DiSabato & Bouckenooghe LLC
Attorneys-At-Law
CASES & CLIENT ALERTS

Below are a few of the cases we are working on and some of the investigations in which we're currently involved.  You can also find information here on select claims deadlines and class action settlements.  If you see something that may pertain to you, please feel free to contact us for more information. 
_____________________________________________________________
 
We recently won a unique summary judgment victory against notorious check-buyer plaintiff Robert Triffin.  Triffin is in the business of buying dishonored checks and seeking to enforce holder-in-due-course rights against the checks' drawers.  Triffin has successfully prosecuted over 20,000 of these cases in New Jersey, and we suspect his business is booming since the advent of mobile deposit technology.  Although the Court could have granted summary judgment under N.J.S.A. 12A:3-414(c) (discharge through prior acceptance), or based on Triffin's defective assignment, the Court instead found that the check in question bore the indicia of a prior mobile deposit, making it so "irregular" as to destroy Triffin's holder status pursuant to N.J.S.A. 12A:3-302(a)(1).  This case (Triffin v. LogistiCare Solutions, LLC, ATL-DC-4118-16) represents the first time the UCC has been applied to mobile deposits in this context.

 
We are currently investigating claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., relating to Chase's assessment of insufficient funds fees, also known as overdraft fees.  It appears that Chase may deliberately schedule e-mail and text overdraft notifications to arrive one day after the overdraft occurs.  Chase charges a daily fee of $34 per overdraft and, by delaying customers' notifications, Chase may deprive customers of the opportunity to avoid the hefty fee. If this has happened to you, please contact us so we can discuss your situation and assess your claims.


We just took on the Atlantic City taxicab industry on behalf of the United Drivers for Uber South Jersey.  Our class action alleges that the cab companies have violated civil RICO and engaged in various forms of unfair competition to the detriment of our clients. We believe that this case has significant impact on the public safety of Uber riders in the Atlantic City area, as the cabs' insurance may not provide coverage under these circumstances. This case puts us on the front line of the tumultuous New Jersey rideshare wars.


We're spearheading an expansive class action against Payless Car Rental (Avis Budget Group) focusing on the discount rental company's alleged practice of surreptitiously adding extra products to customers' contracts.  Customers have reported being billed for items such as fuel charges, loss damage waiver and roadside assistance charges that they explicitly declined at the rental desk.  The case has picked up momentum in the media, including several mentions in The New York Times.  This is one to keep an eye on, and if you've had bad experiences with Payless, please let us know.


We're pursuing a class action on behalf of Enterprise Rent-A-Car customers in New Jersey who may have been double-billed for toll charges.  Our client alleges that he paid a toll using his EZ-Pass tag, but was then billed for the same toll (plus an administrative fee) by Enterprise. If you'd like to learn more about the case, please feel free to contact us.


We won a nice victory in our timeshare sales practices class action against FantaSea Resorts by defeating defendants' motion to dismiss.  Our claims center on defendants' practice of requiring purchasers to execute a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure at the time they close on the purchase of their timeshare interest.  We allege that this practice is illegal under New Jersey law because it deprives owners of certain rights of redemption they would otherwise have. The decision, Tirri v. Flagship Resort Development Corp., 2016 WL 6123146 (D.N.J.), concludes that we've stated a claim under the CFA, TCCWNA and the FAA.  If you've had problems with your Flagship timeshare, please feel free to reach out to us.


We just concluded our third successful victory this year for New Jersey homeowners against home improvement contractors.  New Jersey has a very protective public policy when it comes to home improvement work.  Although most contractors follow the law, many do not.  We know the Consumer Fraud Act and the Home Improvement Practice Regulations better than any contractor doing business today.  In our three recent wins, we leveraged that knowledge and an aggressive litigation strategy to recover substantial damages for our clients.  Homeowners should never be at the mercy of their contractors.  If you are having problems with your home improvement contractor, please feel free to call us for help.  


