45
»** In the Matter of: BYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174 ANSWER COUNT I (Allegedfailure to communicate, allegedfailure to supervise, and alleged failure to safeguard clientfunds in relation to the operation of Credence Law Group) 1. Sometime prior to December 11, 2012, Respondent responded to an attorney job posting on Craigslist, a classified advertisements website. As a result, Respondent came into contact with nonlawyers Scott Murikami and Ariyo Mackay, who told him about an available attorney position at Credence Law Group ("Credence"). ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 1. 2. Murikami and/or Mackay represented to Respondent that Credence was an existing law firm that helped distressed homeowners by assisting in obtaining loan modifications from their mortgage lenders. Murikami and/or Mackay told Respondent that Credence had lost its prior attorney and that they needed an attorney to keep Credence in business. FILED JAN 23 2015 ATTY REG & DISC COMM CHICAGO

BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

»**

In the Matter of:

BYRON LEE LANDAU,

Respondent,

No. 3121895.

BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD

OF THE

ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION

AND

DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER

COUNT I

(Allegedfailure to communicate, allegedfailure to supervise, and allegedfailure to safeguardclientfunds in relation to the operation ofCredence Law Group)

1. Sometime prior to December 11, 2012, Respondent responded to an attorney

job posting on Craigslist, a classified advertisements website. As a result, Respondent came

into contact with nonlawyers Scott Murikami and Ariyo Mackay, who told him about an

available attorney position at Credence Law Group ("Credence").

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 1.

2. Murikami and/or Mackay represented to Respondent that Credence was an

existing law firm that helped distressed homeowners by assisting in obtaining loan

modifications from their mortgage lenders. Murikami and/or Mackay told Respondent that

Credence had lost its prior attorney and that they needed an attorney to keep Credence in

business.

FILED

JAN 23 2015

ATTY REG &DISC COMMCHICAGO

Page 2: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2. Further

answering, Respondent affirmatively states that Murakami and Mackay told him that they

had operated Credence as a law firm, with another attorney, for 4-5 years prior to their

conversations with Respondent. Respondent further states that Murakami and Mackay told

him that the prior attorney left in order to pursue other legal work.

3. Prior to Respondent's involvement, Credence was an existing entity

incorporated in California under the name "Credence Professional Group, Inc." by a

California attorney named Vincent S. Ammirato.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 3.

4. Respondent entered into an agreement with nonlawyers Murikami and/or

Mackay to serve as attorney for Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 4. Further

answering, Respondent affirmatively states that shortly before he entered into

the agreement described in paragraph 4, he was introduced to Israel Aguila, a

bank officer at Bank of America who was involved in providing financing to

Credence. Aguila represented that he (as a representative of Bank of America)

dealt with Murakami and Mackay on a daily basis, and that based on his

knowledge of them through those interactions, he knew them to be honest,

above-board, and successful in the operation of Credence. Respondent further

states that Aguila strongly recommended that Respondent replace Credence's

prior attorney as Murakami and Mackay had requested. Respondent further

Page 3: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

states that Aguila's statements influenced him to enter into the agreement

described in paragraph 4.

5. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay to incorporate

Credence in Illinois and open trust accounts in Credence's name.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 5.

6. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that Credence would

advertise for, solicit, and contact individuals it determined may be in danger of foreclosure

or otherwise needed assistance in modifying the terms of their home mortgages. Respondent

agreed that Credence would offer these individuals assistance in avoiding foreclosure and

obtaining loan modifications from mortgage lenders.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 6.

Respondent admits the allegations contained in the second sentence of

paragraph 6.

7. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that nonlawyer

employees of Credence would take calls from individuals responding to Credence

solicitations and advertisements. Respondent further agreed that the nonlawyer Credence

employees would explain Credence's loan modification program and have the individuals

execute agreements to retain Credence to represent them.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 7, except that he

denies any allegation to the effect that Credence had any "employees" at any

time.

Page 4: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

8. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that Respondent would

serve as attorney for Credence's clients.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 8. Further

answering, Respondent states that he agreed with Murakami and Mackay that

he would serve as an overseeing attorney, with a local counsel who had loan

modification experience, on each case.

9. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that new clients would

provide Credence with information and documents regarding the clients' finances and

mortgages. Respondent further agreed that nonlawyer Credence employees would contact

clients' mortgage lenders and prepare an application for loan modification with supporting

documentation.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 9, and further

answering, states that his agreement with Murakami and Mackay further

provided that the new clients would provide information to local counsel

selected and designated by Credence.

10. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that Respondent would

analyze and approve all submissions to mortgage lenders on behalf of Credence's clients.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 10, and further

answering, states that his agreement with Murakami and Mackay further

provided that additional analysis and approval of the submissions to the

mortgage lenders would be provided by local counsel selected and designated

by Credence.

4

Page 5: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

11. Pursuant to Respondent's agreement with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay,

Respondent would not consult with clients or potential clients.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 11.

