IBJNews

1,300 Hoosiers eligible for United Financial restitution

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller says more than 1,300 Hoosiers are eligible for restitution from United Financial Systems Corp. in the wake of a court ruling against the Indianapolis-based company.

The Indiana Supreme Court ruled last year United Financial Services violated state law by selling estate plans without a license to practice law.

The court determined that United Financial and related companies were liable for refunding fees to the victims and appointed the attorney general's office to assist with the refund procedure.

Zoeller said Friday that state residents must apply for restitution from the company by Oct. 15, 2011, to qualify.

Consumers who qualify and have not received a prepaid claim card in the mail from Zoeller's office should call the attorney general's Consumer Protection Division at (317) 232-6330 or 1-800-382-5516, he said.

The Supreme Court ordered United Financial in April 2010 to cease its unauthorized law practice and reimburse clients who paid fees after June 6, 2006. The court’s order applied to 1,306 clients who collectively must be repaid more than $3 million.

The company also faces at least two class-action suits that could involve 4,000 or more Indiana clients who paid fees before June 6, 2006.

Richard Kennard filed a class-action suit March 16 in Marion Superior Court against United Financial, which in 2002 sold him a $2,500 estate-planning package, along with two annuities. Kennard is represented by Indianapolis-based law firm Cohen & Malad.

Like many United Financial clients, Kennard had a will in effect when a saleswoman visited his home in 2002. His suit claims she persuaded him to buy "inappropriate" power-of-attorney and living-will and trust documents, which were drafted by a lawyer that the firm contracted. Kennard’s probate lawyer later revised the work.

In January, a Logansport law firm also filed a class-action lawsuit against United Financial on behalf of thousands of residents for what attorneys estimate could be $10 million to $20 million in damages.

The lawsuit by Starr Austen & Miller alleges constructive fraud, contractual claim violations, conversion, and disgorgement of fees due to the unlawful practice of law. . The suit named Donald A. Bonnell of Kewanna as the sole plaintiff, but it contends a larger class of 2,000 or more people could have valid claims.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT