Can I sue my legal representation for failing and causing hardship?
Since the real estate crash, I’ve been struggling like most people. Trying to re-modify my mortgage, but the value of the house is less than what I owe. I purchased the house in 2005. I had a two part mortgage, 3 year ARM. After 3 years the monthly mortgages sky rocketed and I started to fall into a major financial hole. So I got behind payments and the house started to default. A friend of mine referred me to a person who was in the same situation. I contacted that person and he set me up with legal representation to try and get a re-modification loan. I live in Virginia and the legal reps were in California at the time. After a year, that company had some internal issue and broke apart. However the legal representative assigned to my case stayed with me. Since Jan of 2010, I’ve been on roller coaster ride with court appearances and paperwork. It’s been difficult since I live in Fairfax Virginia and my legal rep lives in Illinois. Yet, I’ve done what I was instructed. Paid the “processing fees”, transfer of lien, deeds of trusts, etc. I always felt that the whole process was unorthodox, but did not complain since it appeared things were getting done. I guess I am on a trial basis and have been making payments as instructed to the deeds of trust. My first part mortgage hasn’t come after me, but I am not so fortunate with my 2nd part mortgage. They are currently coming after me and will soon garnish my wages. If they succeed then it will put me into square one into my financial issues and may fall behind again. My current legal rep has been reassuring me before that everything is good and the 2nd part mortgage company can’t come after me. As long as I honor the deed of trust and make the monthly payments as agreed. I’m coming to the deadline on which my company requires a release of garnishment document . Well now my legal rep is now stating that they may win and I’ll have to be stuck with the garnish. Before it was fine and we had nothing to worry about, but now the deadline is around the corner, the answers I am getting from my legal rep have turned a 180.
Obviously I am upset because I’ve been doing as instructed and paying as instructed. Now it’s as everything was for nothing and the time and money I spent in the last year has been for nothing. I’m sure you can figure out that I know nothing about legal otherwise I wouldn’t have to hire someone in the first place. I don’t even know if I can even get another lawyer to resolve my mortgage, is that even allowed? Also, can I sue my current legal rep for causing so much hardship? Telling me that everything is ok and taken care of for a year even though the mortgage lawyers kept coming after me. Do I even have a case or am I SOL ?? I hope this wasn’t confusing and I appreciate any advice.
Thank you for your response Heather M. Most of the communicating is through email and text messages. Does that count since I still have all that?
I’m just worried if that I do write in question and answer form. It may tip off my legal rep that I am up to something. Especially since it’s out of the norm of email and texting.
1.) Which of the nations having colonies in the New world allowed their colonists input (albeit limited) in government proceedings?
France and England
Spain and France
2.) Which statement is NOT true regarding religious tolerance in the new colonies?
Their name “Puritans” derived from their goal to purify the Anglican Church (the Church of England).
Some Puritans wanted to leave the Anglican Church and called themselves Separatists.
The Mayflower carried the Puritans to Virginia where they became known as Pilgrims.
The Pilgrims established the first Thanksgiving to credit God for blessing the harvest.
3.) The increasing prosperity of the New World colonies was primarily due to
mercantilism, resulting in a balance of trade.
the Staple Act.
the Navigation Act of 1696, which was legislated to make the mother country and the colonies rich.
the inherent wealth of the land.
4.) Which of the following is NOT one of the articles in the Bill of Rights?
freedom of religion
freedom of assembly
right to privacy
right to a fair and speedy trial
5.) Which of the following statements is NOT true regarding the Dred Scott case?
President Buchanan anticipated that the case would be decided in favor of abolishing slavery.
The court detemrined that because he was black, Scott was not a citizen and had no right to sue.
The Court’s ruling also effectively permitted slavery in all of the country’s territories.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney was applauded by the abolitionists.
6.) The Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was created by (the)
Federal Trade Commission.
7.) The First World War was said to be the
war to stop bullying by more powerful nations.
war to stop Germany from imperialistic advancement into other countries.
war to end wars.
war to establish the United States as a world power.
8.) Which New Deal program/agency refinanced mortgages of middle-income home owners so that they did not lose their homes during the Great Depression?
National Industrial Recovery
Home Owners Loan Corporation
Federal Emergency Relief Administration
Emergency Banking Act
9.) The United States entered World War II after what attack?
10.) Truman’s 21-point plan for reform was called the
Second Fair Deal
Second New Deal