deficiency judgments equal racketeering

Politicians write a fair debt collection practices act and a fair business practices act (sounds like good law), then specifically, exclude lawyers from being prosecuted for violating the acts.

Bankers are not excluded. Bankers employ the lawyers to collect their debts. Most debt collectors are lawyers. Permitted to evade the fair debt collection act and the unfair and deceptive business practices act, the lawyers lie, manipulate and coerce the debtor. Using Court rules and procedures (Rules of Civil Procedures) Judges allow venue violations that deny debtors equal treatment under law and disrespect debtor’s request for fairness when effective legal representation is unobtainable.


Judges are encouraged to provide “fairness,” at least 21 times in the “Rules of Civil Procedure.” In N.C., Montgomery County’s, courtrooms, fairness in the interest of justice, gets trampled and becomes another dirty word for money. In North Carolina, Judges execute deficiency judgments and allow lawyers to add fees.

Mandatory arbitration is ordered by the Court, conducted by lawyers in lawyer owned offices, and is legally binding in a non-court. The debtor unaware the lawyers are dealing from a position of exemption from the law (stacked deck) and are not held accountable for their behavior, finds no justice. The lawyer enters the discussion with threats. The preamble to the US Constitution does not end with a statement: “excluding lawyers.” Law makers need to wake up to their own mistakes and correct them. Debtors are being forced to declare personal bankruptcy as their assets are striped. Exercising debt collection practices bankers are not permitted to use, the lawyers turn a consumer protection law and a fair business practices act into oppressive freedom sucking laws with shameful acts of oppression and extortion. These are activities that the “mob” was executing in the cities of Chicago and New York in the 1930’s.

Equating bankers and lawyers to “mobsters” and “racketeers” is harsh, but, most bankers participate in this practice. First Bank, Shallotte, NC is one such Bank. Bankers, employed here, have built a monument to their success and continue to execute this debt collection practice. From January 2008 through August 28, 2013 First Bank, Troy NC, Montgomery County (headquarters) entered 421 cases of which 169 exceeded $10,000. This pattern of activity can mean that the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is being violated and Racketeers live in our community.

Bankers have every right to collect on a loan. Bankers have every right to execute foreclosures and take possession of assets pledged on the face of the note when in default. In North Carolina bankers have the legal right to execute a deficiency complaint and bring their evidence to court. The proper court and the proper means of disposing of taken assets is the issue. When a pattern of debt collection activity is coupled with a hometown Court, engaged in repeating venue violations allowed by a handful of judges that can give no reason for their unfair “orders,” repeated by the same exempt lawyers representing the same bankers, the picture becomes clear—a racketeering activity is present.

Deficiency judgments force individuals into bankruptcy, insurmountable legal fees, loss of dignity and promote health issues leading to mental instability. Documenting this downward spiral, first by finding an effective litigations attorney, the going price of which, starts at $15,000 up front, win or lose. The price constipates rational thought. Anger, even hate rears its ugly head. Lawyers, using unfair and deceptive legal and business practices, lie, threaten physical harm, and exaggerate outcomes to place fear. Help is unaffordable and obviously unavailable. Complaining in this environment means do-it-yourself.

Why do bankers hustle a new discounted appraisal, an appraisal they order and pay for, then rush the assets to market, and settle for less than 50% on the dollar? The answer is “deficiency judgment.” A deficiency judgment is transportable to any and all other assets owned by the debtor. A deficiency judgment allows assets to be sold at any price, even less than 10% on the dollar. The deficiency, if unsatisfied, remains until the borrower finds more money to pay it off or dies. Granted by the court, interest and fees grow at five to 10% per year. Even after death the borrower’s estate is at risk, if he has any estate left for disposal. Either way the assets are reduced to cash, the cash goes to the banks and the lawyers. The assets at 10% to 30% of original value go to markets and are purchased by scavengers. Judges in Montgomery County (181 miles from Brunswick County), first Judge Lucy Inman and then recently, Judge Richard W Stone, Montgomery County Superior Court denied, without citing any reason, a Rule 60, Motion for Relief, after hearing sound legal arguments including unconscionable means.

