We recently achieved a significant victory in a non-binding arbitration proceeding within a wire-fraud case brought on behalf of our clients–homebuyers who lost tens of thousands of dollars as a result of a devastating example of wire fraud in the process of their real estate closing.

The Case at Hand

Our clients entered into a contract to purchase a home in Florida and were instructed to wire closing funds to the designated escrow agent. Relying on email communications sent by the escrow agent’s address, as part of a chain of communications that, neither before or after, called the wire instructions into question, they transferred approximately $40,000. However, unbeknownst to them, the funds were ultimately diverted to a fraudster.

We filed suit asserting claims for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, based on the title company’s failure to implement basic, industry-standard safeguards to prevent precisely this type of loss, as well as their failure to identify and notify our clients of such breach. After being filed, the judge overseeing the case mandated that the parties engage in non-binding arbitration to try to narrow the issues, and see if a resolution could be met.

What is Non-Binding Arbitration?

Non-binding arbitration is a structured dispute resolution process where a neutral third party hears evidence and issues a decision—but that decision is not final. Either party can reject it and proceed to trial. For business owners and other parties, it’s a strategic tool: it provides an early, cost-effective preview of how a case may be evaluated, often facilitating settlement while preserving full litigation rights.

The Decision

At this non-binding arbitration, the arbitrator largely agreed with our client’s position. In a detailed award, the arbitrator found that the title company breached its duty by failing to implement and communicate adequate procedures to safeguard client funds. Notably, there was no evidence of written policies, secure communication protocols, or meaningful warnings to the buyers about verifying wire instructions. These failures constituted negligence under Florida law.

This case underscores a critical and often misunderstood reality: title and escrow agents have real, enforceable duties to protect individuals and businesses in an era where wire fraud is rampant.

If you’re facing a similar situation or want to discuss other legal matters that may impact your business, contact one of our experienced attorneys in South Florida at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact our team directly at: arianna@ayalalawpa.com

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case].

We are happy to announce that we have defeated yet another attempt by the respondent to avoid the $66,224.44 arbitration award they obtained for their client in a dispute involving a year-and-a-half long arbitration proceeding.

The arbitration case involved a claim filed by our client alleging that the dealer sold her a defective vehicle with a tampered odometer, on a vehicle that was advertised and sold as “certified pre-owned.”

During the arbitration case, we were able to uncover that the Fort Lauderdale Mercedes-Benz, after the initial certification, never re-certified the vehicle prior to selling it to our client, despite the fact that they sold the vehicle to another buyer, after the original certification, but before the ultimate sale to our client.

The case went to a final, two-day arbitration hearing (the equivalent of a state or federal court trial), in which we presented evidence on the multiple issues found in the vehicle, despite their client never being in a collision or otherwise failing to properly care for it.

We also showed at the hearing that the client, following the advice of a certified Mercedes-Benz mechanic shop, was advised to stop using it as it was unsafe to drive, and she in fact did so.

The arbitrator awarded rescission damages of $51,971.82. What this means is that our client is able to return the vehicle that they haven’t been able to use for nearly two years, and that the dealer has to pay them the rescission amount.

In addition, the arbitrator awarded $14,252.62 in damages under our client’s Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) claim.  The arbitrator also ruled that, under FDUTPA, our client is entitled to their attorney’s fees and costs.

The dealer challenged the award in state court alleging baseless claims of bias of the arbitrator and also that the arbitrator exceeded its authority when it awarded the recision of the purchase contract. The court summarily denied both arguments.

You can read the court’s order here. 

As stated by attorney Eduardo A. Maura, “We are extremely happy with the result. Our client is a very honest and competent professional who did all the right things in this case, including waiting for over two years to achieve justice, and withstand every tactic from the dealer. We are glad that the circuit court in Broward left the arbitration intact and was able to see the emptiness of the dealership’s arguments.”

For more information on business disputes, product defect cases, or arbitration, contact an experienced business, arbitration, and product defect attorney in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact arbitration attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com.

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

Ayala Law recently secured a settlement agreement against a South Florida towing company and property owner for the full value of our client’s damages.

The case involved the towing of our client’s vehicle, despite having a valid parking pass, as well as substantial damages to our client’s vehicle, resulting in the need for immediate repairs.

Attorney Ryan M. Sawal had this to say, “This settlement is a testament to what efficient, goal-oriented litigation can look like. Our client had a case in which rapid response was a necessity, and through our team’s deliberate strategy, we were able to achieve a favorable result in record time.”

For more information about property damage disputes, contact an experienced attorney in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact our team directly at: arianna@ayalalawpa.com

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case].

