Jen Ngai Lavallee, Staff Attorney

Over the last couple of years, thousands of homeowners facing the threat of foreclosure have been trying to get loan modifications through the federal government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”). Numerous articles have highlighted some of the problems involving bank compliance with program guidelines. But a recent report published by Pro Publica indicates that, in addition to compliance issues at the servicer bank level, the lack of government enforcement and oversight of the program has also significantly limited HAMP’s effectiveness. The Pro Publica report summarizes findings regarding the quality of HAMP enforcement by Treasury and Freddie Mac against major banks, concluding that one of the main reasons the administration’s flagship foreclosure prevention program has been largely ineffective in helping homeowners get loan modifications is that “[t]he government’s supervision of the program has apparently ranged from nonexistent to weak.”

While bank non-compliance and ineffective oversight of the government’s loan modification program affect all struggling homeowners, the impact of these problems is significantly magnified when it comes to low-income homeowners, who often have limited or no access to internet, fax machines, phones, and copiers—many or all of which are necessary resources in the “paper chase” that has come to define the loan modification application process. Low-income homeowners are also among the most likely to become homeless after foreclosure.  On the flip side, when loan modification does work, it can have an enormous positive impact on the stability and livelihood of families living on the edge of poverty.

The experience of Legal Aid client, Ms. L, demonstrates both the hurdles that loan modification applicants face, as well as the enormous difference that a successful modification can have on the lives of those living in or near the brink of poverty. Ms. L came to Legal Aid fearful that she was about to lose her home of 21 years. After her mother had moved out and was unable to continue contributing to the household expenses, Ms. L fell behind on the mortgage and struggled to make ends meet for the four children she cared for on her own, including one child with permanent and severe disabilities.  She had tried to apply for a loan modification, but her bank had provided her with false information regarding her eligibility and blocked the review from moving forward.

Legal Aid reviewed Ms. L’s financial situation, which indicated that she was likely to qualify for a loan modification, and re-submitted a new application for loan modification on her behalf.  The bank again denied the application, however, claiming that Ms. L’s income was insufficient to support her mortgage even with a reduced interest rate. After investigating the matter further, Legal Aid determined that the bank had failed to count approximately $300 in food stamps as part of Ms. L’s income—even though loan modification program guidelines clearly indicated that food stamps were to be counted—and that the exclusion of Ms. L’s food stamp income was the determining factor in the denial of her application. When the bank persisted in refusing to count the food stamps, claiming that investor guidelines prohibited their inclusion, Legal Aid escalated the matter to the Fair Housing Administration, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the HAMP escalations team, highlighting the bank’s failure to comply with applicable program guidelines and arguing that a failure to count public assistance income under these circumstances was a violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.

Despite Ms. L’s apparent eligibility and Legal Aid’s multiple attempts to get the attention of bank supervisors and government regulators with authority to review the situation, it took months of back and forth to obtain and complete a successful trial modification plan. Shortly thereafter, Ms. L finally obtained a permanent loan modification involving a reduction in her interest rate by more than two percent and the transfer of a portion of her loan balance to a no-interest subordinate loan with the Fair Housing Administration. Ms. L is now current on her mortgage and stable in her family home. Legal Aid congratulates Ms. L on obtaining her modification and for her tenacity in continuing with her foreclosure prevention efforts despite the multiple barriers the bank placed in her way.

While Ms. L was ultimately able to obtain a loan modification and stay in her home, thousands of other homeowners—including many low-income homeowners—continue to struggle.  Legal Aid is committed to continuing its advocacy on behalf of low-income DC homeowners facing foreclosure and to increase access to justice for those who need it most.

Chinh Le, Legal Director

The Hispanic Bar Association of the District of Columbia (HBA-DC) recently announcedthat Legal Aid’s Rosanne Aviles will be the 2011 recipient of the Hugh A. Johnson Memorial Award. The award goes to an individual “with visible ties to the DC Metropolitan area, especially its Hispanic community, who demonstrates unwavering commitment and achievement to public service and dedication to the principles of equality, cultural respect and social justice.” 

