I Call BULLSHIT, #23

Posted June 29th, 2007 by Joe Kaiser

The "commerical use" prohibition in the Public Records Act is narrowly defined and applies ONLY to "lists of individuals."

Dear Rob,

I am astounded at the position your office takes with regard to public records access.

What the heck happened to open access per the Public Records Act (PRA) and more pointedly, how in the world did your staff get so far off track here?

Please take a look at the March 14th press release issued by your office (and THANK YOU for removing that inflammatory “Mortgage Foreclosure Rescue Violations” headline I called BULLSHIT on in my June 19th post).

UPDATE: the inflammatory headline mentioned above was added back to the press release (even though the Office of the Attorney General knows it to be completely untrue). Apparently, it’s a bigger problem politically to admitt your mistake than it is to do the right thing and remove a dishonest headline such as this. Why am I not surprised?

Please note the following activity my former partner is now banned from taking part in. . .

Using the Public Records Act to obtain a list of people likely to enter tax foreclosure proceedings or currently in tax foreclosure proceedings in order to solicit them.— David M. Huey, presumably


It is intentionally worded deceptively (more in a moment), and, as I believe, a rather absurd position for your office to take in light of the fact that county tax foreclosure sales are very much public auctions.

Why would your office feel compelled to restrict access to information regarding a public auction?

Because your staff is so determined to justify the $300k it’s wasted on this bogus “foreclosure rescue scam” investigation that it has completely lost touch with reality.

And what results?


Suggesting access to government foreclosure lawsuits be restricted or forbidden is illogical, unsupported by the applicable statutes and certainly, runs in direct opposition to the spirit of the PRA, as your office well knows.

learning about the law

I’ve read the statutes, Rob.

In fact, one of my favorite activities is learning about the law and things like the PRA. Since my business bumps up against it frequently, it’s important I have a handle on it.

How to?

I head on over to the Washington State Bar website and take a look at the bookstore. The last time I visited, I found this . . . The Public Records Act Deskbook.

It’s been on my bookshelf ever since and I refer to it often.

I taught a real estate investment course to my students recently and used this very deskbook as a main source of reference material for the “accessing Public Records” part of the class.

Has anyone from your office bothered to read it?

If so, I wonder if AAG David Huey noticed your words in the Preface . . .

As Attorney General, one of my top priorities is to strengthen the people’s control over government by ensuring and protecting their right to access public records. Our public records laws exist to promote democracy and open government for all citizens.— Attorney General Robert M. McKenna

And yet your office has now banned my former partner from accessing these very public records?

How can this be?

More to the point, as you well know, your office recently amended its lawsuit against me and included a provocative claim related to my public records requests . . .

Defendant locates victims . . . by, among other means, unlawfully obtaining lists of tax delinquent properties. Defendant obtains lists by filing Public Disclosure Requests pursuant to RCW 42.56.01, et seq. This statute prohibits agencies from providing lists to people for commercial purposes. RCW 42.56.070(9).— Amended Complaint, dated June 21, 2007

“Unlawfully obtaining lists?”


“This statute prohibits agencies from providing lists to people for commercial purposes?”

I so call BULLSHIT.

I am not an attorney, Rob, but I can read. RCW 42.56.070(9), as to the applicable part, states as follows:

This chapter shall not be construed as giving authority to any agency . . . to give, sell or provide access to lists of individuals requested for commercial purposes, (italics added) . . .

See the problem?

The “commerical use” prohibition in the Public Records Act is narrowly defined and applies ONLY to “lists of individuals.”

Requesting a list of properties in the tax sale, or a list of parcels with delinquent taxes, or anything other than “lists of individuals” is perfectly fine, even if my intent is to use that information for a commercial purpose.

Municipal Research and Services Center, in their Report #61, Public Records Act for Washington Cities and Counties, states as follows:

” . . . In addition, this provision does not prohibit disclosure of lists of businesses, corporations, or partnerships; the statute only prohibits disclosure of lists of natural persons.” (italics added).

Clearly, there can be no doubt there is absolutely NOTHING WRONG with me requesting a list of properties in the tax foreclosure sale.

Nothing even kinda, sorta, maybe wrong. And requesting title reports from county treasurers, as mentioned in the suit?

Hardly a list of individuals, Rob.

It’s not a close call, and yet your office at this very moment is suing me for making this exact request, even though it knows or should know there is nothing wrong in me having done so.

And good grief, I’m not the attorney here, I’m just a guy who rescues people in danger of losing their homes to foreclosure.

twisting the law

AAG David Huey, who is an attorney, knows what the statute says and doesn’t say. That’s why he included language in the above-mentioned press release regarding obtaining a “list of people likely to enter . . .”

He knows it’s deceptive because he knows we never requested such a list (and if we did, it was inadvertant, we’re sorry, and we promise we won’t do it again).

Come on, Rob, who gets banned from doing something they’ve never done?

My ex-partner.

And who get’s sued for it?


a mountain of research

What we do is research intensive. You saw the mountain of research work we provided your office in discovery.

As such, we request lists of parcels or copies of title reports and whatever else we need to adequately research properties in upcoming tax foreclosures.

The Public Records Act gives us this right. Your office is the number one proponent of that act.

clearly untenable

I’ve read the amended complaint and am not impressed. Has it really come down to me accessing public records, now?


Good grief, Rob, doesn’t your office have better things to do?

And speaking of your office . . . when it knowingly makes false claims against me by willfully twisting the Public Records Act “commercial use” prohibition and intentionally misapplying it to make me appear dishonest, it has stepped over the line.

That IS deceptive.

And when this conduct comes from the very law firm that played THE key role in the creation of that act and should (and you’d better believe, does) know better?


Rob, I am asking you yet again to fight fair.


Joe Kaiser

2 Responses to: “I Call BULLSHIT, #23”

  1. Leon Blocksom responds:
    Posted: June 29th, 2007 at 6:17 am


    This case against you has got to be one of the scariest things I’ve seen in my lifetime. I’m still trying to figure out what’s wrong with fully disclosing and freely transacting a real estate purchase between two individuals.

    Your case does appear to be a witch hunt. Have they banned John Beck from advertising his course in your state? What about Carleton Sheets and all the other books on the shelves teaching how to buy a house in foreclosure? It’s been going on for a very long time.

    It appears that they are making up some shiny new rules just for you to play by. Hopefully justice will prevail and another bottom feeder will go away. And if not, they better make it crystal clear nationwide EXACTLY what you can and can’t do when it comes to investing in real estate.

    I guess you should feel lucky he’s not suing you for $54 million for a pair of pants. That guy needs some good ole fashion justice.

    Good luck with that Bullshit.


  2. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: June 29th, 2007 at 9:05 pm


    It should scare you and every other investor who obtains information about foreclosures through public records.

    I have to believe, though, in all seriousness, that this is just an attempt to “pile on” and make it appear there’s something to it. But when you break things down and see it’s merely one unfounded claim after another, you understand what’s happening.

    I think it’s more desperation than anything else, frankly, which only makes them look foolish.

    And by the way, I’m up to “I call BULLSHIT #111 as of today, so count on more BULLSHIT posts to follow.


Post a Comment

Enter Your Details:

You may write the following basic XHTML Strict in your comments:
<a href="" title=""></a> · <acronym title=""></acronym> · <abbr title=""></abbr>
<blockquote cite=""></blockquote> · <code></code> · <strong></strong> · <em></em>

  • If you’re a first-time commenter, your response will be moderated.
  • If your response includes a link, it will require moderator approval.
Enter Your Comments:

Note: This is the end of the usable page. The image(s) below are preloaded for performance only.