We’re proud to share that one of our firm’s ongoing federal cases was recently featured on Law360, a leading national legal news outlet known for covering significant developments in the legal industry. The article, written by Katryna Perera, highlights a case in which our attorneys, Eduardo A. Maura and Luis F. Quesada, represent a Nicaraguan businessman in a lawsuit against Citibank concerning the freezing and subsequent closure of his accounts containing over $270,000.

The Case at a Glance

According to the complaint, our client alleges that Citibank froze and later closed his accounts without explanation, despite his compliance with the bank’s requests and repeated attempts to obtain clarification. To date, the funds have not been returned. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, seeks recovery of the withheld funds, attorney’s fees, and a jury trial.

This case highlights an issue that many business owners and international clients face: unexplained account freezes or closures by large financial institutions. For those who rely on timely access to capital, these situations can disrupt business operations and create significant financial and reputational harm.

Legal Remedies Exist for Business Owners

While banks have broad discretion to monitor and suspend accounts under certain regulatory frameworks, they are not immune from legal accountability. Florida law provides mechanisms for clients to recover wrongfully withheld funds, including claims for recovery of bank deposits and actions for declaratory judgment.

As attorney Eduardo A. Maura, who leads our firm’s commercial and banking litigation practice, explains, “Financial institutions have significant power, but that power is not absolute. Business owners, especially those who operate internationally, deserve transparency and due process. When banks withhold funds without cause, there are legal remedies available, and clients should not hesitate to pursue them.”

Common Triggers for Account Freezes

From our experience handling similar cases, account freezes often stem from compliance concerns, mismatched documentation, or overly cautious fraud prevention measures. In many cases, communication breakdowns or internal bank errors can escalate what should be a resolvable administrative issue into a prolonged financial dispute.

To help prevent such situations, businesses should:

• Maintain updated corporate documentation with all banks where they hold accounts.
• Ensure consistency between the business name, ownership structure, and identification documents.
• Promptly respond to bank inquiries about account activity or ownership changes.
• Keep thorough records of all communications with financial institutions.

Still, even with these precautions, account freezes can occur without valid justification, which is where skilled legal representation becomes essential.

Our Experience in Banking and Financial Litigation

Our firm has extensive experience representing business owners and investors in disputes against large financial institutions. In a recent case, we secured a $115,000 settlement in federal court against a multinational bank that had similarly prevented a client from accessing their own funds for over a year. That case involved claims under Florida Statutes Section 655.059, which governs recovery of bank deposits and account access rights.

Our goal in every banking dispute is to resolve matters efficiently, protect our clients’ interests, and, when possible, reach favorable outcomes early in the process to minimize costs.

If You’re Facing a Similar Issue

If you’re a business owner or investor facing issues with frozen or closed accounts, there are legal options available to help you recover your funds and hold financial institutions accountable. Our attorneys are experienced in navigating both the state and federal regulatory landscape that governs banking and commercial disputes.

For more information about this case, you can read the full article on Law360 here. 

If you’re facing a similar challenge or need advice regarding a business or banking dispute, contact one of our experienced attorneys in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact our founding attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com.

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case].

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case.]

Ayala Law is happy to announce that we have obtained a $66,224.44 arbitration award for our client in a dispute involving a year-and-a-half arbitration proceeding.

The arbitration case involved a claim filed by our client alleging that the dealer sold her a defective vehicle with a tampered odometer, on a vehicle that was advertised and sold as “certified pre-owned.”

During the arbitration case, we were able to uncover that the Fort Lauderdale Mercedes-Benz, after the initial certification, never re-certified the vehicle prior to selling it to our client, despite the fact that they sold the vehicle to another buyer, after the original certification, but before the ultimate sale to our client.

The case went to a final, two-day arbitration hearing (the equivalent of a state or federal court trial), in which we presented evidence on the multiple issues found in the vehicle, despite their client never being in a collision or otherwise failing to properly care for it.

We also showed at the hearing that the client, following the advice of a certified Mercedes-Benz mechanic shop, was advised to stop using it as it was unsafe to drive, and she in fact did so.

The arbitrator awarded rescission damages of $51,971.82. What this means is that our client is able to return the vehicle that they haven’t been able to use for nearly two years, and that the dealer has to pay them the rescission amount.

In addition, the arbitrator awarded $14,252.62 in damages under our client’s Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) claim.  The arbitrator also ruled that, under FDUTPA, our client is entitled to their attorney’s fees and costs. You can read the arbitrator’s award here.

Attorney Eduardo A. Maura and Ryan Sawal litigated the case. As stated by attorney Eduardo A. Maura, “We are extremely happy with the result. Our client was a very honest and competent professional that did all the right things in this case, including waiting for over two years to achieve justice, and withstand every tactic from the dealer. We are glad that the arbitrator was able to see through the dealer’s ‘the car is perfect’ line of arguments.”

For more information on business disputes, product defect cases, or arbitration, contact an experienced business, arbitration, and product defect attorney in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact arbitration attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com.

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

When someone gets injured by a defective product, the immediate concern is personal—medical bills, missed work, and long-term consequences. But what most people don’t realize is that filing a products liability lawsuit does more than help you recover compensation—it can also protect others and push companies to make safer products.

In this blog post, we’ll break down how your case could become part of something much bigger.

What Is a Products Liability Lawsuit?

If you’ve been hurt by a defective product—anything from a malfunctioning appliance to unsafe medication—you may have grounds for a products liability lawsuit. These cases are brought against manufacturers, distributors, or retailers who put unsafe products into the hands of consumers.

There are three main types of product defects:

• Design Defects: The product was dangerous from the start due to its design.
• Manufacturing Defects: Something went wrong during the production process.
• Marketing Defects: This includes inadequate warnings or improper instructions.

Your claim could fall into one or more of these categories.

Can One Product Lawsuit Make a Difference?

Yes, one lawsuit can set off a chain reaction that results in product recalls, new safety standards, and better consumer protection. Your case may be the first warning sign that alerts regulators, journalists, or other consumers to a widespread issue.

Real-World Example: Think about Takata airbags or Johnson & Johnson talcum powder. What started with individual lawsuits eventually led to massive recalls and public awareness campaigns.

Why File a Products Liability Lawsuit If the Manufacturer Already Issued a Recall?

Many clients ask, “If the product’s already recalled, what’s the point of filing a lawsuit?”

Here’s why it still matters:

• Compensation: Recalls don’t cover medical bills or lost income.
• Accountability: Lawsuits force companies to take responsibility.
  Public Record: Your lawsuit may uncover internal documents that show the company knew about the danger but failed to act.

How Products Liability Lawsuits Help Regulate Industries

When regulators or lawmakers see a pattern of lawsuits tied to a specific product or industry, they often update safety rules or increase enforcement. These cases can spark real change, from tighter manufacturing guidelines to federal bans.

Your legal action might be the push that leads to:

• Better testing requirements
• Stricter labeling laws
• Updated industry standards

Does Filing a Lawsuit Help Prevent Future Injuries?

Yes, it can. The reality is, many companies won’t act until they’re sued. Lawsuits bring bad press and financial consequences—both strong incentives to fix a problem.

When you file a lawsuit:

• The issue becomes part of the public conversation.
• Other consumers may realize they’ve been harmed too.
• Media outlets often pick up the story, spreading awareness.

In many ways, your lawsuit helps prevent the same thing from happening to someone else.

Can My Case Become a Class Action or Mass Tort?

If others have been harmed by the same product, your lawsuit might evolve into something larger—like a class action or mass tort. These cases:

• Pool together similar claims
• Increase pressure on large corporations
• Attract more media and regulatory attention

Our firm has experience handling complex litigation, including class actions, and we can advise whether your case has the potential to become one.

How a Products Liability Lawyer Can Help You

We understand how intimidating it can feel to go up against a big manufacturer, but you don’t have to do it alone. Our firm offers:

• Thorough investigation into product defects
• Aggressive litigation strategy
• Compassionate guidance throughout your case

At Ayala Law, we don’t just fight for you—we fight for everyone who could be affected. Your case could be the one that makes a difference.

Your Voice Has Power

It’s not just about money—it’s about justice. It’s about making sure companies don’t cut corners at the expense of people’s safety. When you stand up, you might inspire others to do the same—and that’s how real change happens.

If you or someone you love has been hurt by a defective product or need more information on products liability, contact an experienced products liability attorney in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact trial attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com.

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case].

Ayala Law successfully secured a $25,000 settlement in a case involving claims for breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation regarding a vehicle that was the subject of the contract. The case also involved dozens of unauthorized credit checks that severely impacted the Plaintiff’s credit score.

The Plaintiff’s Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claim focused on Section 1681b, which outlines the “Permissible Purposes of Consumer Reports.”

The case lasted a year and a half, with Ayala Law advocating for the client’s rights and achieving a favorable resolution.

“Breach of contract cases like this underscore the real-life impact of negligent practices on consumers,” said Eduardo A. Maura, founding attorney at Ayala Law. “We’re proud to have helped our client achieve justice and recover damages for the harm they endured.”

If you need legal assistance with a breach of contract or negligent misrepresentation, contact an experienced attorney in Miami at 305-570-2208.

You can also contact trial attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com.

Schedule a case evaluation online here.

[The opinions in this blog are not intended to be legal advice. You should consult with an attorney about the particulars of your case].