Rosanne Avilés, Supervising Attorney -Housing

We are delighted that Rosanne will be recognized for her amazing work serving persons living in poverty. Since joining Legal Aid in June of 2007, Rosanne has saved scores of individuals from homelessness, restored housing subsidies to the poorest members of our community, advocated for safe and sanitary housing conditions, and ensured protections for victims of domestic violence. She is an exemplary advocate for her clients and the community at large, bringing a formidable combination of tenacity and precision to everything she does. As a bilingual attorney who speaks Spanish fluently, Rosanne offers her Spanish-speaking clients the best quality representation in their primary language. Many of these clients would not be able to access the justice system but for Rosanne’s representation.  

Each year, HBA-DC recognizes three individuals and one organization with its Equal Justice Awards. In addition to Rosanne, the other awardees are: The Honorable Hiram Puig-Lugo, D.C. Superior Court Judge, who will receive the 2011 Judge Ricardo M. Urbina Lifetime Achievement Award; M. Lucero Ortiz, Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff, at the U.S. Department of Labor, who will receive the 2011 Rising Star Award; and Liberty’s Promise, a non-profit organization that supports young, D.C. area immigrants in need while encouraging them to be active and conscientious citizens, which will be the organizational recipient of the 2011 Hugh A. Johnson Memorial Award. This year’s award ceremony will take place on November 10, 2011 at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Washington. 

Congratulations, Rosanne!

Rachel Rintelmann, Staff Attorney

 Legal Aid is fortunate to have developed relationships with four prominent DC law firms that provide the organization with “loaned associates” on a rotating basis. These associates typically spend six months working at Legal Aid, representing clients under the supervision of our lawyers. 

We recently bid farewell two of our loaned associates: Amy Sandra Lee and Vijay Singh. Amy is an associate with the law firm of Crowell & Moring, and Vijay is an associate with the law firm of Skadden Arps.  Both worked with the Legal Aid’s housing unit. Before they left, staff attorney Rachel Rintelmann sat down to talk to them about their experiences. 

What made you want to work with Legal Aid for six months? 

Vijay Singh of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Vijay:  Since I started practicing law, I have been very interested in pro bono work and have tried to keep an open probono matter on my desk at all times. However, I felt like I wanted to dive in deeper and gain some substantive expertise in a particular area of law, which I couldn’t do with one-off cases. In addition to gaining substantive knowledge, I also wanted to work with the client population served by Legal Aid and become a more invested member of the D.C. community.  So, when the opportunity presented itself to come work at Legal Aid, I jumped at it. I had worked with several Legal Aid attorneys through the Landlord Tenant Resource Center at D.C. Superior Court, and I knew they did high quality work and had a tremendous passion for their clients.  From the attorneys I met, I thought that Legal Aid would be a good environment for me to develop an expertise in housing law.

Amy Lee of Crowell & Moring LLP

Amy:  I wanted the full and true experience of practicing public interest law at Legal Aid. I wanted the six months to immerse myself in endless possibilities: to directly work with new clients, help those clients get meaningful access to justice, learn a completely different area of law, have an impact on the DC community, and advocate in court, all while working with and learning from Legal Aid.

Has working at Legal Aid changed the way in which you view Washington, D.C.?

Amy:   For sure. My viewpoint has broadened immensely after six months of getting a glimpse into the lives of the people who fill the quadrants of the city and how they see the world.  Empathy kicks in and you can’t help but assume the viewpoint of those you talk to and advocate for daily.  And now there is more to see in D.C. – more beauty, more gloom, more hope. But unchanged to me is that this city is defined by the people who fill it. And the people are what make D.C. a most remarkable city.

Vijay:  Yes it has. Before I came to Legal Aid, I thought I knew a lot about the city, but within a few weeks of coming to Legal Aid, I realized how little I actually knew. One of my favorite activities in this job has been riding around on the city buses to visit my clients. It has allowed me to get a glimpse into the diverse neighborhoods around D.C. and waiting at the bus stops has allowed me to connect and talk with our fellow D.C. residents.  Although I have been able to see a lot of the city, the one thing that still astounds me is the immense wealth disparity that exists in this city. Working at Legal Aid has redoubled my resolve to reduce that disparity.

If you could share one lesson or experience with other private attorneys, what would it be?

Vijay: I think the most challenging, but yet rewarding part of this job has been working with clients with severe mental illness. Back at the firm, I would never have occasion to work with a client with severe mental illness, but at Legal Aid, several of my clients have some form of mental illness, ranging from bi-polar disease to various undiagnosed mental illnesses. I would encourage other private attorneys to seek out cases where the clients have mental illness because I believe it has improved my legal skills, and most importantly, they are the people who need our help the most in navigating the often complex and daunting legal system. 

