Home → Consumer Credit Home Page → Enforcement → Enforcement Action
World Law Group d/b/a World Law Debt; 2201 Donley Drive; PO Box 82641; Austin, TX - Cease and Desist Order and Affirmative Order for Sanctions
October 16, 2013
WHEREAS the Bureau of Consumer Credit Protection (the Bureau) is an agency of the State of Maine authorized and designated to administer the Maine Consumer Credit Code, Title 9-A of the Maine Revised Statutes, and the Maine Debt Management Services Act, 32 M.R.S. ? 6172-6183; and
WHEREAS the Superintendent of the Bureau, acting as the administrator of the Maine Consumer Credit Code and the Maine Debt Management Services Act, has determined that notice and hearing need not be provided prior to the issuance of a cease and desist order based on the need for immediate action to protect the public interest, pursuant to 9-A M.R.S. ? 6-108(1); and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, is not registered by the Bureau as a debt management service provider pursuant to 32 M.R.S. ? 6173(2), and does not hold a surety bond as required by 32 M.R.S. ? 6174; and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, has engaged in activities or offered to assist consumers for purposes that are within the ambit of debt management services as defined by 32 M.R.S. ? 6172(2)(A)-(D), as further specified in ?? I-VI, below; and
I. Complaint No. 14586
WHEREAS in May 2011 a Maine consumer, C. M. R., called the Bureau to say that she had found Respondent World Law Debt on the Internet, had contacted Respondent concerning setting up a monthly payment program to pay off her credit card debt, and, after finding that most of the money she would be paying Respondent would be going to Respondent, not to her creditors, she closed her checking account before Respondent could take out any money; and
II. Complaint No. 14824
WHEREAS in June 2011, the Bureau received a complaint from a Maine consumer, K. B., that alleged that he had enrolled in the debt settlement program of Respondent World Law Debt and had paid $425 to Respondent; and
WHEREAS K. B. enlisted the Bureau?s assistance in having the $425 returned to him by Respondent World Law Debt, as he had decided not to continue with Respondent?s program; and
WHEREAS the Bureau in July 2011 wrote two letters to Respondent World Law Debt to obtain a refund for K. B. and to instruct Respondent that it must be registered under Maine law to contract with and offer its services to Maine consumers; and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Debt did not respond to either of the Bureau?s letters; and
WHEREAS K. B.?s bank reversed his $425 charge, the Bureau again wrote Respondent World Law Debt to say that its unregistered activities with Maine consumers continued to violate Maine law and to instruct Respondent that a cease and desist order could be issued; and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Debt ignored this third letter from the Bureau; and
III. Complaint No. 15756
WHEREAS in December 2011 the Bureau received a complaint from a Maine consumer, K. C., that alleged that he had discovered Respondent World Law Group on the Internet, enrolled in its program of debt settlement, and contracted with Respondent to settle debts of his totaling some $44,000, for which service K. C. paid a total of $4734.24 from February 2011 through October 2011 to Respondent; and
WHEREAS K. C. decided to terminate his enrollment with Respondent World Law Group because Respondent provided no substantive services, did not satisfactorily answer questions K. C. put to Respondent, and was otherwise uncommunicative; and
WHEREAS K. C. demanded the return of the money he had paid Respondent World Law Group, a demand that Respondent ignored; and
WHEREAS the Bureau on December 15, 2011, and January 23, 2012, wrote letters to Respondent World Law Group instructing Respondent that it must be registered and bonded under Maine law to contract with and offer its services to Maine consumers and that called upon Respondent to refund K. C. the money he had paid Respondent; and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Group did not respond to the Bureau?s letters but did refund to K. C. $972.87; and
IV. Complaint No. 18110
WHEREAS in February 2013 the Bureau received a complaint, forwarded by the Maine Attorney General?s office, from a Maine consumer, M. K. B., that alleged that she enrolled in Respondent World Law Group?s program of debt settlement and contracted with Respondent to settle credit card debts of M. K. B. totaling over $10,000 and to reduce interest rates on those accounts, for which service M. K. B. paid Respondent $2696 in 2012; and
WHEREAS M. K. B. decided to terminate her enrollment with Respondent World Law Group because Respondent provided no substantive services, and demanded a refund of the money she had paid Respondent World Law Group, a demand that Respondent ignored except to return to her the nominal sum of $10.75; and
V. Complaint No. 18134
WHEREAS in February 2013 the Bureau received a complaint from a Maine consumer, D. M. R., that alleged that in March 2011, after receiving a solicitation from Respondent World Law Group, she had enrolled in Respondent?s program of debt settlement, contracted with Respondent to settle debts for her totaling some $103,000, and paid Respondent $12,086.04 between April 2011 and April 2012 for this service; and
WHEREAS Respondent World Law Group did settle one debt for D. M. R., in December 2011, a debt of $4991 that was settled for $1668.58; and
WHEREAS in April 2012 D. M. R. decided to terminate her enrollment with Respondent World Law Group because Respondent provided no other substantive services and had not satisfactorily explained to D. M. R. how much of her payments were kept by Respondent; and
WHEREAS D. M. R. demanded a refund of the money she had paid Respondent World Law Group, a demand that Respondent ignored except to have Global Client Solutions, the payment processor for Respondent, return $615 to D. M. R., thus leaving, as D. M. R. has calculated, $7548.42 that should be refunded to her by Respondent; and
VI. Complaint No. 18761
