SHELBY When allegations of "robo-signing" by mortgage servicers emerged last fall, Shelby consumer bankruptcy lawyer O. Max Gardner III wasn't surprised.

Since the early 2000s, he had been worried about the deteriorating quality of mortgage loans, many with payments set to recast at unaffordable amounts in future years. And in a 2004 bankruptcy case, he had obtained a mortgage processor newsletter that detailed the outsourced assembly line that was being used to rapidly produce and notarize lending documents.

Gardner's concerns led him to give seminars around the country to other lawyers about problems with the securitization process - the packaging of mortgages, car loans and other assets into securities for investors. In 2006, he shifted to holding "boot camps" for lawyers at his scenic farm in the South Mountains, about 60 miles northwest of Charlotte.

So far, 800 attorneys have passed through the nationally known program. Some of the trainees have been involved in uncovering recent allegations that bank-employed robo-signers had been improperly processing foreclosure documents. Now for the first time, Gardner will hold a boot camp in Charlotte. Running Thursday through Monday at the Blake Hotel, it will allow him to host about 28 lawyers, double the normal class size.

In a bankruptcy case, determining whether a lender actually owns a mortgage note and properly handled the paperwork is critical because a home loan is typically a consumer's biggest debt, Gardner said in an interview last week in his Shelby law office, a historic family home known as Webbley.

"What we're really doing is applying as much legal leverage as possible to really get the consumer and the mortgage servicer to modify that loan," he said. "Nobody is trying to get a free home."

In the nation's foreclosure crisis, Gardner, 65, places the most blame on mortgage servicers, who he says can make more in fees by putting and keeping people in default than from modifying their loans - hurting homeowners, investors in the mortgages and the economy. Falling home values are also making it difficult for borrowers who are current on their payments to refinance into more affordable mortgages because their loan is worth more than the value of the home.

A "dyed-in-the wool" Democrat whose namesake grandfather was governor of North Carolina from 1929 to 1933, Gardner said neither the White House nor Congress has done enough to help struggling homeowners. He's encouraged by investor efforts to sue mortgage servicers over mishandled loans because they bring more "legal firepower" to the issue.

"The idea that somehow we're over the hump or this crisis is over or foreclosures are down - it's disinformation," he said. "Things are going to get much worse before they get better. If somebody doesn't intervene to create some sort of a national program that will have some teeth and some enforcement to it, then I'm not sure where we'll go."

In a wide-ranging interview, Gardner discussed his upcoming conference, robo-signing, the attorneys general investigation of mortgage servicers and what consumers should do if they fall behind on their mortgages. Questions and answers have been edited for brevity and clarity.

Q. What did you think when robo-signing first hit the news last fall?

I was surprised it took the media so long to get up to snuff or realize the seriousness of the problem. I think that was my biggest frustration. We had tried to get this story across, and in a way it's a complex story so it's not an easy story to write about. I think that was the big hurdle we had. I think another problem we had was I think there was some resistance to believe that Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, these kind of institutions could be involved directly and indirectly in this type of activity. There was a steep wall to get over. And we had that problem with the courts, too.

Q. What would you say to the argument that this is just a technicality, that these people are behind in their payments, that they deserve to be foreclosed on, and you're just finding loopholes?

To me fraud on the court isn't a technicality. Our whole system of justice that we have is based on the assumption that the purpose of the whole effort is to find the truth and to get to the truth and have the fact-finder determine what the truth is in the case. And an integral part of that system is that the attorneys that are representing the parties in any case are going to be truthful. It just infuriates me when people say this is just a mere technicality, that somebody signed their name as a vice president of Chase when they actually worked for some other third-party provider, as they call it.

Q. What do you think the investigation of mortgage servicers by the 50 state attorneys general can accomplish?

I'm just not sure how 50 attorneys general can speak with one voice. I know that there are factions in that group. If they get anything done, it will be a voluntary-type agreement. I'm not sure what the enforcement mechanism for that agreement will be. Are the consumers themselves going to have any third-party rights to enforce that agreement? It's just not clear to me how this is going to work.

What I fear is it's going to be more or less a whitewash. The first sort of talking points the attorneys general put out several weeks ago was basically, 'We're not going to violate the law anymore, we're going to do the right thing.' I'm afraid I couldn't accept that kind of promise from the banks and servicers with much reliance on my part. We really need comprehensive federal legislation to deal with this problem and I'm not optimistic that anything like that's going to happen. It should have happened several years ago.

Q. What advice would you give consumers who are falling behind in their mortgages?

I wouldn't advise anybody that the best thing to do is to file for bankruptcy, but I think they really need to get with an attorney who understands how this whole system works to help them though either a voluntary modification with the servicer, maybe a (Home Affordable Modification Program) or some loss-mitigation option that's available. You really need to get a professional person involved.

The worst thing they can do would be to go to all these mortgage rescue, mortgage elimination things that are total scams. But I think trying to deal one-on-one with your mortgage servicer is a very difficult thing to do. You get, 'We lost the fax, we lost the paperwork, you have to resubmit it again.' You need to get somebody who really understands what's going on, and that's going to be an attorney. I always say bankruptcy is the last option, but sometimes that last option is the one you have to take.

Q. How can consumers afford an attorney if they're already behind on their bills?

When we do Chapter 13 cases for consumers, and most of mine are Chapter 13, I put all my fees in their repayment plan so I don't ask for any money upfront. I don't even charge a consultation fee. I think most bankruptcy lawyers who do this kind of work don't charge a consultation fee. I would be skeptical of an attorney who wanted a substantial amount upfront for consultation or a substantial retainer.