Scam Or No Scam?

Posted June 21st, 2007 by Joe Kaiser

Why only $200? Because he said no when I offered him $100.

Dear Rob,

At this very moment a mobile notary is knocking on Phil’s door and presenting him with paperwork that once signed, transfers his entire interest in a two acre parcel to me.

I found out about his pending foreclosure and gave him a call to see if he wanted to sell. He did, and in no more than 10 minutes we’d agreed to a number that works for the both of us, $200.

Why only $200?

Because he said no when I offered him $100.


Yes, $200

Is this deal a scam?

I’m thinking probably not since $200 was an amount I was willing to pay (I might have gone to $500 if he pushed me, though), and as it turns out, an amount Phil’s agreed to accept.

In about an hour, I should be hearing back from the mobile notary to see how things went. Cross your fingers, because with any luck we’ve got ourselves a new piece of real estate in our portfolio.

But I am wondering about this deal because I know your office has a problem with $200 deals, at least according to the March 14th press release you issued about this case . . .

They offered property owners money, sometimes as little as $200, in exchange for the transfer of a title or interest in the property.— AAG David Huey, presumably

My question to you, Rob, is what am I supposed to pay Phil?

If it’s only worth $200, and Phil agrees it’s worth $200, and I agree it’s worth $200, then please tell me how paying him $200 is a problem.

Or is that part of the press release simply to sensationalize this investigation, as I believe?


The rub

You should also know Phil gave me a heads-up about the property. It’s been designated a “wetlands” and isn’t buildable.

He doesn’t think it has any value, much less the $200 I agreed to pay him.

So what’s the assessed value, you ask?

Hehehe, errr . . . $98,200.

And here’s where it gets interesting, Rob.

Scam or no scam?

Since assessments typically run lower than value, you might think it could be worth up to, what, $125,000.00?

On a $200 investment?

Are you kidding me?

Scam or no scam?

And you see, Rob, there’s the rub.

It’s what your office doesn’t “get.” We have no idea what this thing is worth. No one does. There are too many variables, too many unknowns and at this moment no good way to sort them all out.

That $200 I invested might be money I’ll never see again, or it could be the beginnings of a $100,000.00 payday. I won’t know that until I put the property on the market.


20/20 hindsight

Now, here’s the weird part . . .

If I lose money on a deal like this, your office says, “no scam.”

Nobody talks about sellers I paid and then went on to lose money. No one suggests they’d be better off having never done my deal.

But if I strike pay-dirt and make 20 or 30 grand?

“Scam scam scam scam scam!”

Your office enters the arena AFTER the fact. By then, knowing how things played out, it’s easy to say this or that seller would have been better off not selling to me.

AFTER the fact is easy.

That’s like saying I’d be better off today not having “wasted” the $30k I’ve spent on car insurance for my family over the last 25 years because I’ve never had to file a claim.

It’s easy to say that now, looking back at things.

Unfortunately, investors don’t have the luxury of looking back. We have to risk our dollars in the here-and-now, hoping we’ve guessed correctly.

And if not, hoping we don’t lose it all.


Flawed Logic

I agreed to buy, Phil agreed to sell, and if things work out in just a few minutes I’ll be the proud owner of nice little swamp that probably has no value at all . . . or is worth up to maybe $100,000.00.

We’ve transacted.

We’ve simply done a deal that works. It was fair and we’re all delighted. I’ve made no other promises. He wasn’t pressured.

He just wanted out and I provided him with that opportunity and a couple hundred bucks for his time and trouble.

Scam or no scam?

And if I lose the money I invested or if Christmas comes early, it’s still the very same deal. The outcome has no bearing on whether or not the deal itself was or was not a scam.

To suggest otherwise demonstrates flawed logic and a complete inability to understand what it means to be an investor putting your own money at risk.

“They offered property owners money, sometimes as little as $200, in exchange for the transfer of a title or interest in the property.”

Well, yeah, and that’s a problem?

Good grief, Rob. Fight fair.

Respectfully,

Joe Kaiser

P.S. Notary just called and we have ourselves a done deal. Wanna buy a swamp in Clark (no not really) County, Washington? I didn’t think so.

P.P.S. Are you a Real Estate Rampager? If so, you just got a behind-the-scenes look at me putting this entire $200 deal together (and we’re only up to day three of the training program).

Sign up now to learn how YOU can join us online and can take this exact investment strategy to war your own back yard.


3 Responses to: “Scam Or No Scam?”

  1. Phil Cornel responds:
    Posted: June 21st, 2007 at 3:28 pm

    In my limited opinion, it sure looks like a sale (agreed to price and willing buyer and a willing seller). Congratulations are in order. Which brings up the fact that if you are not out there doing, you’re not getting in on the deals. Again, congratulations.

  2. will responds:
    Posted: June 21st, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    I wrote you before about this Joe, but I’m so passionate about this I’ll write again. This is about nothing but the bureaurat’s ego and control issue-nothing else. It has nothing to do with justice or fairness, everything to do with control and power issues. These bureaurats have nothing else to do but sit around looking for ways to make people’s lives difficult. So then like “lawmaker politicians” they can look back, stick out their chest, and say “I did that”, not realizing just how stupid it was, and why? Just because they could.

  3. SpyBoy responds:
    Posted: June 26th, 2007 at 11:21 pm

    As a non-lawyer / non-attorney, but as one who has acquired extensive legal knowledge and understanding of law, and as one who advocates the foundational principals of Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happyness, I am familiar with these types of bureaucratic strong-arm tactics.
    What I say ( ie; my opinion ) is that the surest defense in such an unsure enviroment is to be based on a violation of Constitutional recognized and protected right; the right to contract ( see article 1 section 10 ). Always, always, always stay within the Constitutional protection and defense.
    Of course, thats presuming the existence of a legitimate ( lawful ) contractual agreement, and an absence of any illigitimate activity
    ( eg; fraud, misrepresentation, etc. ).


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.