Foreclosure Defense Florida

Are The Law Offices of David J. Stern Even Law Offices At All?

Foreclosure-mill-pinellasThe “Law Offices of David J. Stern” is perhaps the biggest, by volume, Foreclosure Mill in the State of Florida. The general consensus in the legal community and my personal opinion is that the pleading and legal work that bears the identification of the Law Offices of David J. Stern is sloppy and unsophisticated at best and merely word processed non-legal form documents spit out by a computer that no lawyer could possibly sign his bar number to at worst.

I’m particularly offended by the “signatures” that are found on the legal documents submitted by the Law Offices of David J. Stern.   When an attorney signs a document, it’s supposed to be an affirmation and an oath and a professional responsibility.   But take a look at the arrogant, sloppy mess of a mark that appear on Stern pleadings.   Those non-signature sloppy marks are an offense to me and to the court.   I don’t think they should qualify as a signature under the rules of civil procedure and even if they might meet the technical definition, if I were a judge, I would strike the pleading just because I find them so arrogant and offensive….I would also be questioning the lawyer who supposedly signed the pleading to determine if that lawyer that allegedly signed them wants to take credit for the “signature”

And now comes the revelations contained within the prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for an entity known as   DJSP Enterprises….read on…

DJSP Enterprises, Inc. (” DJSP”, ” we,” ” us” or ” our”) is a holding company whose primary business operations are
conducted through three wholly owned subsidiaries, DJS Processing, LLC (” DJS LLC”), Professional Title and Abstract Company of
Florida, LLC (” PTA LLC”), and Default Servicing, LLC (” DSI LLC”) of DAL Group LLC (” DAL”), a company in which DJSP holds
a controlling interest. DAL, through its operating subsidiaries, provides non-legal services supporting residential real estate foreclosure, other related legal actions and lender owned real estate (” REO”) services, primarily in Florida.

Now what exactly are those “non-legal services supporting residential real estate foreclosure”?   Is this the legal pleadings and real work involved in a Stern foreclosure case?   Where is the line between the legal work and non-legal services?

What role does the ” Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corp.”, the “blank check company which has its principal business and/or material operations in China.” have in the prosecution of foreclosure cases in front of Circuit Court Judges throughout Florida?

What exactly were the “non-legal business and assets” that David J. Stern and the Law Offices of David J. Stern (” DJS”) transferred to the DAL Group   for:

“(i) $58,500,080 in cash; (ii) $52,469,000 in a promissory note issued by DAL to DJS (the ” Stern Deferral Note”); (iii) 1,200,00 DAL Common Units; (iv) 1,666,667 DAL Series A Preferred Units; (v) 3,133,333 DAL Series B Preferred Units; and (vi) the right to receive $35 million in post-closing cash.”

As a result of the Transaction, DAL acquired membership interests in the three limited liability companies (DJS LLC, PTA
LLC and DSI LLC) that together constitute a provider of non-legal residential mortgage foreclosure processing and other services,
principally in the state of Florida.

During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the Company’s revenues from mortgage foreclosure related services, net of revenue from client reimbursements, decreased by $0.6 million, or 2%, to $27.6 million, compared to $28.1 million for the same period lastyear. (What exactly are the kind of mortgage foreclosure related services that a non-lawyer can provide that would generate $27.6 million dollars in three months?)

Our REO liquidation business has a sole customer
through which we generated $3.3 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $1.9 million in the same period last
year, primarily due to an increase in the number of REO liquidation files which grew to 1,728 files in the first quarter of 2010, an
increase of 56%, from 1,111 files in the first quarter of 2009. (Who exactly is this undisclosed sole customer that made this much money off the backs of consumers and shouldn’t the judges granting foreclosure be concerned about who this is?)

Mr. Stern may encounter
conflicts of interest in the execution of his duties on behalf of us. These conflicts may not be resolved in a manner favorable to us. For
example, he may be precluded by his ethical obligations as an attorney or may otherwise be reluctant to take actions on behalf of us
that are in its best interests but are not in the best interests of DJS, his law firm, or its clients. Further, as a licensed attorney, he may
be obligated to take actions on behalf of DJS or its clients that are not in our best interests.