We recently filed and are accepting new claims against Johnson & Johnson's Ethicon, Inc. unit in connection with injuries stemming from Ethicon's Proceed hernia mesh product. The alleged damage caused by Ethicon's surgically implanted prolene hernia mesh is extremely severe and life-altering.  We are specifically focusing our investigation on Ethicon's Proceed surgical mesh, which was used in both men and women.  We encourage anyone to contact us who believes he or she may have cause to bring claims against Ethicon for injuries resulting from Ethicon's Proceed mesh.  At present, there are only a handful of pending cases related to Proceed hernia mesh.  We will give your situation the personal and individual attention you deserve.


We scored another big win for homeowners in the endless war over whether borrowers can enforce their Trial Payment Plans against the lender.  In this class action against Bank of America, the District Court for the District of New Jersey denied BofA's motion to dismiss and has allowed our client's claims for breach of contract and violations of New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act to move forward.  The decision, Laughlin v. Bank of America, N.A., 2014 WL 2602260 (D.N.J.), adds to the growing body of Federal cases that are coming down against the banks on this issue.  If you'd like to know more about the case, or if you completed a Trial Payment Plan but were denied a permanent modification, please feel free to contact us.


Preliminary approval of our class action settlement in our Bottle King case was granted last week.  In the action, we allege that certain Bottle King credit and debit card receipts included card expiration dates in violation of New Jersey's FACTA corollary. This is the first case of its kind brought in New Jersey.  The groundbreaking settlement will provide discount coupons to all class members who submit timely claims.  The claim period runs through July 7, 2014.  To view the settlement details and obtain a claim form, click here.  In the meantime, if you'd like more information on the Bottle King settlement, please let us know. 


We started 2014 with a tremendous win for New Jersey homeowners in our ongoing class action against infamous mortgage servicer, Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.  The Court denied Saxon's omnibus motion to dismiss in its entirety and will allow our claims for breach of Trial Payment Plan contracts, fraudulent misrepresentation and violations of New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act all to move ahead.  When discussing Saxon's conduct, the Court observed that Saxon used Trial Payment Plans to "set the hook" in struggling homeowners.  If you'd like to learn more about the case, or if you have a servicing grievance against Saxon, we'd love to hear from you.



We recently filed a class action against The Tempelton Group LLC of Westbury, New York, in connection with Tempelton's loan modification scam.  In the Complaint, we allege that Tempelton illegally charged up-front fees to unsuspecting homeowners in return for false promises of negotiated mortgage modifications. Thousands of homeowners were victimized by Tempelton, and Tempelton is the subject of an investigation by the Nassau County District Attorney's Office.  If you were among Tempelton's victims, please contact us to become part of the class action.


We achieved a significant step forward in our Bally Total Fitness "Lifetime" Memberships class action on June 12, 2013 when the Court denied Bally's motion to dismiss and allowed plaintiff's breach of contract and certain fraud claims to proceed.  This was a step in the right direction for long-suffering Bally members whose lifetime contracts were effectively terminated in 2011 when Bally sold most of its assets to rival fitness chain, LA Fitness.  If you'd like to hear more about the case, or if you were a Bally lifetime member, please contact us.


Our Toyota unintended acceleration class action - which was consolidated in the California MDL - was part of the historic settlement recently reached with Toyota.  The settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on December 28, 2012.  Class notice will go out beginning on March, 1, 2013.  If you want to get more details about the settlement and obtain a claim form, click here.  We'll also have more information available here for eligible Toyota owners as it becomes available.

 
Our class action against Michaels Stores received preliminary settlement approval on December 19, 2012.  Our Michaels case relates to the PIN Pad hacking that occurred at dozens of Michaels locations across the Country.  If you were a victim of the hacking, you may be included in the class and may be entitled to relief. To view the settlement details and obtain a claim form, click here.  In the meantime, please feel free to contact us to find out more about the case.