Federal prosecutors in New York have charged two men with running a mortgage-modification scheme that federal regulators say bilked more than 3,000 struggling homeowners nationwide, many of them elderly or military veterans, out of millions of dollars in fees while their homes slid toward foreclosure. Armando Solis Barron, who also went by “Solomon,” and Dominic Ahiga, who used the aliases “Michael Grinnell” and “Josh Weinstein,” face wire fraud and conspiracy charges in the Southern District of New York.
How did the scheme actually work?
Prosecutors say the two men ran a mortgage-modification business that targeted homeowners who had already fallen behind on payments — people actively trying to avoid losing their homes. Clients were charged recurring monthly fees on the promise that much of their past-due mortgage balance would eventually be forgiven through a negotiated modification. Instead, according to the indictment, the promised relief frequently never materialized, and the fees homeowners paid while waiting ate into money that could have gone toward an actual resolution with their lender. A number of the business’s customers ended up losing their homes to foreclosure anyway. The alleged conduct spans from at least June 2018 through September 2022.
Who did this actually hit?
According to the Federal Trade Commission, which separately pursued a civil case over the same conduct, the scheme reached more than 3,000 people nationwide — with elderly homeowners and military veterans making up a disproportionate share of the client base, two groups mortgage-relief scams have long targeted specifically because they’re more likely to own homes outright or carry government-backed loans with modification options worth exploiting. In February 2024, a federal court already found the two men liable for roughly $19 million in combined civil penalties and restitution in the FTC and California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation’s enforcement action. This week’s indictment adds criminal wire fraud and conspiracy charges on top of that civil judgment.
Why does a criminal case follow a civil judgment here?
A nearly $19 million civil penalty didn’t end the case because civil penalties and restitution orders don’t guarantee victims recover their money, and they don’t carry the threat of prison time the way a criminal wire fraud conviction does. Pursuing criminal charges after a civil judgment is a common next step when investigators believe the underlying conduct was knowing fraud rather than a business practice that merely violated consumer-protection rules — and mortgage-relief scams specifically have drawn escalating criminal attention as foreclosure-prevention fraud has remained a persistent problem for homeowners already in financial distress.
Sources: U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York · Mortgage Professional America · California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