WHEREAS in June 2013 the Bureau received a complaint from a Maine consumer, C. A. B., that alleged that in mid-2012 he saw, as best he recalls, an advertisement for Respondent World Law Debt on television, as a result enrolled in Respondent?s program of debt settlement, and paid to Respondent, between September 2012 and April 2013, $4528.48 to settle some $40,220 in credit card debts owed by him; and
WHEREAS C. A. B. thereafter had no indication that Respondent World Law Debt was doing anything for him until, after a near total lack of communication with Respondent despite his calling Respondent, he chose to terminate his enrollment in Respondent?s program; and
WHEREAS C. A. B. demanded a refund of the money he had paid to Respondent World Law Debt, and Respondent eventually responded by refunding C. A. B. $1100 to him; and
VII. Complaint No. 19139
WHEREAS in August 2013 the Bureau received a complaint from a Maine consumer, Y. S., that alleged that in mid-2011 she enrolled with Respondent World Law Group in its advertised program of reducing and paying off credit card debts; and
WHEREAS in July 2011, and continuing for 25 months through July 2013, Respondent withdrew from Y. S.?s bank account $369.52, for a total of $9238, and refunded to Y. S. two payments of $369.52 each, with the result that Respondent was paid $8498.96 by Y. S.; and
WHEREAS Y. S. subsequently received periodic letters from World Law Group telling her that her debts had been paid off; and
WHEREAS in July 2013 Y. S. received a letter from the attorney for one of her creditors, whose account she had contracted with Respondent to pay, that threatened a lawsuit if she did not pay the remaining balance on her account, $3785.13; and
WHEREAS Respondent told Y. S., after she was able to reach Respondent only with great difficulty, that they would handle this matter and that she should not answer calls from her creditors; and
WHEREAS Y. S. learned upon checking her credit report that Respondent had not paid any of her debts as they had agreed to do; and
WHEREAS Y. S. had to close her bank account to prevent further withdrawals by Respondent, only to be contacted in writing by Respondent, telling her that she ?must fill out a [sic] Authorization to Debit form? to allow Respondent to continue withdrawing money from her; and
WHEREAS Y. S. informed Respondent that she would do nothing that would allow Respondent to take any more money from her account; and
WHEREAS in September 2013 Y. S. wrote to Global Client Solutions to demand that, as the payment processor for Respondent, it return all money it was holding for payments to Y. S.?s creditors, only to be told by Global Client Solutions that it had received nothing from Respondent.
* * *
WHEREAS on June 4, 2013, the Superior Court for Wake County North Carolina, acting on a complaint filed by the North Carolina Attorney General and the North Carolina State Bar, entered a preliminary injunction against, among others, World Law Debt, a/k/a World Law Group, that enjoined Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, from engaging in or offering any debt settlement or debt negotiation services; from acting in any fashion as an attorney or performing any legal work or giving any legal advice to consumers; from dissipating or disposing of any money received from North Carolina consumers; and from destroying or in any fashion disposing of any financial records; and
WHEREAS the North Carolina Superior Court order affirmatively imposed on Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, the duty to inform its North Carolina customers that it would no longer provide any legal services to them; and
WHEREAS the North Carolina Superior Court order has frozen the bank accounts of Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt;
NOW THEREFORE it is hereby
ORDERED that Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, shall forthwith cease and desist from engaging in conduct, or offering to perform for or on behalf of any Maine consumer any service, within the ambit of the Maine Debt Management Services Act, 32 M.R.S. ? 6172(2)(A)-(D), pursuant to 9-A M.R.S. ? 6-108(1), unless or until Respondent is properly registered to perform or to offer such services; and it is further
ORDERED that Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, shall within 14 days of the date of this Order make payment to the ?Treasurer, State of Maine,? in the total amount of $22,542.48 (which may be subject to distribution as follows: to K. C. in the amount of $3761.37; to M. K. B. in the amount of $2685.25; to D. M. R. in the amount of $7548.42; to C. A. B. in the amount of $3428.48; and to Y. S. in the amount of $8498.96), pursuant to 9-A M.R.S. ? 6-108(1); and it is further
ORDERED that Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, shall within 14 days of the date of this Order pay to the ?Treasurer, State of Maine,? $9000 in civil penalties of $1500 each for having contracted on six separate occasions to perform debt management services for Maine consumers K. B., K. C., M. K. B., D. M. R., C. A. B., and Y. S., while not being registered and bonded to do so, pursuant to 10 M.R.S. ? 8003(5)(A-1)(3); and it is further
ORDERED that Respondent World Law Group, also d/b/a World Law Debt, shall within 14 days of the date of this Order pay to the ?Maine Bureau of Consumer Credit Protection? $2000 towards the reasonable expenses, necessarily incurred, of its investigation and prosecution of these matters, pursuant to 9-A M.R.S. ? 6-106(6) and 32 M.R.S. ? 6178(3).
BY ORDER OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION
| Date: October 16, 2013 | /s/William N. Lund |
| William N. Lund | |
| Superintendent | |
| Bureau of Consumer Credit Protection |
NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS
Any party aggrieved by this Order may appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to 9-A M.R.S. ? 6-108(1) and 5 M.R.S. ?? 11001-11008 within 30 days of the receipt of this Order.
| Date: October 16, 2013 | /s/William N. Lund |
| William N. Lund | |
| Superintendent | |
| Bureau of Consumer Credit Protection |