Prominent Foreclosure Firm Charged With Defrauding Fannie Mae
The Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office alleged Wednesday that Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates knowingly passed along inflated bills for work done processing foreclosures.
March 29, 2018 at 05:51 PM
3 minute read
A prominent foreclosure law firm was charged with defrauding Fannie Mae through a scheme to submit falsely inflated bills to the mortgage servicing companies it worked for, knowing the federal housing authority would ultimately be on the hook through reimbursement payments, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office announced Wednesday.
“As alleged in the complaint, for years [Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates] exploited its relationship with Fannie Mae, a government-sponsored entity, for its own financial gain by knowingly causing Fannie Mae to pay artificially inflated costs for foreclosure-related services,” U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman of the Southern District of New York said in a statement.
The government's complaint against Rosicki and a pair of wholly owned affiliates came as a complaint-in-intervention in a suit already being pursued by a whistleblower against the law firm, Peter Grubea.
The alleged False Claims Act violations by Rosicki began in the aftermath of the housing crisis a decade ago. An embattled Fannie Mae began using servicers to help, among other things, pursue foreclosures. These servicers would retain law firms, such as Rosicki, to go through the legal foreclosure process.
These firms at times hired third parties to handle various pieces of the process. These contractors would submit their bills to the law firms, who would turn around and submit the bills to the servicers, who would then be reimbursed for the cost of handling the foreclosures by Fannie Mae.
Rosicki used the services of Enterprise Process Service Inc., a service-of-process company, and Paramount Land Inc., a title search company, which it owned. These companies would then contract out work to third parties to serve process and perform title searches required to complete mortgage foreclosures on Fannie Mae-owned loans.
According to prosecutors, beginning in 2009 Rosicki used the affiliates as “vehicles for marking up foreclosure expenses as much as possible, while adding as little operating expense as possible, in order to maximize … revenue.”
While Enterprise and Paramount paid the vendors they contracted competitive rates, the bills they would turn around and submit were “exponentially higher” than what the vendors had charged. Senior attorneys, including partners at Rosicki, were aware that revenue margins were from 300 to 750 percent, according to prosecutors.
These fraudulently inflated expenses caused Fannie Mae to pay millions of dollars for falsely inflated foreclosure expenses, the U.S. Attorney's Office stated.
In a statement, a spokesman for Rosicki said the law firm “has been a highly respected leader in the housing mortgage industry and widely admired for its dedication towards improving the broader community.”
“The charges leveled against the firm are based on questionable legal theories, have no merit and will be vigorously challenged in court,” the spokesman said.
The suit has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff of the Southern District of New York.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCaught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
8 minute readGift and Estate Tax Opportunities and Potential Traps in 2025 for Our New York High Net Worth Clients
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1SDNY Criminal Division Deputy Chief Returns to Debevoise
- 2Brownstein Adds Former Interior Secretary, Offering 'Strategic Counsel' During New Trump Term
- 3Tragedy on I-95: Florida Lawsuit Against Horizon Freight System Could Set New Precedent in Crash Cases
- 4Weil, Loading Up on More Regulatory Talent, Adds SEC Asset Management Co-Chief
- 5Big Banks Did Great Last Year. What Does That Mean for Big Law?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250