See the video:

The interview lasted approximately 20 minutes, and only this appearance made it off the cutting room floor.

As a Board Certified Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney, I speak with many people about filing for bankruptcy and their debts. Medical Bill bankruptcies are a very real and growing problem. Don't get me wrong, this is not a new phenomena that suddenly came to rise like the epidemic or pandemic known as swine flu. People have always had to deal with medical bills when either they or a loved one became sick or were injured. However, it seems that over the last few years, medical bill bankruptcies have been on the rise.

Please click on this link and go read the article.

As the only Board Certified Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney in Southwest Florida who handles only consumer cases, I realize that Bankruptcy is much more than a financial issue.

Depending upon the individual, bankruptcy can be devastating emotionally, physically, and financially. Individuals who are experiencing the loss of a home need to take steps to regain control of their lives and their finances. The choice of which Bankruptcy Attorney you should use will be the first step on the road to recovery.

Florida Statute: 559.72 Prohibited practices generally.--In collecting consumer debts, no person shall:

(1) Simulate in any manner a law enforcement officer or a representative of any governmental agency;

(2) Use or threaten force or violence;

(3) Tell a debtor who disputes a consumer debt that she or he or any person employing her or him will disclose to another, orally or in writing, directly or indirectly, information affecting the debtor's reputation for credit worthiness without also informing the debtor that the existence of the dispute will also be disclosed as required by subsection (6);

(4) Communicate or threaten to communicate with a debtor's employer prior to obtaining final judgment against the debtor, unless the debtor gives her or his permission in writing to contact her or his employer or acknowledges in writing the existence of the debt after the debt has been placed for collection, but this shall not prohibit a person from telling the debtor that her or his employer will be contacted if a final judgment is obtained;

(5) Disclose to a person other than the debtor or her or his family information affecting the debtor's reputation, whether or not for credit worthiness, with knowledge or reason to know that the other person does not have a legitimate business need for the information or that the information is false;

(6) Disclose information concerning the existence of a debt known to be reasonably disputed by the debtor without disclosing that fact. If a disclosure is made prior to such reasonable dispute having been asserted and written notice is received from the debtor that any part of the debt is disputed and if such dispute is reasonable, the person who made the original disclosure shall reveal upon the request of the debtor within 30 days the details of the dispute to each person to whom disclosure of the debt without notice of the dispute was made within the preceding 90 days;

(7) Willfully communicate with the debtor or any member of her or his family with such frequency as can reasonably be expected to harass the debtor or her or his family, or willfully engage in other conduct which can reasonably be expected to abuse or harass the debtor or any member of her or his family;

(8) Use profane, obscene, vulgar, or willfully abusive language in communicating with the debtor or any member of her or his family;

(9) Claim, attempt, or threaten to enforce a debt when such person knows that the debt is not legitimate or assert the existence of some other legal right when such person knows that the right does not exist;

(10) Use a communication which simulates in any manner legal or judicial process or which gives the appearance of being authorized, issued or approved by a government, governmental agency, or attorney at law, when it is not;

(11) Communicate with a debtor under the guise of an attorney by using the stationery of an attorney or forms or instruments which only attorneys are authorized to prepare;

(12) Orally communicate with a debtor in such a manner as to give the false impression or appearance that such person is or is associated with an attorney;

(13) Advertise or threaten to advertise for sale any debt as a means to enforce payment except under court order or when acting as an assignee for the benefit of a creditor;

(14) Publish or post, threaten to publish or post, or cause to be published or posted before the general public individual names or any list of names of debtors, commonly known as a deadbeat list, for the purpose of enforcing or attempting to enforce collection of consumer debts;

(15) Refuse to provide adequate identification of herself or himself or her or his employer or other entity whom she or he represents when requested to do so by a debtor from whom she or he is collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt;

(16) Mail any communication to a debtor in an envelope or postcard with words typed, written, or printed on the outside of the envelope or postcard calculated to embarrass the debtor. An example of this would be an envelope addressed to "Deadbeat, Jane Doe" or "Deadbeat, John Doe";

(17) Communicate with the debtor between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. in the debtor's time zone without the prior consent of the debtor;

(18) Communicate with a debtor if the person knows that the debtor is represented by an attorney with respect to such debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney's name and address, unless the debtor's attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to a communication from the person, unless the debtor's attorney consents to a direct communication with the debtor, or unless the debtor initiates the communication; or

(19) Cause charges to be made to any debtor for communications by concealment of the true purpose of the communication, including collect telephone calls and telegram fees.

"To date, the firm has had excellent results in the cases it has been handling. John and Shannon have proven to the mortgage companies that they are a team to be reckoned with." said Carmen Dellutri. "We look forward to the future and hope to help all our clients achieve their goals." said John

So, either today or tomorrow we will know if our elected officials have sold us out to the Banks and Mortgage Companies. My bet is that they will, and for each elected official that sells us out for political gain, I say vote them out. There is no issue that is more important to the people of the United States right now than housing. If you are not sure of where you will be sleeping tonight, how can you be a productive American at work. The issue of housing is core to our economy, and the jokers in Washington are playing politics with the Banks. They are in discussions with banks that we the people own. Why do the banks have any say in this legislation? Aren't we a democracy (Rule by the People)? Sure, as long as you can hire a lobbyist with a politician in his or her back pocket. These are things that baffle my mind. Let's wait and see if they do the right thing.

The videos are located in the media center, which can be found on the lower right side of the homepage.

Click Here to be linked to the bankruptcy videos.

It should be noted that the Dellutri Law Group, P.A. did not produce the videos, and any legal advice contained therein is hereby disclaimed.

Prior to the Court's March 6, 2009 Order canceling the March 30th sale date, the Court had issued a prior Order on February 6, 2009 which stated that the mortgage company could not set another sale date. Despite that Order, The sale date on the defendant's home had been set for March 30, 2009. The Sarasota Judge canceled the sale when she found out that the mortgage company represented to the homeowner that she could modify her mortgage and that the mortgage foreclosure lawsuit would be abandoned.

Kudos to Judge Donna Pader Berlin for putting a stop to a practice that is all too prevalent in today's economy.

An authorized user is not legally liable for a debt. The original credit card holder is. For example, let's say I had a Visa card that I applied for in 2000. In 2005, through aggressive credit card marketing and my lapse of good judgment, I fill out the form and get a card for my brother, since he had just graduated from college. If my brother uses the card, I am responsible, not him. He didn't sign the original contract or application. It is that simple, or to put in lawyer's terms, there is no privity of contract.

At this point in time, it appears that bankruptcy will still be the best option because the House of Representatives is still debating: Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act 2009. Let's hope our elected officials don't over-think this one, and they allow our residents to modify their mortgages in the bankruptcy courts.