12. Respondent agreed with Murkami [sic] and/or Mackay that Respondent would

receive a fixed monthly fee as compensation for all of his work for Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 12.

13. On or about December 11,2012, Respondent opened four separate client fund

accounts ("Credence client fund accounts") ending in the four digits 9812, 9841, 9839, and

6592, at Bank of America. Each account was entitled, "California IOLTA Trust Accounts,

Credence Law Group, TRTEE".

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 13.

14. Between December 11, 2012, and November 30, 2014, Respondent was the

only signatory on any of Respondent's client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 14.

15. On or about January 14,2013, Respondent incorporated Credence Law Group,

Inc., in Illinois. Respondent listed himself as the registered agent and listed his street address

as 180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 15.

16. Between January 2013 and February 2014, Credence listed its office address

on its website (http://credencelawgroup.com) and marketing materials as 180 North

Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois.

5

Page 6: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 16.

17. Between January 2013 and February 2014, the office space located at 180

North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois, belonged to Regus, PLC, a vendor of

executive and virtual office space.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 17.

18. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent work at

the office located at 180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois.

ANSWER: Respondent admits that he was not physically present at the office located at

180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois. Respondent denies

any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 18. Further answering,

Respondent states that a receptionist provided by Regus, PLC frequently

provided Respondent with information, at Respondent's request, concerning

the operation of the office located at 180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500,

Chicago, Illinois.

19. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did any Credence

employee work at the office located at 180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago,

Illinois.

ANSWER: Respondent admits that no persons performing work for or on behalf of

Credence, except for the receptionist provided by Regus, PLC,were present at

the office located at 180 North Stetson Avenue, Suite 3500, Chicago, Illinois

between January 2013 and February 2014. Respondent denies any remaining

Page 7: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

allegations contained in paragraph 19, including, but not limited to, any

allegation to the effect that Credence had any "employees" at any time.

20. At all times between January 2013 and February 2014, Respondent resided in

Nevada and did not have a residence in Illinois.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 20.

21. As of June 2013, the Credence website had a webpage called "Attorneys". The

webpage listed Respondent as "Owner/Lead Attorney" and contained a summary of

Respondent's professional experience. Respondent was the only attorney listed on the

"Attorneys" webpage. At the bottom of the page was a section entitled, "Network ofAttorneys

We Work With:". It is unclear whether any attorneys were listed in the "Network ofAttorneys

We Work With:" section.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 21.

22. Between January 2013 and February 2014, Respondent also referred to

himself as the "Managing Attorney" of Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 22.

23. At all times between January 2013 and February 2014, Respondent was the

only attorney employed at Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits, upon information and belief, that between January 2013

and February 2014, he was the only attorney performing legal work for, or on

behalf of, Credence. Respondent denies any remaining allegations contained

Page 8: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

in paragraph 23, including, but not limited to, any allegation to the effect that

Credence had any "employees" at any time.

24. Between January 2013 and February 2014, nonlawyer employees of Credence

took calls from individuals responding to Credence solicitations and advertisements. During

those calls, the nonlawyer Credence employees explained Credence's loan modification

program and the terms of Credence's legal representation to the potential clients.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 24, except any

allegation to the effect that Credence had any "employees" at any time.

25. Between January 2013 and February 2014, nonlawyer employees of Credence

had new clients execute engagement agreements. The top of the engagement agreements

routinely contained the language, "PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION,"

referred to Credence as a "law firm" providing "legal services", and contained language about

"the scope of the attorney-client relationship".

ANSWER: Respondent admits that between January 2013 and February 2014,

nonlawyers performing work for, or on behalf of, Credence entered into

engagement agreements with clients. Respondent denies any allegation

contained in paragraph 25 to the effect that Credence had any "employees" at

any time. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an

admission or denial of any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 25.

26. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent did

consult with any client or potential client about the engagement letter or its terms.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 26.

8

Page 9: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

27. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent

personally consult with any clients about the means by which the clients' objectives were to

be accomplished.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 27.

28. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent

routinely work in the same physical office space as Credence employees or monitor the

telephone conversations between Credence employees and clients or potential clients.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 28, including any

allegation to the effect that Credence had any "employees" at any time.

29. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent

personally explain a matter to any client to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the

client to make informed decisions regarding Credence's representation.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 29.

30. Between January 2013 and February 2014, clients from at least eight different

states (California, Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, and

Pennsylvania) retained Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 30, except the

allegation that any clients from or residing in California retained Credence.

Respondent denies that allegation, based on information and belief.

31. Between January 2013 and February 2014, the engagement agreements

routinely contained language stating, "Our Standard hourly attorney rate is $450 per hour

Page 10: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

for Partners and $350 per hour for Associates," conveying the impression to new clients that

multiple attorneys were employed at Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 31.

