In a sweeping legal action, several plaintiffs have accused major mortgage service companies of systematically violating federal and state laws related to reverse mortgages. The complaint was filed by Molly-Jeanne Rizzati, Tamara Simpson, Ellisa Martin, Deloris Whitaker, and Michael Hawkins on January 16, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against Compu-Link Corporation (Celink), Carrington Mortgage Services LLC, and Finance of America Reverse LLC.
The plaintiffs allege that these companies unlawfully imposed fees on borrowers of reverse mortgages and Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs), which are federally insured loans designed to help seniors access home equity without selling their homes. According to the complaint, Celink and its co-defendants charged various fees—such as property inspection fees, appraisal fees, preservation fees, and attorney costs—that were not permissible under federal regulations or state laws. These charges allegedly breached standardized HECM loan agreements and violated consumer protection statutes across multiple states including New York and California.
The plaintiffs claim that these practices led to inflated loan balances due to additional interest and mortgage insurance premiums calculated on the unlawful fees. "Defendants collect and profit from those unlawful fees," the complaint asserts, further alleging that these actions constitute breaches of contract as well as violations of good faith and fair dealing covenants. Plaintiffs seek reimbursement for these disputed fees along with associated interest and insurance premiums.
Additionally, the complaint references a related case where similar claims were brought against Celink in Shakespeare v. Live Well Financial Inc., highlighting a pattern of alleged misconduct by the defendants. In that case, an appellate court had previously found sufficient grounds for claims under New York's General Business Law §349 regarding deceptive practices.
The plaintiffs are seeking class-action status for their lawsuit to include all similarly affected borrowers nationwide. They demand restitution for all unlawful charges plus damages for breach of contract and unjust enrichment among other claims. They also call for injunctive relief to prevent future violations by the defendants.
Representing the plaintiffs are attorneys whose names are not specified in this document. The case is presided over by judges from the Eastern District of New York under Case ID 2:26-cv-00277.
Source: 226cv00277_Rizzati_v_Compu_Link_Complaint_Eastern_District_New_York.pdf