Consumer complaint received 2018-05-27
Company: Brock & Scott, PLLC
State: MD
Product: Mortgage
Sub-product: FHA mortgage
Issue: Struggling to pay mortgage

Complaint:
CFPB COMPLAINT NUMBER : XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX, XXXX XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX, XXXX XXXX Senator XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Dear Addressed ; Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
It is forgotten by many that the founding principles of this nation are All Men are created Equal. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These words are the core of this mission. 
XXXX  is my home.XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX was ranked the most dangerous out of the 50 biggest cities in the country, according to a new analysis of crime data. XXXX riots can refer to several incidents of civil unrest in XXXX, XXXX  's history. It is baptism by fire intro to XXXX elite world of privilege, power and prejudice. Minorities are shown implicit bias. This is an ongoing example and request for eradication of this unconstitutional inherent fraud victimization. Your assistance in this unfortunate ongoing situation is hereby requested. This is an official complaint against and in concern of Brock and Scott PLLC. 
However, every XXXX Agency I have reached out to for assistance including Governor XXXX, Attorney General XXXX, XXXX State Bar Association, XXXX Judicial XXXX, elected officials seem to just throw this issue and concern in the not important, just one vote, its not election time pile. Now we have exceeded 10,000 11, 284 strong. 
I was fortunate enough, in a truly unfortunate crime, to meet a once family, a once mother, whom has suffered. Brock and Scott PLLC can now add XXXX  to their list, as their scams, schemes, deception and forged documents ploys was the reason a womens son ended his life. He lost his home, as the courts failed to take the time to evaluate the altered and unlawful documents. When this XXXX year old man, lost his home, he lost his family, wife and children, abandoned him. They relocated back out of state with their biological family, without notice, and he remained here in XXXX. He was ignored and bullied. Unjust enrichment, greed, and ignorance, stole the life of a man, a son, and a father. This gentlemans mother signed the petition, and has helped me in the background to raise over 10,000 ( ten thousand ) 11,284 ( eleven thousand two hundred and eighty four XXXX  Resident signatures. 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, FBI Criminal and Civil, US Security and Exchange Commission, have been properly made aware of the critical nature of this matter. We are now looking for an immediate resolution from the source of the issue.the elected officials, justices and Department Leaders whom sit idle and watch the victimization occur while suppling nothing but excuses. As those people are the problem. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
The fact remains that Brock and Scott PLLC, a XXXX based law firm, has used illegal fraudulent tactics, to include unlicensed activity, by use of forged and uttered documents for unjust enrichment by way of unlawful foreclosures, utilizing racial profiling and class stratification. XXXX v XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX  ) It is most incredible and a very, very troubling commentary on the state of our nations judicial system when fraudulent documents are permitted to be used in any courtroom. Worse than that, its even more troubling that the production and use of fraudulent documents, on a continual basis is allowed, accepted, and does not result in harsh penalties by the court system itself. Moreover, how is this not caught and irradiated prior by the agencies in charge of oversight in such areas, in this case XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation.  Enforcement pursuant XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-205 is hereby demanded. Enforcement concerning the attorneys involved and the Business itself is hereby requested.

BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC engages in illegal collection of asserted debts, by way of unlicensed practice of law, and fraud upon the Court. BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC was not licensed as a collection agency in XXXX, as required by the XXXX Collection Agency Licensing Act ( MCALA ), XXXX. Code Ann., Bus. Reg. 7- 301. This complaint brings rise to the fact that the judgments against XXXX  Residents were obtained based upon affidavits that were irregular in certain respects and BROCK AND SCOTT PLLCs unlicensed collection activities violated the XXXX Consumer Debt Collection Act ( MCDCA ), XXXX. Code Ann., Com. Law 2 14-201 to 14-204, and the XXXX Consumer Protection Act ( MCPA ), XXXX. Code Ann., Com. Law 13-301. 
Points of contention for review : 1. Whether judgments entered or case filed by or in favor of Brock and Scott PLLC in the XXXX Courts are void because Brock and Scott PLLC was not licensed as a collection agency when it filed the actions as required under XXXX  law.

