
14 Sep The Lawless ‘Bounty Hunter’
On the 14th of August, in the same Federal Court in Houston as Magistrate Judge Smith resides, there was a ruling by Senior Federal Judge Nancy Atlas in Jackson vs US Bank. You can view and download it HERE. If you read from page 17, it reads;
TDCPA § 392.101
“In Count Two of their Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Shapiro violated TDCPA § 392.101 by conducting business as a third-party debt collector in Texas without the requisite surety bond. Shapiro responds that it is not a “third-party debt collector” within the meaning of the TDCPA, and thus, is not subject to the bond requirement. Shapiro responds further that even if it is a “third-party debt collector,” its efforts in connection with the attempted foreclosure of the Property are not “debt collections” within the meaning of the TDCPA. These responses lack merit. ”
Atlas details her reasonings based on Texas law and goes on to find in favor of the Plaintiffs in relation to this part of their lawsuit.
The first steps we have taken after reading this ruling are to find out who the defendants Shapiro Schwartz are;
Shapiro Schwartz LLP: a Foreclosure Mill and Debt Collectors
A simple online search brought out the usual “red flags” pertaining to Shapiro Schwartz (hereinafter referred to as Shapiro).
No website.
Same as BDF they hide from the public as they are a foreclosure debt collection agency.
Glassdoor reviews.
All attorneys with the keyword “Foreclosure” prevalent by all reviewers, stating they were lawyers working at a foreclosure mill.
Shapiro Search on Google


Linkedin Staff use Title 'Foreclosure'


Shapiro Review on YP


Now we have confirmed Shapiro are debt collectors, we return to our case and would bring your attention to the following;
BDF
As stated above, they are in the exact same business as Shapiro.
Shelley Hopkins
Worked for BDF as lead Foreclosure Manager.
Mark Hopkins
All his practice income is solely from “foreclosures”, he is what we refer to as a ‘Bounty Hunter’, he is hired by and works directly with BDF and represents them in their cases.
Hopkins Law
When Mark Hopkins stepped in after BDF lost the case at trial in Judge Smith’s Court, he was in partnership with a long term friend for many years. However, that changed when he married Shelley who we believe convinced him to go on his own and together they could become “foreclosure kings” in Texas.
We did some background work on Hopkins at that time and submitted to the court our research, including the fact he lied to the Houston court by saying he was still in a partnership when assigning himself to our case, when, in fact he was now a new firm, trading as Hopkins Law.
The court refused our complaints that he was a debt collector / bounty hunter and ignored his deception, – see our filing doc 111 here – which, by law, would have allowed us to strike him from the case and also have him censured.
Hopkins Law is not Bonded and the case at the 5th should be tossed out.
Hopkins Law is not Bonded and this case has to be either dismissed in favor of the Burkes’ as a result or the case found in the favor of the Burkes’, ending this decade long lawsuit, when you file the en-banc request.
BDF
If you visit the website here;
https://www.sos.state.tx.us/statdoc/faqs2900.shtml
and then search Hopkins Law in Austin here;
http://direct.sos.state.tx.us/debtcollectors/DCSearch.asp
it will confirm that there is no company or person of that name who is currently bonded in the State of Texas.
A Question for the Supreme Court
If you refer to the Jackson ruling, the Judge makes the following statements (page 21);
“The Texas Supreme Court has yet to address whether foreclosure is “debt collection” under the TDCPA. However, courts throughout Texas applying Texas law consistently have considered foreclosure actions to constitute “debt collection” under the TDCPA and have permitted foreclosure-related claims thereunder.”
The footnote no. 18 she includes here lists extensively cases which confirm her statement and reasoning for her opinion and ruling.
We would like HBSSLaw to review and consider our findings and include this in the en-banc filing.
In the worst case scenario, as the Judge clearly stated, the Supreme Court has yet to confirm debt collector ‘status’ which is implied law rather than documented law.
We believe this alone qualifies as an appeal to the Supreme Court, if the en-banc hearings are refused by the 5th COA.
Your opinion in this respect would be valued.
Other cited articles;
Debt collection law firms must follow FDCPA in foreclosure cases.
https://www.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/2018/03/05/debt-collection-law-firms-must-follow-fdcpa-in-foreclosure-cases/?slreturn=20180814054331
No Comments