.




I'm not about to suggest that any other comments made by other users here on this forum about this company are accurate. I cannot imagine there being too many Michael J. Lombardo's that teach at the University of Buffalo and practice law - so it stands to reason that the Lombardo I pulled off the Unified Court System is one and the same. Funny, though, how I was able to determine with him directly that he has no affiliation (direct or otherwise) with this firm.


And then Esther. Poor, poor Esther. If she is truly the "Goldman" of the firm than she must be friends with Elvis.


Let us know what comes back on the VOD letter.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Thu, 09/23/2010 - 12:51

( Posts: | Credits: )


They have not contacted me again. They received my letter in the mail on September 22nd - I sent it certified with return receipt. I will send another letter out by the middle of next week if I have not received an actual debt validation letter from them. They did send me a letter in the mail within the first five days of contact - they called it their debt validation letter but in it they did not include the mini miranda nor did they offer me a way to dispute the debt. I am forwarding a copy of the letter to an attorney for possible FDCPA violations in addition to the call I received the day after I told them I wasn't allowed to take calls at work.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Mon, 09/27/2010 - 08:45

( Posts: | Credits: )


i just got a call from someone named Jim Fasso from Lombardo 718-418-8342. He tried throwing big words out at me. I said to send me something in wrtiting because I wasn't familiar with what he was even talking about. He wanted to email me proof of whatever it is their office claims to have against me. When I said I prefer postal service mail, he said they will just garnish my wages. Empty threats!!

Less than 5 minutes after hanging up with him, I got a call from a "Mrs. Corbett" in their Finalization Department, her number is 716-335-9829. I told her the same thing....send me something in the mail. She said their lawfirm does not send anything in the mail because of the Anthrax scare!! What a BS excuse!!


lrhall41

Submitted by on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 13:58

( Posts: | Credits: )