2. With known violations, court recordation, and numerous consumer complaints, did or does Brock and Scott PLLC meet the qualification to be or have become licensed as a collection agency in XXXX. 
3. With the publicized use of non-attorneys in XXXX, representing a corporation, how are judgements rendered pursuant the fact a judgment is void under XXXX law if the judgment was obtained by an unlicensed attorney, or by a corporation not represented by an attorney. See XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. App. at XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX are docketed attorney representatives, not licensed in XXXX. 
4. Whether a party whom collaterally attacks a judgment entered and/or case entertained by a governing entity in favor of an unlicensed collection agency, Brock and Scott PLLC, should hold the entertaining entity responsible for allowing such illegal action, once known. 
XX/XX/XXXX a federal judge ruled Foreclosure, although legal in nature, is activity undertaken for the general purpose of inducing payment, XXXX said. A debt collector can not avoid FDCPA liability simply by proceeding in rem rather than in personam. Per Brock and Scott PLLC communication to XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, as well has thousands of other XXXX, Brock and Scott PLLC was acting as a debt collector and engaged in debt collection activity when it communicated with the plaintiffs and filed the foreclosure action. 
XXXX v. XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX The Court of Special Appeals of XXXX, the intermediate appellate court in that state, recently held that a party who authorizes a foreclosure trustee to initiate a foreclosure action on a deed of trust must be licensed as a collection agency in the state before filing the foreclosure lawsuit. 
A party that lacks a required license may not file an action in a XX/XX/XXXX court to enforce rights related to its unlicensed activities. See, e.g., XXXX XXXX, XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ). The Court of Appeals explained that : [ I ] f a statute requiring a license for conducting a trade, business or profession is regulatory in nature for the protection of the public, rather than merely to raise revenue, an unlicensed person will not be given the assistance of the courts in enforcing contracts within the provisions of the regulatory statute because such enforcement is against public policy. Id. See also XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) ( reversing summary ejectment judgment entered against a tenant and in favor of an unlicensed landlord because the purpose of the [ landlord licensing ] statute was to eliminate a perceived harm, rather than to build the public fisc.... ) In XXXX, the Court of Appeals concluded that the lack of a license implicated the landlords status as a claimant in XXXX  courts, rather than constituting an affirmative defense. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. at XXXX. The district court had awarded possession of leased 5 premises to an unlicensed landlord, and entered a money judgment in favor of the landlord for rent and late fees. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. at XXXX. On appeal, the Court of Appeals considered the effect of the licensure requirement on the validity of the district court judgment. Id. at XXXX. The Court noted that the relevant statutory provision contained no explicit requirement that a landlord be licensed in order to maintain an action in court. Id. Accordingly, the Court observed that, [ w ] hether [ ] the landlord must establish his bona fides regarding licensure at the time of filing, as a matter of law, or whether the tenant should plead the lack of a license as an affirmative defense remains an issue. Id. The Court ultimately held that licensure impacted the landlords status as a claimant in XXXX courts, rather than constituting an affirmative defense : Licensure under local ordinances in order to operate rental dwelling units is an integral part of a landlord 's status as claimant in those jurisdictions that require licensure. As a result, in order to invoke the facile process of summary ejectment, a landlord in those jurisdictions requiring licensure, must affirmatively plead and demonstrate that he is licensed at the time of the filing of the complaint for summary ejectment in order to initiate the summary ejectment process. 
XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( unlicensed architect not permitted to recover architectural fees in breach of contract action because architect was not licensed as required by law ) ; XXXX XXXX XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. App. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( contractor could not enforce a contract with a consumer in court because contractor was unlicensed ) XXXX law requires a debt collector to obtain a license. See MCALA, XXXX. Code Ann., Bus. Reg. 7-301 ( a ) ( a person must have a license whenever the person does business as a collection agency in the State. ). The MCALA defines a collection agency as a person who engages directly or indirectly in the business of :... ( ii ) Collecting a consumer claim the person owns, if the claim was in default when the person acquired it. Id. at 7-101 ( c ). [ A ] Consumer Debt Purchaser that collects consumer claims through civil litigation is a collection agency under XXXX law and required to be licensed as such regardless of whether an attorney representing the Consumer Debt Purchaser in the litigation is a licensed collection agency. XXXX. State Collection Agency Licensing Bd. Advisory Notice 05-10, XX/XX/XXXX. Acting without a license is also a misdemeanor under XXXX  law. See MCALA XXXX ( b ). BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC concedes that it was not licensed at the time it filed actions against XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX and other XXXX. Moreover, BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC seemingly does not dispute that it was required to obtain a license under The MCALA prior to filing actions against XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX and other XXXX. 
