Consumer Rights

Christopher M. Lefebvre, Esq. practices family, bankruptcy and consumer protection law with his father in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Chris is a member of the debtor/creditor committee of the Rhode Island Bar Association and is a frequent speaker on consumer matters. He was the 1995 recipient of the Rhode Island Bar Association's Pro Bono Publico Award for his commitment to equal access to justice for the poor. To date, his largest case was the Sears bankruptcy class action suit where 190,000 former debtors received restitution in excess of $175 million. Chris received his B.S. from Boston College and his J.D. from Suffolk University Law School.CASES OF INTEREST:Melfi v. WMC Mortgage Corp., 568 F.3d 309 (1st Cir. 2009) : TILA class action case where mortgage company left spaces on model form blank for date of refinancing and date of actual deadline for rescission. District Court held that these technical deficiencies did not violate TILA and First Circuit affirmed. Petition for Rehearing en banc and/or Panel Rehearing filed 6/25/09. If denied, Plaintiff intends to seek a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.Bonney v. Washington Mutual Bank, 596 F.Supp.2d 173 (D.Mass. 2009): Borrower alleged that mortgage company's failure to include the transaction date on the notices of rescission violated TILA. Although the magistrate judge agreed that such a notice stated a claim, the District Court disagreed and called omitting such information "merely technical."Tenney v. Deutsche Bank Trust Corp., 2009 WL 415510 (D.Mass. 2009): Borrower signed a "Certificate of Confirmation of Notice of Right to Rescind."at the closing which both "confirmed" that he would not exercise his right to rescind and stated that the three business days for rescission had already elapsed, when they had not. District Court held that the Borrower had stated a TILA claim and case would not be dismissed.Deandrade v. Trans Union LLC, 523 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2008): Consumer litigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) regarding the credit bureaus' alleged failure to reinvestigate and delete a disputed debt from consumer's credit report.Megitt v. Indymac Bank, F.S.B., 547 F.Supp.2d 56 (D.Mass. 2008): TILA class action case regarding blank spaces on model form.Dixon v. Calusa Investments, LLC, 554 F.Supp.2d 139, (D.R.I. 2008): Consumer brought a putative class action against a creditor, claiming that it had violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in sending out various mailers.In re Chiappone, 2007 WL 4178510 (Bankr.D.Conn. 2007): Successful adversary litigation on behalf of non-debtor wife and her divorce attorney regarding non-dischargeability of certain domestic support obligations and related attorney fees arising from Rhode Island Family Court divorce decree.Dixon v. Shamrock Financial Corp., 482 F.Supp.2d 172 (D.Mass.2007): Consumer sued under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) for creditor sending solicitation offering free consultation for purposes of, inter alia, restructuring his debt.Sullivan v. Greenwood Credit Union, 499 F.Supp.2d 83 (D.Mass. 2007): Class action on behalf of creditors who received a "pre-approved" letter for a home loan from credit union, claiming that the credit union unlawfully accessed the credit reports of the recipients.Park v. Ford Motor Co., 928 A.2d 469 (R.I. 2007): Consumer class action against truck manufacturer that failed to provide security system listed on window sticker as a standard feature.In re Wilding, 475 F.3d 428 (1st Cir. 2007): Bankruptcy Court and B.A.P. both held that Debtor could not avoid judicial lien that had already been satisfied, but the First Circuit reversed and held that if the lien existed at the filing of the bankruptcy petition and was not satisfied until afterwards the lien could be avoided.Palmer v. Champion Mortg., 465 F.3d 24, (1st Cir. 2006): TILA litigation where borrower alleged notice of rescission was confusing because dates which were completed had already passed by time borrower received notices in mail.In re Montes, 2006 WL 3898386 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2006): On Debtor's Complaint, Banrkuptcy Court held any obligation for car repairs could not be deemed an extension of the original retail installment contract and was merely an unsecured claim discharged in bankruptcyMorrissey v. Webster Bank, N.A., 417 F.Supp.2d 183 (D.Mass. 2006): Consumer who was not customer of bank brought action against bank, challenging adequacy of fee notices posted on automatic teller machines (ATMs) owned by bank under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act.Belini v. Washington Mut. Bank, FA, 412 F.3d 17 (1st Cir. 2005): As matter of first impression, TILA permits damages claim based on lender's alleged failure to respond properly to borrower's notice of rescission.In re Watson, 403 F.3d 1(1st Cir 2005): Litigated to the First Circuit issue of whether or not cost of private school tuition for Chapter 13 debtors' minor children was "reasonably necessary" expense so as to be included in "disposable income" available to debtors for payments under their chapter 13 plan (no longer relevant under BAPCPA).Hoefs v. CACV of Colorado, LLC, 365 F.Supp.2d 69 (D.Mass. 2005): Consumer brought action against collection agency, law firm, and lawyer alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and state law - arbitration compelled.In re Ladds,2005 WL 1365078 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2005): Bankruptcy Court denied non-debtor spouse's request for abstention to allow litigation regarding litigation against debtor wife regarding non-dischargeability of certain credit card debt to proceed in Rhode Island Family Court.Rodrigues v. Members Mortgage Co., Inc., 323 F.Supp.2d 202 (D.Mass. 2004): TILA class action against mortgage company and lender alleging violation of disclosure requirements in federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Massachusetts Consumer Credit Cost Disclosure Act (CCCDA).Barrett v. Avco Financial Services Management Co., 292 B.R. 1 (D.Mass. 2003): Class action to recover for creditor's alleged practice of attempting to collect discharged prepetition debts pursuant to "reaffirmation agreements" which did not satisfy statutory requirements.Mann v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp., 316 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003): Chapter 13 debtor-mortgagors sued to recover for mortgagee's alleged violations of automatic stay.Arruda v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 310 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2002): Former Chapter 7 debtors brought putative class action against creditor-retailer, its affiliated entity, and retailer's law firm, alleging that defendants violated the Bankruptcy Code, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and/or state law by entering into post-discharge redemption agreements with plaintiffs without bankruptcy court approval.In re Lamanna, 285 B.R. 347 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2002): Litigation regarding dischargeability of student loan obligations where Bankruptcy Court adopted the "hybrid approach" to student loan dischargeability, whereby the undue hardship analysis is applied to a debtor's educational debt on a loan-by-loan basis.In re Singleton, 284 B.R. 322 (D.R.I. 2002): Bankruptcy Court could only certify debtor class from Rhode Island district regarding creditor's alleged violation of discharge injunction in connection with reaffirmation agreements.In re Larocque, 283 B.R. 640 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2002): Bankruptcy court exercised its discretion to deny enforcement of arbitration clause and retained jurisdiction over TILA dispute.In re Mann, 249 B.R. 831, (BAP 1st Cir. 2000): Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed that consumer debtor could "strip off" wholly undersecured second mortgage on residential real property and treat it as unsecured.Conley v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 222 B.R. 181 (D.Mass. 1998): At the time, the largest class action case in bankruptcy court history, holding Sears liable for obtaining unauthorized reaffirmation agreements from Debtors and failing to file them with various bankruptcy courts.In re Kheng, 202 B.R. 538 (Bkrtcy.D.R.I. 1996): Debtor allowed to "strip off" portion of nonresidential real estate mortgage that was undersecured and continue to pay agreed to monthly mortgage payments for term of note under chapter 13 plan.