Amy:  Vijay has got me thinking about the many clients I got to work with so I’ll share a client experience: Mr. A always had a smile on his face, loved to crack jokes and talk in a “Shakespeare theater voice” when we met. You wouldn’t know that he was HIV positive and lived in an apartment that was infested with bed bugs and roaches. The front door was broken; the electrical outlets were exposed; there were cracks in the wall and peeling paint. Because of the bed bugs, Mr. A had thrown all his furniture including his bed away. He was sleeping on the floor when I met him. The landlord sued Mr. A to try and evict him, alleging that Mr. A did not pay his rent. Legal Aid was able to help Mr. A prove his rent was paid, assert a counterclaim against the landlord for housing code violations, and negotiate a settlement with the landlord. The landlord not only dropped the lawsuit, but agreed to pay Mr. A money to buy new furniture, repaint the unit, and make repairs throughout the apartment. 

What song title best summarizes your experience at Legal Aid?

Amy:   Get Up Stand Up

Vijay:  R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Westra Miller, Staff Attorney

Late last week, Mayor Vincent C. Gray announced that the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), an important program providing food to low-income D.C. seniors, would be extended through the end of 2011.  Advocates, such as Legal Aid, had been concerned that the program would end with the close of the fiscal year on September 30, leaving thousands of seniors without essential food such as juice, cereal, rice, dry beans, or canned goods.  Approximately 6,647 seniors who have a gross income below 130% of the federal poverty level receive a bag of $58 worth of groceries each month through CSFP.  They will continue to receive these critical items with no break in service due to the Mayor’s recent commitment to extending CFSP.  Given the very real economic pressures facing many District residents—and especially seniors on fixed incomes—the extension of a program such as CSFP comes at a critical time.  However, the extension is also a reminder of the precarious fates of many locally- and federally-funded benefits programs in this season of budget-cutting.  While Legal Aid is pleased that many of our clients and community members can continue to rely on the food provided through CFSP through the end of the year, we and other advocates will not stop our ongoing work to ensure that any upcoming budget cuts or programmatic reductions are fair to all D.C. residents.

Stephanie Troyer, Supervising Attorney - Family Unit

Every day at Legal Aid, we work with families living in poverty.  In a recent post, we highlighted the staggering poverty rates contained in the 2010 Census data. Further analysis of that data, together with new sobering numbers, reveal the truly dire circumstances faced by our clients and their children.  

Earlier this week, the Washington Post reported that the District has the highest rate of childhood poverty in the Nation. In our nation’s capital, almost one in three children is growing up poor. Of the more than 30,000 children living in poverty in the District last year, 90 percent were black, 8 percent Hispanic, and less than half a percent were white. Nationwide, Hispanic children now comprise the largest group of children living in poverty, and the rate of poverty for both black and Hispanic children is approximately three times the rate of poverty for white children. 

In addition to the challenges of widespread poverty, the Post also recently reported on the high rate of self-reported suicide attempts by District middle school students.  D.C. students consistently report double the national average of 6.3 percent.   

Challenging as the conditions of poverty may be for adults, the most innocent victims of these conditions are children. And as these statistics demonstrate, in the District, an unconscionable number of children are more challenged now than ever.

Legal Aid is proud to launch its new DC Unemployment Insurance Justice Project, which seeks to expand access to unemployment insurance (UI) for low-income DC residents. With the support of Arnold & Porter through Equal Justice Works, Legal Aid will represent low-wage workers who are wrongfully denied UI benefits. Through individual and systemic advocacy, we will press for effective implementation of changes in the law to benefit low-wage workers. Finally, through outreach, we will ensure that those who most need benefits will have the help and knowledge they need to prevail in their claims.

We believe this new Project will fill a substantial gap in services for our client community. Recent data released by the Federal Government indicates that, as feared, high-unemployment rates are here to stay.  Low-income communities in the District of Columbia have been hit especially hard by the economic recession. In Ward 8, for instance, unemployment rates have reached Depression-era levels with nearly 30% of residents out of work. These numbers are even higher when we include adults who have given up looking for work, or have partially replaced their income with lower-paying part-time positions.

Not surprisingly, high rates of unemployment lead to more families living in poverty. Because few low-wage workers have savings or family members able to assist them during hard times, any loss of income can have a devastating effect. Many families rely on unemployment insurance in order to survive the transition between jobs and ensure access to food and shelter. UI provides up to six months of partial-income replacement and is financed by contributions from employers. 

