LOS ANGELES, Oct. 5, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- Famed class action attorney, Thomas V. Girardi, of Erin Brockovich notoriety, and his firm Girardi/Keese, and Los Angeles attorney Keith M. Fromm, have filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, in Los Angeles, against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. seeking, potentially, billions in damages.
The lawsuit alleges that Wells Fargo committed thousands of instances of extortion, theft, mail fraud and racketeering, against its hundreds of thousands of ARM borrowers throughout the U.S.
This class action is the latest of many accusations assailing how Wells Fargo treats its customers. Wells Fargo's reputation has recently been tarnished by its own admission (and payment of $185 million in fines and penalties), that it opened up 3.5 million fake accounts in the names of its customers, resulting in illegal fees and charges to such customers. Another lawsuit charges that Wells Fargo cheated 500,000 of its customers out of millions of dollars in unnecessary insurance premiums for car loans. Another alleges it swindled thousands of its customers out of fees the bank charged to lock in mortgage rates.
This latest class action complaint alleges that Wells Fargo intentionally violated its duties under a provision in its own standard loan documents known as Section 4(F). Section 4(F) requires the bank to deliver certain mandatory consumer protections, including the phone number and title of a "single point of contact", who can answer any questions from a borrower, before the effective date of any increases in the interest rates or payments on such ARM's. The purpose of the provision is to provide borrowers with personnel who can assist them with alternatives to foreclosure.
The complaint alleges that Wells Fargo intentionally did not comply with the provision 4(F) that Wells Fargo itself drafted, so that it could thwart the consumer protections contained in such provision. Such an alleged intentional non-compliance by Wells Fargo, according to the complaint, resulted in the illegal collection by Wells Fargo of many millions or billions of dollars, and the loss of thousands of borrowers' homes, which may have been saved had they received the consumer protection benefits intended to be afforded by Section 4(F) and its "single point of contact" requirement.
The case is LINDA MORAVEC VARGA v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and Does 2-10, Case No. 2:16-cv-09650-DMG-KS.
For information, please contact Keith M. Fromm at email@example.com, or 310-472-1049.
SOURCE Law Offices of Keith M. Fromm