In XXXX, a collection agencys failure to obtain a license, as required by the MCALA, renders any judgment entered in favor of an unlicensed collection agency void or voidable. See XXXX XXXX, XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). There, an intermediate appellate court in XXXX  held that judgments obtained by XXXX in XXXX  district courts were void because XXXX was unlicensed, as required by the XXXX Collection Agency Act, when it filed the district court actions. Id. In so holding, the XXXX court rejected the trial courts conclusion that the lack of licensure made the judgment merely voidable [. ] Id. at 1233. Rather, the XXXX court held that the legislatures criminalization of an unregistered collection agencys collection of a debt establishes an intent to void any judgment entered in favor of an unregistered collection agency. Id. at 1234. The XXXX court also observed that the XXXX General Assembly adopted legislation to license and regulate collection agencies... [ on the basis that ] practice as a collection agency... affect [ s ] the public health, safety, and welfare.... Id. at 1236. 
In reaching its decision, the XXXX court explained that [ w ] e find this case similar to cases in which a person practices law without a license. Id. at 1237. Under XXXX  law, [ a ] complaint drafted by a non-attorney on behalf of a corporation constitutes the unauthorized practice of law rendering the pleading a nullity and any judgment entered on it void. Id. ( citations omitted ). Consequently, the XXXX court held that a complaint filed by an unregistered collection agency is similarly a nullity, and any judgment entered on such a complaint is void. 
United States District Court for the District of XXXX has held that filing a collection action without a license, as required under the MCALA, constitutes an attempt to enforce a right... that does not exist. XXXX, XXXX, 765 F. Supp. 2d at 732 ( applying XXXX law ). Similarly, in the context of federal law, the XXXX court held that filing a collection action without a license under the MCALA constitutes an action that can not legally be taken. Id. at 731. In so holding, the Hilco court relied upon various cases from other jurisdictions holding that violations of parallel state laws that mandate licensure by collection agencies amounted to actions that can not legally be taken. Id. at 728 ( citing XXXX v. XXXX , XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) ; XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) ; XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ) ). 
The XXXX  precedent on void judgments weighs in favor of adopting the analysis set forth in XXXX. The definition of a void judgment in XXXX mirrors the definition under XXXX law. See XXXX, XXXX XXXX. at XXXX ( A void judgment is a mere nullity, which [ is ] disregarded entirely.... ) ; see also XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX ( A void judgment is from its inception a complete nullity and without legal effect. ). A judgment is void under both XXXX  law and XXXX  law if the judgment was obtained by an unlicensed attorney, or by a corporation not represented by an attorney. See XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. App. at XXXX. The laws of both XXXX and XXXX also require collection agencies to be licensed in order to file collection actions in court, and impose criminal penalties for parties that engage in unlicensed collection activities. See MCALA 4-301 ( a ) and 7-401 ( b ). 
Much like a complaint filed by a non-lawyer, a complaint filed by an unregistered collection agency is [ ] a nullity, and any judgment entered on such a complaint is void. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX. We are further persuaded by the XXXX courts rationale that the imposition of criminal penalties for engaging in unlicensed collection activities establishes an intent by the legislature to void any judgment entered in favor of an unregistered collection agency. 
See XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX. at XXXX ( holding that the drastic remedy of deeming a judgment void because it was obtained by a non-lawyer was called for by [ t ] he totality of the circumstances, including the long history of rules and legislation aimed at preventing the practice of law by non-lawyers [. ] ). Likewise, here, the drastic remedy of deeming a judgment void if it was obtained by an unlicensed collection agency is warranted in light of the legislation aimed at preventing such practices. See, e.g., XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. at XXXX ( discussing the long-standing consumer protection statutes in force in XXXX, including the XXXX and XXXX, as well as the implication of the licensure requirements ) ; MCALA 7-205 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( amount of penalty imposed for unlicensed collection activities is determined based upon factors including the deleterious effect of the violation on the public and the collection industry.... ) ; MCALA XXXX ( b ) ( imposing criminal penalties for parties that engage in unlicensed collection activities ). Further supported by XXXX, which held that filing a collection action without the requisite license under the MCALA constitutes an action that can not legally be taken. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. at XXXX. 
The XXXX cases addressing an unlicensed partys status as a claimant in XXXX  courts also bolster our analysis. XXXX considered whether a party must establish his bona fides regarding licensure at the time of filing, as a matter of law, or whether [ the defendant ] should plead the lack of a license as an affirmative defense. The XXXX Court held that the lack of a license was not merely an affirmative defense because licensure is an integral part of the landlords status as a claimant in XXXX. Similarly, here, the legislature has made clear that any entity that collects consumer claims through civil litigation is... required to be licensed.... XXXX. State Collection Agency Licensing Bd. Advisory Notice 05-10, XX/XX/XXXX. Thus, the licensing requirement contained in the MCALA is an integral part of a collection agencys status as a claimant in XXXX. 
Moreover, like the landlord licensing requirement in XXXX, the MCALA licensure requirement is intended to eliminate a perceived harm, rather than to build the public fisc. See XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX. at XXXX. To be sure, the MCALA imposes penalties for violations of the MCALA --  such as engaging in unlicensed collection activities -- and the penalty amount is determined based upon factors including the deleterious effect of the violation on the public and the collection industry.... MCALA 7-205 ( c ) ( 4 ). Additionally, the MCALA does not just mandate licensure, but also imposes criminal penalties for collection agencies that engage in collection activities without a license. See MCALA 7-401 ( b ). 
BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC was not licensed when it obtained judgments against XXXX  Residents, accordingly, the underlying cases and judgments are void. With that noted, Brock and Scott PLLC has commenced numerous foreclosures in XXXX, in violation of XXXX   Collection Agency Licensing Act ( MCALA ), XXXX XXXX ( XXXX, XXXX Repl. Vol. ), B.R. 7-101, et seq., and many using fraudulent documents. Brock and Scott PLLC, was not licensed until XX/XX/XXXX, License Number XXXX. 
XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation, XXXX XXXX XXXX   ... Abusive debt collection practices can contribute to personal bankruptcies, employment and marital instability, invasion of privacy, mental anguish and emotional distress. Even in times of economic prosperity, it may be difficult to meet certain financial obligations due to a sudden loss of income, coping with a catastrophic injury, or other adverse situations. XXXX has been at the forefront of protecting consumers against abusive debt collection practices by licensing collection agencies and enforcing the XXXX Consumer Debt Collection Act. 
The XXXX  Consumer Debt Collection Act ( " the Act '' ) provides recourse to XXXX   consumers whose rights under the Act have been violated. Please be advised that the Act does not apply to any commercial transaction or transactions entered to carry on a business interest. Also, the collection of certain obligations owed to a state or the federal government may preempt the law. Under the Act a collector who violates any provision of the XXXX  law is liable for damages proximately caused by the violation, including damages for emotional distress or mental anguish suffered with or without accompanying injury. 
It is specifically statedClaim, attempt, or threaten to enforce a right with knowledge that the right does not exist and use a communication which simulates legal or judicial process or gives the appearance of being authorized, issued or approved by a government, government agency or lawyer when it is not. 
Much like a complaint filed by a non-lawyer, a complaint filed by an unregistered collection agency is [ ] a nullity, and any judgment entered on such a complaint is void. XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX. We are further persuaded by the XXXX courts rationale that the imposition of criminal penalties for engaging in unlicensed collection activities establishes an intent by the legislature to void any judgment entered in favor of an unregistered collection agency. With that stated, the listed Attorneys within the many cases, including XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, are not attorneys licensed to practice in XXXX or not attorneys employed by Brock and Scott PLLC. 