Consumer fraud attorney Robert Murphy is a trial lawyer who practices in the areas of consumer litigation in Florida and across the country. In over 25 years of practice, he has actively litigated cases under almost every aspect of the federal and Florida consumer protection laws. He has acted as lead counsel in the litigation of cases both individually and on a class basis in almost every venue in Florida. He is dedicated to advancing the consumer rights of Americans through both courtroom advocacy and the education of families and individuals concerning consumer protection laws.

Practice Areas: Consumer Class Action, Consumer Protection, Complex Civil Litigation Rachel Bentley has dedicated her practice to advocating on behalf of consumers who have been victims of corporate wrongdoing and scams. Ms. Bentley is an attorney with Gordon and Partners class action team and litigates consumer protection cases and complex consumer fraud class action cases. Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Bentley prosecuted violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act as an Assistant Attorney General in the Consumer Protection Division of the Florida Attorney General’s Office. Before serving as an Assistant Attorney General, Ms. Bentley was the Senior Staff Attorney of the Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County, Inc.’s Consumer Advocacy Unit, where she protected the rights of disadvantaged members of the community and represented indigent consumers who were wronged by businesses and fraudsters. Ms. Bentley is a Co-Chair of the Florida Bar’s Consumer Protection Law Committee’s Legislative Subcommittee and serves on the Board of Directors of the Young Lawyers Section of the Palm Beach County Bar Association. She is a member of the National Association of Consumer Advocates and a scholar of the National Consumer Law Center. Ms. Bentley earned her undergraduate degree from Florida State University and Juris Doctor from Florida International University School of Law.