These “rulings” invite questions. Is there excessive “Home cooking” being orchestrated by unjust Courts and Judges? Judges in Montgomery County, forcing Brunswick County residents into bankruptcy is not illegal, but it is not “fair” or “just” either. It is defined as racketeering.

Debtors, trying to understand how they were so naive to get into these situations should know that they were “set up.” Past performances, paying off, on time, loans for many different projects blind the customer to the reality of the deficiency judgment. Borrowers, having a choice, but in realty, have no choice: agree to the deficiency judgment clause or no loan. Ninety-nine percent, trying to do the right thing: build a home, protect and feed their families, build a business or industry, create jobs were coerced, perhaps extorted. Borrowers were sold out by a law with a clause they did not know existed. Borrowers would not know lawyers are exempt until they are arguing their case in a foreign environment (venue) against liars thrives and cheats. The lawyers know. They know and they use their privilege and power. Politicians write the law and that is the beginning or focal point to correct these injustices. Exclude the lawyers? Politicians are usually trained lawyers. The whole industry stinks of nepotism.

Bad law has spawned this fiasco. However, until these laws are amended or rewritten RICO can provide the relief needed to bring these financially-disastrous practices to a halt. RICO does not exempt this “learned” class (lawyers). RICO was originally enacted to stop the “Mob” from taking over the assets and controlling the distribution of wealth. Mobsters exercised unfair business practices and unfair debt collection practices. Bribery, fraud, interference with commerce and transportation by robbing the innocents escaped government control. Taxes were avoided. Today’s mob operates inside banking regulations or de-regulations and their bill collectors operate inside court rooms. It sometimes appears that in North Carolina, one-half of all successful law firms in today’s economic environment have cozied-up to a banker and are executing deficiency judgments. The other half practice bankruptcy law.

The RICO Act can work, if independent judges will allow it. Locals can win back some of the freedoms taken by bad law practiced in prejudiced County courtrooms. Force, if force can ever be used on politicians to correct two bad laws, RICO can be a force. Civil Rico provides no legal assistance unless the litigant is indigent and the judge assigns someone to assist. Pro se representatives cannot navigate the legal waters required to provide a sound legal case. Judge Boyle, in Federal Court, could not allow the RICO complaint to go forward. Citing that Plaintiff offered “no more than conclusory statements,” the racketeering activity continues unabated. Doing-it-yourself (Pro se), uneducated in legal jargon, unable to convince a Federal Judge to allow a Conclusory RICO Complaint to go forward, a simple question is asked: “Do not all Complaints against Defendants start with conclusory statements?” Conclusory statements are followed by presenting facts to support them in a courtroom in front of an impartial jury for consideration. Judge Boyle did not answer the basic question, did not understand the basics of a Civil RICO complaint, or did not want to start an avalanche of cases. Civil RICO is complex as described by Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Past arguments get mixed in with Criminal RICO.

Two errors in the Federal Court Complaint were present: one—the pro se litigant has neither the education nor the resources to argue the merits of the Complaint, therefore a request for legal aid by an indigent, pro se litigant, simultaneously struggling with a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy should not have been denied, and two—all arguments adjudicated in Montgomery County did not violate the doctrine of res judicata or the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Civil RICO does not require any previous convictions or judgments. The Plaintiff, to argue with the Court over these two points, would cost the Plaintiff $15,000.

When does the Attorney General of North Carolina weigh in on this issue? The case is closed according to Judge Boyle but it opens the possibility for a “class action” which the Attorney General (AG) of North Carolina can pursue. The AG is the watchdog of the system and should be aware of the misfortunes being created by these two offending parties, operating in concert, i.e. the Bankers and the Lawyers. No one is suggesting jail time for the fraud, extortion, stealing and interference with commerce these parties are guilty of committing. The treble damages clause in the RICO Statute would end these practices. These boys understand “money.”