The suit, the lawsuit, the suit.
It was all happening at once.
The first letter came from a person who claimed to represent a group of people who were sued by a company that owns a mortgage securities firm, The Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
The FTC had filed a lawsuit in the spring alleging that the company owned and managed hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of mortgage securities, a suit that had been settled in September.
The lawsuit was sent to the FTC’s Enforcement Division, which was supposed to take the complaint and investigate the claim, but the FTC didn’t have the time or money to do that, the letter said.
Instead, the FTC issued a letter demanding that the firm pay $50,000 in fees, and that the individual pay $10,000 of the fee, plus interest, fees, or penalties, the person said in the letter.
The person also said that the person would contact the company in an attempt to resolve the matter, and they would receive a letter asking for the money.
The FTC sent the letter to the person’s lawyer and to the lawyer’s office in California, where the person lives.
The letter also asked the lawyer to send the person an invoice for the $50K in fees.
But, as the person, who has not been named, explained to me in an email, the lawyer never responded.
This, according to a source who spoke with me, is not unusual.
The Federal Reserve, in a press release, wrote: “If you have a claim that was previously resolved by settlement, and you do not get an invoice from the settlement settlement recipient, please contact the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas for a copy of the settlement order.”
The person, the source said, contacted the Dallas Fed, and a settlement was agreed to between the parties.
So, why did the person say he was trying to settle?
“I was just trying to get the money,” the person told me.
“How much money?”
“…$50k, which is more than you paid, and I had the money to pay,” the source told me, but added that he has yet to see an invoice.
What happened next?
The person says that he emailed the company that manages the mortgage securities company and asked to talk about the matter.
I asked the person if he received a response, and he said that he did.
After speaking to the company’s lawyer, the man said that in addition to paying the $20K in fee, the company offered him a new attorney, who, the guy said, “would take the case and resolve it.
He promised I would get my money.”
The Federal Reserve declined to comment for this story.
According to the Federal Trade Commissioner’s Office, in the last 30 years, more than $1.4 trillion has been issued by federal agencies for “non-bank debt securities” (NBDs), and in some cases, more debt is issued by the Federal government than it has issued for NBDs, and more than half of those NBD debts are issued by a single company.
When the person tried to reach out to the people who owned the mortgage bonds in the lawsuit to talk to them about the lawsuit and to discuss the settlement, the agency declined to answer his emails, according a spokesperson for the FTC.
Instead, the spokesperson said, the department “does not make public or otherwise comment on pending litigation.”
As a result, I contacted the FTC to ask if it was aware of any lawsuits that the agency has resolved.
A spokesperson for FTC spokesperson Andrea Kappel, told me that the FTC “is committed to ensuring that we can investigate and take appropriate enforcement action when the alleged violations in our complaints have occurred and we receive the complaint, as soon as possible.”
“In many cases, these settlements can be negotiated with the company,” she said.
In some cases the agency may agree to a settlement that is not disclosed to the public.
As of June, the FTC had resolved more than 1,600 NBD lawsuits, and the agency’s Office of Civil Rights has filed more than 300, according to a spokesperson.
For now, the individual’s claims are unresolved.
But he did tell me that in the future, he is hoping to take his complaint to the state attorneys general who are handling NBD cases.
If you’re wondering why the FTC has not taken action against this company, it could be because it has never had a complaint filed against it, the former lawyer told me in a phone interview.
While the Federal Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Securities and Investment Commission (SAC) have jurisdiction over a company like this one, they can only investigate complaints that are brought to them by federal regulators, and