DJS LLC has one law firm customer in Florida, DJS. Each foreclosure, bankruptcy, eviction, litigation, and other mortgage
default related case file referred to DJS will typically have a fixed fee associated with it that is based on a schedule established by
government sponsored entities, such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. DJS LLC will be paid a fixed fee by DJS for the services it
renders to DJS.

Regulation of the legal profession may constrain DJS LLC’s, PTA LLC’s and DSI LLC’s s operations, and numerous issues
arising out of that regulation, its interpretation or evolution could impair our ability to provide professional services to
customers and reduce revenues and profitability.

Each state has laws, regulations and codes of professional responsibility that govern the conduct and obligations of attorneys
to their clients and the courts. Adherence to those codes of professional responsibility are a requirement to retaining a license to
practice law in the licensing jurisdiction. The boundaries of the ” practice of law,” however, can be indistinct, vary from one state to
another and are the product of complex interactions among state law, bar association standards and constitutional law as formulated
by the U.S. Supreme Court. Many states define the practice of law to include the giving of advice and opinions regarding another
person’s legal rights, the preparation of legal documents or the preparation of court documents for another person.
Although we are
not aware of any ruling or interpretation of laws, regulations or other applicable standards that would result in the operations that DJS
LLC will perform being considered the practice of law, we cannot say with certainty that no existing law, regulation or standard will
be interpreted to produce that result,
or that a new law, regulation or standard leading to that result will not be adopted in the future.
In addition, all states and the American Bar Association prohibit attorneys from sharing fees for legal services with non-attorneys, so
that if any aspect of our business is deemed to constitute the practice of law, it would not be possible for DJS LLC, PTA LLC or DSI
LLC to perform those services.


 

5 Comments

  • avirani0203 says:

    The Law Offices of David J. Stern have blurred the line related to UPL. I believe that the law firm should be referred for investigation. See The Florida Bar v. We The People Forms, 883 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. S.Ct. 2004). This case appears to be on point.

  • J.R. Homeowner says:

    Reading Stern’s prospectus could lead one to conclude that he has simply adopted the businesss model employed by banks and has either:

    A. Employed non-attorneys to *pretend* to be attorneys.

    B. Relegated a few attorneys in this scheme into the role of “robo-signers”.

    When you encounter as many disclaimers as Stern has in that prospectus, especially disclaimers that specifically address the adverse effect that enforcement of *law* might have on that business, then the question of the illegitimacy of that business would seem to be self evident.

  • J.R. Homeowner says:

    Perhaps we could distill this perspectus down to its essence:

    “We are proposing to engage in a business that is likely be found to be unlawful. Until it is found to be such, there is a LOT of money to be made. Would you like to invest?”

  • PJ says:

    “Our REO liquidation business has a sole customer
    through which we generated $3.3 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $1.9 million in the same period last
    year, primarily due to an increase in the number of REO liquidation files which grew to 1,728 files in the first quarter of 2010, an
    increase of 56%, from 1,111 files in the first quarter of 2009. (Who exactly is this undisclosed sole customer that made this much money off the backs of consumers and shouldn’t the judges granting foreclosure be concerned about who this is?)”

    Some prospectus filed with SEC, you are correct who exactly is the “sole customer”???? There needs to be a deep investigation into the people connected with DS… share holders in the companies and entities named on all the REO property connected to this “sole customer”…

  • ForeclosureHamlet says:

    This is exactly why this “foreclosure crisis” is so much deeper than anyone can imagine. Most are distracted by the highly effective propagandized blame-shifting to the “deadbeat borrower who shirked their obligation.”

    WHERE IS HOMELAND SECURITY? Can’t they follow the post-foreclosure sale money?

    ForeclosureHamlet.org

Leave a Reply