Craig has been a protecting consumers’ rights nationwide for more than 15 years, focusing his practice on lawsuits brought under consumer-protection statutes like the Fair Credit Reporting Act. He helps consumers enforce their rights regarding not only the inaccuracies that pervade credit and background-check reports, but also as to reporting companies’ and employers’ failures to abide by the law in selling and using those reports. He also has represented clients with problems relating to identity theft, mortgages, and disputes with auto sellers and finance companies. Litigating mainly class-action cases, Craig has represented thousands of consumers in successfully obtaining millions in benefits for class members and has been appointed class counsel by numerous courts across the country. He is licensed to practice law in four states, and maintains a national practice. As a member of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, Craig assists in educating other lawyers on all aspects of consumer litigation, from discovery, to raising and briefing key issues, and through settlement value and case resolution. He also serves as NACA’s Chair for Virginia, a position he has held since 2018. Before joining Consumer Litigation Associates, Craig practiced complex and class-action litigation for ten years at one of the country’s most-successful boutique firms. There, he developed extensive knowledge of the FCRA as well as class-action procedure, having handled nearly every aspect of consumer class actions from intake, to drafting complaints and discovery, successfully defeating dispositive motions, obtaining class certification, valuing cases, and negotiating settlements.

Daniel Schlanger is a partner at Kakalec & Schlanger, LLP, where he heads the firm's consumer practice. His practice focuses on representing victims of unfair collection tactics, predatory lending, hidden fees, auto fraud, defective products, and other marketplace injustice. The firm brings affirmative litigation (including class actions and significant individual claims) on behalf of consumers and also regularly represents consumers who have been sued on significant debts, including credit card debt, medical debt, auto loans, home loans, lines of credit, personal guarantees, etc. Dan joined Kakalec & Schlanger, LLP's predecessor firm (Schlanger & Schlanger) in 2007 after working as a staff attorney at Legal Aid Society of Cleveland, where he was a member of that organization’s consumer law unit, and helped to found a program focused on wage and hour litigation on behalf of low-income workers. Prior to that, Dan clerked for the Hon. R. Lanier Anderson, III on the United States Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit. Dan received his law degree from Harvard Law School, cum laude, in 2004. He received his undergraduate degree from Carleton College, magna cum laude, in 1994.

An experienced and skillful legal advocate, Jeremiah E. Heck is a founding partner at Luftman, Heck & Associates and has practiced law since 2003. Mr. Heck’s practice focuses primarily on consumer and real estate law. As an Ohio consumer law attorney, his practice is weighted most heavily on consumer law where he represents consumers’ rights, including claims based on unfair debt collection practice by creditors, settling claims with creditors, and claims against businesses for unfair or deceptive trade practices. Mr. Heck has been sought out for his knowledge of consumer law. He was interviewed and quoted by SmartMoney.com, a prominent online financial website, regarding his opinions on consumer rights issues. Mr. Heck’s results on behalf of consumers have been featured on national consumer law websites. Mr. Heck’s advocacy on behalf of consumers has earned him a reputation amongst opposing debt companies and law firms and his strategies have been discussed at their conferences. After graduating from Meigs High School in Southeastern Ohio, Mr. Heck joined the United States Army. He completed basic training as a combat engineer at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Mr. Heck was stationed at Camp Howze, Korea in the 44th Engineer Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division from 1993 to 1994. He was then stationed at Fort Hood, Texas from 1994 through 1996 in the 2nd Armored Division and later in the 4th Infantry Division while holding the rank of Sergeant. Mr. Heck served three years in the Ohio National Guard as a Combat Engineer and three years in the West Virginia National Guard as a Diesel Mechanic. After ten years in the Army, Mr. Heck ended his military career and began study at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio. He graduated in 2000 with a Bachelor’s of Arts Degree in Legal Communications and a minor in Business Administration. Mr. Heck then pursued a Juris Doctorate from Capital University, graduating summa cum laude in 2003. While in law school, Mr. Heck was on the Executive Board for Capital University’s Law Review as Research and Notes Editor. As a part of this Executive Board, a scholarship was started to honor the Most Outstanding Law Review member, which continues to be awarded annually to this day. He also was the Teaching Assistant for Constitution Law and Criminal Law, which lead to his passion for teaching. Mr. Heck currently enjoys teaching Real Estate Law for the Capital University Law School’s Paralegal Program and General Practice, a third year law class, for the Capital University Law School. Mr. Heck’s recent accomplishments are numerous and varied. He was honored as the 2010 Super Lawyers Ohio Rising Star Attorneys. No more than 2.5 percent of the lawyers in the state of Ohio are named to the list. Mr. Heck was the only consumer law attorney selected as a 2010 Super Lawyer Rising Star Attorney for the State of Ohio. Mr. Heck has also received this honor in 2011, 2012 and 2013. In 2010, Mr. Heck climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, Africa. In 2012, Mr. Heck had the opportunity to run and finish the Great Wall of China Marathon. Outside of work, Mr. Heck enjoys playing softball with the law firm team and golfing. He is an avid reader and proud owner of Kili, a Siberian husky. He often participates in charity races benefiting dogs and frequently contributes to dog-related causes.

We focus our practice exclusively on consumer protection and class action law. We work on behalf of consumers whose rights had been violated by advertisers, banks and other lenders, auto dealers, credit bureaus, debt collectors and landlords. Consumer protection laws are designed to protect consumers like you from predatory lenders, overzealous debt collectors, careless credit bureaus and other harmful business practices. At our firm, we work to enforce existing consumer protection statutes to resolve consumer problems with: Unfair collection practices/debt collection harassment Unwanted telemarketing calls (robocalls) and spam texts Junk faxes Identity theft Credit reporting problems Mortgage problems

Attorney Kimberly Hamel Wochholz is from Kissimmee, Florida. She graduated with honors from the University of Central Florida in 2004. While enrolled at the University of Central Florida she interned with the Legal Aid Society of Orange County Florida; whose principal undertaking is to provide professional legal services for the disadvantaged. Mrs. Wochholz then enrolled in the College of Law at Stetson University. During law school she completed the Honors Program and served as an editor on the Stetson Law Review. She also served as an intern with the family law division of the 13th Judicial Circuit, Hillsborough County, Florida, and later joined the Consumer Rights Law Group as a law clerk. Mrs. Wochholz graduated magna cum laude from Stetson Law and was admitted to the Florida Bar in 2011. Since that time, Mrs. Wochholz has proudly litigated against banks, bill collectors, and other companies on behalf of hundreds of consumers. Mrs. Wochholz practices exclusively under consumer protection statutes that require businesses to pay the attorney’s fees of prevailing consumers. These statutes allow attorneys to represent consumers, who often can’t afford to pay an attorney out of pocket, on a contingency basis whereby leveling the playing field between businesses and consumers. She is passionate about holding businesses accountable and protecting her clients.

Robert is a lifetime Lake County resident, born in Libertyville, Illinois, and raised in the neighboring Village of Gurnee. Robert attended Warren Township High School from 2001-05, where he distinguished himself in academics and athletics graduating among the highest in his class and receiving All-Conference football honors. He conducted his undergraduate studies at Illinois State University as a “University Scholarship” recipient, where, in 2009, he graduated with honors with a Bachelor of Arts degree in English Studies. Robert was admitted to practice law in the State of Illinois on November 1, 2012. He attended law school at the Northern Illinois University College of Law from 2009-12, graduating Cum Laude in May of 2012. In November of 2012, after a brief bought working for major corporations, Robert opened Tomei Law to assist those in financial distress–specifically, representing consumer rights through foreclosure defense, bankruptcy, auto fraud, and debt collection harassment. In the fall of 2018, Robert, along with three other fine attorneys, Timothy Johnston, Alan Lenczycki, and Michael Goldberg, founded the law firm Johnston Tomei Lenczycki & Goldberg, LLC (JTLG, LLC). JTLG is a full-service law firm and in addition to an office in Gurnee shared with Tomei Law, P.C., JTLG has an office conveniently located in the heart of downtown Libertyville. Having hailed from a family with Lake County roots, it has always been an aspiration of Robert’s to practice law in the community of his upbringing. The inner drive to further that end, coupled with the desire to assist those in distress, led him to pursue a legal career in the Consumer Rights arena where he has successfully taken on consumer foes that include some of the largest banks, debt collectors, and automobile dealerships in the land and as the owner of Tomei Law, P.C. and partner of JTLG, he plans to continue that fight for justice in Consumer Rights well into the future.

We give you the leverage you need to make sound decisions when disputes rise to the level of litigation. By quickly and aggressively advancing your interests, we efficiently and effectively move cases toward conclusion, whether by pre-trial settlement, alternative dispute resolution, pre-trial judgment, or trial. Every minute and dime you spend on litigation is time and money taken away from what's important to you. Therefore, we actively prosecute your claims and defenses so that you can focus on what's most important to you.