Linda Theresa Pellegrino

The sale of my home represented the totality of my assets on which I would be entirely dependent upon to support myself. It was critical that I maximize the gain on this transaction and receive the proceeds as quickly as possible so I could roll them over into profitable investments. I made this cle...ar to Ms. Pellegrino when I retained her and repeatedly requested her to make sure I received all the proceeds at the closing and arrange for a wire transfer of the proceeds to my bank account. Unfortunately, Ms. Pellegrino believes in giving the state of New Jersey two percent of your sales proceeds, which in our case amounted to $9600, when there is NO requirement to do so. Technically, she took it upon herself to file a GIT/REP-1 form, which calls for withholding two percent of the proceeds, instead of a GIT/REP-3 form, which exempts people who are selling their principal residence from the withholding requirement. She knew we lived in the house for 15 years, so we were clearly entitled to the exemption. She says she chose “a more cautious and conservative approach” by filing Form GIT/REP-1. In actuality, she chose the more inappropriate and irresponsible approach. Inour situation, Form GIT/REP-1 is simply the wrong form. If she knew what she was doing, she would have instead filed Form GIT/REP-3 and marked Box 2: “2. [] The real property being sold or transferred is used exclusively as my principal residence within the meaning of section 121 of the federal Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C. s. 121.” If she had done this, we would have received the $9,600 that she cavalierly gave to the state to hold. She never bothered to tell us that it might be possible to claim this amount on a tax return, and if it weren’t for the intercession of a friend, we would have never be apprised that we were entitled to this money all along. So we wouldn’t have claimed a refund and we would have lost $9,600. Ms. Pellegrino bragged about taking the extra step on the day after the closing of going “to the post office on Saturday morning and sent, via certified mail, the closing documents and proceeds.” She also noted that we “signed for the certified mail on May 21, 2013.” This is from a closing on May 17, 2013. Ms. Pellegrino believes that she discharged her duties by mailing that certified letter. In doing so, she totally disregarded my pleas to get the proceeds via wire transfer and, worse yet, she failed to explain why the check for the proceeds was short by $25,000 (not counting the $9,600), which we were surprised to discover when we opened the certified mail. A few days later, we received another letter by mail with the explanation that it contained “the remaining $20,000.00 which represents the balance of the purchase price.” Except it wasn’t “the remaining balance” and Ms. Pellegrino should have known that. Only after several more frantic calls did we receive yet another letter, sent on May 31, 2013, stating that “enclosed is the remaining $5,000.00 check #2428 from my Attorney Trust Account which represents the balance of the purchase price.” Until we were able to deposit this check, that means a total of $34,500 was misdirected and/or unaccounted for, we find this to be unconscionable legal representation and a total disregard for the client’s interest. We asked Ms. Pellegrino to do the right thing and compensate us at least for depriving us of the $9600 for almost a year because we lost the opportunity to invest it where we would have earned over $3600 during the time the state held the money. Her response was that she thought our request “was not rational” so she decided not to communicate with us at all. That’s our lawyer talking… about her client whose best interests she undertook to represent. We expect members of the New Jersey Bar to exhibit a higher standard of professionalism than this. This attorney had our life savings in her care and failed miserably to protect our interests.