Regents & Associates - Review of
Houston Debt Collection Boutique Firm
REGENT & ASSOCIATES
LAWFIRM REPRESENTS AN ARRAY OF CREDITORS, BOTH BANKS AND DEBT BUYERS
Anh Regent
has his own law firm and operates out of Houston [or rather did so until recently (see April 2015 update below]. He also owned a collections firm that had its privileges to do business forfeited for failure to pay state tax.
UPDATE: Anh Regent has lost most of his clients, who they are now his creditors in his bankruptcy case, filed in March 2015 in Houston (Southern District of Texas / Bankruptcy Court). He also owes his process server (big time - six-figure amount), venders, banks (Chase), the IRS, and numerous other creditors. He let go most or all of his staff because he could not pay them any more, and defaulted on his office lease. He also owes for unpaid salary. He is basically history in the debt collection world. His clients are now trying to collect from him and he also has a dozen-or-so lawsuits pending in which he is the named defendant himself or represented the defendant (most of them for FDCPA actions). He is also being accused of have taken his client's money (advanced for costs of filing lawsuits) and having diverted it to unknown purposes.
The original post continues below. Because of the lease termination, the listed address is no longer accurate.
UPDATE: Anh Regent has lost most of his clients, who they are now his creditors in his bankruptcy case, filed in March 2015 in Houston (Southern District of Texas / Bankruptcy Court). He also owes his process server (big time - six-figure amount), venders, banks (Chase), the IRS, and numerous other creditors. He let go most or all of his staff because he could not pay them any more, and defaulted on his office lease. He also owes for unpaid salary. He is basically history in the debt collection world. His clients are now trying to collect from him and he also has a dozen-or-so lawsuits pending in which he is the named defendant himself or represented the defendant (most of them for FDCPA actions). He is also being accused of have taken his client's money (advanced for costs of filing lawsuits) and having diverted it to unknown purposes.
The original post continues below. Because of the lease termination, the listed address is no longer accurate.
WHICH PLAINTIFFS
DOES REGENT SUE FOR?
Regent
& Associates handles debt collection suits for numerous banks and
assignees. Among them: American Express; Bank of America (FIA); Discover Bank;
LVNV Funding LLC; Portfolio Recovery Associates; Equable Ascent Financial, LLC;
Hilco Receivables.
TYPICAL
PLEADINGS
Mr. Regent
is one of those debt collection attorneys who sues on various theories of
recovery, sometimes even quantum meruit, and even mixes them up within a single
paragraph. Uniquely, among his peers, he typically pleads for a judgment on a
slash/slash-whatever-works theory titled “SUIT
ON OPEN & STATED ACCOUNT/DEBT/BREACH OF CONTRACT" in a single
paragraph. (--> Sample debt suit petition filed by Regent &
Associates).
Regent
also represents creditors in appellate litigation on occasion. One significant
case is Tully v. Citibank(South Dakota), N.A.. In that case, it was the debtor who appealed after he
ended up with a judgment in the trial court, so the appeal itself wasn’t
Regent’s choice. Regent handled the defense of the summary judgment on appeal
himself, however, and lost.
KEY APPELLATE CASE INVOLVED DEBT SUIT BY REGENT
In
Tully, Regent had pleaded three
theories of recovery and had been successful in persuading the trial court to
grant his motion for summary judgment. No one theory was specifically singled
out in the judgment. But the court of
appeals reversed, holding that a credit card debt suit could not be litigated as a sworn account, that quantum meruit – an equitable
theory -- was precluded in the presence of the contract, and that there was a
fact issue as to the amount owed. Therefore, summary judgment on the contract
claim was error also.
In
Tully v. Citibank the court of
appeals expressly held that the bank could not recover under its quantum
meruit theory because the summary judgment evidence conclusively
established that a contract existed. Though not discussed in the opinion, the
contract was actually a requirement of federal law (--> TILA). The Truth in Lending Act just uses slightly different terminology: Disclosure of credit
terms to the consumer (hence "TILA Disclosures", sometimes also
called “TIL Disclosures”).
But
that has not stopped Regent from invoking quantum meruit in debt litigation
after the adverse outcome in Tully, at least occasionally.
LAW FIRM ADDRESS IN
HOUSTON:
Anh H. Regent
REGENT
& ASSOCIATES
2650
Fountain View Dr., Ste 233
Houston,
Texas 77057
Fax:
(713) 490-7075