Due to recent changes in the DC Unemployment Compensation Act, more low-wage workers are eligible for these crucial benefits. For example, workers who quit their jobs because of an ill child or family member are now eligible. The law also provides common-sense redress for workers who missed administrative deadlines through no fault of their own. As a result, many recently unemployed workers may now be eligible for benefits or be able to appeal their denials. However, these new changes also heighten the need for legal assistance to assist UI applicants navigate the law, prepare for hearings, and otherwise assist to enforce their rights. In DC, only 10% of parties in UI appeals are represented by an attorney.

Unemployment insurance is a crucial tool that helps families avoid economic devastation after a job loss. With the ongoing economic downturn and recent changes in DC law, now is the right time to launch this important project for low-wage workers.

Jodi Feldman, Director of Pro Bono and Intake

Each year, the Legal Aid Society receives thousands of requests for legal services.  Although Legal Aid staff represent hundreds of these clients and provide brief assistance to several hundred more, still there are many who we regretfully must turn away because we don’t have the resources to serve everyone in need.  Fortunately, attorneys working in private practice and government settings throughout the city step up to help many of these clients through Legal Aid’s Pro Bono Referral Program. 

White & Case associate Marisa R. Bassett shares her experience representing a client referred from Legal Aid in a case that was resolved earlier this year …

Marisa R. Bassett, Associate, White & Case LLP

I first met my client, Ms. W, in early 2010. The young mother teared up as she related how she had unknowinglyrelinquished custody of her then five-year-old daughter when the daughter’s father tricked Ms. W into signing an agreement giving him custody.  My client thought her child was only going to stay with the father for six months.  Ms. W missed her daughter and desperately wanted her back home.       

Ms. W’s daughter had essentially no contact with her father until she was three years old.  The father then began to visit with the child sporadically.  About three years ago, the father unexpectedly approached Ms. W asking for their daughter to come live with him for a six-month period.  He said he wanted to get to know his daughter.  Ms. W initially refused, but in the spring of 2009, after months of discussions, she agreed, feeling that her daughter would benefit from a relationship with the father.  Then, in late summer 2009, the father presented Ms. W with an agreement that he said was a court order memorializing their agreement.  The document was, in fact, not official; the father had prepared it.  The document essentially stated that the parties agreed that it was in their child’s best interests for the child’s father to have legal and physical custody indefinitely. 

Once the document was signed, the father stopped allowing the child to visit with Ms. W on weekends and took other steps to push Ms. W out of her daughter’s life, including enrolling the child in a new school without identifying Ms. W as the child’s mother on the school forms.  When it became clear that the father was not going to return Ms. W’s daughter to her care at the end of six months, Ms. W filed a motion for temporary custody and went to Legal Aid asking for help.  

I was a first-year associate at White & Case when another first-year, Jacqueline Kort, and I took on the case, referred from Legal Aid, with the assistance of Victor DeSantis and under the supervision of two more senior attorneys, Stephanie Casey and Dana Foster.  Legal Aid assigned us a mentor who provided technical guidance, but we were responsible for the matter from start to finish.  It was exciting to advocate for a client of our own on a case that involved matters so close to her heart and rewarding to help resolve a difficult challenge in our client’s life.              

The Court initially refused to hear any substantive arguments that the agreement was fraudulent and continued to enforce it.  We were undeterred.  At regular status hearings, we pushed for reversal of the custody arrangement while the Court ordered home studies, appointed a guardian ad litem, and arranged for psychological evaluations of both parents and the child.  Ms. W’s case also demonstrated one of the challenges representing clients in family court.  The father did not have a lawyer, and he simply would not speak with us.  When we approached him to discuss issues—large or small—he refused, telling us that he would only accept Court decisions. 

At first, our successes were incremental, securing joint legal custody and obtaining more visitation time for our client.  However, when we received an interim report from the guardian ad litem that included facts and recommendations favorable to our client’s position that the father was not adequately addressing the child’s medical needs, we finally saw an opening to argue that temporary custody should be transferred to Ms. W with visitation for the father, essentially flipping the status quo.  The Court agreed.  A year after we first met Ms. W, and nearly two years after her daughter went to stay with the father, Ms. W brought her daughter back home. 

