Below is my Declaration in support of former FDRS clients’ motion for reconsideration and to add Federal Debt Relief System, Mark Cella, Kathy Quintos and Herman Lewis as responsible parties in the suit filed against them by Household.  The court had recently granted the Household motion for summary judgment.

The FDRS clients continued to pay FDRS and they expected competent legal representation as PROMISED in the FDRS literature.

Kathy Quintos with FDRS provided the court filings and her emails with the instructions on how to file as well the attached documents were filed as exhibits to the motion.

Of course the FDRS contract and the false FDRS promises of assignment to an attorney are also filed exhibits.

I attached my fax to attorney Hammerman (Household) and his response as exhibits to my declaration:

http://fdrs-debt-elimination-scam.info/Exh-A–7-30-09–my-Hammerman-fax-pub.pdf

http://fdrs-debt-elimination-scam.info/Exh-B–7-31-09–Hammerman-response-fax-pub.pdf

As you can see, Hammerman is not at all interested in pursuing FDRS.  Of course he WANTS to get those payments for legal fees after consumers with no legal skills whatsoever file these MORONIC FDRS motions.

I have NO clue what the judge is going to say.

I doubt he’s ever seen anything like this.  And he SHOULD take action to have the AZ AG pursue FDRS and the employees engaged in the unlicensed practice of law, I believe a felony in AZ.

Obviously, these motions to join FDRS and most important, the PEOPLE engaging in the unlicensed practice of law and the sale of this FRAUD, should be filed at the BEGINNING of a creditor suit.

And while it’s not necessary to ask the creditors for assistance, I think it adds a very nice touch and their refusals just give us one more reason to stop paying unsecured debts AFTER becoming judgment-proof.

So my next step is to submit the complaints regarding the unlicensed practice of law to the DA in California and to the Cal AG.   In my opinion, the state of California and the Federal Reserve should be paying these debts.

After all, the regulators have known about this scam and they did NOTHING to stop it.

Here is my sworn and notarized declaration:

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO ADD FEDERAL DEBT RELIEF SYSTEM, MARK CELLA, KATHY QUINTOS AND HERMAN LEWIS AS RESPONSIBLE PARTIES TO THIS CASE

I, Christine Baker, declare under penalty of perjury, that the following is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief:

1.      I specialize in working with consumers who need to improve their credit rating or have financial problems.  Since 1994 I have documented and exposed at my websites systemic credit reporting and FICO credit scoring problems, fraudulent foreclosures, penny stock fraud, various credit and finance scams and illegal collection practices, see http://credit-reporting-collection-ftc-complaints.info/links/

2.      I researched FDRS when I first saw its advertisements and, since 1/8/08, I have posted about the FDRS scam at http://creditsuit.org/credit.php/blog/C158/ and at http://creditfactors.com/resistance/viewforum.php?f=9.  On 6/28/08 I launched my FDRS scam blog at http://fdrs-debt-elimination-scam.info after FDRS’ Dan Lyle failed to produce any evidence to substantiate its outrageous claims to eliminate debts and he threatened me with legal action for my allegedly defamatory, yet obviously true, statements about the FDRS scam.

3.      Many readers emailed and posted at my FDRS blog about their dissatisfaction with FDRS, that FDRS only ruined their credit and that they submitted their complaints to the California Attorney General, who is supposed to be investigating FDRS, but apparently did nothing.

4.      According to readers, the California AG was satisfied with the FDRS REFUND of the amount paid for the totally fraudulent “debt elimination” program.  Readers also claimed that FDRS would issue refunds only with a NON DISCLOSURE agreement so that the victims could not file regulatory complaints or take legal action against it.

5.      The Federal Reserve warned the BANKS about debt elimination scams and unscrupulous outfits like FDRS in its 1/28/04 letter posted at http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/srletters/2004/sr0403.htm.  The regulators FAILED to protect consumers and FAILED to stop the fraud.

6.      Defendant [redacted] retained my services to assist him and his wife Defendant [redacted] to try to get Federal Debt Relief System (“FDRS”) to pay the debts it had promised to eliminate.

7.      FDRS charged about 30% of the outstanding balance of the enrolled accounts to eliminate these debts through 18 monthly payments. I personally reviewed the Defendants’ account information at the FDRS website and accordingly, they enrolled in June 2008 and to date, the Defendants paid $6,755.95 to FDRS.

8.      Some of my clients received unsolicited offers from major banks such as Chase to settle credit card charge-offs for about 10% of the outstanding balance and I have settled many client debts for less than the 30% FDRS charges to “eliminate” debts.

9.      The FDRS claim to eliminate debts is obviously false, as the Court granted the Household Finance motion for summary judgment for the FDRS-enrolled account.

10. I personally reviewed the Defendants’ credit reports and they showed no major delinquencies prior to enrolling with FDRS and were then current on all accounts. They still have excellent payment records for the accounts NOT included in the FDRS program.

11. The Defendants advised me that they had been seeking legal help, but they were not able to retain an attorney.

12. I drafted the Defendants’ demand letter to FDRS and they informed me that FDRS cancelled their account and FDRS stopped taking the monthly payments out of their bank account, but it failed to offer any payment.

13. On 7/19/09, the Defendants submitted their request for assistance with pursuing FDRS to pay the debts in full and their FDRS demand letter to all FDRS-enrolled creditors or their attorneys, including Hammerman and Hultgren, the attorneys for the Plaintiff Household Finance.

14. On 7/28/09 I spoke with Justin (he refused to provide his last name) at Hammerman & Hultgren and he confirmed receipt of the Defendants’ fax.  When I asked why they have not responded, he stated that they would not want to get involved with FDRS.

15. On 7/31/09 I sent my follow up fax dated 7/30/09 to attorney Hammerman [Exh. A] and he responded that same day: “Since you are not an attorney our office will not engage in further communication with you.” [Exh. B]

16. According to the Defendants, they received attorney Hammerman’s 7/29/09 response to their request for assistance the following week in an envelope postmarked 8/3/09 and attorney Hammerman did not even mention FDRS.

17. None of the Defendants’ creditors with FDRS-enrolled accounts offered any assistance – as if they don’t care whether their accounts get paid.  While FDRS appears to be going out of business due to the negative publicity, several other companies such as Debt Crisis Solutions and John Gliha immediately took its place and the principals even posted at my FDRS fraud blog at http://fdrs-debt-elimination-scam.info/fdrs-fraud-blog/2009/01/debt-crisis-solutions-still-advertised-on-alex-jones-show-and-what-happened-to-fdrsorg/

18. I attempted to assist several other former FDRS clients after they had been sued by creditors and were facing garnishment. Unfortunately, they were suffering from serious medical problems (the reason they defaulted on their debts) and too ill to pursue FDRS and to fight with creditors and their ruthless attorneys.

19. While the regulators miserably failed the American people, this Court has the opportunity to make things right and to order FDRS owner Mark Cella, sales person Herman Lewis and Kathy Quintos (who prepared the documents filed by the Defendants in this case) to be joined in this case as they not only defrauded the Defendants, but caused the damages to the creditors as the FDRS program required that clients stop paying the creditors.  FDRS received the monthly payments INSTEAD of the creditors.

20. This Court can take whatever action is necessary to ensure the prosecution of FDRS, Kathy Quintos and possibly others who engaged in the unlicensed practice of law in Arizona. It makes perfect sense that attorney Hammerman does not wish to pursue FDRS as he financially benefits from the FDRS frivolous and ridiculous filings he had to respond to as he expects to be awarded attorneys’ fees.

21. As the American people are financing the bank and insurance company bailouts and million dollar bonuses to corporate executives, the working people are suffering enormous economic hardship and foreclosures and bankruptcies are soaring.  This Court has the power to send a message to all who scam and defraud and to create JUSTICE.

22. My exhibits are true copies of the original.

Dated this 12^th day of August, 2009.