32. Between January 2013 and February 2014, the engagement agreements

routinely contained a three-tiered fee structure. The first tier involved Credence

prequalifying and interviewing the client and, if the lender had issued a notice of default or

foreclosure, contacting the lender to postpone any date for sale of the client's home. The

second tier involved Credence compiling and submitting a loan modification package to the

lender as well as conducting preliminary negotiations with the lender. The third tier involved

Credence negotiating with the client's lender and obtaining approval for a loan modification.

According to the engagement agreements, Credence would be paid a specified amount upon

completion of each tier.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 32.

33. Between January 2013 and February 2014, the engagement agreements

routinely contained language stating, "We do not accept advance fees for our services."

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 33.

34. Between January 2013 and February 2014, nonlawyer Credence employees

routinely demanded up-front fees and advised clients that no further work would be done

on a file unless additional fees were paid in advance.

10

Page 11: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 34, including any

allegation that Credence had any "employees" at any time.

35. Between January 2013 and February 2014, fees from Credence clients were

deposited into the Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 35.

36. Between January 2013 and February 2014, client fees were withdrawn or

transferred from the Credence client fund accounts before the fees were earned.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 36.

37. Between January 2013 and February 2014, more than $6,000,000 was

deposited into the Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 37.

38. Between January 2013 and February 2014, more than $5,970,000 was

withdrawn or transferred from the Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 38.

39. Between January 2013 and February 2014, more than $400,000 was debited

from the Credence client fund accounts to an American Express account in Ariyo Mackay's

name.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 39.

11

Page 12: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

40. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent monitor

the deposits, withdrawals, and transfers of any of the Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 40.

41. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent prepare

or maintain receipt and disbursement journals for any Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 41.

42. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent prepare

or maintain contemporaneous ledger records for any Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 42.

43. At no time between January 2013 and February 2014 did Respondent prepare

or maintain reconciliation reports of any Credence client fund accounts.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 43.

44. Between January 2013 and February 2014, Respondent was paid at least

$64,274.48 by Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 44 upon

information and belief. Further answering, Respondent states that he also

received reimbursement, in amounts presently unknown to him, of travel and

health care expenses, as well as reimbursements for amounts expended on

shipping charges, photocopying documents, and faxing documents.

12

Page 13: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

45. On or about May 2, 2014, Respondent was transferred to inactive status with

the ARDC.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 45. Further

answering, Respondent states that he voluntarily transferred to inactive

status, after discussing the matter with a representative of the ARDC.

46. On or about June 3, 2014, Credence Law Group, Inc., was involuntarily

dissolved by the Illinois Secretary of State.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained in paragraph 46.

47. Between May and December 2014, a website with the address

www.credencelawgroup.net contained the following message:

Credence Law Group is no longer accepting any NEW client files.For all of our clients still in the process, DO NOT WORRY, we arecontinuing to process each and every file 'til we have aresolution for you. If you have any questions, please contactyour assigned processor. Ifyou are unable to reach them, pleasecontact our customer care #: 1-888-502-3121. Thank youvery much and we look forward to the completion of your file!

(emphasis in original).

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 47.

48. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to consult with the client as to the means by whichthe objectives of representation are to be pursued, in

violation of Rule 1.2(a) of the Illinois Rules ofProfessional Conduct (2010), by conduct including

failing to consult with clients about the terms of

13

Page 14: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

Credence's engagement and failing to consult with

clients at any time;

failing to reasonably consult with the client about the

means by which the client's objectives are to be

accomplished, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to consult with clients about the termsof Credence's engagement and failing to consult with

clients at any time;

failing to explain a matter to the extent reasonablynecessary to permit the client to make informed

decisions regarding the representation, in violation of

Rule 1.4(b) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

(2010), by conduct including failing to personally explain

a matter to any client to the extent reasonably necessary

to permit the client to make informed decisions

regarding Credence's representation;

failing to prepare and maintain complete records of aclient trust account, in violation of Rules 1.15(a)(1)

through 1.15(a)(8) of the Illinois Rules of Professional

conduct (2010), by conduct including failing to maintain

complete records of any Credence client trust account;

failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measuresin effect to: (1) have an attorney consult with clients asto the means by which the objectives of representation

are to be pursued, (2) explain matters to the extentreasonably necessary to permit clients to make informed

decisions regarding the representation, (3) supervise the

14

Page 15: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

handling and record-keeping of Credence client fund

accounts; and

f. assisting another in practicing law in a jurisdiction in

violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that

jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including permitting a nonlawyer Credence employee to

discuss with clients the objectives of representation and

to consult with the clients as to the means by which the

objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

48, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 48.

COUNT II

{Allegedfailure to communicate, allegedfailure to supervise, alleged assisting in theunauthorized practice oflaw - Omar & Delfina Buenrostro)

49. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 47 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 47.

50. On or about January 9, 2013, a nonlawyer representative at Credence spoke

with Omar & Delfina Buenrostro ("the Buenrostros") about obtaining a loan modification of

the Buenrostros' home mortgage. The Buenrostros and the nonlawyer Credence

representative agreed that Credence would represent the Buenrostros in negotiating a loan

modification of their home mortgage. The nonlawyer representative discussed with the

15

Page 16: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

Buenrostros the objectives of representation and consulted with the Buenrostros as to the

means by which the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 50.

51. Between January and March 2013, the Buenrostros paid Credence $3,241 for

Credence's representation and tendered documents and information related to their home

mortgage to Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 51.

52. At no time between January 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent discuss

with the Buenrostros the objectives of representation or consult with the Buenrostros as to

the means by which the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 52. Further answering,

Respondent states that he responded, or attempted to respond, to all clients

who asked to speak with him, called him, or emailed him.

53. Between March and June 2013, the Buenrostros left messages with Credence

representatives via email, voicemail and facsimile, requesting information regarding the

status of their matter.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 53.

16

Page 17: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

54. Between March 2013 and December 15,2014, neither Respondent nor anyone

at Credence provided the Buenrostros with any information about the status of Buenrostros'

matter.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 54.

55. Neither Respondent nor anyone at Credence obtained a loan modification for

the Buenrostros.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 55.

56. In May 2013, Respondent or someone on Credence's behalf advised the

Buenrostros' mortgage lender, Bank of America, that Credence no longer represented the

Buenrostros.

ANSWER: Respondent denies that he advised Bank of America that Credence no longer

represented the Buenrostros. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon

which to base an admission or denial of any remaining allegations contained

in paragraph 56.

57. At no time between January 2013 and November 30,2014, did Respondent or

anyone on Credence's behalf advise the Buenrostros that Credence ceased representing

them.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 57.

17

Page 18: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

58. At no time between January 2013 and November 30,2014, did Respondent or

anyone on Credence's behalf advise the Buenrostros that Credence was unable to obtain a

loan modification for them.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 58.

59. Between May and September 2013, the Buenrostros left telephone messages

with Credence requesting a refund of the $3,241 fee they paid.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 59.

60. At no time between January 2013 and November 30, 2014, did Respondent or

anyone on Credence's behalf refund any portion of the $3,241 fee to the Buenrostros.

ANSWER: Respondent admits that he did not refund any fees to the Buenrostros.

Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 60.

61. At no time between January 2013 and November 30, 2014, did Respondent or

anyone at Credence do sufficient legal work to justify retaining the $3,241 fee.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

61, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 61.

62. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

18

Page 19: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

failing to consult with the client as to the means by which

the objectives of representation are to be pursued, in

violation of Rule 1.2(a) of the Illinois Rules of

Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct including

failing to consult with the Buenrostros at any time;

failing to promptly inform the client of any decision or

circumstance with respect to which the client's informed

consent is required, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(1) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to notify the Buenrostros that he ceased

representing them;

failing to reasonably consult with the client about the

means by which the client's objectives are to be

accomplished, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to consult with the Buenrostros at any

time;

failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the

status of a matter, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(3) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to notify the Buenrostros that he ceased

representing them and failing to respond to the

Buenrostros' telephone calls, emails, and faxes

requesting information about the status of their matter;

failing to promptly comply with reasonable requests for

information from a client, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(4) of

the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by

conduct including failing to respond to the Buenrostros'

telephone calls, emails, and faxes requesting information

about the status of their matter;

failing to explain a matter to the extent reasonably

necessary to permit the client to make informed

decisions regarding the representation, in violation of

Rule 1.4(b) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

19

Page 20: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

(2010), by conduct including failing to have any direct

communication with the Buenrostros at any time;

g. failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable

to protect a client's interests, in violation of Rule 1.16(d)

of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by

conduct including failing to give reasonable notice to the

Buenrostros of his withdrawal;

h. failing to promptly refund any part of a fee paid in

advance that has not been earned, in violation of Rule

1.16(d) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

(2010), by conduct including failing to promptly refund

any unearned portion of the $3,241 fee the Buenrostrospaid;

i. failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measures

in effect to: (1) have an attorney consult with the client

as to the means by which the objectives of representation

are to be pursued, (2) respond to the Buenrostros

requests for information about their matter, (3)

promptly notify the Buenrostros that Respondent had

ceased representing them, and (4) promptly refund any

part of the fee paid by the Buenrostros; and

j. assisting another in practicing law in a jurisdiction inviolation of the regulation of the legal profession in that

jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including: (1) permitting a nonlawyer Credence

employee to discuss with the Buenrostros the objectivesof Respondent's representation, (2) permitting a

nonlawyer Credence employee and to consult with the

20

Page 21: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

Buenrostros as to the means by which the objectives of

representation were to be pursued, and (3) failing to

have any direct communication with the Buenrostros at

any time during Credence's representation.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

62, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 62.

COUNT III

{Allegedfailure to communicate, allegedfailure to supervise, alleged assisting in theunauthorized practice oflaw - Lenora & Tommy Browder)

63. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 47 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 47, above.

64. On or about April 2, 2013, a nonlawyer representative at Credence spoke with

Lenora and Tommy Browder ("the Browders") about obtaining a loan modification of the

Browders' home mortgage with Bank of America. The Browders and the nonlawyer

Credence representative agreed that Credence would represent the Browders in negotiating

a loan modification of their home mortgage. The nonlawyer representative discussed with

the Browders the objectives of representation and consulted with the Browders as to the

means by which the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 64.

21

Page 22: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

65. Between April and June 2013, the Browders paid Credence $3,951 for

Credence representation and provided a Credence employee with information relating to

their home mortgage,

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 65.

66. At no time between April 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent discuss

with the Browders the objectives of representation or consult with the Browders as to the

means by which the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 66.

67. Between June and October 2013, the Browders called Credence repeatedly to

speak directly with Respondent about their matter.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 67.

68. At no time between April 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent ever

speak with the Browders or otherwise have any direct communication with the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 68.

69. On or about October 21, 2013, the Browders called Credence and inquired

about the status of their matter. Someone at Credence advised that a woman named Laura

Lopez from Credence would call the Browders back regarding their matter.

22

Page 23: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 69.

70. At no time between October 22,2013 and December 20,2013, did Respondent,

Ms. Lopez, or anyone else at Credence communicate with the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 70.

71. On or about October 30, 2013, the Browders submitted a grievance with the

ARDCagainst Respondent.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 71.

72. On November 4, 2013, counsel for the Administrator sent Respondent a copy

of the Browders' grievance along with a letter requesting information and records

concerning Respondent's representation of the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained within paragraph 72.

73. On November 22, 2013, Respondent sent counsel for the Administrator an

email concerning this matter which stated in part, "The client paid a total flat rate of $3,951,

which per the agreement $2,634 was for services that could not be rendered. A release of

liability is going out to the client so [sic] sign and acknowledge the refund and closing for

[sic] their file."

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations contained within paragraph 73.

74. On or about December 20,2013, Respondent or someone on Credence's behalf

sent the Browders correspondence entitled "URGENT NOTICE". The letter begins, "This

23

Page 24: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

letter is to inform you that we have made numerous attempts to reach you via the contact

information provided on your application to our office without any success."

ANSWER: Respondent denies that he sent the notice referred to in paragraph 74 to the

Browders. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an

admission or denial of any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 74.

75. The statement in the letter described in paragraph 74 above was false because

between October 21, 2013, when the Browders called to inquire about their matter, and

December 20, 2013, neither Respondent nor anyone on Credence's behalf attempted to

communicate with the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent denies that he made any false statements as alleged in paragraph

75. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission

or denial of any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 75.

76. Between April 2013 and November 2014, the Browders resided at the same

home address and maintained the same home telephone number they provided to Credence

when they initially agreed to have Credence represent them.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 76.

77. On or about January 13, 2014, Respondent or someone on Credence's behalf

sent the Browders correspondence entitled "Cancellation Letter". The letter states that the

Browders' loan modification has been canceled and their file has been closed. The letter also

states, "We also made several attempts to get a hold of you with no success." The

"Cancellation Letter" makes no reference to unearned fees or a refund.

24

Page 25: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent denies that he sent the correspondence referred to in paragraph

77 to the Browders. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to

base an admission or denial of any remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 77.

78. Other than the "URGENT NOTICE" dated December 20, 2013, and the

"Cancellation Letter" dated January 13, 2014, neither Respondent nor anyone on Credence's

behalf attempted to communicate with the Browders after the Browders called to inquire

about their matter on October 21, 2013.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 78.

79. At no time between April 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent or anyone

on Credence's behalf refund any portion of the $3,951 fee to the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 79.

80. At no time did Respondent or anyone at Credence do sufficient legal work to

justify retaining the $3,951 fee paid by the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

80, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 80.

81. As of November 2014, neither Respondent nor anyone on Credence's behalf

has sent the Browders a release of liability or any other document to facilitate a refund.

25

Page 26: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 81.

82. Neither Respondent nor anyone at Credence obtained a loan modification for

the Browders.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 82.

83. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to consult with the client as to the means by which

the objectives of representation are to be pursued, in

violation of Rule 1.2(a) of the Illinois Rules of

Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct including

failing to consult with the Browders at any time;

b. failing to reasonably consult with the client about the

means by which the client's objectives are to be

accomplished, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to consult with the Browders at any

time;

c. failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the

status of a matter, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(3) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to inform the Browders of the status oftheir matter when they called Credence;

d. failing to promptly comply with reasonable requests for

information from a client, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(4) of

the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by

conduct including failing to inform the Browders of thestatus of their matter when they called Credence;

26

Page 27: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

e. failing to promptly refund any part of a fee paid in

advance that has not been earned, in violation of Rule

1.16(d) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

(2010);

f. failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measures

in effect to: (1) have an attorney consult with the

Browders as to the means by which the objectives of

representation are to be pursued, (2) keep the Browders

reasonably informed about the status of their matter, (3)

promptly comply with the Browders' reasonable

requests for information, and (4) promptly refund the

unearned part of the fee the Browders paid; and

g. assisting another in practicing law in a jurisdiction in

violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that

jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including: (1) permitting a nonlawyer Credence

representative to discuss with the Browders the

objectives of Respondent's representation, (2)

permitting a nonlawyer Credence representative to

consult with the Browders as to the means by which the

objectives of representation were to be pursued, and (3)

failing to have direct communication with the Browders

at any time.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

83, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

27

Page 28: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 83.

COUNT IV

(Allegedfailure to return unearned fees, allegedfailure to supervise - Gary Diggs)

84. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 47 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 47, above.

85. On or about April 17, 2013, a representative at Credence spoke with Gary

Diggs about obtaining a loan modification of Diggs's home mortgage. Diggs and the Credence

representative agreed that Credence would represent Diggs in negotiating a loan

modification of Diggs's home mortgage.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 85.

86. On or about April 17, 2013, Diggs paid $1,217 to Credence as partial payment

for Credence's representation.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 86.

87. The same day, Diggs decided to terminate Credence's representation and seek

a refund of the $1,127 he paid to Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 87.

28

Page 29: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

88. Between April 17,2013, and April 25, 2013, Diggs contacted Credence at least

seven times via email and telephone to advise of his decision to terminate Credence's

representation and obtain a refund. Diggs left multiple messages advising that he longer

wished to do business with Credence and requesting a refund.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 88.

89. On or about April 19, 2013, someone on Credence's behalf told Diggs that

Diggswould be contacted shortly about obtaining a refund.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 89.

90. At no time between April 19, 2013, and November 30, 2014 did Respondent

or anyone on Credence's behalf contact Diggs about obtaining a refund.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 90.

91. At no time between April 19, 2013, and November 30, 2014 did Respondent

or anyone on Credence's behalf refund any portion of the $1,127 fee to Diggs.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 91.

92. At no time did Respondent or anyone at Credence do sufficient legal work to

justify retaining the $1,127 fee paid by Diggs.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

92, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

29

Page 30: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 92.

93. Neither Respondent nor anyone at Credence obtained a loan modification for

Diggs.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 93.

94. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness

in representing a client, in violation of Rule 1.3 of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to promptly refund the unearned

portion of the fees Diggs paid;

b. failing to promptly refund any part of a fee paid in

advance that has not been earned, in violation of Rule

1.16(d) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

(2010), by conduct including failing to refund any of the

$1,127 fee to Diggs; and

c. failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measures

in effect to promptly refund the unearned part of the fee

the Diggs paid.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

92, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

30

Page 31: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 92.

COUNTV

(Allegedfailure to return unearnedfees, allegedfailure tosupervise - Melinda Gilbert)

95. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 47 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 47, above.

96. Sometime prior to June 12 2013, a representative from a company called

National Housing Advocates spoke with Melinda Gilbert ("Gilbert") about obtaining a loan

modification of the Gilbert's home mortgage. The representative from National Housing

Advocates referred Gilbert to Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 96.

97. On or about June 12, 2013, Gilbert and a nonlawyer representative from

Credence agreed that Credence would represent Gilbert in negotiating a loan modification of

her home mortgage. The nonlawyer representative discussed with Gilbert the objectives of

representation and consulted with Gilbert as to the means by which the objectives of

representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 97.

31

Page 32: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

98. Between June 2013 and July 2013, Gilbert paid Credence $1,492.50 for

Credence's representation and tendered documents and information related to her home

mortgage to a Credence representative.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 98.

99. At no time between June 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent discuss

with Gilbert the objectives of representation or consult with Gilbert as to the means by which

the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 99.

100. At no time between June 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent, anyone

on his behalf, or anyone at Credence have any communication with Gilbert's mortgage

lender, United States Department of Agriculture ("USDA"), about Gilbert's mortgage.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 100.

101. Between July and September 2013, a representative of the USDA informed

Gilbert telephonically that it did not engage in loan modifications.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 101.

102. Between August and September 2013, Gilbert received a correspondence from

Credence in which it informed Gilbert that her loan modification had been canceled.

32

Page 33: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 102.

103. Between August and November 2013, Gilbert repeatedly called and emailed

National Housing Advocates and Credence requesting a full or partial refund of the $1,492.50

fee she had paid Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 103.

104. At no time between August 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent, anyone

on his behalf, any Credence employee or agent, or any National Housing Advocates employee

or agent respond to Gilbert's requests for a refund.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 104.

105. Neither Respondent nor anyone at Credence obtained a loan modification for

Gilbert.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 105.

106. At no time between June 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent or anyone

on Credence's behalf refund any portion of the $1,492.50 fee to Gilbert.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 106.

107. At no time between June 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent or anyone

at Credence do sufficient legal work to justify retaining the $1,492.50 fee.

33

Page 34: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

107, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 107.

108. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to consult with the client as to the means by which

the objectives of representation are to be pursued, in

violation of Rule 1.2(a) of the Illinois Rules of

Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct including

failing to consult with Gilbert at any time;

b. failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness

in representing a client, in violation of Rule 1.3 of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to have any communication with the

USDA and failing to promptly refund the unearned

portion of the fees Gilbert paid;

c. failing to reasonably consult with the client about the

means by which the client's objectives are to be

accomplished, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to consult with Gilbert at any time;

d. failing to promptly refund any part of a fee paid in

advance that has not been earned, in violation of Rule

1.16(d) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct

(2010), by conduct including failing to refund any of the$1,492.50 fee to Gilbert;

e. failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

34

Page 35: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measures

in effect to: (1) have an attorney consult with Gilbert as

to the means by which the objectives of representation

are to be pursued, and (2) promptly refund the unearned

part of the fee the Gilbert paid; and

f. assisting another in practicing law in a jurisdiction in

violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that

jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including: (1) permitting a nonlawyer Credence

employee to discuss with Gilbert the objectives of

Respondent's representation, (2) permitting a

nonlawyer Credence employee to consult with Gilbert as

to the means by which the objectives of representation

were to be pursued, and (3) failing to have direct

communication with Gilbert at any time.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

108, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 108.

COUNT VI

(Allegedfailure to communicate, allegedfailure to supervise, alleged assisting in theunauthorized practice oflaw -Jill Myersand Darwin Myers, Jr.)

109. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 47 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 47, above.

35

Page 36: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

110. On or about September 10, 2013, someone named Andrew Craig who

identified himself as being with "Client Services" spoke with Jill Myers and Darwin Myers, Jr.

("the Myerses") about obtaining a loan modification of the Myerses' home mortgage. Craig

referred the Myerses to Credence.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 110.

111. On or about September 10,2013, the Myerses and a nonlawyer representative

from Credence agreed that Credence would represent the Myerses in negotiating a loan

modification of their home mortgage. The nonlawyer representative discussed with the

Myerses the objectives of representation and consulted with the Myerses as to the means by

which the objectives of representation were to be pursued.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 111.

112. On or about September 12, 2013, the Myerses paid Credence $1,500 for

Credence's representation and tendered documents and information related to their home

mortgage to a Credence representative.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 112.

113. On or about September 16, 2013, the Myerses advised Andrew Craig via email

that they received a letter from their local sheriffs office stating that the Myers' property

was sold at a public sale and that the Myerses needed to vacate the property.

36

Page 37: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 113.

114. On or about September 16, 2013, Andrew Craig emailed the Myerses, stating

he put their communication in the file.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 114.

115. Between September 16, 2013, and October 2, 2013, the Myerses left repeated

messages with both Credence and Andrew Craig via email and voicemail, requesting

immediate assistance and providing additional information from the sheriffs office. Craig

responded by stating, "We will get to work on this right away."

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 115.

116. At no time between September 16,2013 and October 1,2013, did Respondent,

anyone on his behalf, or any Credence representative respond to the Myerses.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 116.

117. On or about October 2, 2013, a Credence representative named Natalie Velez

emailed the Myerses advising that she was just assigned their file that week and will contact

their lender once she is authorized on the account.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 117.

37

Page 38: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

118. On or about November 21, 2013, a Credence representative sent an email to

the Myerses stating, "Wells Fargo denied our request, the sale is official."

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 118.

119. Between November 25, 2013, and January 8, 2014, the Myerses repeatedly

emailed Credence requesting an itemized copy of all work performed on their case, all

documents submitted to the Myerses' lender, any research done, and dates and times for all

phone calls Credence made to the Myerses' lender. A Credence representative advised that

the request was being sent to management.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 119.

120. At no time between November 25, 2013, and November 30, 2014, did

Respondent, anyone on his behalf, or any representative of Credence provide the Myerses

with an itemized copy of all work performed on their case, all documents submitted to the

Myerses' lender, any research done, and dates and time for all phone calls Credence made to

the Myerses' lender.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 120.

121. Neither Respondent nor anyone on his behalf obtained a loan modification for

the Myerses.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 121.

38

Page 39: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

122. Sometime after November 2013, the Myerses lost their home.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained in paragraph 122.

123. At no time between September 2013 and November 2014 did Respondent

have any direct communication with the Myerses.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 123.

124. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to consult with the client as to the means by which

the objectives of representation are to be pursued, in

violation of Rule 1.2(a) of the Illinois Rules of

Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct including

failing to consult with the Myerses at any time;

b. failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness

in representing a client, in violation of Rule 1.3 of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to communicate directly with the

Myerses when they received notice that their home was

sold;

c. failing to reasonably consult with the client about the

means by which the client's objectives are to be

accomplished, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to consult with the Myerses at any time;

d. failing to promptly comply with reasonable requests forinformation, in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(4) of the Illinois

Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to comply with the Myerses' requests

39

Page 40: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

for an itemized copy of all work performed on their case,all documents submitted to the Myerses' lender, any

research done, and dates and time for all phone calls

Credence made to the Myerses' lender;

e. failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that

Credence had in effect measures giving reasonable

assurance that the conduct of Credence's nonlawyer

employees was compatible with Respondent's

professional obligations, in violation of Rule 5.3(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including failing to ensure that Credence had measures

in effect to: (1) have an attorney consult with the

Myerses as to the means by which the objectives of

representation are to be pursued, and (2) have an

attorney consult with the Myerses when they received

notice that their home was sold; and

f. assisting another in practicing law in a jurisdiction in

violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that

jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the IllinoisRules of Professional Conduct (2010), by conduct

including: (1) permitting a nonlawyer Credence

employee to discuss with the Myerses the objectives of

Respondent's representation, (2) permitting a

nonlawyer Credence employee to consult with the

Myerses as to the means by which the objectives of

representation were to be pursued, (3) permitting a

nonlawyer Credence employee to consult with the

Myerses after the Myerses discovered their home was

being sold, and (4) failing to have direct communication

with the Myerses at any time.

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

124, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

40

Page 41: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 124.

COUNT VII

(Allegedfailure to safeguardfunds, allegedfailure to maintain complete records ofclientfund accounts)

125. The Administrator realleges paragraphs 1 through 123 above.

ANSWER: Respondent repeats and realleges his answers to the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 123, above.

126. On or about April 17, 2013, at the direction of a representative at Credence,

Gary Diggs transferred $1,217 for legal fees into the Credence client fund account ending in

the four digits 9812.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 126.

127. Between June and July 2013, Respondent or someone at his direction

deposited $1,492.60 paid by Melinda Gilbert for legal fees into the Credence client fund

account ending in the four digits 9841.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 127.

128. At no time between January 2013 and November 2014, did Respondent do

sufficient legal work to justify retaining the full amounts of fees that Gary Diggs or Melinda

Gilbert paid, as referenced in paragraphs 126 and 127 above.

41

Page 42: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

128, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 128.

129. On or about January 13, 2014, the balances on the Credence trust accounts

were as follows:

Account No. Balance

9812 $(998.10)

9841 $480.00

9839 $ 500.00

6592 $-

Total: $(18.10)

Thus on or about January 13, 2014, the Credence trust accounts were overdrawn by

a combined $18.10.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 129.

42

Page 43: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

130. On or about January 21, 2014, the balances on the Credence trust accounts

were as follows:

Account No. Balance

9812 $(6637.71)

9841 $ 6005.00

9839 $411.23

6592 $-

Total: $(221.48)

Thus on or about January 21, 2014, the Credence trust accounts were overdrawn by

a combined $221.48.

ANSWER: Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge upon which to base an admission or

denial of the allegations contained within paragraph 130.

131. As a result, the unearned portion of the funds referenced in paragraphs 126

and 127 was converted and Respondent is responsible for that conversion.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 131.

132. By reason of the conduct described above, Respondent has engaged in the

following misconduct:

a. failing to prepare and maintain complete records of aclient trust account, in violation of Rules 1.15(a) of the

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (2010); and

43

Page 44: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

b. causing the conversion of the unearned portion of thefees paid by Gary Diggs and Melinda Gilbert, in violation

of Rule 1.15(a) of the Illinois Rules of Professional

Conduct (2010).

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph

132, as those allegations are not factual but state conclusions of law. To the

extent an answer is deemed required, Respondent denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 132.

RESPONDENT'S DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO COMMISSION RULE 231

1. Respondent was licensed to practice law in the State of California on June 14,

1995, and he was assigned bar number 177247. That license has been inactive since

November^ 2014.

2. Respondent does not hold any other professional licenses or certificates.

Respectfully submitted,

ByroiyLee^Latidau, Respondent

Mary Robinson

Robinson Law Group, LLC

333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 450

Chicago, IL 60606

(312) 676-9875

[email protected]

44

BY: 1 Majry RobinsonAttorney for Byron Lee Landau

Page 45: BYRON LEE LANDAU, - iardc.orgBYRON LEE LANDAU, Respondent, No. 3121895. BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Comm. No. 2014PR00174

\lSl/J7/2015 10:48 702—436-7387 FEDEX OFFICE 4157

In the Matter of:

BYRON LEE LANDAU,

Respondent,

No. 3121895.

BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD

OF THE

ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION

AND

DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

Comm.No.2(D14PR00174

PAGE 02

AFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO 735ILCS 5/2-610

Byron Lee Landau hereby certifies, pursuant to the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure,

735 ILCS 5/1-109 and 735 ILCS S/2-610:

1. That he Is the Respondent named fn the above-captioned matter.

2. That his Answer to the Administrator's Complaint, to which the instant

Affidavit is attached, contains certain statements of insufficient knowledge on which to

base an admission or denial of the allegations contained in the complaint.

3. That those allegations of insufficient knowledge are true and correct.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOUGHT.

Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, the undersigned, an attorney, certifies that Misstatements set fort

Affidavit Purs/ant To/fas ILCS 5/2-610 are true and,

DATE: x!fyron Lee LandauRespondent