Per court record, attached, the following have, are and continue to violate the law in Accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ) : Before collecting a debt, the person files with the Board : 1. The correct name of the person ; 2. An address and telephone number of a contact person ; and 3. The name of the persons resident agent. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney # XXXX not employed by Brock & Scott PLLC ( due to signature variations, robo-signing is asserted ) XXXX XXXX works from his home address in XXXX XXXX. 
o XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney # XXXX see fraud complaint on file with the XXXX Attorney Commission and XXXX XXXX is employed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX . 
o XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Attorney XXXX XXXX not employed by Brock & Scott PLLC. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
o XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX : XXXX? XXXX & XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney # XXXX.. Has Remained Inactive In The State Of XXXX Since XX/XX/XXXX o XXXX XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in  accordance with XXXX  Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX  DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX & XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney # XXXX. Inactive Since XX/XX/XXXX. 
o XXXX XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX : XXXX? XXXX XXXX   XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Attorney # XXXX not employed by Brock & Scott PLLC. 
o XXXX XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX  DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.. XXXX Attorney # XXXXnot at a registered Brock and Scott Address to commence or conduct lawful collection activity. 
o XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX fails to meet lawful provisions in accordance with XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 7-102 ( a ) ( 10 ) ( iv ). As no Board Record of Correct Name of Person ; Address and Telephone Number of Contact Person ; and Name of the Persons Resident Agent for his legal address is on record with XXXX  DLLR Financial Regulation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX files this action to seek enforcement by all the governing entities addressed and elected officials for themselves and those persons sued by BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC in XXXX Courts from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX against whom BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC filed a suit in attempt to receive judgment for an alleged debt, interest or costs, including attorneys fees, by way of foreclosure, in its favor in an attempt to collect a consumer debt in XXXX, without a collection agency license. 
Moreover, the approval of a XXXX Collection Agency license by XXXX  Financial Regulation after numerous complaint filed against Brock and Scott PLLC, undermines the need and mission of the agency by core definition. 
Justice, per XXXX XXXX XXXX, Protecting rights and punishing wrongs using fairness. In fact, Procedural due process, is the definition of Justice. Procedural due process, is the principle required by the Constitution that when the state or federal government acts in such a way that denies a citizen of a life, liberty, or property interest, the person must first be given notice and the opportunity to be heard. 
Due process refers to one of two sets of rights. The first is substantive due process, which includes rights related to personhood, like the right not to be discriminated against or the right to privacy. The second is procedural due process, which govern how legal proceedings must be carried out. Life, Liberty and Property Interests. Procedural due process may be implicated whenever the government threatens to take a life, liberty or property interest from an individual, such in this case of foreclosure by fraud and denial of due process. 
The due process clauses in the Fourteenth Amendment and in Article 24 of the XXXX   Declaration of Rights protect an individuals interest in substantive and procedural due process. XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. App. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ). A fundamental component of the procedural due process right is the guarantee of an opportunity to be heard and its instrumental corollary, a promise of prior notice. Id. ( quoting XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) ). 
XXXX XXXX seeks to represent a class comprised of all persons against whom BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC had, has or attempted to obtain a judgment for an alleged debt in XXXX Courts during the period of time in which BROCK AND SCOTT PLLC was unlicensed. Brock and Scott PLLC has violated Rule 8.4 ( a ), above and beyond the numerous contractual, moral, professional and consumer protection laws. They come to XXXX and violate its citizens with unclean hands for unjust enrichment. We will no longer accept campaign lies, we want protection from predatory leaches that wish to see the country spiral backwards due to greed and belligerence. In the past days, that combination was called Slavery. 
It has been recently discovered, the involved entities retroactively attached the mortgage to a securitized trust that was closed and sold to investors in years earlier, and all parties violated have subsequently violated numerous XXXX and Federal law that prohibits fraudulent real estate transactions. 

In Sincere Regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX Enclosures Court Dockets XXXX XXXX XXXX & XXXX County XXXX XXXX and XXXX DLLR License XXXX v XXXX Brock and Scott Case Sample XXXX V XXXX Other

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation