Q&A
Feliz questions Mastro about his representation of Portfolio Recovery Associates
7:07:28
·
5 min
Council Member Feliz interrogates Mastro about his representation of Portfolio Recovery Associates (PRA), a debt collection agency accused of fraudulent practices. Feliz outlines PRA's violations and questions Mastro's decision to defend such a company.
- Feliz details PRA's violations, including submitting false affidavits and misrepresenting debts
- Mastro defends his representation, stating that he helped settle the cases responsibly
- Feliz and Mastro engage in a heated exchange about the extent and timing of Mastro's involvement with PRA
Oswald Feliz
7:07:28
You have a history of choosing to represent the powerful against the powerless.
7:07:32
For instance, defending the real estate interests who sought to weaken our landlords.
7:07:37
I want to talk about another big corporation that you defended.
7:07:39
You represented the Portfolio Recovery Associates, the PRA company 1 of the largest debt collection agencies in the nation.
7:07:46
You defended this corporation in a class action lawsuit with serious allegations, allegations which were then proven, a lawsuit which alleged that in connection with the debt collection efforts The company and its debt collector offer, Malin and Associates, submitted false or defective affidavits to state and local courts in order to fraudulently obtain default judgments against consumers for phantom deaths.
7:08:11
That's that couldn't be legally recovered from many reasons.
7:08:15
Just last year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ordered that the PRA, your repeat offender client, to pay more than $24,000,000 having violated a 2015 consent order.
7:08:28
This was after the company had already been ordered to pay more than $27,000,000 in consumer refunds and penalties for its debt collection tactics.
7:08:39
In a 2015 case, the CFPB, the Consumer of Financial Protection Bureau, found that the company, the client that you defended, collected on unproven and inaccurate debts.
7:08:50
They filed misleading affidavits.
7:08:52
In debt collection actions.
7:08:53
They misrepresented that they intended to prove debts.
7:08:56
If customers contest them, they even misrepresented that the company had legally enforceable actions to debts out that would that were clearly outside of applicable statute of limitations.
7:09:08
Basically telling consumers that you you you had claims to debts you knew you couldn't collect.
7:09:14
I wanna reiterate, these weren't just allegations.
7:09:16
These were findings proven by a federal independent agency.
7:09:23
After getting caught red handed, the company you defended continued violating the law through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics, and lawsuits.
7:09:35
Debt collection particularly affects vulnerable disadvantage communities, it affects low income families that are struggling, draining resources from families who need them the most.
7:09:46
So a few question about this.
7:09:49
You as a lawyer had disruptions in terms of clients that you could have represented.
7:09:54
You're obviously talented.
7:09:55
There's no question about that.
7:09:57
Why use your talent and your skills to defend powerful interest like the ones in this case going after vulnerable people?
Randy Mastro
7:10:07
Council member, everything you have described about PRA happened after I represented PRA.
7:10:16
Clients come to you with in private practice, with their worst problems.
7:10:22
That doesn't mean that everything they did is what you would do, but you you help them try to resolve their problems.
7:10:32
And in that case, I'm sure you must realize after that recitation that we settled the cases that I represented.
7:10:40
PRA paid money for what it did.
7:10:43
We responsibly and ethically represented PRA and I haven't represented PRA in years.
7:10:50
And the fact of the matter is if we're going to scrutinize private practice lawyers at major law firms applying those standards that any client they've ever touched, you're going to attribute that former clients conduct forever to them and that their clients have to have always been on the right side and you can't represent them even if you represent them ethically and responsibly to settle matters and get, you know, results that are fair to both sides because they result in a settlement.
7:11:29
You know, you're gonna eliminate lawyers in private practice at major law firms ever being able to qualify for a court council again, and I stand on the shoulders of giants.
7:11:39
If unfortunately, I have to have this a job, of individuals who have been
Oswald Feliz
7:11:43
listed.
Randy Mastro
7:11:43
Some of the greatest lawyers in private practice in city history,
Oswald Feliz
7:11:47
I think.
Randy Mastro
7:11:47
And I'm glad they served, and I'm willing to serve.
Oswald Feliz
7:11:50
I think the facts of that case show that this is not a case about lawyers hoping to resolve issues.
7:11:55
That their clients are
Randy Mastro
7:11:56
I didn't represent them in the This is you cited
Oswald Feliz
7:11:59
the fact of that case show that this is a case about big corporations using high powered lawyers to not only evade the truth, but also evade accountability.
7:12:07
Think those are the facts of that.
Randy Mastro
7:12:08
They didn't evade accountability.
7:12:09
They paid lots of money.
Oswald Feliz
7:12:12
Yeah.
7:12:12
They And
Randy Mastro
7:12:12
they agreed to structural reforms.
7:12:14
It's a structural
Oswald Feliz
7:12:15
influence of some sentiment.
Randy Mastro
7:12:16
My my wife
Oswald Feliz
7:12:17
violated it, and then they were forced to pay an additional $20,000,000.
7:12:20
27,000,000 So
Randy Mastro
7:12:22
I I didn't represent them then.
7:12:24
Go ahead.
Oswald Feliz
7:12:24
Yeah.
7:12:24
But you represent to them after they took those actions and you presented them.
7:12:28
Right?
Randy Mastro
7:12:28
I represented them in connection with one set of lawsuits that were resolved with financial and remedial action.
7:12:39
And I think there was a responsible resolution that all parties agreed to.
7:12:43
I didn't represent them before.
7:12:45
I didn't represent them after.
