􀂃 Deceptive foreclosure rescue practices, including claiming consumers owed more than their homes were worth and misrepresenting the cost of repairs, consumers’ debt and sale options in order to increase Harvest’s equity in the property.

􀂃 Deceptive "subject to" sales and "Due On Sale acknowledgements" that failed to disclose significant consequences related to the fact that the original mortgage loan remained in the consumer’s name and that the consumer could still go into foreclosure if Harvest failed to make the loan payments.

􀂃 Deceptive practices such as concealing the sale of the property from the bank and misleading consumers into concealing the sale from their bank in order to avoid triggering a "due on sale" clause in the loan agreement, which would accelerate the pay off date for the full balance of the consumer’s loan.

􀂃 Deceptive and misleading use of blank documents, including having consumers sign contracts with blank spaces and altering the sale price multiple times after the contract was signed and without obtaining the consumer’s consent.

􀂃 Deceptively inducing consumers to sign over special powers of attorney for the sale of their properties to a Harvest employee. This created significant conflicts of interest, as it gave Harvest control over both sides of the transactions.

􀂃 Requiring consumers to sign "seller’s acknowledgements" which included numerous misleading statements about the transaction, including that they were fully informed, understood all terms of the contract and were satisfied with their negotiation and the final sale terms.

􀂃 Deceptively referring consumers to "independent counsel" who were actually attorneys with whom Harvest had a pre-existing referral relationship.

In addition to the $350,000 in restitution payments, the settlement includes requirements that Harvest and its owners and managers:

<< Previous    1  [2]  3    Next >>