We subsequently secured a consent custody agreement.  Ms. W now has full legal and physical custody of her daughter, and the father is permitted visitation on alternating weekends.  Ms. W’s daughter goes to school with her siblings and is thriving in first grade.       

—Marisa R. Bassett, Associate, White & Case LLP

Director of Development

Last night, Legal Aid had the honor of being the featured organization at the Hispanic Bar Association of DC (HBA-DC) happy hour for Hispanic Heritage Month.  The event was a great opportunity for Legal Aid to raise awareness about our work, particularly in the Latino community, and inform HBA-DC members about our volunteer and pro bono opportunities.  The happy hour was also a fundraiser for Legal Aid.  Special thanks to the HBA-DC Board for selecting Legal Aid as the featured organization for the event.  We look forward to continuing to partner with HBA-DC.

Stephanie Troyer, Supervising Attorney - Family Unit

Last week, msnbc.com ran a lengthy piece examining a very serious problem for parents who fall behind in their child support obligations. With economic insecurity and job loss facing parents nationwide, many non-custodial parents find themselves unable to maintain employment. After missing child support payments, these parents may be brought before a judge and jailed if the judge finds that payments could have been made but the parents refused to do so. 

In DC, as in Georgia and most other states, non-custodial parents are not guaranteed an attorney in civil contempt proceedings for failure to pay child support. Without an attorney, non-custodial parents may fail to effectively raise important defenses. While a parent theoretically ought to be sent to jail only when he or she has the ability to pay under a child support order, this is not always the case.

At Legal Aid, we believe that child support orders should be fair and just, and our attorneys help both custodial parents seeking child support and non-custodial parents who may be ordered to make payments. 

When one parent is facing the possibility of time behind bars, however, we believe it is particularly important that he or she have access to an attorney and receive the benefit of all the procedural safeguards required by law. In January of this year, we joined other organizations in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to recognize the seriousness of this issue and provide for the right to counsel in civil contempt proceedings. While the Supreme Court did not fully agree with our position, it did conclude that significant protections must be put in place to make sure that any jail sentence is appropriate.

Legal Aid will continue to work to ensure that non-custodial parents’ rights are protected in contempt proceedings.

David Young, Deferred Associate

 When I joined the Legal Aid Society’s public benefits unit as a deferred associate in 2010, I was fresh out of law school and anxious to actually practice law. However, like many new associates in law firms, I was somewhat unfamiliar with the areas of law I would be practicing in, and I had very little experience interacting with actual clients. The various public benefits programs all have unique and sometimes difficult rules and regulations that take time to master. Learning how those programs worked, and learning how to interact with clients, government agencies, and various courts on a regular basis were all difficult challenges I faced as a deferred associate and a new attorney.

Those challenges, however, also meant I had the chance to have my own clients and to work directly in a variety of cases. Even though my work was closely supervised by experienced attorneys, I was given the opportunity from the first day to draft motions and briefs, interact with clients, and represent them before government agencies and courts. From Social Security disability appeals to hearings before the District’s Office of Administrative Hearings, I learned about the rules and regulations of public benefit programs by actually researching and writing about the law and representing clients at hearings and conferences. 

And although most of my cases involve individual clients and their families, on occasion I also had the privilege of working on cases that had a system-wide impact. One of my early cases was a challenge to the District of Columbia’s failure to timely implement a change in the District’s Food Stamp law that increased benefits for thousands of District families. To my relief, I discovered that many of the concepts I learned about in law school—such as mootness and administrative deference—were applicable to the real world and had a substantial effect on the outcome of the case.  After a long series of hearings and negotiations, we eventually were reached a settlement agreement that was a victory for our clients. 

But the most important aspect of working at Legal Aid has been meeting and interacting with clients on a daily basis. It may be difficult to see the real world impact of a favorable legal decision when the client is an abstract entity.  But at Legal Aid, there is little doubt about the positive effect a successful case has on our client community. Whether it’s helping a disabled worker obtain the Social Security benefits they need to pay their rent, or helping a family obtain the Food Stamp benefits they need to have a decent meal, the tangible effect of Legal Aid’s work is obvious and important.

Although my time at Legal Aid will draw to a close today, and I will soon begin working at a law firm, I plan to continue to be involved in Legal Aid’s activities by working on pro-bono cases, volunteering for legal clinics, and participating in the Generous Associates Campaign. Working at Legal Aid has changed my perspective about the challenges and injustices faced by those in poverty, and inspired me to stay committed to help Legal Aid make justice real.