Andrew M. Engel

My practice includes all areas of consumer protection law, including mortgage foreclosure defense, predatory lending, mortgage broker fraud, home improvement claims, and other consumer claims. Recent case victories include: Fed. Nat’l. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, (Oct. 31, 2012) 2012-Ohio-5017. This case is a huge victory for Ohio homeowners. It will help level the playing field for homeowners, and it provides hope to those who have previously lost their home to foreclosure. The Supreme Court ruled that a bank must have the right to enforce the note and mortgage on the day it files its foreclosure case. If it doesn’t have the right to enforce at that time, the trial court does not have jurisdiction to hear the case, and the case must be dismissed. This also means that in long-closed foreclosure cases in which the bank filed suit before it obtained the right to enforce the note and mortgage, any judgment granted to the bank is void, and may be attacked by the homeowner. Wallace v. Washington Mutual Bank, et al. (June 26, 2012) 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 10-3694 – The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court dismissal of a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act against a law firm that misrepresented the legal status of its client when it filed a foreclosure case. The law firm had asserted in the complaint that its client was the “holder” of the note when that representation was false. The 6th Circuit held that such conduct could support a cause of action under the FDCPA. FV-I, Inc. v. Lackey, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 13-AP-0983, 2014-Ohio-4944 – Obtained reversal of summary judgment in a foreclosure action under the plain error doctrine. The trial court granted the foreclosing lender a judgment in excess of the face amount of the note being sued on. The court of appeals noted that “Given the stakes in a foreclosure action, this type of error seriously affects the basic fairness and public reputation of the judicial